This is about ownership of a definition as an organization. WE can either show ownership and give this word a bent in respect to the organizations mission, or we can leave it as an open-ended question, thereby allowing any existing and future members to give it thier own personal meaning without holding them captive to it.
Well and so, if you have a concrete mission you should have a concrete bent to brand the whole to be easily identified...Replace the organizational name with any other representation wording and what do you get? Memphis Freethough Alliance...Memphis Secular Alliance? Memphis Skeptic Alliance? Who is your target member? FREE - unrestricted vs. captive? THINKING - not something encouraged by any diety or theism I know of.... It works for my framework and perceptions limited though they are. On Oct 27, 12:50 pm, Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It was probably a mistake for me to post the first paragraph of > Lowder's essay or to offer a summary. It's too easy (and perfectly > natural) for people to respond to my blurb rather than to the essay > itself. I'm always happy to hear what my fellow freethinkers think, > but I am especially interested in your review of the specific ideas > expressed in the essay and how they might impact MFA. > > http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2000/lowder1.html > > Aaron --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
