American Atheists terminates its president over sexual misconduct allegations Part 3?

[guillaumeb]

Last edited Tue Apr 17, 2018, 11:53 AM - Edit history (1)

From the article:

American Atheists, one of the most combative organizations dedicated to the promotion of secularism, has terminated its highly visible president, David Silverman, over allegations of financial and sexual misconduct.
Silverman, through his lawyer, denied the accusations.
American Atheists’ board announced the move on Friday (April 13) hours before the website BuzzFeed News published a story detailing the allegations of two women who say Silverman, 51, had nonconsensual sexual contact with them.

To read more:

https://religionnews.com/2018/04/16/american-atheists-terminates-its-president-over-sexual-misconduct-allegations/

2 allegations of non-consensual sexual assault, allegations of financial improprieties, and possibly taking personal advantage of a position of power and trust.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[trotsky]

1. Yep.

Now how does this compare to religious organizations that not only keep their abusers employed, but transfer them to new areas with fresh, unsuspecting victims?

Your desperation to pretend like these are the same is predictable and lame, as usual.

[SonofDonald]

2. An athiest accused of sexual misconduct

Wow, that's just messed up

Remind me, how many priests were found to be sexually abusing boys?.

Loooong way to catch up with that amount eh?.

Religion or the lack of isn't the issue.

[trotsky]

3. Careful, you're feeding his narrative.

Of course no one has ever claimed religion "made" priests molest children.

But religious institutions, sometimes because of their dogma and doctrine, have protected the rapists and criminals in their ranks. That is the key difference, and the one that people like guillaumeb will never, ever discuss because they don't want to accept that reality.

So instead it's "See? An atheist is guilty of sexual harassment - it's a human issue and religion has nothing to do with it, so quit talking about the thousands of pedophile priests the Catholic Church has protected!"

[guillaumeb]

4. Agreed, the problem is predators.

And predators are everywhere.

[trotsky]

5. Predators are indeed everywhere and no one has said otherwise.

But some institutions protect them, and others force them out. I understand why you don't want to talk about that, but would rather sweep the entire issue under the rug with "everyone does it."

[guillaumeb]

8. Very few prey on others.

All who do so should be prosecuted.

[trotsky]

11. Who has said otherwise, gil?

I'll answer that for you: NO ONE.

David Silverman has been booted from the American Atheists organization.

Tim Dolan is protected by the Catholic Church at the Vatican.

Now THAT'S a problem.

[guillaumeb]

12. Who has said otherwise?

[trotsky]

14. You haven't said a thing. That's ALSO a problem.

Your only "response" has been to grasp at any kind of false equivalence you can make, such as this Silverman incident.

Do you recognize how it's different than what the RCC has done, and continues to do?

[guillaumeb]

16. Speaking of not saying anything, see #13.

This might be the beginning of a series.

[trotsky]

18. I am unable to see a post with that number on this thread.

Sorry.

But what I do see is you refusing to answer a simple question.

[guillaumeb]

45. If you wish to see it, remove the obstacle.

I can clearly see it.

[trotsky]

49. I choose not to interact with certain people.

You, you're worth humiliating. Others, not so much.

[guillaumeb]

59. You reveal the inner Trotsky with every response.

[trotsky]

63. Thanks!

Better than being deceitful!

[guillaumeb]

66. You should not thank me.

[yallerdawg]

22. I'm on someone's 'ignore.'

Works for me, too!

[guillaumeb]

46. At first I thought I must have been in error,

but thankfully I am still perfect.

[tonedevil]

43. By their actions...

the Catholic Church.

[Major Nikon]

54. We must forget how folks like the Branch Davidians, RCC, FLDS feature such successful predators

Because after all there's really no difference. A predator is a predator.

[trotsky]

56. Yeah man, it's totally just a human thing.

Religion has no role whatsoever in enabling, perpetuating, or defending these predators. None whatsoever, SO STOP SAYING THAT!

[yallerdawg]

6. The "Better Than Catholics" defense.

When confronted with evidence that human behavior is consistent regardless of the organization or institution, out come the "Buts..."

11th Commandment.

[guillaumeb]

7. Amen!!

Sorry, too religious.

Agreed!!

[yallerdawg]

9. And - that wasn't a typo!

I really do mean "Buts..." with one t.

[guillaumeb]

10. Whew!!!!

This story keeps growing each day. When I saw it in RN I thought it was the story you poster earlier. Now there are 2 people accusing a person in a position of authority and influence.

[yallerdawg]

13. "Reaction in the atheism community has been glum."

“There’s an epidemic of sexism, sexual harassment & assault in movement atheism,” Kristi Winters, an atheist and feminist activist said on Twitter. “Attacking credible accusers isn’t a solution, it’s protecting rape culture. Are atheists good w/out gods? Prove it.”

[guillaumeb]

15. Dawkins is an excellent example of the problem.

I am certain that we will hear of more such incidents. And given that approximately 85% if people are theists, it stands to reason that the raw number of predators will be far smaller among atheists.

[guillaumeb]

17. Do you have a link to the tweet?

[yallerdawg]

19. Kristi says:

Link to tweet

And for posterity (the internet is forever).

[Cuthbert Allgood]

38. So you aren't just arguing that the human population is consistent

you are saying that our lack of a god makes us worse? Because that's what this tweet is arguing.

[yallerdawg]

41. This is an Atheist decrying sexism in the Atheist movement.

And a feminist pointing out that defense of this man for any reason is disgusting and offensive.

Carry on.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

42. Ah, missed that. My bad. Good news is they fired him.

So, they did the right thing pretty quickly. She should be happy.

[Lordquinton]

21. Whole lot of straw

Can't argue honestly, so gotta go with your forced narritive.

[Mariana]

26. No one here is defending Silverman. nt.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

36. So you are agreeing that Catholics don't have any moral advantage?

I mean, if human behavior is consistent and nothing in the RCC makes that any different, then why are they any better source of moral direction and teaching?

And, for the record, I have not seen a single atheist defend Silverman's actions nor say anything other than his firing should have happened. And American Atheists haven't claim to have any moral superiority.

[yallerdawg]

37. Now you want to have a level playing field.

Alright-y!

Sounds good to me!

[Cuthbert Allgood]

39. We can have the discussion once you let me know your thoughts on that.

Do Catholics have a special insight into morality and a subsequent ability to tell us how we should live our lives?

[Lordquinton]

20. Man, you guys are having a field day with this

Guess when you're in a desert you have to enjoy what little water comes your way.

[trotsky]

24. The pattern is consistent.

Scene: the Religion Forum

Person A: Hey, the Catholic Church seems to have had a pattern of horrible behavior in its history regarding the sexual abuse of minors. Does this have any relationship to the religion itself?

Person B: Well, historically the RCC has believed itself to be above any secular authorities. It has taught that...

Person G: OmfG YoU gUYs davID sIlVeRMaN, PResIDent and ruLEr oF all AMeRICAn ATHeistS, Has bEen RemoveD fRoM HIs POSitION AftER RepoRTs Of SExuAl haRASSMeNt.

Person B: OK, that's good, I'm glad. But about the teaching that...

Person G: ShUt uP! ATheisTS CAN bE sEXUAl prEdatOrs ToO.

Person A: Yes, we all understand that, Person G. But since this is the Religion forum, the topic is generally tied to reli...

Person G: gueSS yOu atHEists arEn'T MorAllY sUpErIoR aftER AlL! Ha HA!

[Lordquinton]

28. It's boring really

Person A: the RCC uses it's influence and wealth to hid priests who rape children

Person Y: so you think atheists are better than Catholics? Here's three threads about the same guy!

[trotsky]

32. Person Y sounds obsessed.

I'm glad I see no evidence they exist.

[Lordquinton]

47. Absolutely

Would be a nightmare trying to discuss anything with them.

[guillaumeb]

48. 93% of posts in one group, religion.

Define obsession please.

[trotsky]

51. This is the forum I post the most in, yes.

That is my choice.

I have battled with many religious bigots here - most of them vanquished and dismissed from DU now.

It's only a matter of time.

[guillaumeb]

61. Define obsession.

An interesting claim. Interesting for what it reveals about you.

[trotsky]

64. Can't help but engage in personal attacks, can you?

That's unfortunate. You go on being you, I guess. Show everyone how a good Christian behaves.

[MineralMan]

23. They fired him. They didn't move him to a different office

in another place. That is how legitimate and ethical organizations deal with things like this. Organizations that cover such things up by shifting people around are arguably not legitimate or ethical.

Every type of organization has the potential to hire someone who is not an ethical person or even a criminal. It is what that organization does when such behavior is discovered that identifies it as ethical or not. Apparently, American Atheists is an ethical organization. I have no personal knowledge of that group, however, and don't know anyone who is a member of it. I know many atheists.

Some organizations I know about, though, have failed to behave ethically. You may have heard of some of those, perhaps.

Firing Silverman, upon knowledge of reliable evidence of bad or criminal behavior, was the appropriate thing to do. Most organizations of any size have had to do the same thing.

[trotsky]

25. As I'm sure you are aware, it is no use pointing out these obvious differences to guillaumeb.

Not one atheist has defended Silverman here, to my knowledge. Not one.

And as you note, American Atheists dismissed him. If they HAD protected him from investigation or prosecution, even though I am not a member of their organization, I would call for his dismissal.

But as is obvious to anyone without an agenda to prevent critical discussion of religious beliefs, this isn't about honest and open dialog. It's about creating a false equivalence and setting up straw men in order to stifle that dialog so that only "positive" things about religion can be discussed.

[MineralMan]

27. Yes, I'm aware of that tendency on the part of "some few."

I respond often to such things, but only because people are reading these threads who do not participate in the discussions.

Sadly, such posts about non-theist organizations are simply used as "what-about" attempts to divert attention. In recent years, one Christian denomination was exposed for institutionalizing extremely unethical treatment of heinous offenders who sexually abused children for many decades. It has been major news for many years, and new evidence is appearing still on a regular basis.

There is no equivalence between a non-religious organization firing someone for misdeeds and a religious organization that hid child sexual abuse around the world for decades, or perhaps for centuries, as an institutional matter. The American Atheists did what all organizations should do. The Roman Catholic Church did what no organization should do. They are paying dearly for it today. They could have avoided all of that by behaving in an ethical way that respected the law. They did not. Sadly, criminal convictions are often impossible, due to statute of limitations laws.

In many ways, the posting of such stories as this American Atheists story simply illustrates the difference between ethical and non-ethical organizations. There is a delicious irony in that, but it seems to go unnoticed by those who post those stories here. That's hardly surprising, of course, but ironic nonetheless.

I'll continue to point out that irony, whenever it is appropriate.

[guillaumeb]

30. Irony. A good one.

[guillaumeb]

29. With zero due process.

Does this group of atheists have no respect for due process and the rights of an accused?

[MineralMan]

31. Such rights and rules only apply to courts of law.

Organizations and businesses can fire people for different reasons and with different degrees of evidence. Surely you knew that. Based on the articles, that organization had ample cause to fire him.

I guess I will have to assume less knowledge on your part in the future and explain things in more simple terms.

[Voltaire2]

33. I think what that meant was that "American Atheists" ought to have moved him to

a city state where he would be immune from extradition and then let him stay in an apartment in a palace while awaiting "trial" in a kangaroo court after which he might have to stay in his palace apartment a bit longer.

That is if there are even criminal charges involved. If there aren't then the example to follow would be to do absolutely nothing.

[MineralMan]

34. Ah, I see.

Well, some organizations would do that, but they're religious organizations and answer only to their "God," which doesn't seem to be paying much attention. If it did, a thoughtful guy would think it would probably be righteously pissed off.

In fact, that should make one wonder, I think. Wonder about, you know, the very existence of deities, in fact.

[trotsky]

58. Since the primary issue here is that the people involved are ATHEISTS...

the only proper resolution to all this is for every atheist to shut up and quit saying bad things about religion.

Gil might be happy then.

[trotsky]

35. Whoop, time to pull out this old gem again!

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=255985



It's extra special when you literally embarrass yourself.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

40. Do you have some insight that they violated their contract with him?

Or are you just pulling words out of your ass? Because I'm sure if they violated the contract, Silverman will make that clear and a court of law will decide.

And they should have fired him for it and I reckon they have a clause in the contract that allows them to fire for this.

[Act_of_Reparation]

50. So you're upset AA fired an employee accused of sexual assault by multiple women.

Or your original plan—to catch atheists in a double-standard by defending "their guy"—unexpectedly went to shit.

Either way, you should probably stop. I mean, it's one thing to accidentally step on your dick... it's quite another to stand there stomping on it, like you're doing now.

[trotsky]

52. If there's one thing gil has proven...

it's that he has no sense of shame. He'll stomp on that dick just to show us.

[Act_of_Reparation]

53. Or...

...that his dislike for atheists is so profound he will shit all over them for doing what we could all agree was the right thing to do.

[trotsky]

55. Never forget, he defended a TRUMP SUPPORTER (and continues to do so!)...

because an atheist group booted him out. The atheist group was concerned about separation of church and state, and did not think Trump would do enough to protect that.

So gil, in his hatred for atheists, tosses liberalism AND secularism (two things I THOUGHT everyone on this board would agree with) out the window so he can rail on atheists for being "intolerant" of a Trump-loving asshat.

Hopeless.

[Act_of_Reparation]

57. Don't forget the rest of the First Amendment.

He's tossing freedom of association out the window, too.

[guillaumeb]

60. Let me make it easy for you.

Does accusation equal conviction?

[Act_of_Reparation]

62. Was David Silverman convicted of something?

Fuck me, the justice system works quickly these days.

[guillaumeb]

65. I cannot make it any easier.

Ask a lawyer.

[Act_of_Reparation]

67. I'd suggest you do the same.

Of course, the lawyer you'd ask isn't a very good one.

[tonedevil]

44. He should have just become...

a Catholic Priest then the organization would do everything they could to protect them. It is obvious from this that the religious need secularism to be moral.