Thursday, August 30, 2012



Odd: Atheist to Give Opening ‘Prayer’ at Tulsa City Council Meeting‏

What a lot of wishy-washy nonsense!

On numerous occasions, atheist activists from across America have made known their disdain for prayer at government meetings. But now, at least one non-believer is prepared to join in on public invocations. This Thursday, Dan Nerren, the non-believing founder of the Humanist Association of Tulsa, will offer up an opening prayer at the Tulsa City Council Meeting.

Nerren, who became an atheist after reading a book that purportedly exposed Biblical contradictions, is a retired railroad worker and a former Christian (he was a Southern Baptist before his conversion to non-belief).

After years of atheist groups unsuccessfully petitioning to stop religious prayers at these government meetings, the city council took an intriguing step — a move to allow atheists to partake in secular invocations.

What will be his message, you ask? Rather than appealing to God for the well-being of Tulsa residents, the atheist leader will be urging council members to address “the welfare of all people” in the community “by respecting the inherent dignity and worth of each person.”

The concluding line, as presented by NewsOK.com, appears to be inspirational in nature. It reads, “We must remember that in the face of adversity, we need not look above for answers but instead recognize the proven potential within ourselves and in each other to overcome any challenges we face.”

Source

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

"We must remember that in the face of adversity, we need not look above for answers but instead recognize the proven potential within ourselves and in each other to overcome any challenges we face.”

Sounds a lot like the conservative mantra:

We must remember that in the face of adversity, we need not look to government for answers but instead recognize the proven potential within ourselves and in each other to overcome any challenges we face.

Wishy-washy indeed.

Anonymous said...

"the atheist leader will be urging council members to address “the welfare of all people” in the community “by respecting the inherent dignity and worth of each person...”

With the exception of cults such as Islam, isn't that exactly what major religions already teach?

Govmintsux said...

"isn't that exactly what major religions already teach?"

Not really, what they say and what they do are two different things. It's just like the Republican and Democratic platforms. Full of ideals posturing and then forgotten about a week later.

Anonymous said...

But religions of course also appeal to a Deity for help like (or literally) appealing to a celestial "Big Daddy", or to some feudal lord or king. In fact the terms "lord" and "king" are frequesntly used by Christians, which shows it's just so utterly and pathetically anthropomorphic.

Anonymous said...

Tolerant libearls in action again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2195109/California-bans-gay-cure-therapy-lawmakers-say-want-protect-sissy-boys.html

Anonymous said...

It may be "wishy-washy", but it does sound reasonable. And just why shouldn't non-believers be allowed to make a statement like this in place of a mystic prayer? If you don't like it, why not drop this crap altogether and just get down to business. You can always pray or have your deep thoughts before you show up for the meeting.

Dman said...

To Anon 5:42: First I'll tell you I agree with you that they should then just drop the preamble stuff and get to work. But to answer your question as to why non-believer's shouldn't be allowed to make such opening statements:

Because it serves no purpose other than, perhaps, a pep talk. The purpose of the opening prayer was to appeal to a higher power for guidance/wisdom, and to remind people that they are accountable to One higher than they. Something which, if there is a God, is probably a wise thing to do. Regardless of any particular individual's beliefs the prayer had a purpose.

Without that appeal to a higher power, it's just idle talk. Save the pep talk for the football game.

Anonymous said...

" to appeal to a higher power for guidance/wisdom"

How many documented times did this higher power actually provide guidance and wisdom?

Anonymous said...

"...and to remind people that they are accountable to One higher than they."

They should be reminded that they are accountable to the people! It seems that one's oath and honor should be enough to keep one on track. If they don't have any wisdom, I've yet to hear of any politician gaining it through prayer.

Anonymous said...

Shows that once again atheism is just another religion. Albeit one based mostly upon being anti-Christian. I guess the Church of Satan and the Temple of Set are too 1970s for them anymore.

Anonymous said...

There is no such thing as 'a former Christian'. If he is not now a Christian then he never was one.

Anonymous said...

Govmintsux,... do you know of any institution in the world, including governments, that does more charitable work, in more places, than the Catholic church?

Anonymous said...

"If he is not now a Christian then he never was one."

I guess baptism does not count. I was a Catholic until I reached the age of reason.

Anonymous said...

12:51 PM You are just trying to stretch the definition of "religion" to mean that "atheism" is merely a competing religion like your own. The very term "a-theism" means lack of believe in a god or gods, and unlike the usual meaning of "religion", atheism has no position on anything except NON belief in a god. It doesn't require any POSITIVE beliefs such as Communism or Nazism or even Satanism, much less "evolutionism", which bigoted theists often like to claim.

Anonymous said...

If religions can only justify their existence by the charitable organizations they run, then what relevance is their religion (except as "Trojan horse").

Anonymous said...

11:37 AM. You are clearly either dumb or ignorant. Human society, like some other social species, have succeeded better by finding other qualities than raw selfish individualistic motives to survive. The eugenic ideas of the Nazis (and many with similar views in the early 20th century, including in the USA) would have destroyed the natural variation in the population, and weakened the gene pool rather than strengthened it, as nobody knows what new situation a person may have to face in the future, either physically or intellectually (and likewise restricting the genepool of animals and plants by too much selective breeding).
The issue of "God" or "religion" doesn't or needn't come into at all.

Anonymous said...

Clearly some bird species are just pis*ed that evolution didn't favor them with any intellectual skills.