Skip to comments.Atheist Booth Approved for CPAC, Then Yanked by ACU Hours Later
Posted on 02/26/2014 7:53:54 AM PST by SeekAndFind
This morning, American Atheists announced the group would have a booth at the Conservative Political Action Conference beginning March 6 in Washington.
Conservative isnt a synonym for religious, said American Atheists president David Silverman in a statement announcing the booth. In fact, a fifth of conservatives seldom or never pray, and the same number state religion is not important in their lives.
If conservatism doesnt embrace religious neutrality, its influence will wither and die, Silverman said. Atheists are a growing constituencyan increasingly united constituencyand conservative legislators ignore our vote and our voice at their own peril. We demand equality and fairnessnothing morewhich is the very foundation of American values. Imposing religious dogma on its citizens should not be the role of the small government advocated by conservatives.
They were even prepared to offer a free one-year membership in American Atheists for anyone who stopped by the booth.
Just a few hours after the story was out, CPAC rescinded the groups booth approval.
Silverman said he received a phone call from American Conservative Union Executive Director Dan Schneider informing him that the ACU board is breaking its agreement to permit American Atheists to host an information booth.
The atheist leader said Schneider told him the reason for the dis-invite was the tone of a quote he gave to CNN: The Christian right should be threatened by us.
This is exactly the problem. The ACU, which has invited CPAC speakers such as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Sarah Palin, is afraid of my tone? My tone was clearly an excuse to back out after our press release angered religious conservatives, Silverman said.
Continuing to conflate religion and conservatism is not a viable strategy; this was apparently too scary for CPAC attendees to hear, Silverman said. Americas religious conservatives can deny it all they want, but soon theyre going to realize that ignoring the growing number of atheist constituents is a losing proposition.
He said that a member of the American Atheists board met with CPAC organizers in the weeks after their registration, and their input was well-received and the atmosphere was positive. He added that the atheists were even suggesting CPAC speakers and other engagement opportunities.
Silverman said they still want to come to there conference. We still want to attend CPAC. If the ACU will invite us to exhibit as previously agreed, we will be there to talk about the importance of religious equality, he said.
Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center, who has previously accused CPAC of destroying the conservative movement, said the invitation extended by the ACU, Al Cardenas and CPAC to American Atheists to have a booth is more than an attack on conservative principles. It is an attack on God Himself. American Atheists is an organization devoted to the hatred of God. How on earth could CPAC, or the ACU and its board of directors, and Al Cardenas condone such an atrocity?
Threatening other conservatives isn't exactly conservative.
Conservative isnt a synonym for religious, said American Atheists president David Silverman
IT SHOULD BE...
If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned
Silverman said. Atheists are a growing constituency
Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy[a] that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.
I agree. . . the only persons that need changing regularly are babies and politicians. (can’t remember where I heard that comment)
1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.
2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.
3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.
4. ( often initial capital letter ) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.
5. ( initial capital letter ) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Conservative Jews or Conservative Judaism.
If you’re running candidates for eternity, this certainly applies. Otherwise you could get called out about relevance as easily as these atheists are.
Actually, “human” ought to be.
No.. it shouldn’t be...
Im probably more ANTI socialist, collectivist, communist, etc than most on FR. GO back through my posting history if you dont believe me...
Im not religious, but im also not against peaceful religion either. Peaceful being the primary adjective there.
I also respect the role that the christian religion has played in our freedoms. I just dont personally believe in it.
Either side limiting themselves of natural Allies is idiotic. However, I think Atheists in general have made themselves unwelcome do to their militant stance against people who peacefully practice a peaceful religion. They need to calm the hell down and take a libertarian stance towards peaceful religions. So, that being said, as a non religious person, I would have kicked them out just for being D-bags.
Skunk. Punch bowl.
And they know it — this was a stunt. What did they expect to happen.
Though it would be interesting to go ahead and let them do it, then evangelize them at the event. “No fair! That wasn’t in the plan!”
What he really meant was that what conservatism needs to do is disenfranchise the role of religion from its platform. It needs to yank all the social planks away and rip them up. Then and only then will conservatism be palatable to people like him.
The truth? When conservatism embraces religious "neutrality" it will be dead, dead, dead.
The role of religion is our adherence to God which of course Silverman can not stomach.
What I do mind is Atheists who try to force their religion on the rest of us. These militant Atheists are anti-First Amendment and anti-freedom.
Atheists need to develop religious “neutrality”. In my experience these people are generally militant D-bags who go after the safe religions but wont say a word against religions that will cut their head off with a rusty spoon.
You are getting along fairly well because you still believe in a number of values that are championed in Christianity.
You are not being a “dog in the manger.” Not believing, or at least as you say you don’t believe (actually I’ve been told by a person who has told me she is an atheist, that she prays — whereupon I told her that means no, she isn’t an atheist) you don’t want to spread the disbelief. In fact, you do have some respect for God.
To get people from the “respect” view to the “He’s wonderful and I want Him” view is the task of evangelists.
Explicitly “Atheist” and “Agnostic” societies generally have axes to grind. They aren’t content to not believe, or to doubt, on their own. They think this attitude should be spread.
Trouble is, once they do, they have gone in the ring with evangelists who have just as much right to speak their minds. And in the long term, evangelism usually wins. I say it’s because there really is a God, but also we can see that to preach in favor of a something is more appealing than to preach in favor of a nothing.
CPAC is a joke, they allow homosexuals but deny atheists (today).
CPAC is becoming a RINO fest.
The real problem is that we have the greatest offender sitting in the White House.
Then we would have 20% fewer supporters. How is that good?
More people respect religious faith than you might think, and this has been a historical constant in America. A person who has a vision of something to believe in is going to be motivated to go somewhere. This differs from the person whose life is dominated by doubt or stark disbelief. He or she only wants to hand out wet blankets.
I think it would be folly to try to explicitly tie a conservative movement to a particular denomination, or even to require a viable candidate to be associated with a house of worship. But for them to explicitly encourage faith is not folly.