'Humanist' - food for thought
Offline Sunsara blogs about verdict of the videographer trial
Anyone not following Sunsara on facebook or blogspot should take a little time and go back to research the events which are the subject of this 'verdict' before you pop off something stupid and I call you on it.
Past thread here:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/Ethical_Society_Woes
Now to preface these remarks, I am not above making obnoxious comparative analyses. I enjoy it.
I have, for YEARS, asked members of the christian ideology to band together and denounce the Westboro Baptist Church(WBC hereafter) due to the constant claims by these same christians that "They're not christians like us."
Overwhelmingly, these alleged moderate christians quietly denounce the actions of the WBC to me, but in public they waffle by simply refusing to voice their opinion citing that the WBC has the freedom of speech.
My reply(every single fucking time) : "YES they do. However, YOU also have that same right to denounce them! Yet you remain silent!"
To which, they walk away muttering to each other about the fundamentalist atheist they have encountered.
And so that brings me to this rather disconcerting instance concerning the 'Ethical' Humanist Society of Chicago (EHSC hereafter).
By its(EHSC) very title, ethics, humanity, and society seem to be the values such an organization would espouse. Is that not what one would expect if inquiring of the organization's viewpoints? It was when I first heard of them.
The most recent actions, SCRATCH THAT, inactions of the EHSC, not the verdict, are my focus. Where are the ethical humanist members of the society when such actions are undertaken by their leadership? Where are the people who have given this power of proxy to individuals to act for an entire organization?
They are in the pews, my dear friends. They are watching with sadistic glee or strained acquiescence, or even worse... negligent tolerance.
It disgusts me. The initial actions of the EHSC to STIFLE(disinvite) Sunsara from speaking followed by their treatment of the videographer culminating in THIS most despicable action of remaining silent while someone's freedom is taken away by their elected leaders defies logic and more importantly, their own espoused values.
I have been asked to be more tolerant of people who deny the label of ATHEIST. Whether it was brights, humanists, skeptics, or the ever-loving non-believers, I have made many attempts to ignore the label and focus solely on the ideologies of the individuals. For the most part, I have always been able to find common ground with the purveyors of pithy personifications such as these. I have also been able to witness their adherence to their own individual tenets regarding the doctrine so labeled.
The EHSC is not one of those.
Of course, that brings us back to the comparative analysis. Sincerely just as much as I want christians to OPENLY denounce the actions of the WBC, I want all the members of every atheistic 'community' to OPENLY denounce the EHSC.
Facebook, twitter, myspace, blogs, phones, and word of mouth. I want 'Fuck the EHSC' to be in the vernacular of every non-believing human being that disagrees with their actions/inactions.
AND if you don't... then just as I relegate the negligently tolerant christians to the position of harmful idiots, so also will you be treated.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
- Login to post comments
For the EHSC -
http://www.ethicalhuman.org/contactus.html
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
I twittered and facebooked this thread. I'll be able to sleep at night now.
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Err... d'oh!
Let me rephrase: "you attract more flies to honey than you do to shit."
The only point I was trying to make; somehow it got garbled on execution.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
I don't have any idea what this thread is about. Can someone tell me what this is about, and what I should think?
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
How skeptical and inquisitive of you. Is it really that easy, just tell you what to think? :P
You'll have to read both threads linked to in the opening post. Let me see if I can lay out the jist of it...
1. Sunsara Taylor speaks at Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago
2. She's supposed to return the next day but a few old ninnies lodge somewhat bullshit complaints about her, so they cancel her, because they're too lazy to act rationally.
3. Sunsara makes speech at EHSC about how she's not allowed to make speech and has a camera man film it.
4. EHSC calls police on her and the camera guy ends up getting assaulted by the police. "The videographer was pushed to the ground face-first, handcuffed and maced directly in his eyes, and multiple cops piled on top of him. He now faces charges of criminal trespass, resisting arrest, and simple battery, for allegedly "striking" the undercover pig in the chest as he was being dragged, beaten and maced."
5. Camera guy loses trial (yesterday), goes to jail without bond, faces up to 3 years in prison.
This thread will likely result in multiple and conflicting opinions. The issue of importance here to both Josh and I are how EHSC acts both morally and ethically. Josh and I think they suck at both, in addition to the fact that they posses really shitty reasoning skills.
Here's a tongue in cheek letter from Pastor Dave who is thinking along the lines of Josh and I:
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Pretty much!
Sounds like a mess. I don't see anything from the EHSC, have they released any statements about what their side of the story is? Can you get court records from the case to see what the judge actually ruled and why?
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
Why do all that? Sunsara and Josh already told me what to think!
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
This link contains the EHSC version of events along with PZ Myers thoughts on the issue:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/11/ethical_humanist_society_of_ch.php
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Lol. Thanks, I'll take a look at your links.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
When anyone calls the police, the person calling for help has no control over what the police do. Or what the police decide charge the trouble maker with. Just a thought for your next riot.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Soooo, you were interested enough to post this, but not interested enough to go back and read the incident?
"The shocking incident took place at the insistence of the president of EHSC. About 40 people witnessed the videographer being brutalized by the police in the foyer of the facility"
Thanks for the wonderful input.
Can you have a riot with a petite brunette and a cameraman????
Dumbass.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
Love you too.
I have no doubt the president insisted the police get involved. I don't agree with this. I think it was poor judgment on his part.
But it is true, if you call the police and they get involved, you lose all control of the situation when the police take over.
You want a take on it? The president got into it with the speaker. They set up an adversarial relationship. The speaker got pissed enough (and most likely I would have been as well in the same circumstances) to give the speech anyway with embellishments. The president then acted like a real jerk (having lost their temper) and called the police. The police showed up and said - um, I don't know about this. The president insisted. The photographer objected to the police trying to take his equipment and a scuffle ensued.
When the police get involved in a scuffle the scufflee loses. They pile on and go for it. They will tell everyone they were frightened for their lives and extreme force was justified. The president did not have to ask them to brutalize the photographer - at that point the police were going to brutalize anyone who got in their way or even objected to the brutalizing. That's all I was saying. Be careful when you ask the police to show up.
Then, when you go to trial for resisting arrest, you will lose. I have yet to see anyone no matter how badly they were brutalized by the police get off of the charge. I have seen cases where the person did NOT resist arrest (as witnessed and so testified), were still brutalized, and were still put in jail for resisting arrest.
That is all I am saying - don't call the police unless you have no other choice. And to repeat, the president was a stupid jerk. This will get the organization the wrong kind of publicity and will not further their cause. The organization may even dissolve because of this incident. The speaker will be a martyr and make a fortune off of speaking about the incident. The photographer will write a book (if not too badly brain damaged from the beating) and be thereafter largely forgotten. Check in a few years and see if I am right.
edit: And the police involved won't even get a hand slap because of it.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Now we can progress.
I am more interested in the 40 people watching.
I am more interested in the 'ethical' humanists turning a blind eye, a limp wrist, and a deaf ear to the situation.
I am interested in the freedom of Gregory Koger who has been deliberately wronged by a society with the word 'ethical' in its title/label.
Now that YOU are up-to-speed. What interests you? Perhaps you could simply post a link to this thread in some of the other places you inhabit on the web.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
Just dumping a link for further reading:
http://sunsara.blogspot.com/2010/08/free-gregory-koger-not-only-is-he.html
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
I understand your concern about people not interfering. I am a child of the late 60s and nothing has changed - if someone is getting beat up by the police and you attempt to interfere, there will be a riot. Tear gas and rubber bullets and "terrorists" being subdued by the police trying to protect the rest of the community. Sorry, I wouldn't have intervened, either but would have left the building as inconspicuously as possible. I'm a coward and it really hurts too much to simply sit on the floor let alone get up. And getting beat up would not contribute positively to my general well being. It is sad but true, that many people have concerns similar to mine.
Hopefully, Mr. Kroger can get out on appeal. I would recommend to Mr. Kroger to in the future when confronted by representatives of the law, to peacefully hand over his equipment, agree to be nice in the future and then call a lawyer to get his equipment back.
As for my interests? On this topic, I strongly recommend Selected Shorts where Jerry Stiller reads "At the Anarchists Convention" by John Sayles. You can get a CD of it. I couldn't find it in a free venue.
https://www.symphonyspace.org/estore/item/50
I enjoy laughing. If that makes me foolish, oh well.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.