By Thomas O’Rourke
President of the Philosophy Club
Rutgers University Class of ’13
I had intended to finish this article in the beginning of September, but my health took a turn for the worse and then midterms came and before I knew it September was October and three presidential debates had come and gone.
With the election days away, what I have to say is more pressing than ever.
I thought that for my first blog post, I would comment on an important issue facing the secular community, which I discussed with David Silverman during our last meeting in February. For those who don’t remember the feel of the community back then, politics came to the forefront with the rise of the Atheist Party. A cursory examination of their platform reveals them to be a (refreshingly) more honestly liberal version of the Democrats.
This prompted me to ask “What is the role of politically right-leaning nonbelievers in (more…)
If you didn’t make it to the David Niose talk you missed out. But you don’t need to miss out on a good summary of the discussion.
The Rutgers Targum, the University’s oldest newspaper, published a piece about the event on September 19th.
Check out the article in the link above.
In the talk David Niose discussed (more…)
What do you think about the Democratic National Convention taking out and then putting back “GOD” in their Platform??
Do you think it should be taken out of the Dem Platform?? Is it harmful or inappropriate to stay in?? Are there pragmatic concerns that it should remain there… for now?? Or does it not really matter?
On the one hand, there are concerns about who represents atheists, and non-theists in general. And further, are they being explicitly marginalized?
The re-assertion of “In God We Trust” as the national motto by the House of Representatives in Nov 2011 seems to imply that if you’re an atheist, then you aren’t part of the “WE”.
Does this reaffirmation of God in the Dem Platform now explicitly marginalize or exclude atheists?
On the other hand, are there any pragmatic arguments as to keeping it? For instance, it’s merely an empty symbol or all things in their time. If the Democrats kept it out they would lose too many voters and Romney would win. If so, defeating Romney now might be worth keeping a merely symbolic reference for a while longer.
So does the use of a single scribble on paper really matter that much if their policies aren’t theocratic? and the losses it might spur if kept be too big?
So what are your thoughts?? Was the move harmful and marginalizing? Or a necessary bit of pragmatism?
By Bill Hochstuhl
NJ State Chapter Leader
National Atheist Party
Please allow me to introduce to you a young and growing political party: THE NATIONAL ATHEIST PARTY!
Now don’t let the name fool you, although membership is primarily made up of non-believers, believers are equally welcomed. We are not about anti-religion. We fully agree with equality for ALL .. regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, social status and yes .. religious belief (or lack thereof).
What all members must agree with however is the need to rebuild and strictly protect the wall of separation between church and state.
We hold the Constitution true and interpret it’s Amendments to clearly indicate a desire for a Secular Nation, which allows its people choice, written by our Founding Fathers at (more…)