| Flyer approved by Oklahoma Joes: | |
| (http://i.imgur.com/i7yjwfc.jpg) | (http://i.imgur.com/bkI5A7d.jpg?1) view full sized (http://i.imgur.com/bkI5A7d.jpg?1) |
Quote from: BKDotCom on April 08, 2013, 09:50:45 PM
Disappointing:
http://www.reddit.com/r/tulsa/comments/1byfen/oklahoma_joes_bbq_turned_away_a_fundraiser_they/
Flyer approved by Oklahoma Joes: (http://i.imgur.com/i7yjwfc.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/bkI5A7d.jpg?1)
view full sized (http://i.imgur.com/bkI5A7d.jpg?1)
Quote from: patric on April 08, 2013, 11:59:31 PMIt's funny to me because I had a couple of posts right in the middle of that screencap that were deleted before this was taken. In fact, the whole "as an American" thing was in response to a post of mine, though I don't remember what. I might have eventually made my way to this place before, but surely not now.
This website
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013/04/camp-quest-oklahoma-kicked-out-of-their-own-fundraiser-by-christian-business-owner/
has screencaps of Oklahoma Joe's facebook page before they took it down.
Quote from: patric on April 08, 2013, 11:59:31 PM
This website
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013/04/camp-quest-oklahoma-kicked-out-of-their-own-fundraiser-by-christian-business-owner/
has screencaps of Oklahoma Joe's facebook page before they took it down.
Quote from: custosnox on April 09, 2013, 12:13:22 AM
http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3tslvz/
Quote from: guido911 on April 09, 2013, 12:29:56 AMWe are in freakin Oklahoma and some people are shocked that one of its restaurants would not want to support a "pro science", er, "free thinker", er, agnostic, er, atheist, organization? I guess being a Christian means you are anti-science and not a "free thinker". If Camp Quest was truly up front, why not have Oklahoma Joes put in the flyer CQ caters to atheists and agnostics, instead of the ambiguous info that ultimately appeared.so you are okay with this place agreeing with helping needy children send a science summer camp that simply lacks the religious element of other camps, then backing out of the deal, as well as kicking the supporters out simply because it was discovered they were atheists?
Quote from: Gaspar on April 09, 2013, 09:55:54 AM
#1. If you are going to offer fundraising for groups, and you have some political, religious, or other allegiance to withhold, you need to disclose that in your fundraising contract.
#2. It is your DUTY to research the organizations before you agree to a partnership, to determine if they are eligible under the law, and conform to your standards.
#3. Once you engage, it is unethical to break that engagement.
It seems that Joe's fundraising contract needs to include a space for religious affiliation. I am curious as to how this would play out if it was a Jewish or Muslim summer camp?
Quote from: Gaspar on April 09, 2013, 09:55:54 AM
#3. Once you engage, it is unethical to break that engagement.
Quote from: Hoss on April 09, 2013, 10:12:02 AM
Hmm. Last I checked, religious affiliation and discrimination therein was unlawful.
Maybe I'm wrong.
This is going to be a PR nightmare for Oklahoma Joe's. It already is for the mothership evidently, as they were blamed from the outset until they disavowed this location.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 09, 2013, 10:22:47 AM
Broken Arrow location, PR nightmare not so much. Since BA is a bedroom community, I suspect church-goers would continue to support Oklahoma Joe's, perhaps more so now that there is a crap storm circulating over this.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 09, 2013, 10:22:47 AM
I suspect church-goers would continue to support Oklahoma Joe's, perhaps more so now that there is a crap storm circulating over this.
Quote from: Hoss on April 09, 2013, 12:26:29 AM
And you can see how quick the KC "mothership" disavowed the BA location.
https://twitter.com/OklahomaJoesBBQ/status/321454373433638912
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 09, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
I'm okay with them not wanting to sponsor the event. I think they signed off on the fundraiser without vetting the organization properly and that is their own problem.
They should agree to host a fundraiser night in the future for the same group. They will come out in a better light and the organization will raise a lot more money than they would have the first time.
Quote from: DTowner on April 09, 2013, 02:46:28 PM
I don't have the brain capacity or memory to keep track of all the affronting businesses that this or that ideology or "right thinking people" are boycotting at any given time. My purchase decisions are mundanely made on the basis of patronizing those who have a product I want or need. That said, if some business engages in politics or funds things with which I am strongly opposed, I tend to quietly stop doing business with them – no rally, no petition, no Facebook rants, no picketing, no rousing the rabble on street corners.
Here a business failed to properly vet a group/event it agreed to sponsor. They've compounded their error by bungling the attempt to fix their mistake. Hopefully they will try to make it right as best they can – although inevitably some will be upset no matter what they do now. However, next time I'm craving the best ribs in Tulsa (sorry, Burn Co, I don't eat lunch at 10:30), I'll head out to BA and eat at Oklahoma Joe's because my love of ribs knows no political bounds.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 09, 2013, 03:00:06 PM
JMO, Albert G's is better than Oklahoma Joe's. ;)
Quote from: BKDotCom on April 09, 2013, 03:15:38 PM
Someday there might be an Albert G's downtown. They got the floor poured a couple weeks ago.
Quote from: DTowner on April 09, 2013, 02:46:28 PM
I don't have the brain capacity or memory to keep track of all the affronting businesses that this or that ideology or "right thinking people" are boycotting at any given time. My purchase decisions are mundanely made on the basis of patronizing those who have a product I want or need. That said, if some business engages in politics or funds things with which I am strongly opposed, I tend to quietly stop doing business with them – no rally, no petition, no Facebook rants, no picketing, no rousing the rabble on street corners.
Here a business failed to properly vet a group/event it agreed to sponsor. They've compounded their error by bungling the attempt to fix their mistake. Hopefully they will try to make it right as best they can – although inevitably some will be upset no matter what they do now. However, next time I'm craving the best ribs in Tulsa (sorry, Burn Co, I don't eat lunch at 10:30), I'll head out to BA and eat at Oklahoma Joe's because my love of ribs knows no political bounds.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 09, 2013, 03:47:39 PM
Try Back Alley again. They have a new smoker and a new pitmaster. Had their ribs on Friday and they were excellent, in fact, the whole meal was excellent. Ribs, pork, beans and fried green tomatoes. Topped it off with a nice Tank 7 or three (wife was driving).
Quote from: Gaspar on April 09, 2013, 03:47:39 PM
Try Back Alley again. They have a new smoker and a new pitmaster. Had their ribs on Friday and they were excellent, in fact, the whole meal was excellent. Ribs, pork, beans and fried green tomatoes. Topped it off with a nice Tank 7 or three (wife was driving).
Quote from: Gaspar on April 09, 2013, 03:47:39 PM
Try Back Alley again. They have a new smoker and a new pitmaster. Had their ribs on Friday and they were excellent, in fact, the whole meal was excellent. Ribs, pork, beans and fried green tomatoes. Topped it off with a nice Tank 7 or three (wife was driving).
Quote from: Gaspar on April 09, 2013, 03:47:39 PM
Topped it off with a nice Tank 7 or three (wife was driving).
QuoteCamp Quest was founded in 1996 by a small group of dedicated and energetic people with the Free Inquiry Group of Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky. Edwin and Helen Kagin, Ed McAndrews, Elizabeth Oldiges, Nikki Orlemann, and David Scheidt served as members of the original Camp Quest planning committee, with Vern Uchtman as chairperson.
The idea to offer a summer camp program designed for children from atheist, agnostic, humanist, and other freethinking families originated partially in response to the Boy Scouts of America's increasing enforcement of their policy requiring boys to profess a belief in God. It became clear that children from nontheistic families needed their own place to belong and enjoy the summer camp experience
Quote from: DolfanBob on April 09, 2013, 05:35:29 PM
I certainly hope that it's a Camp for Adult "kids" Did you read their response and profanity laced rant?
Quote from: guido911 on April 09, 2013, 05:40:31 PM
Can you link that?
Quote from: guido911 on April 09, 2013, 05:39:25 PM
And about this fundraiser, if I happened to eat there that night, would part of my purchase be used to support that organization?
Quote from: guido911 on April 09, 2013, 05:39:25 PM
And what about Mardel's or Hobbt Lobby, or St. Francis Hospital, should they be required to hold fundraisers for CQ if asked?
Quote from: guido911 on April 09, 2013, 05:39:25 PM
The more I follow this, the more contrived this whole thing seems to me.
Quote from: Vashta Nerada on April 09, 2013, 07:20:47 PM
There's quite a leap from "agreed to" and "required."
Quote from: guido911 on April 09, 2013, 05:39:25 PMYou fail to understand the distinction here, it is not an atheist camp. It is a science camp, and encourages free thought and humanistic values, which are not religious or nonreligious specific. These are ideas that are shared on both sides of the line. It's not about saying "hey, there's no god." Granted, the whole concept was brought about to give kids an alternative to all of these "let me shove my beliefs down your throat" Christian camps, but it's not about pushing any religious or anti-religious dogma. And yes, Joe's was fully informed on what the camp was, they received a brochure and full disclosure on the camp. His decision to break his deal had absolutely nothing to do with the camp, but the fact that he found out that horrible, horrible atheists, oh no, were involved in it. Run for the hills and lock up the kids, the atheists have arrived. So you tell me, is it legally acceptable for someone to break an agreement with you, costing you money, time, and materials, simply because they find out you are Catholic? Or do you make it clear to everyone you do business with that you are Catholic before doing so?
The more I follow this, the more contrived this whole thing seems to me. Go to Camp Quest websites, and compare the messages there to what was actually stated in the Joes' flyer. I do not see the word "atheist" or "agnostic" anywhere. Why not include it? Only "free thought" and "natural wonder". Wow, that sounds appealing to me, because who doesn't support those descriptions. This is from the "history" page:
http://www.campquest.org/history
Has anyone said that Joes knew this about CQ before agreeing to sponsor the event? And about this fundraiser, if I happened to eat there that night, would part of my purchase be used to support that organization? And how am I to be protected from supporting that outfit which plainly contravenes my belief system? IF, and I mean IF, Oklahoma Joes did not know this before hand, how can anyone fault them for backing out? Grizz is right, if Joes should be faulted, it's because it did not perform due diligence. And besides, could you imagine being a worker at Joes, Christian, Jew or whatever, and hearing, "Hey kids, come to our camp because there is no God"?
And what about Mardel's or Hobbt Lobby, or St. Francis Hospital, should they be required to hold fundraisers for CQ if asked? There are far too many open-ended issues here, but I guess since it involves a Christian place...
And here is a link to some folks offering to help out CQ.
http://www.stiefelfreethoughtfoundation.org/about.html
Quote from: custosnox on April 09, 2013, 10:25:18 PM
You fail to understand the distinction here, it is not an atheist camp. It is a science camp, and encourages free thought and humanistic values, which are not religious or nonreligious specific. These are ideas that are shared on both sides of the line. It's not about saying "hey, there's no god." Granted, the whole concept was brought about to give kids an alternative to all of these "let me shove my beliefs down your throat" Christian camps, but it's not about pushing any religious or anti-religious dogma. And yes, Joe's was fully informed on what the camp was, they received a brochure and full disclosure on the camp. His decision to break his deal had absolutely nothing to do with the camp, but the fact that he found out that horrible, horrible atheists, oh no, were involved in it. Run for the hills and lock up the kids, the atheists have arrived. So you tell me, is it legally acceptable for someone to break an agreement with you, costing you money, time, and materials, simply because they find out you are Catholic? Or do you make it clear to everyone you do business with that you are Catholic before doing so?
Quote from: guido911 on April 10, 2013, 12:38:07 AMObviously you still don't understand, IT IS NOT AN ATHEIST CAMP, and stop with the whole agnostic crap, you don't want to get me started on that misuse of a term. It has nothing to do with turning kids into good little atheists, or trying to get them to affirm their disbelief in deities, it's simply a science camp with a focus for kids to develop critical thinking and learn some humanistic values (you know, be good to your fellow man kind of thing). They kicked them out AFTER agreeing to let them host the fundraiser because they found out some of the supporters were atheist. If you really want to know what the camp is, I'll share a little story about a woman who is sending her kid to the camp:
Can you link to the brochure you said Joes had? I would like to see it.
Oh I understand completely what is going on, and have some problems with Joes' due diligence. If it was given a brochure and they didn't read it, okay. But I read the flyer; did you? Did you see the word atheist or agnostic? Did you? If no, why not. If CQ is all about being up front, why didn't they announce for all of Oklahoma and Joes' patrons to see right on the damned flyer? I will tell you, because this is Oklahoma and that would turn people off. These people called themselves anything BUT what they truly are and opted for the ol' euphemism. Bait and switch and misleading/misdirection. If I went into Joes that night and saw that flyer, would I have any idea that at the root of their group was to be a foil for groups like the Boy Scouts? Nope. They kinda left that language out of the damned flyer as well. What pisses me off is if I went in there and spent money, and later found out a portion of it went to CQ, I would be screaming at someone.
Joes' ultimate decision, though, I have no problem with. If Joes said "FU" to the group BEFORE agreeing to host the event--would you even know about it or asked why? This whole thing is another way for some group of people to b!tch about someone being Christian and unbelievably living up to their principles. This is Oklahoma, and it is largely Christian.
As for personalizing it, if I went to Joes and said "I am Catholic and want to raise money to send a group of kids on a mission trip to Jamaica to build homes", and they said NO, "because you are Catholic". I would just freakin move on. It's their business, and Joes is under ZERO obligation to do anything to help me or my causes. If I am out some commitment capital, okay. I'll moan. But sheesh, the whole "I'm going to boycott Joes over this" bullsh!t is just noise.
Here's a news story on this event.
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/Broken-Arrow-business-says-faith-gets-in-the-way/vAcwMQrIzUCFekpYFVA8xA.cspx
QuoteLocated just north of Seattle, Camp Quest Northwest is a summer camp for atheists or children of atheists, self-described "freethinkers" or people not otherwise traditionally religious.
QuoteThe camp hosts different sessions, such as the Socrates Cafe, where campers are free to discuss anything on their minds, from the age-old question of "where do we come from?" to how to handle bullies who pick on them because of their agnostic beliefs.
QuoteAt Camp Quest, religion, in some form, is often a topic of discussion, but here they believe more in talking about evolution and logic. They think critically and question everything, and they don't believe in God.
Quote from: custosnox on April 10, 2013, 02:18:32 AM
Obviously you still don't understand, IT IS NOT AN ATHEIST CAMP,
Quote from: RecycleMichael on April 10, 2013, 10:37:55 AM
There is a difference between a non-religious camp and an atheist camp.
The TV had an interview with a Dad who said they are Christians but their kids attend this camp every year. He didn't seem to think it was an atheist camp, but a camp focused on science.
I think poorly of Joe Davidson now. His wife agreed to this fundraiser at his restaurant and he stepped in after it had started and said no. I think he showed very poor judgment and has come across as a donkey in trying to defend himself. Yes, he has a right to not do fundraisers for any group, but when your wife agrees to one and you over-react, you deserve to lose my business.
He should apologize and write a check for the amount the group would have normally made, then shut up about his religion. Anything else proves he is a donkey.
Quote
A 34 year long buddy of mine runs a science summer camp. He's an atheist and the majority of kids who attend and supervise are as well. The camp is sponsored by the atheist of America.
They were having a fund raiser at Oklahoma Joes. About an hour in Okla Joes called it off saying they don't support that kind of organization and ended the event.
Emma attended last year and both girls will this year.
The camp does not preach Anti-God or Pro-atheist message. Neither are even mentioned.
Thumb tired. Call if you want more info.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 10, 2013, 08:20:33 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/US/atheist-summer-camp-heaven-earth-nonbelievers/story?id=17067039#.UWVnFzeJnTo
Quote from: RecycleMichael on April 10, 2013, 10:59:38 AM
Belief in God is one thing. Belief in Joe is another.
Why would a restaurateur alienate a large percentage of potential customers?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on April 10, 2013, 10:59:38 AM
Belief in God is one thing. Belief in Joe is another.
Why would a restaurateur alienate a large percentage of potential customers?
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 10, 2013, 10:28:42 AMApparently you are the one that needs to do the homework. This isn't some new thing to me that I came upon after watching the news, I'm involved with these people, I help promote it at my events, I know people who send their kids to this. I actually know what I'm talking about, you on the other hand, seem to like talking out of your a$$
You need to do a little more homework.
Because that is EXACTLY what it is.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 10, 2013, 11:15:55 AMFunny, because the same group boycotted Chic-Fa-le and I would say that the vast majority still haven't touched that place.
That said, this will blow over in a matter of weeks and a year from now most people won't even remember it happened if you asked them. Short attention spans and I'd bet out of people who publicly say "I'm boycotting" 25 to 50% don't end up doing it.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 10, 2013, 08:20:33 AMI'm not sure what is going on up in seattle, but that is not what it is about here.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/atheist-summer-camp-heaven-earth-nonbelievers/story?id=17067039#.UWVnFzeJnTo
Quote from: custosnox on April 10, 2013, 11:53:52 AM
I'm not sure what is going on up in seattle, but that is not what it is about here.
QuoteWhat is Camp Quest ?
Camp Quest is the first residential summer camp in the history of the United States for the children of Atheists, Freethinkers, Secular Humanists, Humanists, Brights, or whatever other terms might be applied to those who hold to a naturalistic, not supernatural world view.
Camp Quest was started in 1996 by Edwin Kagin as a project of the Free Inquiry Group, Inc. (FIG) of Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky.
QuoteThe idea to offer a summer camp program designed for children from atheist, agnostic, humanist, and other freethinking families
Quote
Camp Quest's purpose is to provide children of irreligious parents with a residential summer camp, dedicated to improving the human condition through rational inquiry, critical and creative thinking, scientific method, self-respect, ethics, competency, democracy, free speech, and the separation of religion and government guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 10, 2013, 12:31:59 PMYes, it was designed to give atheist children a place to go without the religious crap of all of the other camps. That does not make it some kind of atheist indoctrination camp. It's a science camp. The only reason you can really call it an atheist camp is because it lacks religion, but hell, if we go down that route, then need to start calling our pets atheist pets simply because they lack a religion. So what is basically being said is that this camp is not being supported because it doesn't make religious claims. Gotcha.
From the History of Camp Quest:
FIG being an Atheist organization
From Camp Quest Oklahoma's website:
Camp Quest Mission Statement:
Quote from: custosnox on April 10, 2013, 01:56:30 PM
Yes, it was designed to give atheist children a place to go without the religious crap of all of the other camps. That does not make it some kind of atheist indoctrination camp. It's a science camp. The only reason you can really call it an atheist camp is because it lacks religion, but hell, if we go down that route, then need to start calling our pets atheist pets simply because they lack a religion. So what is basically being said is that this camp is not being supported because it doesn't make religious claims. Gotcha.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 10, 2013, 02:02:18 PM
My dog is a Catholic.
The cats are all atheist though.
Quote from: custosnox on April 10, 2013, 01:56:30 PM
The only reason you can really call it an atheist camp is because it lacks religion,
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 10, 2013, 02:43:04 PM
That is categorically untrue. Do I need to pull some more information directly from the organization you claim to speak for?
A camp lacking religion is called a camp lacking religion.
A camp which says that it was created specifically for atheists, discusses how to avoid being bullied by christians, and has classes on how to thinking critically and not supernaturally is an atheist camp.
There are Christian zealots and Muslim Zealots, but I've never known a Zealot more kooky than you and I'm starting to find Scientology with it's spaceships and h-bombs more centered in reality.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 10, 2013, 02:02:18 PM
My dog is a Catholic.
The cats are all atheist though.
Quote from: custosnox on April 10, 2013, 01:56:30 PM
Yes, it was designed to give atheist children a place to go without the religious crap of all of the other camps.
Quote from: rdj on April 10, 2013, 03:36:25 PM
My step-cats are from satan, does that make them atheists? :o ;) ;D
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 10, 2013, 02:43:04 PM
That is categorically untrue. Do I need to pull some more information directly from the organization you claim to speak for?
A camp lacking religion is called a camp lacking religion.
A camp which says that it was created specifically for atheists, discusses how to avoid being bullied by christians, and has classes on how to thinking critically and not supernaturally is an atheist camp.
There are Christian zealots and Muslim Zealots, but I've never known a Zealot more kooky than you and I'm starting to find Scientology with it's spaceships and h-bombs more centered in reality.
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 10, 2013, 03:58:23 PM
Such a cop out. There are TONS of camps out there that don't bring up religion at all. YMCA camps for instance.
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 10, 2013, 03:58:23 PM
Such a cop out. There are TONS of camps out there that don't bring up religion at all. YMCA camps for instance.
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 10, 2013, 03:58:23 PMYMCA MISSION: To put Christian principles into practice through programs that build healthy spirit, mind, and body for all.
Such a cop out. There are TONS of camps out there that don't bring up religion at all. YMCA camps for instance.
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 10, 2013, 03:58:23 PMRight...considering that YMCA stands for Young Men's Christian Association.
Such a cop out. There are TONS of camps out there that don't bring up religion at all. YMCA camps for instance.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 10, 2013, 02:43:04 PMSo, if a camp is open to everyone, including atheists, discusses how to avoid being bullied (though I really don't know where you are getting this from, I'm starting to think you are making stuff up at this point), and how to think critically (yeah, no classes on how to not think supernaturally), it is an atheist camp? THIS IS A SECULAR SCIENCE CAMP. Just because atheists are involved in something does not make it a specifically atheist organization, event, or activity.
That is categorically untrue. Do I need to pull some more information directly from the organization you claim to speak for?
A camp lacking religion is called a camp lacking religion.
A camp which says that it was created specifically for atheists, discusses how to avoid being bullied by christians, and has classes on how to thinking critically and not supernaturally is an atheist camp.
There are Christian zealots and Muslim Zealots, but I've never known a Zealot more kooky than you and I'm starting to find Scientology with it's spaceships and h-bombs more centered in reality.
Quote from: DolfanBob on April 10, 2013, 05:06:29 PM
Far as I'm concerned. The best one for kids these day's is "Boot Camp"
Quote from: guido911 on April 09, 2013, 12:18:05 AM
And if need be I will double/triple my order to offset any "boycott"...
Quote from: Conan71 on April 09, 2013, 10:22:47 AM
Broken Arrow location, PR nightmare not so much. Since BA is a bedroom community, I suspect church-goers would continue to support Oklahoma Joe's, perhaps more so now that there is a crap storm circulating over this.
Quote from: zstyles on April 11, 2013, 08:39:50 AM
will be ordering lunch for the entire office today from them!
Quote from: AquaMan on April 11, 2013, 09:08:30 AM
Mixing politics, religion and capitalistic business has always been a bad idea unless you intend to commit to the religion or politics more than the business like Michaels. The fact that this is often argued on this forum explains a lot about Tulsa. I won't eat there because of his blunder. If he had kept his mouth shut I wouldn't know how stupid his business was but he opened it and removed all doubt (credit to Mark Twain).
Business is business. Religion is business. Politics is business. One of those three combinations is pure.
Quote from: zstyles on April 11, 2013, 08:39:50 AM
I have alot more to worry about than where I am going to eat based on someone making a capitalistic business venture and than actually doing what HE wants to do and not considering what the VILLAGE wants or whose little feelings might get hurt...good for him I plan on having him cater out next party and also will be ordering lunch for the entire office today from them!
Quote from: custosnox on April 10, 2013, 04:49:11 PM
So, if a camp is open to everyone, including atheists, discusses how to avoid being bullied (though I really don't know where you are getting this from, I'm starting to think you are making stuff up at this point), and how to think critically (yeah, no classes on how to not think supernaturally), it is an atheist camp? THIS IS A SECULAR SCIENCE CAMP. Just because atheists are involved in something does not make it a specifically atheist organization, event, or activity.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 11, 2013, 12:45:17 PM
Who really cares (apparently Joe)?
The point is that he (or his wife) made an agreement with this group. The group then rallied their membership, facebook peeps, twitter twits, and the public to show up. Lots of people showed up, and after many of them got their meals, Joe exclaimed that he would not pay the group.
Very cut-N-dry situation here. His reasoning was secondary to the fact that he redacted a commitment to a group of customers and engaged poor poor customer relations. The fact that he kept money intended for a non-profit organization is unethical. When the customer made their purchase, they did so on the premise that 10% of the funds would help the group that they drove to Oklahoma Joe's, and purchased a platter of food, to help.
It's not rocket science.
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 11, 2013, 03:15:30 PM
If Joe thought that he was mislead (and truth is, NONE of us know if he was or not), he has every right to pull out during the event.
As for my YMCA example above, bad example. I was in a hurry, and was basing my comment on personal experiences at the YMCA camps, where religion wasn't a factor at all. That said, I'm sure there are hundreds of summer camps in Tulsa that don't have a thing to do with religion.
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 11, 2013, 03:15:30 PM
If Joe thought that he was mislead (and truth is, NONE of us know if he was or not), he has every right to pull out during the event.
Quote from: Stanley1 on April 11, 2013, 03:15:30 PM
If Joe thought that he was mislead (and truth is, NONE of us know if he was or not), he has every right to pull out during the event.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 11, 2013, 12:45:17 PMAnd that is exactly the problem. Trust me, the group gets turned down by plenty of organizations for their lack of beliefs, and it is never a big deal, it's pretty much expected. It's the fact that they threw them out in the middle of the fundraiser because of it after they agreed to it is the problem.
Who really cares (apparently Joe)?
The point is that he (or his wife) made an agreement with this group. The group then rallied their membership, facebook peeps, twitter twits, and the public to show up. Lots of people showed up, and after many of them got their meals, Joe exclaimed that he would not pay the group.
Very cut-N-dry situation here. His reasoning was secondary to the fact that he redacted a commitment to a group of customers and engaged poor poor customer relations. The fact that he kept money intended for a non-profit organization is unethical. When the customer made their purchase, they did so on the premise that 10% of the funds would help the group that they drove to Oklahoma Joe's, and purchased a platter of food, to help.
It's not rocket science.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 11, 2013, 05:41:04 PM
Which would pretty much mean he is incompetent at running the business that constitutes his chosen career path. There is no scenario where he doesn't come out smelling bad on this deal....
Quote from: custosnox on April 11, 2013, 06:04:06 PM
Trust me, the group gets turned down by plenty of organizations for their lack of beliefs, and it is never a big deal, it's pretty much expected.
Quote from: guido911 on April 11, 2013, 07:00:24 PM
Wow, he is incompetent based on this ONE event? Must be nice being perfect. If the manager was misled or operated under a mistaken belief, then as a matter of law there can be no contract to breach. People here have mentioned the contract, has one been published? What was the consideration given up by CQ for the contract?
Quote from: guido911 on April 11, 2013, 07:00:24 PM
Wow, he is incompetent based on this ONE event? Must be nice being perfect. If the manager was misled or operated under a mistaken belief, then as a matter of law there can be no contract to breach. People here have mentioned the contract, has one been published? What was the consideration given up by CQ for the contract?
In my line of work, people make mistakes all the time, and the idea that a mistake must equal financial liability (money changing hands) is incorrect. CQ is attention whoring right now.
Maybe the lesson learned here is that Joes, and all businesses for that matter, needs to doubt all innocent-enough sounding organizers that "free think" and assume that expression is a euphemism for atheist--because GOD knows they will not put that information in their damned flyer.
Quote from: cynical on April 11, 2013, 10:27:40 PM
Guido, unilateral mistake doesn't get them off the hook. Under Oklahoma law, in order to rescind a contract because of a mistake, the mistake has to be mutual. Also, to find a contract here is so easy it is trivial. You want consideration? Here it is: in return for Joe's promise of a share of the proceeds, the group agrees to hold its event at Joe's. Win-win and plenty of consideration to spare, especially when the organization performed its end of the bargain.
Even if Joe's wanted to claim fraud, they would need to prove that the organization intentionally misled them as to some material fact. It is highly unlikely that a court would find the lack of religion of the organizers to be material, and it is even more highly unlikely that a court would find a misrepresentation of a fact that is publicly broadcast on the organization's web site. I gather you don't practice contract law.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 11, 2013, 08:34:23 PM
No, not just this one - there are several "events" wrapped up into this one... first is the fact that whatever he used to do at the barbeque contests didn't make the trip to the restaurant. Every contest - and, granted, there have only been two that impinged on my consciousness - where I got to taste his food, I was blown away by how good it was. Then the restaurant....well, it has been a pretty big disappointment. I'm betting that he used better grade materials at the contests than he does in the restaurant....maybe economic considerations overrode great food...?? Maybe changed the methods and/or recipes??
And I am not concerned about a legal contract. If his wife is authorized to make that type of commitment, then he is obligated morally and ethically to fulfill it - she making the commitment in his name is the same as if he made the commitment. Or would that be a case of the concept of selective morality?
If she is NOT, then he has another management issue that he hasn't resolved. Which is another issue of management competence....
Oh, yeah.... Yes, it is....nice being perfect!
Quote from: guido911 on April 11, 2013, 07:07:54 PM
Well maybe THAT explains why their flyer does not have the word "atheist" in it--because CQ learned being up front gets them turned down.
Quote from: Townsend on April 12, 2013, 08:06:34 AM
It shouldn't matter. Might as well turn someone down for any philosophical difference if this is the case. Even other Christians.
Quote from: guido911 on April 11, 2013, 07:07:54 PM
Well maybe THAT explains why their flyer does not have the word "atheist" in it--because CQ learned being up front gets them turned down. Also, "plenty of [other] organizations" turning CQ down would lend credence/support to Joes' decision to cancel the event . Once groups know what CQ is really about, they turn CQ down as expected.
Quote from: guido911 on April 12, 2013, 12:57:37 AM
You want to have this debate with me? How about starting with the statute governing the definition of "mistake" (taking into account negligence is not sufficient); then focus on whether the remedy for the mistake is reformation, rescission, cancellation; then perhaps focus on the existence of a mutual mistake of fact arising from a failed meeting of the minds; then take into account the legal distinction between "motive" and "consideration"--as I remain unconvinced there was even an enforceable contract here. I will not get into the fraud issue because neither you nor I know the circumstances or statements/representation which were made (also, because there are several additional elements needed to establish fraud you overlooked in your post See 15 O.S. Sec. 58). Save your case law research and look at OUJI 23.33, 23.35, then you may want to rethink your view on unilateral mistake.
And best of luck proving your damages if there was a breach, other than perhaps some reliance. All I see is a crappy situation as a result of Joes not looking into CQ more timely.
If you want to keep it simple first, review OUJI, starting with:
Consideration:
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=74210
So let's have it out. And yes I practice contract law, so can you back pocket the condescension?
Quote from: guido911 on April 11, 2013, 07:07:54 PM
Well maybe THAT explains why their flyer does not have the word "atheist" in it--because CQ learned being up front gets them turned down. Also, "plenty of [other] organizations" turning CQ down would lend credence/support to Joes' decision to cancel the event . Once groups know what CQ is really about, they turn CQ down as expected.
Quote from: BKDotCom on April 12, 2013, 11:18:26 AM
retread.... it's a science camp, not an atheist camp.
If there's a music camp where no religious hymns are sung.. is it an <dr evil>atheist music camp</dr evil>?
If there's a sports camp where nobody mentions Jesus... is it an <dr evil>atheist sports camp</dr evil>?
If there's an art camp where nobody paints the virgin Mary... is it an <dr evil>atheist art camp</dr evil>?
If two bible thumping Christians have a discussion about anything wherein nobody asks "what would Jesus do".. are they having an <dr evil>atheist discusion</dr evil>?
(http://web-images.chacha.com/images/Gallery/5507/who-are-the-most-likeable-movie-villains-588174254-jan-17-2013-1-600x450.jpg)
Quote from: guido911 on April 12, 2013, 01:15:44 AM
You need to lighten up a bit here, because I think you are reaching a bit now. Being incompetent to means lacking skills or ability. Because he may not have brought his "A" game to the restaurant biz doesn't make him incompetent. And besides, I really like Joes, so maybe it is you who is incompetent at rating good barbecue, or maybe it's me, if we use your broad brush.
Fact is, your upset because assuming the very worst here, Joes failed to exercise due diligence or even used poor judgment. That's not incompetence, that's what happens in life.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 12, 2013, 03:05:07 PM
Actually, I think he really just made an error in judgement that will end up costing him some customers, but gain him others, so the net result will probably be no worse than a wash...and due to some of the ones he is likely to gain, and the preponderance of that attitude in OK, he may well be ahead by a noticeable amount. This could be a sound business decision that will benefit him.
I guess I could be in error about him, but past discussions about barbeque put Albert G's at or near the top in every conversation for a wide group of people, I suspect I am more mainstream than not on that issue. And since I don't really care that much for OK Joe, that just means I have a little more finely parsed selection mechanism than many/most....
And in the past, he has demonstrated the ability to make magnificent barbeque - currently, for whatever reason, he has chosen not to continue it today...it isn't the same as when I have eaten it in the past.
Quote from: cynical on April 12, 2013, 11:07:08 AM
Guido, you're still talking around the issue. How can there be a mutual mistake where every essential element of the contract was based on facts both sides understood. Again, taking it back to Contracts I: Offer: In return for your organization holding its event at Oklahoma Joe's, we'll pay 10% of the gross proceeds to your organization. Acceptance: Okay, we'll host our event at Oklahoma Joe's. Consideration: The promise to pay 10% is consideration for the promise to hold the event at Joe's. The promise to hold the event at Joe's is consideration for the promise to pay 10%. The deal was agreed to and even performed by the organization.
So, what is the mistake? How is that mistake mutual? How is a mistake by Oklahoma Joe's as to its own motivations relevant to the contract? If there is no mutual mistake, how are the remedies for mutual mistake relevant? Is this not just a case of buyer's remorse?
I am well aware of the jury instructions you cite. They don't support your argument. The first element of 23.35 requires the party seeking to get out of performing its contract to prove that it was not negligent in entering into the contract in the first place. In this case if Joe's only wanted to support Christian organizations, it should have said so up front, something it has not claimed to have done. It also could have conducted minimal research on the organization seeking to hold an event there and declined to enter into the agreement based on that research. That didn't happen. The third element of 23.35 requires the mistake to be common to both parties or that there was fraud or unfair conduct on the other party's part. Joe's did not claim fraud. There can be no serious claim that both parties were mistaken about the organization's non-religious nature. So how does 23.35 support Oklahoma Joe's claim for rescission?
The fraud instruction in 23.33, if it applies at all, is a double-edged sword. Only if the organization falsely claimed to be a Christian organization or if Joe's stated up front that it only supported Christian organizations, the organization might be guilty of fraud for not disclosing its atheist roots, excusing Joe's from performing. Since our hypothetical here is based only on facts that have been disclosed by the parties to the dispute, and since Joe's has not said that the organization intentionally misled it, only that it didn't want to support an atheist organization, it can't very well claim fraud. On the other hand, for Joe's to wait until the event was taking place to pull out of the deal shows such egregious bad faith that it might infer an intent to not perform the contract at the time it was entered into. That would be more than a mere breach of contract but would be the tort of fraudulent inducement. Prudent business owners are very careful about such things.
You didn't previously mention damages as a problem. Damages are simple enough to demonstrate, especially because the event was taking place when management backed out of its deal. Multiply the gross proceeds of sales to the participants times the agreed-upon percentage, plus pre-judgment interest. Perhaps offset it by the fair value of the publicity the organization has received.
Only by making up a misrepresentation claim out of whole cloth can Joe's defend itself. It is very difficult to claim misrepresentation when the other party has accurately published its position. It was simple enough for posters on this forum to find out what the organization stood for. It would have been equally simple for Joe's. They didn't bother, which takes them out of the purview of 23.35.
QuoteThe law will enforce a promise only if the person to whom the promise was made gave something of value or promised to give something of value in exchange for the promise. This is the requirement of consideration.
If you find that [state what is claimed to be the consideration for the contract], then you should find that the requirement of consideration was satisfied, and you should go on and decide the other issues in the case. Otherwise, you must find that there was no contract.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 12, 2013, 03:04:38 PM
If the music camp's mission statement starts with "a camp for atheists and kids of atheists" then yes, it's an atheist music camp.
Quote from: Vashta Nerada on April 12, 2013, 07:40:38 PM
Arent verbal contracts still recognized in Oklahoma?
Quote from: guido911 on April 11, 2013, 07:07:54 PMtry again, it's right in the brochure they give out. http://www.campquest.org/sites/default/files/CQBrochureSept2011.pdf
Well maybe THAT explains why their flyer does not have the word "atheist" in it--because CQ learned being up front gets them turned down. Also, "plenty of [other] organizations" turning CQ down would lend credence/support to Joes' decision to cancel the event . Once groups know what CQ is really about, they turn CQ down as expected.
Quote from: custosnox on April 14, 2013, 12:12:27 AM
try again, it's right in the brochure they give out. http://www.campquest.org/sites/default/files/CQBrochureSept2011.pdf
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
Quote from: guido911 on April 14, 2013, 05:01:03 PM
Compelling link.
Quote from: BKDotCom on April 14, 2013, 05:18:15 PM
I think this one should work
https://www.campquest.org/sites/default/files/cq_brochure_3.2013.pdf
the camp quest site has links to that 404 brochure all over the place
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 14, 2013, 07:57:25 PM
Camp: Can my group have a atheist fundraiser at you restaurant, we will bring in atheist business and you willgainlose Oklahoma's religious customers?
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 14, 2013, 08:14:42 PM
Here is one...
Joe: hey! You guys said you were Christian but you didn't say you were Catholic. You don't think like me. Leave.
...........
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 14, 2013, 08:14:42 PM
Here is one...
Joe: hey! You guys said you were Christian but you didn't say you were Catholic. You don't think like me. Leave.
Quote from: AquaMan on April 15, 2013, 09:57:21 AM
Another one.
"Hey, Goldstein! You didn't tell us your organization was Hebrew. Your website looked like everyone else's except for that candelabra. We don't do kosher. Sorry."
Legality aside, there simply isn't a good defense for his actions.
Quote from: Red Arrow on April 14, 2013, 09:32:28 PM
I believe that could have easily happened within my lifetime.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 15, 2013, 10:52:09 AM
It has.
Close family friend went to school in rural area in the 50's and 60's where the kids were literally taught that Catholics are Communists. Many in the area still believe that....
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 15, 2013, 12:56:02 PM
They aren't?
Quote from: AquaMan on April 15, 2013, 09:57:21 AM
Another one.
"Hey, Goldstein! You didn't tell us your organization was Hebrew. Your website looked like everyone else's except for that candelabra. We don't do kosher. Sorry."
Legality aside, there simply isn't a good defense for his actions.
Quote from: AquaMan on April 15, 2013, 02:35:41 PM
Yeah everyone is crazy and racist but the guido. In fact the guido is being persecuted. Yeah that's the ticket!
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 15, 2013, 12:56:02 PM
They aren't?
Quote from: Gaspar on April 15, 2013, 04:27:46 PM
Communists don't typically tolerate religion in general, unless it can be regulated by the state.
Quote from: Breadburner on April 16, 2013, 08:30:01 AM
His biz he has the right to refuse service....
Quote from: Breadburner on April 16, 2013, 08:30:01 AM
His biz he has the right to refuse service....
Quote from: guido911 on April 15, 2013, 03:44:15 PM
(http://www.bangshift.com/forum/attachment.php?s=b9f46443b05b8ef693973785b36d0a37&attachmentid=12449&stc=1&d=1341624124)
Quote from: Gaspar on April 16, 2013, 08:52:30 AMTry again, they were asked to leave. And essentially what you laid out is what happened
He didn't refuse service, in fact, he invited them to stay. He refused to uphold an agreed upon business transaction, based on religion.
Completely different.
"I would like to buy that car."
"Ok, give me $2,000."
"Here is $2,000. Can I have the keys now?"
"No, you're an atheist."
Quote from: Gaspar on April 16, 2013, 10:54:38 AMI don't have time to sit here and just pick at your entire argument, I'll just pull one part out. Joe's actions can be considered against the laws, so that completely blows this argument out. You won't see a lawsuit over it because CQ has decided to focus on the kids, not the incident. They have also taken the stance that they will not endorse any picket, and request that any that are done are to be strictly informative in nature. So I would say I they are being pretty true to their "values," and are showing quite a bit of integrity.
As long as Joe has done nothing that can be considered against the law, Camp Quest is not being true to their "Values" by persecuting him, because they are engaging in judgment based on some belief that there is an established and finite definition of integrity, virtue, or honesty. Science provides no such definition, so they are acting contrary to the very mission they profess.
Quote from: Breadburner on April 16, 2013, 01:25:04 PM
I will eat there now.....
Quote from: custosnox on April 16, 2013, 12:20:08 PM
Joe's actions can be considered against the laws, so that completely blows this argument out.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 16, 2013, 02:22:49 PM
A shop keeper can legally refuse service to anyone they please with or without explanation. Whether or not it's a good idea is a different discussion.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 16, 2013, 02:22:49 PMThere are a number of other issues at hand with the legalities of this action, but yes, this kind of situation has been tested in court as discrimination and has been upheld as being so.
A shop keeper can legally refuse service to anyone they please with or without explanation. Whether or not it's a good idea is a different discussion.
Quote from: custosnox on April 16, 2013, 03:06:21 PM
There are a number of other issues at hand with the legalities of this action, but yes, this kind of situation has been tested in court as discrimination and has been upheld as being so.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 16, 2013, 03:56:22 PM
Geez, could you at least speak in more general terms? How about citing some cases?
There are plenty of examples of employment and religious discrimination, I don't recall hearing about vast amounts of case law as it relates to retailers and doing fund raisers.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 16, 2013, 04:23:38 PM
Ahhh, but can you cite religious discrimination when a group of people espouses NO religious beliefs?
An athiest is someone who has no belief in a diety, deities, or religion correct?
Sorry, can't resist.
Quote from: custosnox on April 16, 2013, 05:57:20 PM
Thanks CF and Hoss, I didn't have the time at posting to find the relevant information.
Heir, no, atheism is not a religion, it does not require believing in something, it only lacks the belief in supernatural deities. That's it. A person can claim that even the scientifically verifiable is non-existent and still be an atheist.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 16, 2013, 07:38:26 PMAnd that is the difference between a gnostic atheist and an agnostic atheist. But then you start getting into philosophy in ways that even the atheist community cannot agree on (trust me, I've seen discussions last for hours on this subject).
So, lack of belief in supernatural deities would be different from believing that supernatural deities do not exist...?
(The atheists I have known have all expressed to me that they believed that God - all supernatural deities - do not exist. But I have only known a few true atheists...most the rest were really agnostic.)
Quote from: custosnox on April 16, 2013, 07:49:04 PM
And that is the difference between a gnostic atheist and an agnostic atheist. But then you start getting into philosophy in ways that even the atheist community cannot agree on (trust me, I've seen discussions last for hours on this subject).
Quote from: Gaspar on April 17, 2013, 10:00:59 AM
This has sparked a great discussion.
Religion is belief system (it matters not what specific religion), based on the the acknowledgement that there exists something greater than the individual human mind. Individual religions incorporate cultural systems, fables, and rituals designed to enforce that belief in a way that all members can comprehend even though it is accepted that they are by nature incapable of comprehensive religious knowledge (just as an ant in your kitchen is incapable of understanding your mind). Religion is typically the basis for society, because it establishes a world view and cultural rules that allow humans to share similar ethical and moral positions including but not limited to family, sexuality, law, and life itself. Basically, religion is the acceptance that we are all children of something greater.
Atheism is simply an individual choice NOT to adopt the belief that anything exists greater than the individual human mind or the collective human experience. It is an existential and purely materialistic, in that "if a thing cannot be proven through observation or scientific evidence, it does not exist." In atheism, belief is fluid, in that the atheists of the 1500s are very different than the atheists of today, because the science and understanding of the universe has changed. Atheists are free to define their own ethics and morality, and common moral positions, and are not bound to any cultural standard.
Personally I know many atheists. Spending a great deal of my youth in the Unitarian church, I watched many of my friends come to adopt a position of existential materialism as they grew up. Their lives tend to follow similar themes. Many are not happy that others would accept the concept of something greater than what experience or empirical evidence can show. This pushes them to evangelize (or educate as they call it) just as other religions do, and fosters the concept (as Heron mentioned) that they may indeed be a religion. It would be a struggle to be a real atheist, in that our wishes, hopes and dreams are based on a sense of spirit. I find that religion IS human nature. From the time we are children, until the day we die, it is necessary to have the faith that there is something more, something beyond what we can see, read, taste, touch, feel or smell. Our fantasies are our way of reaching for that. Otherwise life has little value beyond pleasure or pain, and the sensations from acquisition or loss of the material.
No offense Custosnox, but it is my experience that atheists have very sad lives filled with loss and tragedy, not because of any cosmic or supernatural karma, but because society provides very litte space for them.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 17, 2013, 10:00:59 AM
(just as an ant in your kitchen is incapable of understanding your mind).
Quote from: Hoss on April 17, 2013, 11:09:43 AM
And yet, many Christians and people of faith blame the atheists for their pain, instead of looking in the mirror.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 17, 2013, 01:47:49 PM
Weak minds feel content to blame others for their failures. That is not unique to any particular group, religion or political affiliation.
Quote from: Breadburner on April 17, 2013, 04:16:49 PM
The Q is not bad.....!!
Quote from: Hoss on April 17, 2013, 04:25:53 PM
Not really good, either.
Quote from: Breadburner on April 17, 2013, 04:16:49 PM
The Q is not bad.....!!
Quote from: Hoss on April 17, 2013, 02:54:38 PM
True. I just state this because it's the primary reason I am no longer affiliated with any religion. They ALL are judgemental and think theirs is the singular religion.
Quote from: Breadburner on April 17, 2013, 04:16:49 PM
The Q is not bad.....!!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 17, 2013, 05:28:41 PM
My condolences....
Have you been to Albert G's? It really is very good - I think you would like it more than "not bad".... and the price/performance ratio is decent, too!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 17, 2013, 05:28:41 PM
My condolences....
Have you been to Albert G's? It really is very good - I think you would like it more than "not bad".... and the price/performance ratio is decent, too!
Quote from: Townsend on April 17, 2013, 02:11:28 PM
Once a kid understands religion and how it works, the kid will stop praying for the bike.
The kid will steal the bike and pray for forgiveness.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 17, 2013, 10:00:59 AMClose, but a little off. It's not that society follows religion, but more the other way around, as a way to control the masses and explain the unknown.
This has sparked a great discussion.
Religion is belief system (it matters not what specific religion), based on the the acknowledgement that there exists something greater than the individual human mind. Individual religions incorporate cultural systems, fables, and rituals designed to enforce that belief in a way that all members can comprehend even though it is accepted that they are by nature incapable of comprehensive religious knowledge (just as an ant in your kitchen is incapable of understanding your mind). Religion is typically the basis for society, because it establishes a world view and cultural rules that allow humans to share similar ethical and moral positions including but not limited to family, sexuality, law, and life itself. Basically, religion is the acceptance that we are all children of something greater.
QuoteWow, you really don't know what you are talking about. First of, it is not a choice, it's simply a matter of believing or not. Saying it's a choice is one of the most idiotic statements that can be made on the subject. Beyond that, it is simply the lack of belief in any supernatural deities. It does not require anything else. And yes, atheists of the 1500s are very different from the atheists of today, but guess what, so is every freakin one else. Oh, and in case you didn't notice, all groups are free to define their own ethics and morality, though they all are bound by cultural standards. The primary difference between atheists and theists in this respect is that theists pretend (well, most believe it, but belief does not make fact) that they have some holy scripture that they base theirs on, therefore making it better than everyone else's.
Atheism is simply an individual choice NOT to adopt the belief that anything exists greater than the individual human mind or the collective human experience. It is an existential and purely materialistic, in that "if a thing cannot be proven through observation or scientific evidence, it does not exist." In atheism, belief is fluid, in that the atheists of the 1500s are very different than the atheists of today, because the science and understanding of the universe has changed. Atheists are free to define their own ethics and morality, and common moral positions, and are not bound to any cultural standard.
Quoteand all of that is one of the biggest crock of shite that I've ever seen, and pushed by so many theists that it's truly sad. I am willing to bet that I know a great many more atheists than you, and on a large part, they tend to be a good deal happier than the theists that I know. (actually, I think there is a study on this out there as well, but just going from memory here and can't back it up) Of course the general public sees the ones that are outspoken, often truly pissed off about how they have been treated by others. These folks, and yes, I'm one of them, only make up a small portion of the community (and those who don't even associate with the community, though that does not keep them from being an atheist). I'm willing to bet that everyone in this forum actually knows several atheists and don't even know it. Oh, and the group that is trying to push everyone else into atheism fall into the category of atheism known also as anti-theism. These are the ones that think that religion is inherently toxic. No, I don't fall into this group. While I think we would be better off without all of these mythologies, I feel everyone should be allowed their beliefs (or lack there of), as long as these are not forced on others, and do not hurt others. However, because the angry and anti groups are generally the most vocal, these are the ones that most people think represent the vast majority of us.
Personally I know many atheists. Spending a great deal of my youth in the Unitarian church, I watched many of my friends come to adopt a position of existential materialism as they grew up. Their lives tend to follow similar themes. Many are not happy that others would accept the concept of something greater than what experience or empirical evidence can show. This pushes them to evangelize (or educate as they call it) just as other religions do, and fosters the concept (as Heron mentioned) that they may indeed be a religion. It would be a struggle to be a real atheist, in that our wishes, hopes and dreams are based on a sense of spirit. I find that religion IS human nature. From the time we are children, until the day we die, it is necessary to have the faith that there is something more, something beyond what we can see, read, taste, touch, feel or smell. Our fantasies are our way of reaching for that. Otherwise life has little value beyond pleasure or pain, and the sensations from acquisition or loss of the material.
No offense Custosnox, but it is my experience that atheists have very sad lives filled with loss and tragedy, not because of any cosmic or supernatural karma, but because society provides very litte space for them.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 17, 2013, 08:44:39 PM
Christianity is fairly unique to that view. Jews, Hindus, Budists, and Muslims, must answer for trespasses beyond simple confession.
Quote from: sgrizzle on April 17, 2013, 07:27:36 PM
I went there, felt like I overpaid and the food was pretty meh.
Quote from: Townsend on April 17, 2013, 09:39:10 PM
Praying for forgiveness is different than confession.
Quote from: custosnox on April 17, 2013, 09:24:48 PM
First of, it is not a choice, it's simply a matter of believing or not. Saying it's a choice is one of the most idiotic statements that can be made on the subject. Beyond that, it is simply the lack of belief in any supernatural deities. It does not require anything else.
Quote from: Red Arrow on April 17, 2013, 09:53:17 PM
It's easier to get forgiven than to get permission.
;D
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 17, 2013, 10:05:43 PM
But how do you get to that point of believing or not? Do you not study/investigate/learn/analyze the subject first, then achieve a point of view - believing or disbelieving...?? Was there no input that took you from the blank slate you were at birth to the point where you are now? If there was, then that would have to imply a decision process of some sort involving a choice of some sort. ??
I find it difficult to believe (no pun intended) that you just spontaneously woke up one day and said "I don't believe" without some kind of previous input, even if subliminal and not rising to a blatantly conscious level...?? How would the neurons arrange themselves in that fashion without some type of previous electrical activity - input...
Very good friend of mine who is very enthusiastically atheist (amazing Mechanical Engineer!!) was raised Catholic and is a product of the Catholic schools. His input was at least in part from the nuns.... he appears to have lived the cliche of nuns with rulers in school.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 17, 2013, 10:05:43 PMQuestioning isn't the same thing as choosing. You read something that doesn't make sense, or you hear something that makes you start to wonder. I'm not saying it's a spontaneous process, but just as a person doesn't choose to believe in their particular faith, you don't choose to stop believing. You might choose to start following the tenets of a faith and eventually, though not always, start believing it, but you don't choose to actually believe it. Don't believe me? Why not? Are you simply choosing not to? Think about it.
But how do you get to that point of believing or not? Do you not study/investigate/learn/analyze the subject first, then achieve a point of view - believing or disbelieving...?? Was there no input that took you from the blank slate you were at birth to the point where you are now? If there was, then that would have to imply a decision process of some sort involving a choice of some sort. ??
I find it difficult to believe (no pun intended) that you just spontaneously woke up one day and said "I don't believe" without some kind of previous input, even if subliminal and not rising to a blatantly conscious level...?? How would the neurons arrange themselves in that fashion without some type of previous electrical activity - input...
Very good friend of mine who is very enthusiastically atheist (amazing Mechanical Engineer!!) was raised Catholic and is a product of the Catholic schools. His input was at least in part from the nuns.... he appears to have lived the cliche of nuns with rulers in school.
Quote from: custosnox on April 17, 2013, 10:22:49 PM
Questioning isn't the same thing as choosing. You read something that doesn't make sense, or you hear something that makes you start to wonder. I'm not saying it's a spontaneous process, but just as a person doesn't choose to believe in their particular faith, you don't choose to stop believing. You might choose to start following the tenets of a faith and eventually, though not always, start believing it, but you don't choose to actually believe it. Don't believe me? Why not? Are you simply choosing not to? Think about it.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 17, 2013, 10:48:24 PMI challenge you to choose to believe that I'm typing in French, and that French is your native language.
Yep. That's pretty much what I was saying...I "choose not to believe" - actually find it difficult to believe - you came to that belief - or not belief - without having some kind of input. Even though you may not have been aware of the accumulation of input. That input had to have started when you were born, 'cause at that point, you were pretty much a blank slate waiting to be written to - unless you were completely different from the other 7 billion of us.... And how can you get from blank slate status to where you are today without input - followed by "action" determined by your interpretation of that input??
I think that maybe people start their belief in faith by what the parental units put one through. Same thing with non-believers... At some point, though, people do evaluate what they have been indoctrinated with during childhood, some earlier, some later. And it may well be a continuous, ongoing process that may lead to an 'inflection' point of some sort...or not. Some are 'reborn', becoming recommitted to their belief. Some walk away from the whole thing - like my friend - not believing any more. Some just keep on their current path. People not indoctrinated in childhood may continue as is, or change to something different. There is input that comes at everyone, all the time. Every piece of that is a bit of information that one uses to build up the experience base - those neural connections. Making choices whether to accept or reject; embrace or not, each particle of information.
If you were raised in a church, then somewhere came not to believe, where was that point? If raised outside a church, certainly there must have been a barrage of input from various church related entities such that there had to be a 'sorting' process - a picking and choosing of which info to accept/believe or not. (There has been plenty of discussion here about various religious/non-religious concepts.)
Quote from: custosnox on April 17, 2013, 09:24:48 PM
Close, but a little off. It's not that society follows religion, but more the other way around, as a way to control the masses and explain the unknown.
Wow, you really don't know what you are talking about. First of, it is not a choice, it's simply a matter of believing or not. Saying it's a choice is one of the most idiotic statements that can be made on the subject. Beyond that, it is simply the lack of belief in any supernatural deities. It does not require anything else. And yes, atheists of the 1500s are very different from the atheists of today, but guess what, so is every freakin one else. Oh, and in case you didn't notice, all groups are free to define their own ethics and morality, though they all are bound by cultural standards. The primary difference between atheists and theists in this respect is that theists pretend (well, most believe it, but belief does not make fact) that they have some holy scripture that they base theirs on, therefore making it better than everyone else's. and all of that is one of the biggest crock of shite that I've ever seen, and pushed by so many theists that it's truly sad. I am willing to bet that I know a great many more atheists than you, and on a large part, they tend to be a good deal happier than the theists that I know. (actually, I think there is a study on this out there as well, but just going from memory here and can't back it up) Of course the general public sees the ones that are outspoken, often truly pissed off about how they have been treated by others. These folks, and yes, I'm one of them, only make up a small portion of the community (and those who don't even associate with the community, though that does not keep them from being an atheist). I'm willing to bet that everyone in this forum actually knows several atheists and don't even know it. Oh, and the group that is trying to push everyone else into atheism fall into the category of atheism known also as anti-theism. These are the ones that think that religion is inherently toxic. No, I don't fall into this group. While I think we would be better off without all of these mythologies, I feel everyone should be allowed their beliefs (or lack there of), as long as these are not forced on others, and do not hurt others. However, because the angry and anti groups are generally the most vocal, these are the ones that most people think represent the vast majority of us.
Quote from: carltonplace on April 18, 2013, 06:51:48 AM
Who cares what his religious views are or if he can't abide the non-believers, infidels or even those that have different Gods and Jesuses.?
Why would anyone want to buy BBQ from a jackhole?
Quote from: carltonplace on April 18, 2013, 06:51:48 AM
Who cares what his religious views are or if he can't abide the non-believers, infidels or even those that have different Gods and Jesuses.?
Why would anyone want to buy BBQ from a jackhole?
Quote from: custosnox on April 17, 2013, 09:24:48 PMThe primary difference between atheists and theists in this respect is that theists pretend (well, most believe it, but belief does not make fact) that they have some holy scripture that they base theirs on, therefore making it better than everyone else's.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 18, 2013, 09:10:45 AM
Yet, I read the writings of atheists who believe their system of beliefs is superior to theists and they are quite condescending to anyone who has religious beliefs.
Quote from: custosnox on April 17, 2013, 11:23:22 PM
I challenge you to choose to believe that I'm typing in French, and that French is your native language.
Quote from: AquaMan on April 18, 2013, 09:53:10 AM
C'est finis.
Quote from: Hoss on April 18, 2013, 09:16:05 AM
All beliefs/non-beliefs do this.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 18, 2013, 11:12:32 AM
I disagree, amongst my most truly spiritual friends, they don't speak of their beliefs unless they are asked. But I tend to surround myself with like thinkers and tend to avoid people with superiority complexes regardless of where that complex stems from. My beliefs work for me and that's all that matters. As an aside, some of the most spiritual people I know never or rarely set foot in a religious institution.
I'm very much a believer, but what I believe might get someone else beaten or arrested in 11 states, that's why I don't push it on anyone else. ;)
Quote from: Conan71 on April 18, 2013, 01:32:12 PM
Just saw this on a friend's FB page today:
"Your beliefs don't make you a better person, your behavior does"
Quote from: Conan71 on April 18, 2013, 11:12:32 AM
But I tend to surround myself with like thinkers and tend to avoid people with superiority complexes regardless of where that complex stems from. My beliefs work for me and that's all that matters. As an aside, some of the most spiritual people I know never or rarely set foot in a religious institution.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 18, 2013, 02:00:51 PM
Intellectual Inbreeding School of Thought....??
Sorry...just couldn't resist.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 18, 2013, 11:12:32 AM
I tend to surround myself with like thinkers and tend to avoid people with superiority complexes...
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 18, 2013, 09:18:52 AMsimply claiming it does not equate believing it. Belief comes from life experiences telling you something is true. Something in your life had convinced you that it is reality. The example of language comes from you being told your entire life that this is the English language, and you will continue to belief that until information you see as factual comes along to contradict that, at which time you may begin to question it, and eventually, possibly, start to belief otherwise, but not by choice.
We are. What language did YOU think we were talking in??
Quote from: custosnox on April 18, 2013, 03:11:34 PM
simply claiming it does not equate believing it. Belief comes from life experiences telling you something is true. Something in your life had convinced you that it is reality. The example of language comes from you being told your entire life that this is the English language, and you will continue to belief that until information you see as factual comes along to contradict that, at which time you may begin to question it, and eventually, possibly, start to belief otherwise, but not by choice.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
Quote from: Conan71 on April 18, 2013, 03:23:35 PM
Some people choose to explore out of what they've been fed their entire life, yet others choose not to. I can choose to listen in to someone who might change long held beliefs of mine, or choose to tune them out.
It's all semantics, but I'm in a punchy mood this week.
There's still choice and free will involved.
Quote from: Townsend on April 18, 2013, 03:42:08 PM
Sometimes it's just a question of "what makes more sense?" That's how I came to my present conclusion.
With thousands of years to come up with answers, "That's why they call it faith" doesn't fly for me.
Quote from: custosnox on April 18, 2013, 03:11:34 PM
simply claiming it does not equate believing it. Belief comes from life experiences telling you something is true. Something in your life had convinced you that it is reality. The example of language comes from you being told your entire life that this is the English language, and you will continue to belief that until information you see as factual comes along to contradict that, at which time you may begin to question it, and eventually, possibly, start to belief otherwise, but not by choice.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 18, 2013, 03:57:15 PMyou obviously didn't use critical thinking here.
You just came around to make my argument!!
If you start to believe it, then if not by your choice, it would have to be against your choice and will....but if you accept the new information (may or may not be facts) it would have to mean that you accepted another set of 'facts' that became your new belief of choice....
Isn't pushing a chain ever so much fun....?
Quote from: custosnox on April 18, 2013, 03:59:53 PM
you obviously didn't use critical thinking here.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
Quote from: custosnox on April 18, 2013, 03:11:34 PM
simply claiming it does not equate believing it. Belief comes from life experiences telling you something is true. Something in your life had convinced you that it is reality. The example of language comes from you being told your entire life that this is the English language, and you will continue to belief that until information you see as factual comes along to contradict that, at which time you may begin to question it, and eventually, possibly, start to belief otherwise, but not by choice.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
Quote from: Gaspar on April 19, 2013, 09:51:35 AM
Read Being & Nothingness, after a couple of hours, you will be able to argue with yourself over the color of the sky. ;D
Quote from: Gaspar on April 19, 2013, 09:51:35 AMYou are obviously a lost cause on this, but no matter how you spin it, you cannot choose what you believe, and know that you just sound like an idiot when you tell an atheist that they choose not to believe. In any case, I'm done with this back and forth.
Interesting. It seems you put much faith in the existential experience manifesting your beliefs devoid of any choice, even though the interpretation of experience requires choice. As Sartre put it, "we are condemned to be free."
I can certainly respect your position, however the argument of how you form your beliefs without exercising choice simply does not compute, in fact it goes against existential analysis.
"What do we mean by saying that existence precedes essence? We mean that man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world – and defines himself afterwards. If man as the existentialist sees him is not definable, it is because to begin with he is nothing. He will not be anything until later, and then he will be what he makes of himself. Thus, there is no human nature, because there is no God to have a conception of it. Man simply is. Not that he is simply what he conceives himself to be, but he is what he wills, and as he conceives himself after already existing – as he wills to be after that leap towards existence. Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. That is the first principle of existentialism." --Sartre
Read Being & Nothingness, after a couple of hours, you will be able to argue with yourself over the color of the sky. ;D
Quote from: custosnox on April 19, 2013, 09:33:33 PM
You are obviously a lost cause on this, but no matter how you spin it, you cannot choose what you believe, and know that you just sound like an idiot when you tell an atheist that they choose not to believe.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 22, 2013, 01:59:10 PM
That is an absolutely amazing statement if you really believe it!
Quote from: Gaspar on April 22, 2013, 04:57:11 PM
He can't help it. He has no choice in the matter.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on April 22, 2013, 05:08:42 PM
I have had a fairly "busy" life, and the older I get the harder it is to truly be amazed! Or even mildly surprised....
It would be really interesting to meet custosnox and visit for a while...that belief would truly amaze me!
Quote from: Gaspar on April 22, 2013, 05:24:43 PMYou really don't know very many atheists, do you? Do a little checking around, because, quite frankly, there are a large number of us who are tired of this "you choose what you believe" tripe. Seriously, think about it for a bit. I tell you that I have an invisible, purple unicorn in my backyard that only I can see or interact with. Do you believe me? No. Why? Because logic tells you that it is far more likely that I'm off my rocker and imagining things (or lying). That isn't a choice, it's a matter of facts being presented. If you really think it's a matter of choice, then choose to believe me. Make that choice to believe that I have an invisible, pink unicorn in my backyard. Oh, and saying you believe isn't the same thing as actually believing.
It seems that he is a devout atheist who bases his beliefs on faith rather than analytical reasoning or choice. ;)
He is, however the first atheist I have ever encountered who is willing to discount free will and logical deduction as the basis for his belief system, which makes him a bit of an enigma.
Quote from: custosnox on April 23, 2013, 01:13:47 AM
You really don't know very many atheists, do you? Do a little checking around, because, quite frankly, there are a large number of us who are tired of this "you choose what you believe" tripe. Seriously, think about it for a bit. I tell you that I have an invisible, purple unicorn in my backyard that only I can see or interact with. Do you believe me? No. Why? Because logic tells you that it is far more likely that I'm off my rocker and imagining things (or lying). That isn't a choice, it's a matter of facts being presented. If you really think it's a matter of choice, then choose to believe me. Make that choice to believe that I have an invisible, pink unicorn in my backyard. Oh, and saying you believe isn't the same thing as actually believing.
And something else on that, a great many atheists who de-converted did not do so willingly. Most wanted to believe in the mythology they grew up with, because it gives you a sense of comfort. They just couldn't do it anymore. Here is a good example of how that happens.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/magazine/from-bible-belt-pastor-to-atheist-leader.html?pagewanted=all
Quote from: custosnox on April 23, 2013, 01:13:47 AM
I tell you that I have an invisible, purple unicorn in my backyard that only I can see or interact with. Make that choice to believe that I have an invisible, pink unicorn in my backyard.
Quote from: custosnox on April 19, 2013, 09:33:33 PM
You are obviously a lost cause on this, but no matter how you spin it, you cannot choose what you believe, and know that you just sound like an idiot when you tell an atheist that they choose not to believe.
Quote from: custosnox on April 23, 2013, 01:13:47 AM
Seriously, think about it for a bit. I tell you that I have an invisible, purple unicorn in my backyard that only I can see or interact with. Do you believe me? No. Why? Because logic tells you that it is far more likely that I'm off my rocker and imagining things (or lying). That isn't a choice, it's a matter of facts being presented. If you really think it's a matter of choice, then choose to believe me. Make that choice to believe that I have an invisible, pink unicorn in my backyard. Oh, and saying you believe isn't the same thing as actually believing.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 23, 2013, 06:43:18 AM
Here is my difficulty. I do not believe that anything just happens. I believe that there is always cause and effect. I suppose it is my logical weakness, as a result of an almost disastrous Philosophy major from TU. Thank Dog, I had a professor that guided me elsewhere. I am extremely familiar with the Atheist argument(s). The Thiest is typically the one that will argue his/her faith based on ultimate truth, beyond our comprehension or knowledge (at which the debate can go no further because logic and faith do not mix). The Atheist, on the other hand, has all of the tools of science, psychology, reason and logic on his side. He has made the choice not to believe in a deity because he realizes there is no basis for that belief in science, and he recognizes and rejects the psychology behind those that do believe as superstition. Ultimately it is the theiest that believes they are guided by fate or the hand of God, and their beliefs come from their particular diety. For the atheist to accept such determinism is illogical.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 23, 2013, 06:43:18 AMTrying to go deep into this using a phone isn't something I care to try, so I'll just respond in brief. First, let me say I seem to be very emotionally charged on the subject, something I've only recently realized, which makes it difficult for me to not go down the crazy track here and there, so I'll beg your indulgence at those tines.
Not trying to be in any way offensive. I just don't understand you're rather unique resistance against free will. Perhaps most of the atheists I know are atypical.
It is usually impossible to debate an atheist because theists must resort to faith, and that breaks down under logical analysis. At the very core of atheist philosophy is the acceptance of logic over faith. From the Sophists of ancient Greece who first began to challenge the fables of the gods to the existential movement in Europe, the concept of religion (or lack therof) is based on individual choices made as a result cultural upbringing, social status, logical deduction, education, and experience. If you argue that becoming an atheist is not a choice, than the same must hold true for becoming a Christian, or Scientologist, or Pagen.
Here is my difficulty. I do not believe that anything just happens. I believe that there is always cause and effect. I suppose it is my logical weakness, as a result of an almost disastrous Philosophy major from TU. Thank Dog, I had a professor that guided me elsewhere. I am extremely familiar with the Atheist argument(s). The Thiest is typically the one that will argue his/her faith based on ultimate truth, beyond our comprehension or knowledge (at which the debate can go no further because logic and faith do not mix). The Atheist, on the other hand, has all of the tools of science, psychology, reason and logic on his side. He has made the choice not to believe in a deity because he realizes there is no basis for that belief in science, and he recognizes and rejects the psychology behind those that do believe as superstition. Ultimately it is the theiest that believes they are guided by fate or the hand of God, and their beliefs come from their particular diety. For the atheist to accept such determinism is illogical.
Here is your opportunity to clarify. If you can answer the question "Why are you an Atheist?" then you have made a choice, just as Christians, Jews, Wiccans have made a choice if they can answer the same "Why are you a _______?" Even though they may argue to the contrary. If however, if your answer is simply "I don't know why I am an Atheist, I just am." than this discussion is truly over.
Note: I am not trying to debate you on religion, that is silly. My purpose is to debate the existence and exercise of your free will. You have posed a logical cupcake that I cannot ignore, by calling me an idiot for my implying that you have free will. ??? I simply want you to acknowledge that you are indeed free to choose how and what you believe in, or do not believe in. I can't understand why that is so difficult?
Quote from: custosnox on April 23, 2013, 02:58:13 PM
Trying to go deep into this using a phone isn't something I care to try, so I'll just respond in brief. First, let me say I seem to be very emotionally charged on the subject, something I've only recently realized, which makes it difficult for me to not go down the crazy track here and there, so I'll beg your indulgence at those tines.
On the subject at hand, I do not discount freewill, only that believing or disbelieving is not a choice, but rather an end result of the acceptance of evidence. Where the choice plays a part us if we choose to accept certain things as evidence, out if we choose to analyze the matter. Even a lot of that, however, is determined in a lot of preexisting factors that effect the psyche. But, in the end, if the evidence you accept does not support a point, than you simply cannot believe it. So you can not choose your beliefs, but you can choose what you expose yourself to that can effect those beliefs.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
Quote from: Gaspar on April 24, 2013, 06:31:25 AMI can live with that
I think we can leave the discussion here. It seems that we are indeed in agreement, it is only our definition of "Choice" that differs. I consider the highlighted above as an acceptable definition of choice, even though you require something more rigid. Either way, I understand your point now and respect it though we disagree on what constitutes choice.
Quote from: guido911 on May 03, 2013, 08:32:24 AM
Here's a similar event in Houston re: the NRA. http://hotair.com/archives/2013/05/01/houston-schools-cancel-nra-safety-program-after-discovering-nra-connection/