Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (58461)	10/11/1999 11:55:00 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

ACLU is willing to help anybody who's got a Bill of Rights problem, except Second Amendment, they don't do that. They are really gung-ho First Amendment, and to give you an idea how gung-ho they are, remember they took the side of the KKK when it wanted to march in Skokie, and they support the Neonazis when they want to parade, too. I used to do pro bono for the ACLU, when I lived in New Orleans, since I moved to D.C. metro area, my impression is that they've got a lot of people willing to help. I think they used to do more fourth, fifth and sixth amendment stuff, but that's not as important as it used to be. My opinion is that they aren't advancing any particular political agenda, but I am sure that the majority of ACLU members are liberals. And I don't suppose they do much in the way of property rights.

To: greenspirit who wrote (58461)	10/11/1999 3:54:00 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

It seems to me, if someone makes an assumption and another person challenges that assumption, the onus falls on the person challenging the assumption to provide evidence which is contrary. No, Michael. That's not the way it works. Following your logic, I could make a totally preposterous assumption -- all charitable foundation executives beat their wives, for example -- and then challenge YOU to prove me wrong, by finding me at least one foundation executive who does not beat his wife. I also don't see any evidence that you have read any of my posts. After all, I did agree that since most people in this country consider themselves "Christian" (of varying degrees of orthodoxy and commitment), the majority of people working in charitable/humanitarian organizations are probably "Christian," in the broad sense. My point was that the majority of the organizations themselves are NOT "Christian"! That is, they have no specific religious affiliation! Anybody -- Christian, Jewish, Muslim, agnostic, atheist, Buddhist, animist -- can join them, and anybody does! And, as I said, if you can prove otherwise, I will eat my hat. :-) Joan

To: greenspirit who wrote (58461)	10/11/1999 9:20:00 PM
From: E	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

In my hard-working Amnesty International group, there are two Episcopalians, four Jews, and a whole bunch of atheists. We used to have two nuns, too, but they moved. Atheists support other groups, they don't hang together except sometimes in specifically atheist causes, just as brunettes per sedon't meet (except, arguably, at the bleach counter.) The one way in which atheists as atheists, work to help people is by fighting for humanity against what they feel are the harmful effects of religion-- and this only makes sense, if you think about it. You may think their cause is a poor one, but the active atheists think they are helping free people from the forces of darkness and superstition and helping them to better lives. I am an atheist. I support Amnesty International, which works for religious freedom for all. I support Medecins Sans Frontiers, which is religion-blind. I support a local shelter for battered women-- religion-blind. I support two environmental groups-- non-religious -- and the Fellowship of Reconciliation, a religious organization that I support mainly because I know some of the (religious) people associated with it, and know that they are very good people with good hearts who try to do good works. Atheists don't gather as an identity-group once a week in a church or synagogue like those who show up in church on Sunday. There are fewer atheists in prison than there are members of any other religiously-identified group. I have the feeling you feel that atheists care less about humanity than do religious people. Is this the case? Do you know that very few atheists "profess" atheism? Why do you suppose that is? This is very much a here-we-go-again issue here.