And a name... it's unavoidable. I'll take any suggestions you may wish to put forward.

THWOTH wrote:

Nora_Leonard wrote:
What I was trying to say is that we're used to talk about the need for 'secular' society, whereas I don't think they speak in those terms in the US. Of course I could be wrong, as I don't live there, I live here.

I'm only teasing you. I don't want to derail the topc, but (ha!) I would say that though the US may be secular in there being no state-religion there is hardly a distinction or separation between religion and the state, or a very real freedom from religion in great parts of the public and political life.

Agreed. But I was just talking semantics really, or even opening gambits for any atheists who would take up the challenge. So whereas an atheist at a church in Britain would have the history of a public discussion about the secular society to reference, I don't think the same terms would work in the US.

pelfdaddy wrote:Everyone who has commented thus far has been helpful, and seems to really get the drift of the idea. This is good. I need to settle on a date for this... thoughts?

Feb 23rd, the international day of rational scepticism

One thinks maybe a Sunday would be better?

pelfdaddy wrote:And a name... it's unavoidable. I'll take any suggestions you may wish to put forward.

John?
Day of the triffids?
Ramses Niblick the 3rd, kerplunk kerplunk whoops where's my thribble?

I'm no good with names

Nora_Leonard wrote:

THWOTH wrote:

Nora_Leonard wrote:
What I was trying to say is that we're used to talk about the need for 'secular' society, whereas I don't think they speak in those terms in the US. Of course I could be wrong, as I don't live there, I live here.

I'm only teasing you. I don't want to derail the topc, but (ha!) I would say that though the US may be secular in there being no state-religion there is hardly a distinction or separation between religion and the state, or a very real freedom from religion in great parts of the public and political life.

Agreed. But I was just talking semantics really, or even opening gambits for any atheists who would take up the challenge. So whereas an atheist at a church in Britain would have the history of a public discussion about the secular society to reference, I don't think the same terms would work in the US.

I think you're right Nora. For a perspective on US secularism there is Christopher Hitchens' 2010 open letter to the Texans for Truth Rally posted here : THWOTH @ Christopher Hitchens dead (1949—2011)

mattwilson wrote:One thinks maybe a Sunday would be better?

That would only work if you were just going to target churches. For mosques, Friday would be better; for synagogues, Saturday. For all of them you need to find out the time of the 'fellowship' aspect, as I'm assuming you wouldn't want to disrupt any part of a service? Which doesn't mean you can't sit through the service...

Then we need a week of action, not just a day.

THWOTH wrote:Then we need a week of action, not just a day.

We could call it "The week Muhammad went to the molehill."

Not to be a black cloud, but a concern hits me. I am reminded of the first intention behind "Draw Mohammed Day", which was to instigate a great number of people to draw respectful, neutral, or unspecific images of the prophet to make the point only about the refusal to bow down to censorship. What actually occurred, once the event had become well known through Facebook, YouTube et al, was that a large proportion of people published deliberately offensive and crass pictures - Mohammed molesting children, Mohammed as a pig etc. I don't have a particular problem with this but can't help think that the original message, and an opportunity to engage with the Muslim community, was lost or at least reduced in favour of a venting of spleen followed by a predictable response of outrage.

The idea seems excellent on a rational board like this, frequented mainly by considerate adults, but once it hits the wider intertubez, I would be concerned that it might attract people who, by intent or misunderstanding, mistake the idea for a more aggressive or confrontational type of engagement. I may be being a little over cautious but, if it were me, I would give this some consideration and, at the very least, be very clear in any open invitation to emphasis the purpose and tone expected.

Precambrian Rabbi wrote:
The idea seems excellent on a rational board like this, frequented mainly by considerate adults, but once it hits the wider intertubez, I would be concerned that it might attract people who, by intent or misunderstanding, mistake the idea for a more aggressive or confrontational type of engagement. I would give this some consideration if it were me and, at the very least, would make sure I was absolutely clear to emphasis the purpose and tone expected.

I totally agree. That's why I suggested that the place of worship be contacted first to make sure such a visit would be welcomed. Someone else also suggested that each group had a leader who could hopefully ensure good behaviour.

Perhaps if the emphasis was placed on a wish to seek fellowship and engagement rather than confrontation?

mattwilson wrote:One question, do you think that religious folks don't care when someone dies because they'll be in heaven?

The last funeral I went to it was all religiotards who were balling...

Hmmm. A rather more liberal-minded denomination, I take it?

Nora_Leonard wrote:Perhaps if the emphasis was placed on a wish to seek fellowship and engagement rather than confrontation?

I certainly think that should be the tactic and maybe the expression of that sentiment might be 'hippy' enough to put off anyone more inclined to stirring up trouble. I am just concious of the sadly unbreakable and omnipresent law that for every hundred or so well-meaning individuals attempting genuine engagement to reconcile or at least understand and accept a variant perspective, it only takes 1 or 2 asshats who've brought their axe's to grind, on either side, to make the situation go, potentially, horribly wrong.

I suspect that I am being overly anxious but it is best to be prepared. In principal, to be clear, I think it's an excellent idea and one that I would support (although I agree with the earlier poster that it probably makes more sense in the US than the UK).

Precambrian Rabbi wrote:

Nora_Leonard wrote:Perhaps if the emphasis was placed on a wish to seek fellowship and engagement rather than confrontation?

I certainly think that should be the tactic and maybe the expression of that sentiment might be 'hippy' enough to put off anyone more inclined to stirring up trouble. I am just concious of the sadly unbreakable and omnipresent law that for every hundred or so well-meaning individuals attempting genuine engagement to reconcile or at least understand and accept a variant perspective, it only takes 1 or 2 asshats who've brought their axe's to grind, on either side, to make the situation go, potentially, horribly wrong.

I suspect that I am being overly anxious but it is best to be prepared. In principal, to be clear, I think it's an excellent idea and one that I would support (although I agree with the earlier poster that it probably makes more sense in the US than the UK).

It might not take many atheists to double the usual congregation in the UK.

MATT,

Ok, Day of the Triffids, good...good...anything else?

Rabbi,

You are absolutely right. If everyone who reads this thread simply sends the word along to some other site or forum that they frequent, saying simply, "Have you heard about this...?" and then makes certain to mention the purpose of the act, they will be doing their part to be responsible.

I do not think that permission is needed to attend for the most part. American churches are welcoming and eager for visitors. If it is an evet well-known in advance, then they will be expecting us. Local atheist associations could coordinate themselves just enough to ensure a noticeablee presence and attend a large, significant congregation. With proper behavior all should go well.

Secular Sunday? I hate alliteration, but...

As Nora said, it will be the antithesis of the confrontational demonstration.