Hi y'all - I think Crotchbow is appealing. I don't agree with the article posted by Aaron. The CFA definition is fine with me. Of course, if we accept a theist as being a true believer and not just someone who attends church for social reasons etc. then they are not practicing freethought as their faith is illogical (Mr. Spock episode 284 11/2/84.) I do agree with the article in respect to all atheists not being freethinkers - some are just too lazy to think. Nevertheless, I feel that Freethinker is a good umbrella term, and as pointed out, is unrestrictive versus confining.
On Oct 27, 3:37 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think Crotchblow has a point. In the early days we went through > this. But before I go any further, I would like to ask Aaron what > prompted you to post that link? Are you considering that it would be > an idea to consider changing the name of MFA? It is the name. It is > inclusive. It is inviting (I think). Why should MFA change the name > just to bow down to certain groups who feel it is offensive. I am > getting to far along in thought so I'll just wait till I hear your > response to those previous questions. > > :-) > > stemcell > > On Oct 27, 1:47 pm, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > 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- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
