While I really like the idea of Richard Dawkins's OUT campaign, I have to admit that I am not too happy with the symbol he has chosen for it. Yes, I understand, it's the scarlet letter, and in a lot of ways, being an public atheist can lead to similar pariah treatment as being adulterous Hester Prynne.
I understand that's likely what is being got at. However, I don't like the scarlet letter as the galvanizing symbol for atheism. First and foremost, it is Puritan adultery punishment to me. And beyond that, it's the symbol for an immoral action, and the ignorant already associate atheism with immorality, no need to help that link along, especially when most atheists are highly ethical people who already fight the opinion that morality is impossible without religion. Not to mention that the shirts aren't clear on the meaning of said scarlet letter. It's just the letter and the generic "OUT campaign" website, which somewhat paints the picture of some immoral GLBT swingers club (I must admit that the phrase out campaign brings to mind GLBT issues in my mind).
So basically, it's a confusing shirt with a hateful symbol of immorality on it. Not exactly great press. Dawkins can appropriate it and twist it all he likes, but that's not going to change what most people are going to think when they see a scarlet letter and the word OUT campaign (adultery + gay). Yes, literarily it really stands for, and is used in speech as, a term for becoming a pariah, but it always has that seedy undertone. I don't want that further incorrectly associated with atheism.
If you really wanted to have a true OUT campaign wherein we all stood up and said, "we don't believe in God," lets at least get a shirt that communicates the idea that we are atheist/agnostic and we are just normal people, none of this flashy, literary, *wink*wink* appropriating of an immoral symbol, unclear bullshit. You don't get respect or standing by making secret codes. I can't exactly think of something better, but you need something clear, humanizing, and noncombative. In my opinion, these shirts and the symbol don't fit any of these requirements. It personally strikes me as a bit smug, which is not a big friend winner. It also feels hollow to me for some reason, akin to a publicity stunt.
I like the idea, I really do, but I hate the symbol chosen. I refuse to support something so careless as to not really take into account what that symbol is going to mean to a lot of people when they see it.
I'm also annoyed by all the bloggers complaining that the campaign isn't getting as much support as it should, that if all atheists would stand up and speak out, things would change for the better as we all stood in solidarity. This whole thing is so slapdash and pushy that I personally don't care for it. There are also people who have their own reasons to want to pass, as they are likely living in an area where they could legitimately become a pariah or lose job opportunities, or something silly. Coming out in this manner is highly personal, and I support a person doing it when they feel safe and ready. Perhaps they'd like to come out without the aid of a shirt, on their own terms. We don't need to start attacking one another's personal choices.
ETA: I found the opinion on the campaign here also very interesting. My own non-belief isn't something I dwell on, all the blogging and blog-reading notwithstanding. It's just a part of me. I think the campaign is trying to do a lot more things, like present atheist as humans too, and try to move forward from there... it just isn't doing it very well.
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Thursday, August 9, 2007
See, I knew that saying was bunk.
Of course I can't find the article at the moment, but I have read through a trusted outlet that the number of fundamentalist Christians in the military is increasing. Now, this really doesn't surprise me on a basic level. A lot of people who join the military, especially enlisted men, are undereducated, often poor, with few other prospects, which is a classic background for fundamentalism. Especially ones that are joining now, wishing to participate in freeing Iraq or whatever else it is that keeps them signing up.
On top of that, the military is traditionally very conservative, which, again, has links to fundamentalist Christian beliefs. So far, few surprises.
Now, we're hearing about fundies evangelizing the troops in hopes of conversion, which also explains the new numbers of fundies in the military (I severely doubt it's all the pro-war fundies that have been told to join up to support what they want to do). And, of course, the icing on the cake, a superior officer disrupting an atheist meeting and using his rank to bully his non-fundamentalist Christian brothers in arms.
Now, the way the chain of command works, this was a rather frightening experience, especially with all the threats and accusation this fundie meeting crasher supposedly spouted. Life for an elisted man kinda sucks, especially with a war going on. The military is a harsh place that hammers in chain of command as best it can, and isn't really always nice about it. This is the same chain of command that keeps command rape and sexual abuse of female soldiers operating. Even when such an abuse is reported, the offender, who is generally of higher rank, receives a slap on the wrist, which is what is likely to occur here (not that sex crimes and religious harrassment are equitable).
Even if the exact veracity of the story is in doubt, there are points that mean that there is need for a further investigation, namely that the officer attended willingly a meeting that he was an outsider of, and lied to do so, then used his power in conduct unbecoming of an officer. Now, whether he went for debate and got a bit overheated, or whether he did so with purely antagonistic purposes in mind is what an investigation is for.
While America has plenty of freedom of religion written into that old Constitution, the military's view seems to be more like freedom to choose your personal branch of Christianity. I've heard of enlisted men being bullied by their drill sergeant if they don't go to Church on Sunday, and who are forced to participate in group prayer as part of a mandatory exercise. Only recently were Wiccans able to have pentagrams put on their graves when buried in Arlington National Cemetary, and there were plenty of asses willing to have tantrums over it.
On some level, I am rather concerned by this. If fundies succeed in cementing their hold on the military, it just takes a few kooks to push it to a new, frightening level. But, beyond that, they seem to be sending the message that their men have guns and are combat trained.
How funny, that we have fundamentalist extremists fighting other fundamentalist extremists. If only the powers that be could see the irony.
EDIT: Oh, wait, there's more!
Freedom Packages, eh? I wasn't aware that we called care packages "French Packages." There really isn't much freedom in the packages, just shoving a doctrine down one's throat.
But, seriously, this is all rather sick and heavy handed, and, sadly, will have an impact among some kids who have nothing else, and are in an environment that makes them rather emotionally vulnerable and unstable. The idea of evangelizing to the Muslim community... surely SOMEONE had to realize that's more harm than good, right? Right? Anyone?
On top of that, the military is traditionally very conservative, which, again, has links to fundamentalist Christian beliefs. So far, few surprises.
Now, we're hearing about fundies evangelizing the troops in hopes of conversion, which also explains the new numbers of fundies in the military (I severely doubt it's all the pro-war fundies that have been told to join up to support what they want to do). And, of course, the icing on the cake, a superior officer disrupting an atheist meeting and using his rank to bully his non-fundamentalist Christian brothers in arms.
Now, the way the chain of command works, this was a rather frightening experience, especially with all the threats and accusation this fundie meeting crasher supposedly spouted. Life for an elisted man kinda sucks, especially with a war going on. The military is a harsh place that hammers in chain of command as best it can, and isn't really always nice about it. This is the same chain of command that keeps command rape and sexual abuse of female soldiers operating. Even when such an abuse is reported, the offender, who is generally of higher rank, receives a slap on the wrist, which is what is likely to occur here (not that sex crimes and religious harrassment are equitable).
Even if the exact veracity of the story is in doubt, there are points that mean that there is need for a further investigation, namely that the officer attended willingly a meeting that he was an outsider of, and lied to do so, then used his power in conduct unbecoming of an officer. Now, whether he went for debate and got a bit overheated, or whether he did so with purely antagonistic purposes in mind is what an investigation is for.
While America has plenty of freedom of religion written into that old Constitution, the military's view seems to be more like freedom to choose your personal branch of Christianity. I've heard of enlisted men being bullied by their drill sergeant if they don't go to Church on Sunday, and who are forced to participate in group prayer as part of a mandatory exercise. Only recently were Wiccans able to have pentagrams put on their graves when buried in Arlington National Cemetary, and there were plenty of asses willing to have tantrums over it.
On some level, I am rather concerned by this. If fundies succeed in cementing their hold on the military, it just takes a few kooks to push it to a new, frightening level. But, beyond that, they seem to be sending the message that their men have guns and are combat trained.
How funny, that we have fundamentalist extremists fighting other fundamentalist extremists. If only the powers that be could see the irony.
EDIT: Oh, wait, there's more!
Freedom Packages, eh? I wasn't aware that we called care packages "French Packages." There really isn't much freedom in the packages, just shoving a doctrine down one's throat.
But, seriously, this is all rather sick and heavy handed, and, sadly, will have an impact among some kids who have nothing else, and are in an environment that makes them rather emotionally vulnerable and unstable. The idea of evangelizing to the Muslim community... surely SOMEONE had to realize that's more harm than good, right? Right? Anyone?
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Ex-gay where it shouldn't belong (IE anywhere)
You know, Virginia, I stood up for you last post, and you have to go and do this on me.
I've heard lots of complaints in my time about religious conservatives who want us to "think of the children," who don't want to have to explain to their children why Adam and Steve are kissing. You know, let children be children and not touch any idea of sex that isn't just something scary only married people do to have seventeen babies. And it makes God cry otherwise.
In a lot of ways, they wanted to keep sex off of the table, it seemed. I have never agreed, but it makes them uncomfortable, and these are their children, their business.
But, now, as is the way with sex-obsessed fundies, people whose sexual mores seem to warrant billboards telling them not to commit adultery, they are being delightfully hypocritical.
These are the people that fight books with gays in them from hitting public bookshelves. They don't want to cross that bridge with little Jimmy and Suzie. But now that it's on their terms, painting gays as abominations unto God, it's alright. I suppose you can cross that bridge with the little ones as long as there's hate on the other side, not something to humanize a minority.
Not to mention the idea of handing these ex-gay fliers to elementary and middle school students. Now, this is only a ploy to reach impressionable minds, and, as always, it makes me ill. Not to mention that elementary school children don't have the most concrete ideas about their own sexuality, and that middle school kids are having a tough enough time, especially if they are coming to terms with being gay (no small task in today's world) that they don't need this shit to make them feel worse, or do some severe psychological damage to themselves for the sake of fitting in.
It's sick, and it's very harmful to these kids' psyches. The Arlington County Court should be ashamed of itself. The school board made the correct call, not to mention the simple fact that, in actuality, public schools have few civil rights protections within their doors (we were reminded of this quite frequently in high school).
They complain that they have the right to freely organize as an extracurricular type group. To come to schools as a counterbalance to those pesky Gay-Straight Alliances. Well, you see, we have this separation of Church and State thing here, and it does apply to schools, as they are government run. I'll accept religious groups the moment they are doing something constructive (other than teaching gay children how horrid how they were born is), and the moment they stop having a hissy fit over things like the Atheist Club and Pagan Student Alliances. It's a two way street, kids.
To be honest, I'm a bit wigged that Arlington County is where this occured. For non-Virginia natives, this is a county in the northeastern part of the state, where a lot of people settle in order to work in DC. It's a hodge-podge of many different sorts of people, not exactly the best fundie material, really. But then, we look at the Liberty University hiring, god spouting administration, and I suppose it's changing.
Though, I still have a hard time conceptualizing it.
It's a shadow of what they'd love to do: block all other viewpoints to force theirs upon others (nothing pro-gay, all must be full of hate and shame regarding those damned homosexuals). We can't just have parents individually choose whatever they would like to teach their children regarding morality, can't have them having many viewpoints to choose from (I believe this is because when all the viewpoints are placed upon the table, the fundie one tends to lose). They can claim that it's to open up conversation, but I doubt that'll be the case, knowing the fundie track record for discussing things like homosexuality and the Bible.
I've heard lots of complaints in my time about religious conservatives who want us to "think of the children," who don't want to have to explain to their children why Adam and Steve are kissing. You know, let children be children and not touch any idea of sex that isn't just something scary only married people do to have seventeen babies. And it makes God cry otherwise.
In a lot of ways, they wanted to keep sex off of the table, it seemed. I have never agreed, but it makes them uncomfortable, and these are their children, their business.
But, now, as is the way with sex-obsessed fundies, people whose sexual mores seem to warrant billboards telling them not to commit adultery, they are being delightfully hypocritical.
These are the people that fight books with gays in them from hitting public bookshelves. They don't want to cross that bridge with little Jimmy and Suzie. But now that it's on their terms, painting gays as abominations unto God, it's alright. I suppose you can cross that bridge with the little ones as long as there's hate on the other side, not something to humanize a minority.
Not to mention the idea of handing these ex-gay fliers to elementary and middle school students. Now, this is only a ploy to reach impressionable minds, and, as always, it makes me ill. Not to mention that elementary school children don't have the most concrete ideas about their own sexuality, and that middle school kids are having a tough enough time, especially if they are coming to terms with being gay (no small task in today's world) that they don't need this shit to make them feel worse, or do some severe psychological damage to themselves for the sake of fitting in.
It's sick, and it's very harmful to these kids' psyches. The Arlington County Court should be ashamed of itself. The school board made the correct call, not to mention the simple fact that, in actuality, public schools have few civil rights protections within their doors (we were reminded of this quite frequently in high school).
They complain that they have the right to freely organize as an extracurricular type group. To come to schools as a counterbalance to those pesky Gay-Straight Alliances. Well, you see, we have this separation of Church and State thing here, and it does apply to schools, as they are government run. I'll accept religious groups the moment they are doing something constructive (other than teaching gay children how horrid how they were born is), and the moment they stop having a hissy fit over things like the Atheist Club and Pagan Student Alliances. It's a two way street, kids.
To be honest, I'm a bit wigged that Arlington County is where this occured. For non-Virginia natives, this is a county in the northeastern part of the state, where a lot of people settle in order to work in DC. It's a hodge-podge of many different sorts of people, not exactly the best fundie material, really. But then, we look at the Liberty University hiring, god spouting administration, and I suppose it's changing.
Though, I still have a hard time conceptualizing it.
It's a shadow of what they'd love to do: block all other viewpoints to force theirs upon others (nothing pro-gay, all must be full of hate and shame regarding those damned homosexuals). We can't just have parents individually choose whatever they would like to teach their children regarding morality, can't have them having many viewpoints to choose from (I believe this is because when all the viewpoints are placed upon the table, the fundie one tends to lose). They can claim that it's to open up conversation, but I doubt that'll be the case, knowing the fundie track record for discussing things like homosexuality and the Bible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)