Statement Regarding Ellen JohnsonA specially called, and properly noticed, meeting of the five Boards of Directors that together comprise American Atheists, was held on April 29, 2008.All members of the five boards were personally present via telephone at that meeting, including the President Ellen Johnson.By a majority vote of the Board of Directors of American Atheists, Inc, and by a unanimous vote of the Board of Directors of two of the other four corporations, Ellen Johnson was involuntarily removed from the office of President of American Atheists, Inc. and from the office of President of the other four corporations.The bylaws of each of the five corporations permit the removal of the President by a majority vote of the Board of Directors.Out of deep respect for Ellen Johnson?s many services to American Atheists, in deference to her privacy, and with the desire that her Presidency be remembered favorably by history, American Atheists asks that this statement be accepted without calls for further explanation. Be assured that the action taken was in the best interests of the organization and of its membership.Frank R. Zindler, Acting PresidentAmerican Atheists, Inc.; Charles E. Stevens American Atheist Library & Archives, Inc.; Society of Separationists, Inc.; United Secularists of America, Inc.; and American Atheists General Headquarters, Inc.
This is pretty self-explanatory. Once again Ellen is welcomed to post on this blog any time.
In the mean time, we are looking forward and looking up. Change is in the air.
Sorry, no can do.
Why was there a post saying that Ellen left ‘for personal reasons’ and now there is a post saying that she was ‘involuntarily removed’?
Those two statements strike me as mutually exclusive.
is Ellen still on the board?
The word is she found God.
I find it a bit hard to feel “assured” when the person doing the assuring previously posted that Ellen left for personal reasons… still, out of respect for Ellen, I’ll refrain from asking any more questions.
So we should accept your word on faith?
That doesn’t seem very atheistic to me…
“Someone” who chomochone? We like sources here.
cjn
Wow…it appears that American Atheists is in as much disarray as the democrat party….
My first guess would have been a power grab because of the “majority” vote within AA. However, with the other two voting “unanimously” for her removal, it makes me wonder if there wasn’t something much more serious which occurred…
But the dues paying members will never know. Instead the powers at be would rather have their troops speculate instead of knowing the truth…
Wow…it appears that American Atheists is in as much disarray as the democrat party….
My first guess would have been a power grab because of the “majority” vote within AA. However, with the other two voting “unanimously” for her removal, it makes me wonder if there wasn’t something much more serious which occurred…
But the dues paying members will never know. Instead the powers at be would rather have their troops speculate instead of knowing the truth…
Sorry for the double post…the AA server appears to have hiccuped…
Yah the older statements were vague just to protect everyone from complications that can arise when a relationship ends. Now it’s a little less vague.
But this is pretty easy to read. The President and the Board had major issues and the Board terminated the relationship according to the rules of the organization. Ellen was aware and an active participant in the proceedings. It didn’t work out. It happens, and it sucks.
Ellen is still on the Board. Whether she stays is anyone’s guess.
I really like Ellen, as do most Atheists I know, but she’s not the President anymore. Frank is (for now), and he will take us in the direction that is more agreeable to the board (or they’ll remove him too).
She did NOT find religion Chomo. Please do not spread such rumors, even if you are trying to be funny.
I’m not sure which is more eyebrow raising — the repeated references to AA in terms of a corporation, the or the professed desire for history to be seen for what they’d rather it be, rather than what it is.
The need or want for privacy in this matter is understandable and justified. I think you’ll find, though, atheists are far more of a “warts and all” sort of bunch in general, even if it “isn’t their business”. So much has been concealled in the name of wanting to alter history.
It all depends on who we’re viewed, right? If this were a government, we’d have a right to demand it. If this were a corporation, the board members could demand it, the shareholders could demand it. But the customers and the lower employees could not.
Of course, the “customer/employee” paradigm concept isn’t accurate in this case since in function, they’re one in the same.
I’m not assured. I’ve yet to hear what this “new direction” is that apparently couldn’t be accomplished with Ellen at the helm. I’m all for new blood and fresh ideas, but I’d like to think we could trust the AA representatives to be open and honest about what’s going on. So far, I don’t get that impression. I wouldn’t want to think we atheists are being told to “sit down and shut up and not ask questions” by other atheists.
Gee Karen…couldn’t you have been a bit less inflammatory? After all, Dave is the communications director and simply trying to calm the waters…
I agree Karen. Are we going to hear from CNN first?
This could be nothing, or it could be something.
Rumors are never a good thing.
I am going out on a limb here. I saw her in a couple of interviews and was not impressed. She seemed quite an angry person. Never met her in person so cant’ say I know her personally but my opinion is we don?t need another Madeline O?Hair.
Seems there are quite a few well known Atheists out there that are very level headed and can handle the pressure. Very likable people that make their arguments strong and respected. Not emotional. Richard Dawkins is one in particular.
My guess would be Ellen was canned not because she found Jesus, but because she encouraged atheists not to vote. I’ve heard some felt she really messed up on that comment and since she was the president some took it as she was speaking on behalf of the entire AA organization. I heard a whole lot of members got pissed and sent emails in complaining.
American Atheists also use to be the premier organization for atheists, and some felt that Ellen represented the old guard, so the push for new ideas is to get AA back in the mainstream, and not viewed as a personality cult of O’Hair (much like Rand and her followers). The not-voting comment was the icing on the cake, I’m sure.
A lot of members feel, I think, that there is a lot potential for this organization that just hadn’t been utilized. Though it may not have the numbers like FFRF, it is definitely in a place to become that, if it played its cards better. AA is pretty much a household name, or at least it was when O’Hair steered the ship. I think the members want that again, but just not all the drama associated with it. I think the Board knew if it didn’t take action, especially since the take off of the New Atheism, AA would be overshadowed by groups like AAI under the leadership of Downey.
Sometimes the deck has to be shuffled a bit.
Shady123,
I like your theory. I was very dismayed about the “don’t vote” comment.
I think shady123 may be on to something. Atheism has become a lot more hip in the last couple years and is even beginning to approach mainstream, yet AA seems to have been left in the dust amid all the hype. At least that’s been my impression. I have no idea how much that has to do with Ellen’s leadership, but it seems like a plausible reason for AA to consider a new direction.
I think Zindler is awesome, or at least his articles are awesome. Looking forward to new era.
phreedm
Hehe. Well, at least it isn’t in as bad a shape as the Republican Party.
Dave
This is not acceptable. I am sick of opacity in our government and I wont accept this authoritarian posture from AA. If we do not get all the facts with respect to the firing then I will drop AA in favor of one of the other free thought organizations.
Eh, I never much cared for Ellen that much anyhow, just kind of a mediocre president in my not-so-humble opinion. What!? So crucify me already!
Seriously though, Frank will probably do something spectacular in his presidency.
Okay, I didn’t mean that. Actually, I stand corrected, I guess she’s done some great things for AA that I didn’t even know about until I went to the AA website. I guess she’ll be missed.
Well, it remains to be seen if Zindler will be a better spokesperson than Johnson. I have never seen him, so for the moment I have no judgement.
However, I think it would be a better policy to have fixed terms and maybe term limits, if that is not the case now.
There would be less controversy if at the end of a term, a new person was chosen.
This is the best blog on the web,as long as things can be aired out anyway we want I can deal with it.The waiting is the hard part.
Apparently most of you were not at the convention, as I was. Ellen did NOT tell people not to vote. What she did say was that atheists should band together as a group with lots of voting “power” and THREATEN not to vote if our views are not heard. She explicity said we should vote, but threaten not to. This may be somewhat duplicitous and some may not like it, but these are the facts.
Also, Ellen is far from an angry person and nothing like O’Hair. To the contrary, not only is she warm and friendly and funny, she has done a great deal to unite all the atheist groups and IS a uniter not a divider! (pardon the reference!)
What is the point of all the above speculation as to why this and why that when none of you have any facts and have no idea why this happened. Many of you are making comments re people’s behavior and personality while, sometimes admittedly, have never met anyone involved. And, likely, don’t participate in any AA activities.
I have great fondness for Ellen personally, think she has done a great deal for the organization. This does not mean it is not time for a new person. Frankly, I don’t know, but it would be nice to know what the Board’s thoughts are.
Also, for the record, if AA wants to take a new direction, Frank Zindler, while a very dedicated atheist. is not, in my opinion, the person to do it. If change is in order there needs to be much younger blood with new ideas.
Dave Silverman would be a perfect example of this type of new leader. There are many more like him in the organization, all over the country.
please ignore the droll….
I am also with Karen…..open honest integrity is an attribute I would like to find in AA….Religion offers none….the media, especially Fixed Noise, has none….
I appreciate the truth in all that it is…..
My question, Is Ellen still on the board?, has not been answered….
“Ellen your fired, but you can stay on the board if you want”….hmmmmm
Frank-
I’d say it’s time to put up or shut up. Obviously, we’re aware that a difference in vision existed and that a power struggle took place.
Who do you think you’re dealing with, anyway – sheeple?
You’re acting president – not the Pope – so don’t insult us with this, “…accepted without calls for further explanation” crap.
I suggest that A.A. come clean and publish the list of grievances it had against Ms. Johnson.
If this represents a change in direction for the organization, a revised mission statement is also in order – pronto.
maizie,
Maybe that’s what she said at the convention, but in a video posted on the American Atheists website 2/5/08 she very specifically said that she didn’t vote on Super Tuesday, and she also very specifically encouraged secular voters to stay home during the general election. Nothing about threaten – just don’t vote, period, which was a ridiculous thing to say, in my opinion.
However, if the board was so upset about that particular comment, seems like they would have said something many weeks ago. It’s got to be something more complicated and/or more serious than that.
The board is under no obligation to reveal the specific details of Johnson’s dismissal. Indeed, I would be surprised if they do so. Am I curious? Sure. But this is a private organization, not a publicly elected government agency. Legally and morally, Johnson’s right to privacy trumps our curiosity.
The very nature of this organization imposes upon it an obligation to conduct such business IN THE OPEN.
If the reasons for Ms. Johnson’s dismissal are valid, that validity should also be self-evident.
Bottom line – The board wants to make some changes in the organization. As a member(?), I’d like to know its plan.
Tarma, Maizie is correct. I was at the convention also. The video may have been misleading, but that was its intent. Ellen was most likely not terminated for that. You are correct, though, in that we may never know, or should know, the facts. A lot of people want closure, but it probably won?t happen. We need to move on.
Ellen should be remembered for the thousands of hours she has sacrificed for all of us during her 13 year presidency ? not to mention the 30 years she has been an active member. At the convention I got to talk with Ellen one on one for a while. I found her to be intelligent, witty, caring and sincere – the archetype of an activist and friend. I went there to meet Dawkins and Krauss, but it was my talk with Ellen that was the highlight of the weekend. Don?t forget Ellen has been the voice of AA and taken it in a new positive direction since Madalyn disbanded all of the national franchises and left thousands of atheist stranded without a voice. Many of those disenfranchised former franchises (now the AAI) are still bitter towards AA. Ellen has done much to help heal. Do not forget all that she?s accomplished.
As far as the future of American Atheists goes, we need to step up and help set a new course. There is much that needs to be fixed, but as atheists we need to come together and work to resolve our vicissitudes and work to address our needs. We don?t need another elitist think tank (Center for Inquiry); we already have a voice on Capital Hill (Secular Coalition); the FFRF and AU fight brilliantly when we are wronged. No, we need something more, something to propagate and disseminate our world view. We need an organization to stand up to religion itself ? not just the consequences of it. American Atheists can be a great instrument in helping to achieve equality in America, but only if ?we? are up for the challenge. We (members) need to continue to voice our opinions and help to shape a plan for the future.
At the end of her speech at the convention, Ellen looked out at all of us and said, ?You are the real heroes.?
I believe it was Dave that suggested we don’t vote. Or, to be fair, suggested that we not vote for any candidate that doesn’t pander to us. And of course since none of them do that amounts to the same thing.
character |?karikt?r| noun
the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual -
fifth column | is a group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group to which it is expected to be loyal -
To: American Atheists Board of Directors
Through your collective lack of character, in the handling of your firing of Ellen Johnson, you?ve managed to make me ashamed of having been a member of American Atheists.
Through your collective lack of character, in this matter, you?ve gained a reputation for being unworthy of trust.
Through your collective lack of character, in this matter, you?ve done more to substantiate the claim of the religious that Atheists lack moral character than any of the faithful have ever been able to accomplish.
Which leads me to wonder if you are not, collectively a Fifth Column.
Good bye
atheistud@lycos.com
ELLEN WAS FIRED IN A TELEPHONE CALL?!
Oh well, I suppose that’s warmer than a Post-It.
Hey, I didn’t write the above comment, it’s a quote from Deep Diver that I wanted to address. I don’t know how to work your #!*!! blog responses yet. Please remove the above comment lest anyone think I wrote it.
I wanted to point out that Ellen is NOT an angry person. She can be angry at CNN and O’Reilly, as can’t we all, (and she should be angry at the Board)but she is generally a very grounded person, a good Mom, sister and daughter. She is the face of Atheism that I would like to see projected out there: A soccer Mom who is smart, poised, self-confident, beautiful, determined and dedicated. This is the image I would like to see us identified with, not a bunch of taciturn old Biblical scholars.
As for Madalyn Murray O’Hair, please, some respect. Madalyn was a brilliant lawyer who fought the good fight for us and died for it. She was right for her time. Ellen is right for ours.
” . . . .Ellen is NOT an angry person. She can be angry at CNN and O’Reilly, as can’t we all, (and she should be angry at the Board)but she is generally a very grounded person, a good Mom, sister and daughter. She is the face of Atheism that I would like to see projected out there: A soccer Mom who is smart, poised, self-confident, beautiful, determined and dedicated. This is the image I would like to see us identified with, not a bunch of taciturn old Biblical scholars.
As for Madalyn Murray O’Hair, please, some respect. Madalyn was a brilliant lawyer who fought the good fight for us and died for it. She was right for her time. Ellen is right for ours.”
Well said, Smartgal. Thank you.
P.S. If you think Ellen Johnson is going to respond to the Board on this blog, think again.
I emailed Ellen a couple of days ago with two words: FIGHT BACK. DON’T QUIT.
This is the response I got back from Ellen:
“Oh. They don’t listen to what I have to say. Their minds are made up.
But thanks for your support.
Ellen”
————-
I apologize to Ellen for disclosing publicly the contents of a personal email but I thought it important for members to know that there is a profound lack of communication between the Board and the president of AA. If the Board doesn’t listen to the president of AA, then they certainly aren’t going to listen to you or me.
Jane
I agree with Maizie. We have almost no info and speculation is not helpful. What would be helpful is the facts.
And I am under no obligation to remain a member of AA.
Doesn’t trump my pocket book. AA has a lot of explaining to do. I will not tolerate such opacity.
kosmic,
Maizie may well be correct about what she heard at the convention. I maintain that the video was absolutely, positively, crystal clear in Johnson stating that she did not vote in the primary, would not vote in the general, and that other secular-minded individuals should not vote in the general election. If you don’t believe me, the video is available on Youtube – listen for yourself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHHAeKVgGKs
I don’t know Ellen Johnson personally. She “seems” like a nice person, and she probably is. On the other hand, I also know from personal experience that some people are definitely not what they “seem” to be. I am in no position to judge her.
I am trying to look at this situation as a positive opportunity for American Atheists to grow and improve. We shall see.
What,
No argument here. We are all free individuals and will proceed as we deem appropriate. I’m going to wait a while and see how it all shakes out.
Smartgal,
4 words?
You should apologize to her. I find that unconscionable.
You don’t know the whole story here, and repeating her statement, likely made in frustration and/or anger, cannot help this situation.
What’s this “in deference to her privacy” crap in your statement about Ellen’s firing, Frank? First you very publicly fire her, then you say you can’t tell us why “in deference to her privacy?”
Is the real reason you can’t you tell us WHY she was fired is that you are afraid we might knock down your reasons with simple rational thinking?
Ellen’s life is an open book. She has never been big on “privacy.” In every AA Solstice party I’ve been to in New Jersey, Ellen drew in her Mom, her sisters, at least one of her kids and her Main Squeeze (as she calls him), Bart.
Compared to Madalyn Murray O’Hair, Ellen’s life is an outstanding example of decorum.
I talked briefly with Ellen at the 2007 Seattle convention and of course observed her in action the whole time. I was impressed by her as I was by the speakers and the general caliber of everyone involved.
As a membership organization, I think the board does owe us a more definitive explanation of what precipitated the ?involuntary removal? from office.
I personally find it amazing that Ellen was willing to serve as president for 17 years. I serve on a number of boards as a volunteer and generally find that I need a break after five or six years.
Ellen came to the presidency under very trying conditions, to put it mildly. I for one feel we owe her a great deal of gratitude.
Smartgal,
So, if you got fired, you’d be okay with your employer telling everyone all the details? I don’t think so. An employer does have an obligation to maintain an employee’s privacy. It’s not like they could keep the fact that she is no longer president a secret, but I don’t understand this overiding interest in all the gossipy details. Well, I understand it, but that doesn’t make it right.
I think a better analogy would be if Congress had closed session and fired the Speaker of the House — and then didn’t tell anyone why.
All corporation speak aside…
“You should apologize to her. I find that unconscionable,” says Tarma about my releasing Ellen’s response to me after she points out that I sent 4 words to Ellen, not two: FIGHT BACK, DON’T QUIT.
(OK, I sent 4 words. I had previously PUBLICLY RELEASED only 2 of the words I sent to Ellen, “FIGHT BACK.”)
I HAVE indeed apologized to Ellen for disclosing her response. It’s right there in my comment! But I am wise enough (I’m Smartgal) to realize that the greater good, for both Ellen and AA, is that the we all know that there has been virtually no significant communication between the Board and Ellen.
That tells me a lot. It tells me that Ellen has probably been confronting this animosity for 13 years. It tells me that they have probably been looking for something to nail her on.
This Freedom Walk (which a lot of members had approved of and backed financially) was initially approved by the Board, was it not? So now they disapprove of it? Then they fire her for doing it? On the telephone? If that doesn’t sound like a set-up, I don’t know what is.
———-
I’m also amazed and amused that they fired Ellen by phone. LIKE I SAID BEFORE, IT’S PROBABLY A WARMER GESTURE THAN A POST-IT.
But I can think of an even more notable way: Why not send a runner to catch up with Ellen in Alabama, carrying a laminated letter saying, YOU’RE FIRED. The two letters (one from Bill Moore) might even reach the guv’nor in Jackson, Miss. at the same time. What a lark it would be if the governor got the wrong letter by mistake? I’d love to see his face reading YOU’RE FIRED in front of a forest of TV cameras. Might be the best thing AA could ever do for Mississippi.
But not for Ellen.
Smartgal,
You are merely speculating. You don’t know anything of the sort, and it seems to me that you are intentionally trying to inflame the issue. You may be perfectly correct for all I know, and maybe the entire AA board is composed of horrible, unfeeling, and conspiratorial ogres, but “probably this” and “probably that” doesn’t mean squat. How about some facts? You know, the things that we atheists like to base decisions on?
If Ms. Johnson wants to enlighten the general public about her situation, she will do so herself. I still maintain that the board should rightly be constrained by privacy concerns on her behalf. So sue me.
Tarma says: “So, if you got fired, you’d be okay with your employer telling everyone all the details? I don’t think so. An employer does have an obligation to maintain an employee’s privacy.”
But Tarma, I would like to point out that WE ARE ALL ELLEN’S EMPLOYERS by financially supporting AA.
As employers, we don’t want to see a good employee go just because a colleague is jealous of him. As employers, we would want to know what an employee did to justify his firing.
Speaking as someone with some corporate experience, I have seen some excellent employees fired because a rival with lesser credentials set him up. It’s done all the time. It’s called office politics. Or now, the fancier name is “corporate psychodynamics.”
You disclose your naivitee’ and inexperience with “corporate-speak” when you mention gossip,Tarma. In the corporate world, it’s known as “information,” and you’d better know it or you’ll never get ahead. Only housewives call it “gossip.” That’s because housewives are generally isolated and thus have no psychodynamic use for sub-rosa information. Besides, their husbands don’t want them to have this information. It’s another way of keeping housewives subordinate.
Ellen is operating in a corporate-like world. Boards of Directors are mirrors of the corporate world. Yes, we are like the stockholders, as someone on this Blog has already pointed out. And we, as responsible stockholders, want to know what’s going on now with what appears to be at this point, the Enron of Atheism.
Tarma says: “I still maintain that the board should rightly be constrained by privacy concerns on her behalf. So sue me.”
The Board must love you, Tarma. I bet they wish all of us would roll over like this and not ask any probing questions.
Dumbgal,
You are a loon.
The members of American Atheists are not Ellen Johnson’s “employers.” Give me a break.
I have decades of “corporate experience.” Besides several other corporate positions, I worked for 20 years for a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization. I dealt directly with the board, with the executive director, with other employees, with volunteers, with members, and with outside agencies. I am perfectly familiar with office politics. Some of us try to rise above it and actually follow prescribed personnel policies. So, take your housewives comment and shove it.
If you want to label your idle speculation as “information,” go right ahead, dear. Still sounds like “gossip” to me.
We (members of American Atheists) are NOT like stockholders in any real sense of the word. Talk about naivete….
Holy shit, now you’ve got me using Phreeky’s ellipsis