Why Weren’t Atheists Invited to the Democratic National Committee’s Interfaith Gathering?

The Democratic National Convention will open next week with an interfaith gathering. Representatives from Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and other faiths will be there.

No atheists, though.

We weren’t invited.

The Secular Coalition for America has tried to persuade Convention CEO Leah Daughtry to allow atheists to be a part of the gathering, but to no avail.

Daughtry did, however, speak to the press about the SCA’s letter. From a piece by Ronald Aronson:

“Atheists speaking at an interfaith service… does that work?” a “befuddled” Daughtry was quoted as asking in a July 19 story by the AP’s Eric Gorski. “I don’t quite know. But they’re part of the party, you treat them with respect.”

The first sign that treating them with respect was not a priority for Daughtry was her lumping all notheists who include not only agnostics but also humanists, skeptics, and believers in spirit but not a personal god into atheists.

And the second came with the announcement of the lineup for what had once been thought of as a “values” and a “unity” event: no one represents the millions of secularists. Daughtry: “Democrats have been, are and will continue to be people of faith – and this interfaith gathering is proof of that.”

But what about those Democrats who are not “people of faith?” Are they not invited? Or invited just to watch others pray? Should their own outlook not even be acknowledged?

If the Democrats are trying to strike unifying chords among their entire kaleidoscopic range of liberals, moderates, and progressives, it should be obvious that secularists cannot dare be left out of the “big tent” event, and that it should be about beliefs and values, not solely about religion.

This opinion piece in the Colorado Springs Gazette begs to differ. In the process, it shows incredible ignorance regarding atheists as a whole… as well as why the writers think atheists should not be invited to the DNC:

A few atheists have their panties in a twist once again, this time fussing that an atheist leader wasn’t invited to speak at an Aug. 24 interfaith service that’s part of the Democratic National Convention.

…

… an amazing number of atheists have taken to confronting and insulting believers of other religions. They pretend that atheist beliefs are proven true, while others are proven false. They refer to other religions as “irrational,” and “superstitious.” Their approach to ministry is overbearing and rude. They engage in confrontation, with disregard for persuasion. It’s as if they’ve watched too much “American Idol,” where Simon Cowell briefly made it hip to be the bully.

A few short comments about that excerpt and a few others in the piece before my head explodes:

Atheists do not say “There is no God” as if it were a proven fact. We say we do not believe in a God.

Atheists do not claim “absolute knowledge” as the article states. Which, incidentally, is a different view from a religious person who “knows” God exists despite any physical evidence.

The article says PZ Myers “stole and destroyed the Catholic Eucharist,” when in fact, someone sent him a cracker which was handed out for free.

The writers of the piece are taking the actions of a few atheists and generalizing them for everyone.

The Secular Coalition for America has no intention of going to the DNC and starting shit with the other faiths. We just want to be included among those with religious beliefs. It’s a matter of respect and awareness. Not hostility.

The Gazette piece gets worse. Note this particular juxtaposition:

Hitler imagined a world without Jews. The Freedom From Religion Foundation rented a billboard near the Colorado Convention Center that says: “Imagine No Religion.”

Are you fucking kidding me?!

Since when are words on a billboard the equivalent of killing 6,000,000 Jews?

They go on to write about what would happen in a religion-less world — apparently, there would be more Pol Pots, more Stalins, far fewer charities, no Golden Rule, and we’d be rid of most hospitals and great universities.

As I read that, I wanted to respond to each point separately… and then I read the end of the piece:

Democrats will nominate a Christian gentleman who respects others. It’s likely they didn’t invite atheists to their faith service because they didn’t want embarrassing guests. Atheists might bring pseudointellectual proselytizers, who are intolerant, self-aggrandizing and rude. Atheists should fund universities and hospitals. They should feed and clothe starving kids. They should act more like Christians and Jews. If they do some of that — if they contribute to a diverse humanity — they might get better party invites.

I know you’ve heard this before… but you replace “atheist” with “Muslim” in that paragraph and lots of people would be out of a job.

As it stands, there’s not much reaction from anyone.

Grimalkin

A Christian believes that Shiva doesn’t exist. A Christian believes that God’s existence is a proven fact and that Shiva’s non-existence is equally proven.

So why are atheists singled out?

And do the democrats not realize that secularists make up about 10% of the country? Not to mention the fact that the bulk of that 10% will be voting for Obama? Imagine if, in the next election, that 10% just decides that they’ve taken enough abuse from the democratic party and just sat out. That would make a landslide victory for McCain!

I’m sure that this sort of thing is going to make a good number of us sit out. I’m considering it myself. How can I vote for a party has an exclusive membership that extends only for “people of faith”?

I would just like to add that I work in the non-profit sector. I get paid far less than market value for my job and I take that paycheque gladly because I am doing something good with my life. But, you know, I’m just an atheist. So I probably have some sort of evil motive…
Jared

It’s the Gazette – no big surprise. And remember, Colorado Springs has the heads of more major religions than any other city in the world. My family’s from there, and you can’t go more than a block or two from a church without running into another church.

I would like to see non-believers included at the DNC, though… Especially as a new Democrat.

Let’s react to this. Write letters to the Gazette everyone!

GENERAL INFORMATION
The Gazette
30 S. Prospect St.
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
719-632-5511
http://www.gazette.com
penn

Doesn’t the Democratic Party recognize the world’s most famous Deist, Thomas Jefferson, as its founder? I mean what the hell? He passionately spoke/wrote about our need to free from any religion if we so choose. This is just good old fashioned douchebaggery.
SarahH

While the article is ridiculously offensive (I feel no need to parse through why each part is awful), I always do feel a bit torn when it comes to atheist participation in “Multi” or “Inter” Faith events.

We go to great lengths to remind people that atheism isn’t a religion or faith – it’s simply a lack thereof. Do we really belong at a multi-faith gathering?

I think it depends on what’s being discussed, but on the whole, unless a right to representation is being withheld (i.e. actual voting on federal policies or parcelling out money to be used for charity) I don’t see a problem with atheists being left out of such meetings.

The better question, IMO, is whether these gatherings are appropriate at certain events. While I understand the desire for party unification, I don’t know that this is the best way to go about it.
Matt

Nice…
The usual discriminatory bullshit I should come to expect.
Paul Thoreau

And amazingly, some wonder why some atheists are angry, and speaking out.

Things seem to be getting worse, not better. Faith-based initiatives, the demonizing of Jeremiah Wright, and Rick Warren interviewing presidential candidates all just make me more angry.

There seems to be more religion in politics now than ever before.

Atheists have a reason to be angry, and we have a right to express that anger.
Grimalkin

SarahH – you are absolutely right. The Democratic party should not be hosting these events at all because they are, in their essence, exclusionary. The government has no right to exclude any member of the population based on religion (or race, gender, etc.).

However, if you are going to have a “multicultural” sort of event (if we accept religion as a form of culture), then you absolutely need to make sure that every single group is represented.

Besides, remember that the reasons they gave had nothing to do with “Atheism isn’t a faith, therefore it doesn’t properly belong to a faith gathering.” Their reasons were exclusionary (“we don’t like them, we don’t want them in our party”). Their reasons for excluding us are far more offensive to me than the actual act of excluding.
The Barefoot Bum

That the Democratic party is having an official religious gathering is itself objectionable. Democrats hold and seek public office in the government; religion simply shouldn’t enter into their official activities.
Dan Florien

Well I can see why: it’s “interfaith,” and I don’t think atheism has much faith. 🙂
Ian

I wouldn’t say there’s been no reaction, I wrote about this at Edger (a pre-release blog for CFI).
Odgie

I’m not saying that I think they were right not to invite atheists, but SarahH is right; if you don’t want to be seen as a religious (or irreligious) demographic, then why would you even want to participate in such a gathering?

As far as why the Democratic Party is holding such a meeting–it’s probably to promote unity among the variety of faiths that are represented within the party. To pretend that any party member or participant defines themselves solely or primarily as a Democrat would be naive and ultimately self-defeating.
Grimalkin

Odgie – As I said earlier, it’s the reasoning they gave for not inviting Atheists that rubs me the wrong way. Doesn’t it bug you that she would say: “Democrats have been, are and will continue to be people of faith”? That is deliberately exclusionary.

That’s what this whole meeting is about – excluding Atheists and trying to promote the idea that one must be religious to be welcome in the Democratic party.

Not to mention that this isn’t a religious thing, this is the Democratic National Convention!
Gabriel

We are discriminated against because we are still a minority that it is okay to discriminate against. A lot of people need someone to hate. We fill that role nicely. If we ever want to get over this we need to stop all of the stupid in-fighting between our various groups. And we need to have a concerted campaign to get atheists, agnostics, secularits, humanists, etc. elected to office. We need to fill as many school board seats, city councils, county government, state legislatures, state offices as we can. These lowere level offices carry huge power and influence. Do we want to improve our schools? Do we want to get science taught instead of creationism? Then we need people on the school board all the way up to the state level. It is easier than running around suing every time some creationist tries to get science kicked out of the schools. We are able to see the problems. We need to work together for the good of our country.
TXatheist

There has got to be a way to get all the atheist Dems to make enough noise to get them to change their mind. I realize there are atheists for Ron Paul and John McCain but some type of petition saying we’ll vote for McCain if we are ignored would be a suggestion. Lori Lipman Brown starts the petition?
Odgie

Grimalkin – I hear you, and the statement you quoted does sound exclusionary. But I wonder if she meant it that way. She could have meant “We welcome people of all faiths;” of course, she might have added, “or people of no faith,” to prevent the uproar.

Also, the Democratic Party is heavily courting the religious vote for the first time in ages. Many believers (myself included) are disgusted with the Republican Party in general and W in particular and the Democrats recognize that and are seizing the unforgiving moment.

I am not saying that atheists shouldn’t take exception to this, but be careful about the inferences you draw…I seriously doubt that the Democrats don’t place any value on your vote.
llewelly

Not to mention the fact that the bulk of that 10% will be voting for Obama?

A fact which makes the DNC only more certain they can ignore us. What other choices do we have? McCain? Bob Barr?
Spork

Wait, wait, waitadamnminute.

We say we do not believe in a God.

I’m constantly having to correct people that atheism isn’t a belief, it’s a lack of belief. Belief and faith being the same in this context, why would any atheist be upset about someone finally getting it right?

We don’t belong in any interfaith conference because we don’t have any faith in a deity.

Let all the loonies play together. We don’t need to be invited to their parties. We need to be at the table for larger social and political issues. But, if a bunch of whackaloons want to get together and gossip about their imaginary friends, I really don’t give a shit.
SarahH

Oh, right, also to this:

The Gazette piece gets worse. Note this particular juxtaposition:

Hitler imagined a world without Jews. The Freedom From Religion Foundation rented a billboard near the Colorado Convention Center that says: “Imagine No Religion.”

Are you fucking kidding me?!

I totally invoke Godwin’s Law!
Grimalkin

Odgie – I have no doubt that the Democratic party wants and values my vote. But, like Llewelly, I think that they’ve come to just assumed that they will get it, so they can ignore us and focus their campaign on the on-the-fencers. Unfortunately, I see this backfiring in a major way.

Obviously, as Llewelly says, what are my options? Should I vote for McCain? That’d be stupid, especially since he is even more of what I would be protesting. So what would be the point? That being said, I’m seriously considering sitting out this election. It would be my first (including the locals) since I turned 18, but I am finding it more and more difficult to support the Democratic party.

I hope you are right, I really do hope that she was taken out of context or that maybe she spoke without thinking. If there’s an apology and if I see a serious effort to be more inclusionary from now on, it will make it all up to me. But she is going to have to do the work. She wants something from me (my vote), so she will have to give something to me (a reassurance that the democratic party will uphold the separation of church and state).
Grimalkin

Spork, this isn’t an inter-faith conference. This is the Democratic National Convention. Imagine if they had opened it with a “Christian gathering” and so excluded all Muslims, Hindus, etc. Do you think these groups would be any less angry just because “hey, it’s a Christian gathering, so it doesn’t involve me!”

The fact that this is government-sponsored and that it deliberately excludes all non-believers is a big deal. It’s not just a couple backwater crazies getting together in their little club house. This is our government, this is the party most of us belong to.
llewelly

Also, the Democratic Party is heavily courting the religious vote for the first time in ages.

‘courting the religious’ is what made the Republicans anti-gay, anti-women, and anti-freedom.
Bill D. Johnston

I am a person of faith, but I think it shameful that nontheists were not invited.
After all, Thomas Jefferson said, “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
Epistaxis

Atheists do not say “There is no God” as if it were a proven fact.

Yes I do. The same way I say, “There is no Santa.” I still don’t claim “absolute knowledge,” though – I have the same knowledge as everyone else, which is sufficient.
martymankins

“Atheists do not claim “absolute knowledge” as the article states. Which, incidentally, is a different view from a religious person who “knows” God exists despite any physical evidence.”

The above nails the whole hypocrisy on the head. It’s ok for believers to say for a surety that God exists but non-believers can’t state their belief of no God? Something just seems wrong with this.

This is truly a majority vs. minority here.

As a Democrat, I’m saddened by this. They are not the “balls to the wall” party that I remember from years past. Speak up, stand up for everyone. I wish they would.
Kate

The above nails the whole hypocrisy on the head. It’s ok for believers to say for a surety that God exists but non-believers can’t state their belief of no God? Something just seems wrong with this.

Who said it was okay for them to state surely that a god exists? Not me…
ollie

Ok, flames expected, but this is a correct decision.

After all, this is a FAITH gathering and, well, one of the reasons I am an atheist is because I think that FAITH is a bad thing!
Craig

I’m an atheist and I feed and clothe starving children (I sponsor two kids). Do I get an invite to the party?

@Ollie: Yes, they call it a “Faith” gathering, but it could be renamed to something more inclusive – e.g. a “Values and unity” event as hinted at by Aronson.
j swift

While attending the inter-faith conference would be productive in addressing issues such as discrimination against atheists. It is also counter productive, isn’t it, to demand attendance when you are trying to disabuse the religionists that you are a faith – secularist, humanist, atheist whatever.
Mike B

Well, I think I’ve pretty much decided to do 1 of 3 things this election cycle:

1) Find someone 3rd party to vote for an essentially “throw my vote away”

2) Sit this one out

3) Vote for Yoda. If we’re gonna vote based on fiction, it may as well be decent fiction.

Oh, and a buddy of mine just had a good idea:
“I think they should take out a sign at the convention center that reads “We wanted to say HI, but we weren’t invited””
David D.G.

Mike B wrote:

Oh, and a buddy of mine just had a good idea:
“I think they should take out a sign at the convention center that reads “We wanted to say HI, but we weren’t invited””

I love it. It properly chastises them, yet without being so seriously indignant or angry as to make others want to raise their shields against the sentiment. That’s not to say that stronger protests and admonitions shouldn’t be raised, but this would be a great one to include as well.

~David D.G.
postsimian

I love this site. I was recently given an assignment in my Composition class to respond to an Op-Ed piece. I think I just found the one (Gazette). Thanks Hermant!
Siamang

I think the Gazette piece is perfect. It’s EXACTLY the argument that needs to be made as to why we SHOULD be at the table at the DNC.

I’m going to send Leah Daughtry that editorial, with the words “If you want to see what hate we face, and why we object to being excluded from the dialog, this is it. If this editorial turns your stomach as it does mine, then understand us when we demand to be part of the American values dialog at the Convention.”

Anyone have Leah Daughtry’s email address? I don’t want to send it from the Secular Coalition’s website.
ollie

Well, the problem with the Gazette article is that it contains false stuff.

1. Leading scientists (National Academy of Science caliber) in fact are 93 percent atheist or agnostic (Nature); so a search under “Leading Scientists Still Reject God”

2. Einstein openly ridiculed religious practices and openly rejected a personal god. In fact, he called the standard religious practices “childish”.

He did NOT accept the atheist label but he did say that you could call him agnostic.

See the most recent popular Einstein biography.
Scotty B

SarahH Says:
August 21st, 2008 at 9:20 am

Oh, right, also to this:

The Gazette piece gets worse. Note this particular juxtaposition:

Hitler imagined a world without Jews. The Freedom From Religion Foundation rented a billboard near the Colorado Convention Center that says: “Imagine No Religion.”

Are you fucking kidding me?!

I totally invoke Godwin’s Law!

Actually, I think technically you want Reductio ad Hitlerum.

/Also, yippee! My picture is working now!
cipher

One funny aspect of this is that many of the Jews who will be in attendance are probably atheists!
Siamang

Actually, I think technically you want Reductio ad Hitlerum.

My preferred term: “Agumentum ad Nazium”.
Aj

I remember the first time I heard Hitler’s “Imagine”, what a great song. Hitler was probably the least popular member of the Beatles.

If atheism is a religion then so is a-fairism, a-Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, a-Invisible Pink Unicornism, and a-Teapotism are also religions. Religions without ritual, faith, laws, and myth. If you want to call not believing in ghosts, but not claiming their nonexistance, a religion, then it’s a religion. That’s not how I understand the term, or anyone I know.

We call religion irrational and supersticious because it is bloody well full of irrationality and superstition. Is there an entry test to this event? Perhaps a faithhead comes up with the ace of spades, and asks you to name it, and you must name it a club, heart, or diamond.

Daughtry’s job is to court religious voters. It’s not a big deal that atheists weren’t invited to her event. However, the Democrats do not ever court nonreligious voters, they do not listen to secular issues, they shadow the Republicans, they won’t separate religion and state. This is what happens when you vote for the least worse party, they can race to the bottom, following the Republicans.
Polly

I would have been angry if atheists had been invited to an interFAITH gathering. I would’ve been even angrier if any atheists actually attended.

I have no stake in faith-anything. They should hold gatherings on a different basis all together. Until they do, we’re not interested in their little, mystic circle-jerk.
Elles

[random fact]They once put a picture of myself playing the piano with the Colorado Springs Philharmonic during a 24-hour fund-raiser in the Colorado Springs Gazette. The conductor gave me a lecture about show business.[/random fact]
justin jm

From Colorado Springs Gazette…

Atheists should fund universities and hospitals. They should feed and clothe starving kids. They should act more like Christians and Jews. If they do some of that — if they contribute to a diverse humanity — they might get better party invites.

(bold mine)

Aren’t we doing this just by existing?

I agree with the others here. Whoever wrote this CSG article is willfully ignorant. Time to go soak my brain in battery acid after reading that tripe.
miller

Don’t mistake the opinion piece in the Gazzette for the “official” reasoning as to why atheists were excluded. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to exclude atheists from an “interfaith” gathering. I mean, in some respects atheism is just another religious category, and in other respects it isn’t. It’s hard to blame people for mixing all those respects up when even I have trouble keeping them straight.
Siamang

Atheists should fund universities and hospitals. They should feed and clothe starving kids. They should act more like Christians and Jews.

So if we scheme billions from America’s shut-in grandmothers to fuel our private fleet of jets like the televangelists, we’ll get a seat at the table if we kick back a few mill’ to a soup kitchen?

Got it.

And really, fuck this motherfucker. How much does this asshole give to charity a year?

I give, not as much as I’d like to be able to. I don’t put a no-cross symbol on my checks, though.
Spork

Grimalkin…whoops! I read too quickly while hopped up on cold meds this morning. I didn’t realize this was the DNC. Given some of Obama’s recent statements regarding the inclusion of those without faith, I now agree that this is an offense worth getting upset over.

My apologies for my oversight.
Siamang

There are plenty of legitimate reasons to exclude atheists from an “interfaith” gathering. I mean, in some respects atheism is just another religious category, and in other respects it isn’t.

What’s going on is that the Democrats are having a kickoff “Unity and values” meeting ahead of their convention. They use the word “Faith” to head it up so that they can specifically exclude people with non-traditional beliefs, so that they can stroke the exceptionalists.

This is all about them trying to distance themselves from the secular left and pandering to those members of religions who think that secularists are evil. And the SCA is laying a big turd in their punchbowl by making it visible and obvious that this is indeed what they’re doing. They hide behind weasel-words like “unity” and “values” when the meeting should really be called “God Wants You to Vote Democrat, God, God, God of all Faiths, But Mostly Jesus, Obama, Jesus, Obama, A Vote for Obama Equals a Vote For Jesus, One Rally Under God, Rally For Faith, Unity, Faith and Jesus……huh, wha? atheists? nonbelievers? ain’t none of them in the dem party, noooo way….Rally”.

It’s hard to blame people for mixing all those respects up when even I have trouble keeping them straight.

Oh, it’s completely straight in this instance. This is a pander parade, and we ain’t invited. Good on the SCA for calling attention to this. I think it’s pretty clear that we aren’t welcome, and it’s sheerly because our beliefs threaten the voters they want to court.

In the past I’ve given hundreds of dollars to the democrats. The Obama campaign and the DCCC keep sending me requests for money. I gave hundreds to John Kerry’s campaign and Howard Dean’s, and to the local and congressional committes too, and I’ve already contributed about a hundred or so to Obama.

No more. Every time the dem’s call to get more money from me, I’m going to make sure they know why they’re not getting one red cent this year. Every dollar I was going to send to Obama’s campaign is going to MSF, or Nothing but Nets, or Habitat, or the Sierra Club or the Valley Food Bank.

It is CLEAR, that once again I am not welcome. Can you IMAGINE if they had a “Families and Communities” rally and deliberately excluded gays? Especially once it became clear, as this is, that the rally only EXISTS in order to distance the party from the minority movement all the better to pander to those who hate us?

I’m fucking serious about this… If it’s close in California, I’ll hold my nose and vote for Obama, but that’s it. My money is where it’ll do good for human beings in need, and not to put people in power who seek to take away my voice.

I said GOOD DAY!!!!
Darryl

Siamang, I’m feeling the same way these days. But, I’m more pessimistic than I think you are.

This whole campaign–the whole political system we have–it’s bullshit, pure bullshit. It’s a playground of the rich and powerful manipulators who don’t give a shit about the little people like me. There are lots of good folks doing the grunt work of government, sure, but too many get sucked into that corrupting machine and come out the other end thinking only of themselves. Government service becomes just another job that doesn’t mean anything. At the top, where “power politics” is played, decisions get made that serve the interests of the big players, not of me.

I haven’t been represented in years, atheism aside. I have no voice. Yet, I pay my taxes, I support the system like most people; I’m part of the problem, but powerless to do anything about it. I realize that what we have now is an insane mix of self-serving entities and people in the millions, all channeled and led around by a relative few parasites. It’s an absurd system that has gone out of control.

It affects me, but I do not trust it, and I cannot depend upon it. It’s up to me to watch out for me–government no longer exists to protect and not restrict my liberty or to promote my welfare. It cannot be trusted because those that inhabit its offices are not to be trusted. I suppose I was a fool to ever believe in this or any form of government. I guess I let myself believe that a primitive species like ours was capable of rational self-government. We can do so much, but some things are beyond us.

I am grateful that I wasn’t born in some poor place where some warlord could just shoot me for his pleasure. I have had my share of good in this country, but it is no “city on a hill.” I chose twenty years ago to stop lying to myself about God; now I think I’ll stop lying to myself about this.
miller

Siamang,
Fair enough. The problem is that the interfaith meeting was ever called to begin with.
Siamang

Well sure… From what I read, every night of the convention is begun with a religious speech… and God and Country talk’s going to be everywhere.

The the point where the ADL has even spoken up about this being worrisome.
Richard Wade

Regardless of whether atheists should have been invited to the Interfaith Gathering, people here who are saying or hinting that they will sit the election out or throw away their vote on a third party are foolish. No, not foolish, they’re idiots.

Are you a one issue voter? Is there no more dimension to you and your life than your atheism? It’s going to take generations to overcome the bigotry against atheists but in the meantime we are facing the very real threat of four to eight more years of the same bullshit ideological administration that has wiped its ass with the Constitution, reduced our freedoms and rights, bled us dry in a pack-of-lies war, ruined the environment, pushed civil rights back ten years, made the U.S the laughing stock of the world, lost us allies and made us more enemies. Atheists invited to their silly faith fest or not, we can’t afford another Republican plutocracy.

I consider you people my friends but please get your heads out of your god-free asses and see the bigger picture.
Rayven Alandria

This angered me so deeply that I will have to calm down before responding to the vitriol in that article. I cannot understand why people in this country think it’s okay to speak about Atheists the way they do in that piece of garbage. If the word “Atheists” had been replaced with “Muslim” or some other group, lawsuits would be flying.
H of Cashburn

Some very good points have been made, I just have one comment, orthogonal to the discussion. I think the use of expletives, although they convey the message emphatically, is unnecessary. I know I will probably get many criticisms of this opinion, but I think it conveys an image of crassness, rather than freedom of verbal expression. Just because I don’t believe in a god doesn’t mean I don’t believe in common decency.

“Are you f***g kidding me?!”

Was that actually necessary? Anyone else?
James Smith, João Pessoa, Brazil

Considering the “non-believers now make up about 20% of the population of under 30’s, that makes them a larger voting group than blacks, Hispanics, gays, the NRA, or any other “minority”. In other words, to be ignored at great political peril.

What is needed is the same type of organization these other groups have used to make a presence larger than their actual numbers would justify.

Anarchists Unite!