Welcome to Factonista.org

Factonista is an online freethought advocacy organization that relies on its users for content. Through international broad-based collaboration with its users, and other groups and organizations, it strives to provide timely and comprehensive news, views, reviews, and creative multimedia on issues at the forefront of everything under the umbrella of freethought

Not a member? Register | Lost your password?
Hi and welcome to Factonista. Please keep in mind we're still in BETA. We'll be fully functional very very soon. In the mean while feel free to browse around, read our articles, and participate in our discussions. If you note any bugs and feel like helping us out, forward a quick message to us here. Thanks! [close]

Posts Tagged ‘UAAA’

Secular convocation vs fundie radio

Saturday, October 25th, 2008

So I’ve been having a media circus in Edmonton here over trying to change one line from the convocation charge. The best so far was the radio interview I agreed to without looking into (I still would have done it had I known).

The station is AM 930 The Light. On their website is featured ads for Focus on the Family and Christ Centred Professionals Club (among others). This showed me that it would be a very en”light”ening interview.

I recorded the stream and posted it on my blog. Check it out there and see how far into the call ins you can get (hint: they advertise Expelled several times).

UAAA keeps fighting for secular convocation

Thursday, October 23rd, 2008

My group made the front of the city section of the local paper today, in our crusade for a secular convocation.

It’s been a busy few months, but we’ve finally ascertained meetings with the right levels of administration and could potentially see this resolved by the end of November (university administrations move pretty slowly).

Here’s an exerpt (the full story will be taken down in 30 days, after which you can find it on my blog):

A student group at the University of Alberta is fighting to make the school’s convocation ceremony a God-free event.

Specifically, the U of A Atheists and Agnostics society objects to one line in the service, when the chancellor charges graduates to use their degrees for “the glory of God and the honour of your country.”

The group is petitioning the university to either remove the line or change the wording to respect their “God-optional” views.

The god-optional refers to the last story the Edmonton Journal ran on my group.

I ought not to say such things

Tuesday, October 14th, 2008

I’ve saved writing about the recent vandalism at the University of Alberta on Edger until now for a few reasons. Mainly, I wanted all the heat to settle down, for our new banner to go up, and for as many facts and opinions to come in as possible. Also, it should note this post will mirror the original and follow up posts from my own blog.

So first, let’s try to go through the order of events as objectively as possible.

  1. We’ve been working at the University of Alberta for a while now to try to achieve a secular convocation ceremony. As part of this campaign, I wrote an opinion article for the campus newspaper, which attracted both negative and positive reactions (about two weeks worth of letters).
  2. The UofA Atheists and Agnostics large (5′ x 8′) hanging banner gets vandalized over a weekend after hanging in an atrium for several weeks and the entire previous semester. The contact email and website were cut from the bottom and the phrases “God loves you,” “Jesus is coming,” and hearts and crosses are drawn across the banner.
  3. We later figured out, after removing the banner (while unveiling the new one), that the heart and cross were added to cover up some other writing. We couldn’t make out what was written under the heart, as the writing was mostly indistinguishable.
  4. I reported the incident to campus security the morning I discovered the banner and issued press releases to all the media outlets in town that I could get a hold of. CTV (local television) later did an interview with me (not YouTube’d yet). I also wrote my first blog post on it.
  5. After having a number of the “atheist community” blast me for using the word “hate” I wrote my second post saying simply that I called this act for what it was, although it wasn’t the position my group had taken. This was further clarified later in the week when another member of my club’s exec appeared on campus radio to discuss the issue.

So what are my thoughts on the issue?

First, one of my Christian friends (who heads the local IVCF chapter), wanted to point out:

1. The hate crime (I don’t mind calling it one… it was) was performed as it seems as a response to previous events on campus in which I had only a few glimpses of knowledge.

2. To comment about the vandalism without commenting about the convocation debate seems in some sense to be making a sideways response to the one event.

I find it utterly appalling that he tries to justify this action as a retaliation for my writing an article in a campus paper. I wrote some words. They drew and permanently damaged property that wasn’t theirs. Big difference. I may have offended them, but they actively worked to remove the ability of my group to advertise itself – a right possessed by every group on my campus (including the Pro-Life group). Being offended isn’t a protection we afford people in Canada (generally).

But what else happened here? When I went out actively looking for support, I instead was told: “this is more of a love crime” from some atheists. People I expected to side with me and back me up in denouncing an act of targeted intolerance against my group instead chastised me for overreacting.

Let me emphasize, my friend, an evangelical Christian, and the Pentecostal group on campus agreed with my denunciation of the event, while atheists and the United Church chaplain (a very liberal church in Canada) thought I was being unreasonable for expecting some sympathy.

I can understand having small posters vandalized or ripped down – at 5-15c a piece, I would be surprised to see all of them after a week. But for someone to go out of their way to deface and damage a large hanging banner, required planning, time, and effort (I believe they actually removed it from the building it was hanging in, did their damage, and then re-hung it – mainly because it was attached to the wire it hung from differently).

So why the argument? I really don’t see why, as an atheist, I can’t say that an act of intolerance against my group is equivalent in terms of intolerance and hate to writing “God hates fags” on a gay-support group’s banner, or “terrorist” on a Muslim banner. Just because they put a heart on it doesn’t mean that’s what they’re feeling.

Even if I grant that they may actually feel that God does love us, that still doesn’t change the intent of the actions, which was to imply that our group shouldn’t be spreading its message, and should instead accept Jesus (or burn in hell, as the implied alternative).

So I just thought I’d put it out there: clearly a double standard exists within the atheist community that we can’t cry foul, even when it happens to us. And I think this is the greatest tragedy of this entire debacle.

So here’s where I’ll summarize my positions:

It’s a hate-crime to commit any crime based on intolerance. However, standing on a bench shouting that atheists should burn in hell, while in bad taste and rudely offensive, should not be a crime, but should not be encouraged.

Finally, to end on a positive note, here’s the video of my group coming together to repaint and hang a new banner: