I imagine that is true. Sad but true.
Thanks! I don't think my TV will do much besides stereo out, but I wasn't sure if this would work. Since it sounds like it will, that removes one of my concerns with the Chromecast. Good to know.
I'm not generally inclined to dismiss someone as deluded just because I disagree with some of what they say.
I agree completely, both about the need to be more inclusive in general and that part of this should involve reaching out to more working class atheists. You raise a great point about the challenges for many people in even getting to conferences, not to mention the expenses associated with them. What I'm less clear about is whether the best way to do this is to expand the missions of these organizations as this author seemed to be suggesting.
Let me see if I am following this correctly. You're saying that Black atheists are accusing atheist groups of being racist instead of respecting the right of people to associate with who they want. You're then calling specifically Black atheist groups racist when they attempt to associate with who they want. Aren't you doing exactly what you are accusing them of?
It seems like something like this could work if the organization was large enough. The organization could have a fairly broad mission in line with what most of us think of as traditional secular goals, and then there could be many SIGs within the organization for members with particular interests within that mission (e.g., outreach to persons of color). Obviously, members would have to agree to refrain from demonizing each other constantly for something like this to work, but there are certainly models of large professional organizations outside secularism that manage to do it reasonably well.
That's a great point. I had a similar experience when I first started. I realized that I did have a somewhat different viewpoint than some of the others, and like you said, there were issues I didn't think were being addressed.
I don't think Hemant said that he has a right to feel safe or not to be insulted. I don't believe I did either. I think we both shared our reactions to the photo.
If the Occupy protesters had been carrying guns, I'd have to agree.
When members of the oppressor group offer criticism - even constructive criticism - directed at members of an oppressed group, they are accused of contributing to oppression. And yet, when members of the oppressor remain silent, they are accused of ignoring important problems and thus contributing to oppression. The only viable option, it would seem, is for members of the oppressor group to provide uncritical support for anything offered by members of an oppressed group, no matter how absurd it may be. This has always struck me as somewhat problematic especially in a community that typically prides itself in freethought, skepticism, and critical thinking.