A number of e-mails and comments have been received criticizing the Board of Directors of American Atheists for its dismissal of Ellen Johnson as President. Acting President Frank Zindler has been answering at least some of these critics as time has allowed.In reply to one person who suggested that the dismissal was rash, precipitous, or even without cause, Zindler replied:
“Thank you for writing to American Atheists concerning the dismissal of President Ellen Johnson. Please be assured that this was not an action that was taken lightly or without an immense amount of agonizing on the part of all members of the board. Two special meetings of the Boards of Directors of American Atheists, Inc., and its four affiliated American Atheists corporations were held for the purpose of allowing Ms. Johnson to discuss policies concerning which she and the boards disagreed. For reasons known only to Ms. Johnson, she did not take part in those meetings and did nothing to resolve the issues in question. Consequently, at a third special meeting of the boards, a majority of the directors felt it their fiduciary responsibility to remove Ms. Johnson from the office of President, although she has not been removed from membership on the boards themselves.”
Several critics have argued that it was unfair or even treacherous to dismiss Ms. Johnson while on her civil-rights march to Mississippi. Zindler’s reply was
“Concerning Ms. Johnson’s ‘Bill Moore March’ through Alabama and Mississippi, I must inform you that this was carried out without the sponsorship of American Atheists, Inc. For complex legal reasons, the Board of Directors had instructed her not to do that in any way that would give the impression that the action was an official activity of American Atheists, Inc.”
Several of Zindler’s letters have contained the following paragraph:
“I hope you will understand that most of the members of the boards of directors are seasoned Atheists with long experience in American Atheists, Inc., going back to an early period in the career of Madalyn Murray O’Hair. We care deeply for the organization she founded and wish to see it prosper. We honor her memory and seek by all legal means available to advance her cause — the cause of Atheist civil liberties, separation of state and church, and the liberation of the human mind. We feel now more than ever that this is the most important Atheist organization in America — not only in what it is trying to do but also in what it is in fact doing.”
One writer has even alleged that the boards dismissed Ellen for reasons of power or personal gain, to which Zindler replied:
“Your assertion that the Board dismissed Ms. Johnson ‘for seemingly no better reason that to exercise power’ is particularly troubling, as it presumes either that we acted out of whim — i.e., with no compelling reason of fiduciary responsibility — or that we somehow will enjoy personal gain from this painful action. I cannot expect you to believe that we did in fact have important reasons of fiduciary responsibility for the simple reason that I am not at liberty to tell you what those were. However, as for the second assumption — that of personal gain from exercise of power — I would have you know that all the Directors of the Board serve without salary, as do the Secretary and Treasurer. Although Ms. Johnson as President did receive a very modest salary, as Acting President I am serving without pay — as I have done for 13 years as Managing Editor of American Atheist Press (itself a full-time job). “I will be Acting President probably for only five or six months, until a new President can be selected. Nevertheless, I hope you will stay with us and help us in our fight against the forces of ignorance and superstition — not only through my brief tenure in an office I never sought, but also into the future with whomever succeeds me.”
Zindler also has expressed gratitude for Ellen’s accomplishments in many of his replies, for example “I agree with you perhaps more than you can appreciate that Ellen Johnson has been a brilliant and effective leader of the Atheist movement and has made many extremely important contributions to the cause of reason, Atheist civil liberties, and separation of state and church.”
The town idiot wrote
. No need for me to comment.
My membership in A.A. came w/ my commitment to sponsor Viewpoint on local public access TV. My only goal was to break the religious monopoly there.
Since these shows are supposed to represent ME, I have not been shy to criticise. My email correspondence w/ Ellen has been an even-handed mix of admonishment and praise.
Bottom line – I’m not happy when someone in this organization causes me embarrassment. The actions of the Board w/ respect to this unceremonious firing of our public face is the act of just such a caffone(get an Italian dictionary and look it up).
How do you think this looks to an asshole like Bill Donohue? Bill O’Reilly? Glenn Beck?
The whitewash piece by Zindler has obviously fooled no one and now, thanks to all the bullshit, WE look like idiots just for being members.
If you had problems w/ Ellen, couldn’t you have exercised some public decorum in dealing w/ her?
Tomorrow, I have to deliver the next two episodes of Viewpoint to the TV station. Thanks to the unprofessional conduct of this Board, I can no longer hold my head high for this task.
The Board was not looking at the big picture, here.
This is unfortunate. I’m not going to comment on actions I was in no position to observe, but it does seem to this member that this action came on rather suddenly.
Perhaps, it was unavoidable. When the president of any organization is at loggerheads with the majority of that organization’s board of directors, then it’s not hard to predict what the outcome will be.
Possibly board members and Ms. Johnson can reconsider their positions and achieve a reconciliation. Failing that, I hope the board will recognize Ellen’s years of service on the front line in some meaningful fashion and that she will continue to be an ally to the organization she has served so ably all these years.
Conflict of interest, much??!!
To Jeanne and Gil Gaudia, who went ballistic on the Blog when I pointed out punctuation errors in American Atheists magazine:
Your anger reveals to me that you, probably as volunteer editors, are the ones responsible for the erroneous hanging periods in the magazine.
WELL, I KNEW IT WASN’T ELLEN.
For your information: check out Page 170 of The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage.
I have not enountered any “exceptions” to this rule in my 30 years of editing publications in New York City.
In any case, the erroneous hanging periods appeared far too often in the AA magazine to be “exceptions.”
——–
Just out of curiousity, Gil and Jeanne, if my handle had been “Smartguy” instead of “Smartgal,” would your response to me have been as vicious?
I wonder.
AA needs to work on getting rid of the rampant misogyny in its ranks.
Smartgal needs to stop playing the misogyny card all the time. Until you have any evidence, it only makes it look like you have an unrelated agenda to push and it adds nothing to the discussion.
For the record, I agree with you about the editing in the magazine, it has made me cringe fairly often.
Here’s another word for the Board of Directors of AA: HEARTLESS.
I can put myself in Ellen Johnson’s shoes when I think about the Freedom Walk: First the Board said Yes. Funds for the Freedom Walk were even solicited on this Blog (I know people who sent in money for it.)
Then the Board said, Well, maybe not. Then, Well, just don’t use AA funds. And then, after being wishy washy all this time while Ellen made arrangements, the Board finally issued a No…But by that time, I think Ellen had committed herself to so many people, particularly to those old veterans who had tried to complete Bill Moore’s walk 45 years ago, and their children, and it was an emotional committment… How could she reverse herself when the vacillating Board finally said No? I can see her being torn and then finally deciding to go with her heart.
And I can also identify with Ellen’s perhaps wanting to do an Atheist kind of “memorial” for Madalyn Murray O’Hair, something that Madalyn would have appreciated, or something she would have done herself in her day. And I can identify with the sorrow that Ellen must have felt seven years ago when Madalyn’s body was found, and I can even imagine tears washing down Ellen’s face as she ran the Freedom route, and I can imagine Ellen thinking, This is for you, Madalyn, in expiation of all that the Board did not do 13 years ago.
Yes, I can identify with Ellen’s sorrow and her grief and maybe her gut need to do something.. something that Madalyn would have done herself, or would have encouraged, as Madalyn had encouraged Bill Moore on his trek.
I listen to you Board members with your pompous talk of fiduciary liability and I think, bullshit, you are heartless, unimaginative, unempathetic wimps who wouldn’t recognize a noble act if it slapped you in the face.
Yes, all the time Ellen was running in the South, I was thinking, “Run, Ellen, run.” And I was thinking of Madalyn too, and her unmarked grave somewhere in the Southwest, and I knew Madalyn would have approved.
You did good, Ellen. You acted couragely. If you were defiant, it was because the situation called for defiance. Madalyn was often defiant.
Run, Ellen, run. Run away from those who don’t understand, who don’t cry, who don’t feel the sorrow.
Here’s another word for the Board of Directors of AA: HEARTLESS.
I can put myself in Ellen Johnson’s shoes when I think about the Freedom Walk: First the Board said Yes. Funds for the Freedom Walk were even solicited on this Blog (I know people who sent in money for it.)
Then the Board said, Well, maybe not. Then, Well, just don’t use AA funds. And then, after being wishy washy all this time while Ellen made arrangements, the Board finally issued a No…But by that time, I think Ellen had committed herself to so many people, particularly to those old veterans who had tried to complete Bill Moore’s walk 45 years ago, and their children, and it was an emotional committment… How could she reverse herself when the vacillating Board finally said No? I can see her being torn and then finally deciding to go with her heart.
And I can also identify with Ellen’s perhaps wanting to do an Atheist kind of “memorial” for Madalyn Murray O’Hair, something that Madalyn would have appreciated, or something she would have done herself in her day. And I can identify with the sorrow that Ellen must have felt seven years ago when Madalyn’s body was found, and I can even imagine tears washing down Ellen’s face as she ran the Freedom route, and I can imagine Ellen thinking, This is for you, Madalyn, in expiation of all that the Board did not do 13 years ago.
Yes, I can identify with Ellen’s sorrow and her grief and maybe her gut need to do something.. something that Madalyn would have done herself, or would have encouraged, as Madalyn had encouraged Bill Moore on his trek.
I listen to you Board members with your pompous talk of fiduciary liability and I think, bullshit, you are heartless, unimaginative, unempathetic wimps who wouldn’t recognize a noble act if it slapped you in the face.
Yes, all the time Ellen was running in the South, I was thinking, “Run, Ellen, run.” And I was thinking of Madalyn too, and her unmarked grave somewhere in the Southwest, and I knew Madalyn would have approved.
You did good, Ellen. You acted couragely. If you were defiant, it was because the situation called for defiance. Madalyn was often defiant.
Run, Ellen, run. Run away from those who don’t understand, who don’t cry, who don’t feel the sorrow.
Here’s another word for the Board of Directors of AA: HEARTLESS.
I can put myself in Ellen Johnson’s shoes when I think about the Freedom Walk: First the Board said Yes. Funds for the Freedom Walk were even solicited on this Blog (I know people who sent in money for it.)
Then the Board said, Well, maybe not. Then, Well, just don’t use AA funds. And then, after being wishy washy all this time while Ellen made arrangements, the Board finally issued a No…But by that time, I think Ellen had committed herself to so many people, particularly to those old veterans who had tried to complete Bill Moore’s walk 45 years ago, and their children, and it was an emotional committment… How could she reverse herself when the vacillating Board finally said No? I can see her being torn and then finally deciding to go with her heart.
And I can also identify with Ellen’s perhaps wanting to do an Atheist kind of “memorial” for Madalyn Murray O’Hair, something that Madalyn would have appreciated, or something she would have done herself in her day. And I can identify with the sorrow that Ellen must have felt seven years ago when Madalyn’s body was found, and I can even imagine tears washing down Ellen’s face as she ran the Freedom route, and I can imagine Ellen thinking, This is for you, Madalyn, in expiation of all that the Board did not do 13 years ago.
Yes, I can identify with Ellen’s sorrow and her grief and maybe her gut need to do something.. something that Madalyn would have done herself, or would have encouraged, as Madalyn had encouraged Bill Moore on his trek.
I listen to you Board members with your pompous talk of fiduciary liability and I think, bullshit, you are heartless, unimaginative, unempathetic wimps who wouldn’t recognize a noble act if it slapped you in the face.
Yes, all the time Ellen was running in the South, I was thinking, “Run, Ellen, run.” And I was thinking of Madalyn too, and her unmarked grave somewhere in the Southwest, and I knew Madalyn would have approved.
You did good, Ellen. You acted couragely. If you were defiant, it was because the situation called for defiance. Madalyn was often defiant.
Run, Ellen, run. Run away from those who don’t understand, who don’t cry, who don’t feel the sorrow.
alatham said:
—————-
‘Smartgal needs to stop playing the misogyny card all the time. Until you have any evidence, it only makes it look like you have an unrelated agenda to push and it’
———-
Smartgal replies:
You just don’t get it, do you?
I’m the woman who posted on this blog that there were ONLY 7 WOMEN at our New York Pope Picket out of a total 75 picketers–or less than 10%. WHAT MORE EVIDENCE DO YOU NEED THAT WOMEN DO NOT FEEL WELCOME IN ATHEIST GROUPS?
And of course misogyny is a “related” topic: I’m one of the people who has accused the Board of misogyny in dealing with Ellen (corroborated by Arthur and others). Pay attention, alatham, and connect the dots.
And by the way, your not seeing the connections here is probably due to (drum roll) your unconscious misogyny.
Wow, how unprofessional to post all this crap on the blog. You guys need to get your shit together.
alatham,
How right you are (on both counts)!
dumbgal,
I’ll repeat myself here. You are a loon.
And being of the female persuasion, I don’t have any (drum roll) misogyny, unconscious or otherwise.
smartgal,
None. But you need a lot more evidence to start claiming that it’s a result of misogyny rather than either a simple failure to reach out to women, or inherent disinterest amongst women.
Women have far more active battles to fight with society than mere atheism. In my limited experience, atheist activists tend to be white males (myself included). I consider that a commentary on the fact that white males don’t have any other overriding social ills to battle. Women have enough on their plate (feminism, which I wholeheartedly support, though I have a feeling you won’t care) without being atheist activists as well.
Don’t attribute to malice that which you can attribute to laziness.
Simple accusations do not make your case without evidence. Show me some evidence and I will support you. Continue to scream “Persecution!” without any evidence and most of us will continue to ignore you.
I’ll respond to this particular attack once I’m done beating my girlfriend. I’m kind of busy at the moment.
When president John McCain increases government subsidies to churches, mandates religion in public classrooms, bans the theory of evolution, posts the 10 commandments in every courthouse, post office, and police station in America, and declares us atheists to be the scum of the earth, some of you will still be completely wrapped up in your little flame wars.
Is there anyone left who is still focused on changing the world for the better?
Focus on what is important or fight your silly little flame wars on craigslist!
alatham,
Chris B is right.
I appreciate your sense of humor in dealing with a sensitive topic. I’m signing off now; don’t want to deal with the Nazi butches butting in on this thread. ‘Bye.
I guess Mr. Meltzer could use a proof-reader, “The biggest one is her refusal to accept the fact that the board had waken up after thirteen years of sleeping and was ready to start acting as a board.”
“had waken up”? You meant “waked” or woken” I am sure. Or “awakened”.
I can’t comment on the inner workings of AA, but I’ve never felt unwelcome in athiest groups/blogs etc. In fact I’ve felt that, overall, athiest men seem to be more enlightened about women’s issues than the average “god-fearing” man. Perhaps because IMHO they’re educated to the inherent mysogny in the Abrahamic religions, and they reject not only the religion, but it’s anti-female doctrine (that has severly tainted humanity) as well.
Have any of you other gals felt unwelcome?
cry4turtles
I’ve never felt unwelcome on this or any other atheist blog. I’ve not made it to any conventions, so I can’t speak to the feeling of being with the group in person. There are no groups where I live, so, this virtual communication is pretty much the extent of my atheist outreach. Although I have recently discovered two other people I know who are humanists.
My feeling has been like yours, that atheist men are more enlightened, both about women’s issues and about accepting women as equal partners in life. I personally doubt Ellen’s situation with the board had anything to do with misogyny. I think smartgal is offbase with her allegations there.
…and as an atheist man, I’d like to point out that we appreciate an enlightened woman who is accepting of a man as an equal partner in life and is enlightened about men’s issues(we have them).
Unfortunately, you’re a minority among atheists.
I’ve always had the opinion, and I’ve expressed it to Ellen, that her gender was her most valuable asset to her position. In the religious world, women are usually the driving force behind religious practice within the family. These ignorant stooges have too much authority over developing minds.
Who better than another woman to deliver the message, “Grow up”?
This current thread brings up a whole new topic here–misogyny in Atheist organizations–when this thread should really be about Ellen’s dismissal and I don’t want to dilute that topic.
I will say, though, there is probably less misogyny within the Atheist community than in religious communities (especially the notorious polygamous Mormons, who keep women as virtual baby-producing slaves)but, make no mistake, it is subtly here too.
I don’t say this angrily or blamingly, just a bit sadly. It is hard to totally eradicate a mind-set and we may have to wait until the next generations, I think, to effect better acceptance of gender equality.
For one example of the subtlety of gender discrimination, let me cite the person who posted here on this blog that he felt–and told Ellen– that her gender was her biggest asset as leader of AA. Tell me,sir, would you say that to Frank or Conrad? Would you go to Conrad and say, I think your best asset here as administrator is that you are a male?
I rest my case.
Smartgal
I don’t see the misogyny on this blog or in connection with Ellen’s firing. Matador’s opinion about Ellen’s gender as an “asset to her position” (or even her biggest asset) is not necessarily misogyny. I don’t know whether his assessment is true or not but what if it is? I have always thought of her gender as being AN asset albeit not her greatest one.
I think I made it abundantly clear as to why I made that statement regarding gender.
Actually, I probably didn’t call it her “biggest” asset when I told her that. I did note that I considered it advantageous.
Ellen understands that I’m quite sensitive as to how gender plays a role in communications – and how eliminating the gender gap can build bridges w/ other women. I doubt she took offense.
If you wish to keep harping on it, be my guest – you’ll only come off as hyper-sensitive. It is an anthropological fact that the sexes think and communicate differently.
If that is misogyny, then it is also misandry.
You are the one who keeps bringing up the topic of misogyny. It seems to be the central theme to your life. Sorry that you have had such bad experiences (or whatever has caused your obsession), but it is certainly a red herring in the middle of this discussion.
Bart,
This is from Gil and Jeanne Gaudia.
We want to take you up on your call for everyone to start working together in order to get American Atheists back on track. Therefore we would be willing to resume our volunteer work with Ellen (and any board members we can assist, in any way we can) in order to return to the status quo ante. If Arthur needs help or Rachael, and we can do it via email or telephone, we would be happy to offer this service, without compensation (as it has always been) in an effort to spark a resumption of business as usual.
Sincerely,
Gil and Jeanne
Smartgal,
Courageously, couragely (whatever).
What has happened has happened. Now it is time to stop bickering among ourselves and start moving towards mending. This is OUR organization and we need to pull together to make it work. Volunteer your time, money, positive suggestions and support.
When somebody leaves an organization that has a key, it is standard practice to change the locks. (That is in reference to an earlier comment). It is also common practice to fire an employee who makes public statements about areas that he is privy to without consent, so don?t be surprised if we hear that Arthur got fired.
I think it is great that Bart stepped forward and made a statement.
Frank is our President for the moment and therefore I will give him my support and confidence.
i hope that as frank and the board move forward they will consider that quality not quantity is more important.i could care less if FFRF is bigger as long as we are well managed.
RedLilac
In my experience reconciliation is usually accompanied by openness. Many of us are demanding it and will vote with our feet if we don’t get. Atheists are generally not known for there willingness to suck it up and fall in line.
Maybe Zindler and the Board can explain to us what the new direction they plan is. Where is this great new improved program?
From Matador: “If you wish to keep harping on it, be my guest – you’ll only come off as hyper-sensitive. It is an anthropological fact that the sexes think and communicate differently.”
———-
Matador, I wish you wouldn’t use emotionally charged words like “harping” and “hyper-sensitive.” I like to think that I was GENTLY hinting, and hopefully opening some eyes to a problem that is there (sometimes it’s called the glass ceiling problem)and pointing out that this problem was undoubtedly a factor in this AA fracas.
I would appreciate it if you did not engage in namecalling or blaming the victim or saying that I must be eliciting misogyny myself by something I am saying or doing. Perpetrators always blame the victim.
Interesting that my suggestion that the AA Board of Directors may have been influenced by misogyny in dealing with Ellen was slapped down as being a figment of my imagination, even though it turned out to be corroborated by Arthur Brenner.
And just for the record, Matador, physiologists have found that there is no difference whatsoever between the female brain and the male brain structurally or functionally. If you put a disembodied female brain beside a disembodied male brain, you will not be able to tell which is male and which is female.
The sexes do indeed “think and communicate differently” but that is cultural. Women have been taught to think and communicate differently. And males have been taught to be in command. Perhaps this will change in future generaions.
It’s easy to say, if you are a male, that there’s no misogyny in Atheist organizations. That’s because you don’t experience it. Or if you are an isolated female whose contact with organizational psychodynamics is limited, you may not have been subjected to the many forms of misogyny we experience in the workworld. Those of us who are, or have been, in the corporate world or have worked in any medium-to-large organization in any decision-making capacity, know that misogyny has not been irradicated in the workplace and that we have to deal with it, sometimes to our disadvantage.
Your assurances that atheist men are not misogynistic, or perhaps less so than other male groups, may be wishful thinking, and I share your wish. However, my experience–and I work very closely with top male leaders in the atheist movement–is that Atheist men, especially those of an older generation, have a long way to go before they are free from misogyny.
I am hoping that perhaps some of these atheist men will read this and at least think about it and examine their deepest attitudes about the place of women. I know they will deny that they are misogynistic themselves and say, Oh no, NOT ME, my attitude toward Ellen has nothing to do with her being a [beautiful, competent] woman whom I might need to control, put down, override, punish, show who’s boss. Oh no,it’s not that!
Ri-i-i-ght.
From Matador: “If you wish to keep harping on it, be my guest – you’ll only come off as hyper-sensitive. It is an anthropological fact that the sexes think and communicate differently.”
———-
Matador, I wish you wouldn’t use emotionally charged words like “harping” and “hyper-sensitive.” I like to think that I was GENTLY hinting, and hopefully opening some eyes to a problem that is there (sometimes it’s called the glass ceiling problem)and pointing out that this problem was undoubtedly a factor in this AA fracas.
I would appreciate it if you did not engage in namecalling or blaming the victim or saying that I must be eliciting misogyny myself by something I am saying or doing. Perpetrators always blame the victim.
Interesting that my suggestion that the AA Board of Directors may have been influenced by misogyny in dealing with Ellen was slapped down as being a figment of my imagination, even though it turned out to be corroborated by Arthur Brenner.
And just for the record, Matador, physiologists have found that there is no difference whatsoever between the female brain and the male brain structurally or functionally. If you put a disembodied female brain beside a disembodied male brain, you will not be able to tell which is male and which is female.
The sexes do indeed “think and communicate differently” but that is cultural. Women have been taught to think and communicate differently. And males have been taught to be in command. Perhaps this will change in future generaions.
It’s easy to say, if you are a male, that there’s no misogyny in Atheist organizations. That’s because you don’t experience it. Or if you are an isolated female whose contact with organizational psychodynamics is limited, you may not have been subjected to the many forms of misogyny we experience in the workworld. Those of us who are, or have been, in the corporate world or have worked in any medium-to-large organization in any decision-making capacity, know that misogyny has not been irradicated in the workplace and that we have to deal with it, sometimes to our disadvantage.
Your assurances that atheist men are not misogynistic, or perhaps less so than other male groups, may be wishful thinking, and I share your wish. However, my experience–and I work very closely with top male leaders in the atheist movement–is that Atheist men, especially those of an older generation, have a long way to go before they are free from misogyny. I am hoping that perhaps some of these atheist men will read this and at least think about it and examine their deepest attitudes about the place of women. I know they will deny that they are misogynistic themselves and say, Oh no, NOT ME, my attitude toward Ellen has nothing to do with her being a [beautiful, competent] woman whom I might need to control, put down, override, punish, show who’s boss. Oh no,it’s not that!
Ri-i-i-ght.
I thought I might want to join this organization, but I’m having serious second thoughts now. Anyone care to encourage me to change my mind?
Smartgal
After reading your accusations of misogyny I think it is time for you to consider your misandry.
Whoa whoa, the Pope may be laughing. This blog is good but not an ideal place to wash our laundry. This whole situation is a result of a lack of democracy within AA. Alright, no big deal, we can work around that.
Eric in Seattle is right, we should give Ellen a 10% raise after the board reinstates her and give anyone getting a stipend an increase. Anyone directly involved not getting a stipend should get one. Simple. I am willing to kick in more financially as I think many of you will too. I’ll throw a fifty in the mail Monday.
Christianity is on the verge of collapse. All the Christians have is that same lame ass old tired fairytale they have to reinvent over and over as science unravels every angle they cling to. The farther down archeology digs the farther back in time we realize humanity existed before the Jewish folk tales. The farther out in space the Hubble telescope allows us to see the more incoherent all religion is. Transitional fossils are being dug up left and right and geology is unraveling questions for anyone willing to look. Time to toss out the discontent and focus on the goal. Mistakes were made but so what? We all make mistakes and learn as we move forward.
I suggest state directors be elected starting next year at each state convention. There are only 17 state directors but I think via Meetup.com we can add more from border states with a little effort. After that smooth transition Ellen should be willing to put her position on the line the following year. I doubt anyone would run against her. With a democratic structure in place the membership would not have to hold open air discussion for the Pope’s pleasure.
A coherent strategy needs to be formulated. I do not agree AA should be middle of the road. We have to fight every twisted idea pushed by the religious world. War is not a solution to failed economic policy. Racism does exist and I do see sexism locally within the atheist movement. This is a project bigger than the president and board.
We are on the verge of having the first black president of America who just happens to have been introduced to Islam first and now is a Christian. He has lived comparative religion and he has my vote.
Christianity should be taught in public school within a comparitive religion class with a glimpse at atheism. The first folks to argue about content would be the Christians.
Christianity is withering and we need to put aside petty issues that can be dealt with later. We need to offer up the fruit of knowledge to the sleepwalking masses. I forgive them for they know not what they do. Let’s not let them say the same about us.
I’m heading out of state in the morning but will have more to say Monday about the march and the convention. Mark Farris
1qguido
Should we wake them before giving them the fruit. They might aspirate if we don’t. And what about vegies?
Women have been taught to think and communicate differently. And males have been taught to be in command.
This is a concerted effort on the behalf of the Abrahamic male-dominate religions (with their male-dominate god, invented to dethrone the goddess religions of the day). There actually were cultures alive and well on our planet that did not espouse these twisted values. The ancient Iroquois are an example. Women were equal to men, and could even divorce them. The majority of white woman who escaped into the Iroquois Nation (or were lucky enough to be kidnapped), rarely wanted to return.
If only we had learned from them, instead of massacring them.
Must dominate! It’s the great european white way!
nancyjensen1213,
Not me. Personally, I’m still trying to dig my way out of all this dirty laundry. I suppose I will continue to monitor the situation and try to be hopeful that American Atheists can get its act together, but at this point I am not at all sure I will renew my membership.
Is it just me, or does anyone else find it extremely inappropriate that one of the board members (Bart Meltzer) says he is Ellen Johnson’s significant other? What an incredible conflict of interest over the past several years, in my opinion. Interesting, what we are now finding out.
One thing for sure, if Ellen Johnson were to be reinstated as president, I would definitely not renew my membership.
And, if they cannot get more skilled editors, there does not seem to be much hope for the magazine. I appreciate that the Gaudias have apparently been doing the job on a volunteer basis, but the number of errors is unacceptable to me. Still, Ellen Johnson was supposed to be the official editor, correct?
Finally, I now see that the letter to members on the AA website has been reworked yet again (still with typographical errors and misspellings, of course) to try to put a positive spin on all this.
As you can tell, this member is not a happy camper.
Smartgal-
Yes, Dear
There…better?
(…marriage veteran;-)
SG-
If you wish to engage me in a debate over the employment/promotion of the underqualified in the interest of “fair play”. A.K.A. affirmative action, Dave has started a more appropriate thread for it – Truth v. PC
(I think Truth v. BS would have been better)
In addition to having serious doubts about joining AA, given what’s transpired over the course of these past weeks, I’m amazed at some of these comments.
For example, Smartgal, who seems to think she’s Smart, has two misspelled words in her comments about the mistakes of others. Where’s the Smart in that gal? Since I’m a gal myself, please, no accusations that I am biased.
Also, a serious conflict of interest in AA when a member of the board is the significant other of the Pres. Bart, how were you able to be objective in all of this?
nancyjensen1213,
Careful, she’ll accuse you of misogyny, you know
Dear friends,
I have thought long and hard about the decision I made about withdrawing my sponsorship of “The Atheist Viewpoint”.
This has not been an easy decision to make because I am torn between what the board did to Ellen and the fact that the voice of Atheism and rational thought must never be dimmed.
Today I read and heard numerous times of the comments that “reverend” John Haggee made about the catholic church and also that “god sent Adolf Hitler to the jews”…
I am attaching just one of the articles on Hagge and how John McCain has now rejected the Haggee endorsement. Hopefully this will show the nation how ridiculous and frightening fundamentalist religion really is.
After seeing that Haggee will be picking up where the (thankfully) departed delusional Jerry Falwell left off in his outrageous “faith filled” mindless spewing of hate, I have decided while I do not agree with the boards decision to fire Ellen, I must (after really thinking hard about this) yield to the greater good of continuing to give American Atheists a “voice” in the very catholic and evangelical/ protestant populated city of “saint” cloud, MN.
I have decided to continue my membership in American Atheists as well as continue to sponsor “The Atheist Viewpoint ” here on Charter Cable Channel 12 on Tuesday evenings at 7:30 PM Central Time.
Please know that my greatest and most sincere hope is that Ellen and the board can work through all of their difficulties and Ellen will be re-instated as President and Co-Host of “The Atheist Viewpoint”.
I care about Ellen and I care about the future of American Atheists.
I finally had to realize that much, much more was at stake here than we realize…..
The very survival of the human race is in jeopardy if fundamentalist, irrational religious zealots like John Haggee are not challenged with rationality, proof of the lies and errors of the bible and stopped.
I hope that all of you, especially Ellen can understand my position.
I met so many of you wonderful people at the American Atheists convention in Minneapolis and you all made me proud to be counted among you as a fellow secular humanist.
Please. Make me proud again. Let’s all try to work together for a rational world and put our differences aside once and for all for the common good. Our world and the future of our human species is literally at stake here.
Timothy, please continue to mail me Atheist Viewpoint Episodes.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Jack Richter An American Atheist…just like YOU!
McCain Denounces Hagee
Updated 5:10 p.m.
By Juliet Eilperin and Michelle Boorstein
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) today rejected the endorsement of megachurch pastor and ardent Zionist John Hagee after learning of a sermon in which Hagee posited that Nazism was God’s will.
Hagee’s sermon was delivered in the late 1990s but a video of it began circulating widely this week on the Web on the site talk2action, which monitors the religious right. The sermon calls Hitler a “hunter,” a reference to the Book of Jeremiah, which quotes God saying he “will restore [the Jews] to the land I gave to their forefathers.”
Hagee is one of the country’s best-known evangelical Christian Zionists; he founded a pro-Israel alliance of Christian groups and has donated tens of millions from his Texas-based ministry to support humanitarian causes in Israel. He has said he is driven by the belief that the creation of the state of Israel, and the return of Jews to Palestine, are God’s will.
“A hunter is someone with a gun and he forces you. Hitler was a hunter,” Hagee says in the sermon. “And the Bible says — Jeremiah writing — ‘They shall hunt them from every mountain and from every hill and from the holes of the rocks,’ meaning there’s no place to hide. And that might be offensive to some people but don’t let your heart be offended. I didn’t write it, Jeremiah wrote it. It was the truth and it is the truth. How did it happen? Because God allowed it to happen. Why did it happen? Because God said my top priority for the Jewish people is to get them to come back to the land of Israel.”
When asked what McCain thought of the remarks, campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds responded with an e-mail from the candidate, denouncing Hagee.
“Obviously, I find these remarks and others deeply offensive and indefensible, and I repudiate them,” McCain said. “I did not know of them before Reverend Hagee’s endorsement, and I feel I must reject his endorsement as well.”
The comments represented a significant shift by McCain, who had refused to reject Hagee’s endorsement despite controversial comments Hagee has made about Catholicism and his implication that Hurricane Katrina represented divine retribution. After learning of those comments, McCain said just because he accepts — or seeks — someone’s endorsement doesn’t mean he endorses that person’s views.
At roughly the same time McCain rejected Hagee’s endorsement, the reverend issued a statement saying he was withdrawing it to prevent any further damage to the presumptive GOP nominee’s candidacy.
“Ever since I endorsed John McCain for president, people seeking to attack Senator McCain have combed my records for statements they can use for political gain. They have had no qualms about grossly misrepresenting my position on issues most near and dear to my heart if it serves their political ambitions,” Hagee said in the statement. “I am tired of these baseless attacks and fear that they have become a distraction in what should be a national debate about important issues. I have therefore decided to withdraw my endorsement of Senator McCain for President effective today, and to remove myself from any active role in the 2008 campaign.”
The senator also made an effort to draw a distinction between his link to the controversial megapreacher and Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) ties to Chicago Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright’s incendiary remarks about the U.S. government have dogged Obama for months.
“I have said I do not believe Senator Obama shares Reverend Wright’s extreme views. But let me also be clear, Reverend Hagee was not and is not my pastor or spiritual advisor, and I did not attend his church for twenty years,” McCain said in the statement. “I have denounced statements he made immediately upon learning of them, as I do again today.”
In talking to some influential people in American Atheists, I learned that Ellen could possibly be reinstated by the Board if she apologized to them.
I don’t see her doing that. How about if the Board and Ellen apologized to each other?
Atheist men, especially those of an older generation, have a long way to go before they are free from misogyny. I am hoping that perhaps some of these atheist men will read this and at least think about it and examine their deepest attitudes about the place of women. I know they will deny that they are misogynistic themselves and say, Oh no, NOT ME, my attitude toward Ellen has nothing to do with her being a [beautiful, competent] woman whom I might need to control, put down, override, punish, show who’s boss.
This is not about me, guys. You can try to discredit me all you want. It’s about Ellen. I strongly feel that this intelligent, competent, gorgeous, confident woman–the person I think should be on the media representing Atheists–may be being punished to show her who’s boss.
To be fair, entertain that notion just for a moment.
Actually, I’ve taken the past few days away from this board to do just that.
I asked myself whether I’d be as defensive of Ellen if she were more like her predecessor. Make whatever comparisons you wish. At that point, I realized that all I know of Ellen is her public personna and the gracious demeanor of her emails.
I haven’t the perspective of any of the board members – and certainly not that of Bart M. – who probably knows her best(and at her worst).
I’ve decided that I like Ellen as a spokesperson for AA because – from a marketing perspective – she could sell ME anything.
I could say as much of the women in my personal life – which is why I am now a committed bachelor.
Given that, I’ve decided that the reason I joined AA is the best reason to put internal politics aside and remain – to keep Viewpoint on the air in my area.
Matador, we’ve gone at it on this blog about misogyny, which I have accused the AA Board of Directors of being guilty of in dealing with Ellen. Now I have an updated comment on this matter:
Last Tuesday, the New York City Atheists held its monthly Meetup at the Stone Creek Pub in Manhattan. Usually we have slightly more men than women at this event
LAST TUESDAY,THERE WERE NO WOMEN.
Well, except for me, but I don’t count because I am one of the organizers of this event. THERE WERE 14 men and zero (0) women.
I don’t know what’s happening but I was afraid something like this might occur. ARE WOMEN KEEPING AWAY FROM ATHEIST EVENTS BECAUSE THEY’VE HEARD ABOUT WHAT’S HAPPENED TO ELLEN? Is this an ad hoc protest against the male-chauvinist pigdom within AA? Has the news spread that fast within the atheist community? Has misogyny within the Atheist movement come home to roost?
I personally will do nothing to build up women’s confidence in AA until the Board of Directors does something to exonerate Ellen.
As for you women out there who boycotted our last Meetup, I am totally with you. Frank, Conrad, Dick, all you guys out there who would never have stopped one another from fulfilling an obligation that you had planned, certainly not done such a thing publicly to a man, certainly not in such a humiliating manner as you treated Ellen, you can be sure that whatever influence I have in this Cause will be used to fight the anti-female attitude of your current boys’ club, to see that women officers and volunteers are treated with the same dignity, respect and cooperation that men are, and to boycott any decisions you make that deny an equally strong voice and respect to women.
May the memory of Madalyn live on!
Most members of the local group NYC Atheists — as with many other American Atheists affiliates — aren’t also members of the national group. And even fewer attendees of zero-committment Meetups are members of, or would follow the changes at, AA. Correlation is not causation. And not everything negative that happens to a woman is from misogyny.
No matter who runs them, freethought groups have always been disproportionately male (and white, and elderly, and straight). And humanist groups tend to be more politically liberal. Imbalances in all these categories reflect the whole atheist and humanist organizational cultures, not this short-term leadership issue.
SG-
For the record, I think that the Bill Moore walk could have been avoided, as it is – on the surface – a “black thing” and not an “atheist thing”.
On the other hand, it wouldn’t hurt to extend the olive branch to the black community, given their attachment to religion and their distrust of us.
However, once commitments were made and reputations were on the line, I’m in total agreement w/ you as to how it was handled. Ellen was disrespectfully left twisting in the wind.
I notice that there has been no public complaint from Ellen, herself. That would be because she has too much class.
That’s a big part of Ellen’s appeal as a spokesperson for American Atheists. She is easy to respect at a distance.
No one looks good close-up.
Joyce Meyer is also very attractive. But even at a distance, one can easily see that her positive attributes such as beauty and hyper-intelligence are unfortunately combined w/ extreme narcissism and profound O.C.D.
Sexism will always exist. It’s better to recognize it than to deny it.
For example, this was in an episode of Viewpoint. I emailed Ellen and called her on it.
Ellen thinks that Bill Donohue is a nice guy.
I’m not kidding!
That’s because that fat, bulldog-pussed, Irish-catholic, son-of-a-bitch, bully treats her off-camera like ANY heterosexual male would treat Ellen-
-like he’s got a chance.
Men are hard-wired to be nice to beautiful, intelligent women.
As another male, I can look into those little pig eyes and see what he is.
For that reason, I’d rather see Ron(WFBYN)Barrier go up against Donohue, O’Reilly, Beck, Hannity, etc.;->
It could be that the attendance at the meetup was affected by the political climate. I’ve been reading a bit today about sour grapes over Clinton’s failing campaign.
Michael Dorian writes:
—————-
Michael, I’m just now getting around to answering your question above.
Ellen’s “Freedom Walk,” was intended to finish the civil rights mission of Bill Moore’s march to deliver a letter to the governor of Mississippi protesting segregation in that state. Moore never completed that walk 45 years ago because he was shot through the head and murdered on a lonely road–and this ranks for many of us as UNFINISHED BUSINESS in modern atheist history.
That is why Ellen chose this event rather than any of the topics you mention above. You have to know a little history here to know the connection between Madalyn Murray O’Hair and the Bill Moore event. (And yes, I realize that you are too young to know this–you weren’t even born when it happened.)
Bill Moore was a close friend of Madalyn’s, close enough that he slept at her house when he was in Baltimore. Madalyn encouraged him in his walk, and helped him prepare for it, even to the extent of choosing what message was going to be on the sandwich board he carried.
Madalyn was utterly devastated by Bill Moore’s murder. In her autobiography, AN ATHEIST EPIC, she wrote this about Bill: “He introduced me to the writings of Albert Ellis…he was kind, he was happy, he was gentle. I think we all fell in love with him. Garth did immediately. Bill did within hours. Mother was captivated…Bill and I were simpatico and he had it going with the kids. We never even had a disagreement. We got into the damndest in-depth conversations that this world has ever heard. I thought he was a male Madalyn Murray and he thought I was a female Bill Moore…”
Madalyn describes how she learned of his death:
“Bill [Murray, her son] was standing in the middle of the living room screaming at the top of his voice…He was as white as a sheet. “Bill Moore’s been shot.”..The wail came out of Bill, ‘He’s dead!’ Someone had driven past Bill Moore, parked the car on one side and as Bill had walked past, shot him through the brain. He was killed instantly. The man’s fight with Bill had been over Atheism. When it was found out that Bill was not only a ‘Nigger Lover’ but an Atheist too, someone determined to kill him and kill him he did.”
The above quotes are from Chapter 35 of Madalyn’s autobiography,AN ATHEIST EPIC, a whole chapter on Bill Moore.
So you see, Michael, Ellen’s Freedom Walk had everything to do with Atheism as well as civil rights. And even now, there is much belief in this country that atheism is a civil rights issue.
Madalyn feared that she too would suffer the fate of Bill Moore because of the rampant hate of Atheists in this country. Atheism was, she felt, a civil rights issue along with racism. And in truth, it is. Though today we have a Black man and a woman running neck and neck for the presidency, both of them have a better chance at that office than an Atheist does. Polls show that no one would vote for an atheist today.
Madalyn did in the end suffer the same fate as Bill Moore. Though she was murdered ostensibly for her money, the fact is, the police did nothing to help her or look for her or protect her or help prevent the crime. For all intents and purposes, the police in Texas were virtual accomplices to the murder of Madalyn and her family.
At the time of Madalyn’s abduction, no one on the AA board of directors did anything that might have saved Madalyn’s life, ostensibly because there was the thought that Madalyn may have indeed flown-the-coop from the country where she was so persecuted. To this day, many board members regret that they did not do so, and wish they had done something, anything, that might have saved Madalyn, Garth and Robin from the brutal deaths they suffered. (Garth’s skull, found in Madalyn’s grave, “did not have an inch on it that was not cracked,” said the IRS agent who was among those who found the bodies–which indicates he must have put up a terrible struggle.)
Ellen Johnson was “like a daughter” to Madalyn Murray O’Hair. There’s no doubt in my mind that Madalyn would have wanted Ellen to be her successor.
And there’s no doubt in my mind that Madalyn would have wanted Ellen to complete Bill Moore’s “Freedom Walk.”
If Ellen can be faulted in any way, it’s that she did not, or could not, explain to the world, and to the Board of Directors, the deep grief she still feels about Madalyn, and her sense of obligation to fullfill Madalyn’s goals. I tried to voice that when I wrote on this blog that I imagined Ellen running down South with tears slipping down her cheeks. I can only imagine the sorrow she must have felt when the bodies of Madalyn and her family were uncovered 7 years ago. I can only imagine Ellen’s emotional need to memorialize, in some way, Madalyn’s life and death.
That is why I weep for Ellen now: I feel she has been as misunderstood by the Board right now as Madalyn’s disappearance was 13 years ago. You can’t do anything anymore for Madalyn, board members, but Ellen is still here with us. Don’t let her suffer alone and isolated now, as you heartlessly punish her for an innocent and well-meaning act that was only meant to commemorate another innocent and well-meaning act 45 years ago.