This is what I like: atheism doesn’t need Global Thinky Leaders, in which the same ol’ faces get elevated — it needs more people, deeper roots, wider distribution. Check out the Openly Secular project. Maybe you should contribute a video, too!
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
I love Barney Frank. He’s like an even more adorable version of Milton from Office Space.
I am seriously considering it.
That was a very nice way to start the day. It’s really good to see a sample of the diverse peoples in the world who are happily secular.
Q: what do you call a movement without any leaders?
A: “a cultural change”
It’s refreshing to find someone who apparently holds the term “Thought Leader” in the same contempt that I do. Business buzzwords are the private sector equivalent of Orwell’s Doublespeak.
Plus, hey… you’ve already got a THINKY KING, what else do you need?
A revolution?
PZ:
:Gasps yes while falling over laughing:
PZ:
Give it about a year, and you’ll have your revolution.
Apparently the Richard Dawkins Foundation agrees as it is one of the four founding project members.
millssg99:
Which means what, exactly? Is this your way of saying we’re too mean to the Great Thinky Kings? An “oh, they aren’t so bad, really”?
@lyeska #11: I don’t know if the commenters on this blog are just overly defensive or gratuitously aggressive.
Given the recent posts by PZ on Dawkins, I was surprised myself to see PZ endorsing a projects that lists the RD Foundation on top of its joint members: http://www.openlysecular.org/#/about
Chill out, really. You may even, dunno, make this a less horribly daunting place for newbies.
Not to highjack anything, but has anyone mentioned the controversy over a Nebraska prison inmate suing the state to let him worship The Flying Spaghetti Monster as a pastafarian.
http://journalstar.com/news/opinion/editorial/editorial-pastafarian-lawsuit-has-serious-ramifications/article_105749e0-25b5-5776-a76b-66806fd45ff6.html
Gotta love it.
F.O. @12:
Here’s a third choice: you don’t know a thing about other the moods of others, so your interpretation is incorrect.
Because she didn’t respond in a manner that you approve of, Iyéska isn’t chill? You don’t know a thing about her mood, yet you sure are pretending to have some understanding.
Just bc you may find it daunting, or you are projecting your opinion onto others doesn’t make it so.
Dave Steinheider @13:
Just a heads up, off topic posts like yours are better suited to the Lounge of the Thunderdome (they are open threads for the discussion of any topic).
A BAGGAGE KING!
(Don’t ask me to remember what thread that wonderful typo was in, it was all of 24 hours ago I saw it.)
F.O.:
Well, you aren’t talking about the commentariat, are you? You’re talking about me. So, me obviously not going out of my way to be properly sweet and polite constitutes gratuitous aggressiveness, does it? Many times, I don’t mince words. And really, I find the idea of people being all surprised over PZ posting something in part supported by RDF to be…stupid. If someone really cares about that, great, they can explain why they care. So here’s a suggestion: Fuck off.
Do not tell me (or anyone else) to chill/relax/calm down. It’s both stupid and insulting. I had no need to chill/relax/calm down at the time I posted, nor do I now. I’m quite happily kickin’ back with tea and rats, so one more time: Fuck off.
I’ve been actively posting at Pharyngula for 6 years, and in that time, I have welcomed a fucktonne of new people, actively helped new people, have often had the pleasure of people letting me know I helped them or made things better for them, and generally enjoyed every influx of new folk. Some people are just bloody stupid, and no, I’m not overreaching myself in those cases. And today has been People Say Stupid Shit Day, across threads.
millssg99 can maybe explain whether there was something passive aggressive meant with that bare statement of fact or not?
F.O.
Why surprised. You really thought that PZ wouldn’t support a good thing just because something Dawkins’ is involved with also supports it?
Also, don’t tell Iyéska or anyone else to chill. Thanks.
I’ve been openly secular in Australia for more than sixty years and never any problems.
Lovely.
Lyeska can be as aggressive as she wants and Tony’s priority is to scold *me*.
You are just a gang of petty bullies.
@Beatrice #18: No I didn’t think that, but I had a lapse of cognitive dissonance when I noticed that, which probably made it easier for me to empathize with #10.
I think “passive-aggressive” is the new black.
As for you, F.O., I just remind you that we humans have great big brains. If we allow ourselves to escape from stereotypes and religious thinking then it is perfectly possible to use that brain capacity to acknowledge that an individual or an institution can be doing lots of good, even admirable, work and still be seriously wrong/mistaken/destructive on one topic.
That’s what secularism is – you examine the ideas on their merit and waste no time at all bothering about which circle of hell the person will end up in.
Wow it was a bare statement of fact that I thought might be interesting since I assumed not everyone would realize it.
I’m not a fan of that style of video editing. I was hoping for an entire video of Barney Frank, honestly.
Richard Dawkins’ tax shelter can support good things. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Iyéska, I didn’t even think your comment was harsh. I’m a newbie, in fact I think this is my third post after years of lurking, and the only “horribly daunting” thing about this site is trying to get paragraph breaks to work properly.
Thanks for responding, millssg99
Ianthorpe @ 23:
Thanks! Oh, paragraph breaks – they work, they are there, but preview is still broken. Pain in the arse, that.
millssg99 @ 22:
So, there was absolutely no point to you making that bare statement of fact? Why did you think it would be interesting? Did you expect people to react thusly: oh man, didn’t know it involved RDF, I revile it!? You must have had some expectation, and I’m curious as to what it was.
QFT.
Also QFT.
When I saw it I had a momentary chuckle as I had just linked over from a statement about Global Thinky Leaders. Now maybe that doesn’t make you chuckle but it did me. If I had the desire to provoke something I am perfectly capable of such by adding more to the comment. Similarly I recently watched a documentary where I swear I saw PZ sitting in the audience next to Dawkins. I had to laugh and think my how times have changed.
Frankly if you don’t have similar reactions I don’t care. I don’t expect everyone to react the same. It should not surprise you to realize that not everyone is out to make provocative statements that lead to armchair wrestling matches. Sometimes they just make simple straightforward comments. Sorry if it was not enough. I’ve already spent more time explaining this than it was worth and makes me wonder why I bothered in the first place.
I would guess that clarity of communication is sufficient reason for anyone who considers themselves a rational adult. Thanks for pointing out that RDF is a sponsor. I missed that, though it is hinted at in the title of the OP. Moderating your reaction to mild criticism would be also be appreciated. A petulant whine about the criticizers worth is not helpful.
Foooock, that should read would also be appreciated, *swats extra be* and critics at my #29. I blame the allergy meds for the grammar brain fart of ‘criticizers’. WTF brain?
Yeah, to be honest it struck me but I didn’t even consider it worth a post.