Transgender athletes set the atheist world on fire (Rationality Rules vs ACA) (1 Viewer)

[SystemShock]

So, the video I posted on the transgender athlete thread has caused quite a stir in the atheist world.

For those who don't know yet care , Stephen Woodford, fellow heathen from the UK, known for his Rationality Rules youtube channel and creator of the video, was invited to Austin TX and featured in the 2019 Atheist Convention (or whatever they call it). He spoke there, then he appeared on a couple of the Atheist Experience shows, a show produced by the Atheist Community of Austin, whose most prominent face is Matt Dillahunty.

After fully monetizing Woodford's appearances and him being back in the UK, the ACA issued a statement condemning Woodford for this video (which was released before he even was invited to the event ) and "his many homophobic and transphobic posts on social media" (which is completely false) , and even issued an apology to all of the LBGTQIABCDEFGH+ community for Woodford's "phobic and insensitive remarks". And even after that, they are still monetizing Woodford has they have not taken his content off any of their channels.

Needless to say, there has been a huge backlash against the ACA from atheists, for their words and actions in regards to Woodford.

It's clear to me, a type of militant, intolerant zealot has taken over the ACA, and it is a real shame, considering what the ACA and Dillahunty have done for the atheist world (I won't say community, I don't think we are one) from giving atheists a simple outlet to express themselves, to the clergy project. In the past couple of years, they have become ever more intolerant of theists calling into their Sunday show. Rather than debating topics, they spend most of the time arguing semantics and definitions and shushing people back and forth.

 

[Taurus]

Le sigh. One might hope at least atheists could get over these stupid 'purity tests'.

IE: You must believe exactly as I do and speak exactly as I would or you're eeeeevil.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

there's a bit too much winking and tut tutting for me to actually understand the point(s) you're trying to make (like i had to google what ACA meant in this context and was a bit underwhelmed)

i don't mind discussing this, but i don't have the time to do too much research

would you care to bullet point the timeline/main events?

 

[efil4stnias]

there's a bit too much winking and tut tutting for me to actually understand the point(s) you're trying to make (like i had to google what ACA meant in this context and was a bit underwhelmed)

i don't mind discussing this, but i don't have the time to do too much research

would you care to bullet point the timeline/main events?

bullet point # 1.

Money.

bullet point #2.

still about money.

Looks like his issue is that the ACA invited this guy to speak , he spoke, denigrated many, ACA condemned the language, issued apology, yet continued to profit from his speech by keeping his videos alive on their website.

i think

 

[antipop]

why would the 'atheist community' have a specific stance on transgender people in sports? i mean, that's just an odd thing to even choose a side for

 

[SystemShock]

bullet point # 1.

Money.

bullet point #2.

still about money.

Looks like his issue is that the ACA invited this guy to speak , he spoke, denigrated many, ACA condemned the language, issued apology, yet continued to profit from his speech by keeping his videos alive on their website.

i think

Not quite.

First, Woodford didn't denigrate anyone. He made a video about transgender athletes (which I linked in the thread started by Mr. Sparkle about transgender athletes) in which he concludes he is not in favor of allowing transgender XY's to compete against XX's. If you take the time to watch the video, I don't think any reasonable individual could conclude Woodford made any statement which could possibly be construed as being transphobic.

The kicker, he made the video before he was even invited to the event.

I guess my point is more on the seeming downward spiral of what once was an open minded, a pivotal and legitimate outlet and support system for atheists, (ACA), into yet another ultra-woke intolerant bunch of social justice warriors.

By its nature, atheism draws a large number of gay folk, who are tired of being told by religions they are walking mortal sins who are less than dirt and deserve to burn in hell forever and ever. And that's fine. After all, many think less of atheists than they thing of gay people.

However, this particular case shows that, no matter how open minded a group or organization can be, it can succumb to irrational social pressures and tribalism.

 

[SystemShock]

why would the 'atheist community' have a specific stance on transgender people in sports? i mean, that's just an odd thing to even choose a side for

As I posted above, atheism attracts a significant number of LGBTQ+ people, since they are condemned by major religions.

 

[antipop]

As I posted above, atheism attracts a significant number of LGBTQ+ people, since they are condemned by major religions.

but atheism is not a religion....at least, it shouldn't be...

it appears that it's headed that way though

 

[Flipx99]

However, this particular case shows that, no matter how open minded a group or organization can be, it can succumb to irrational social pressures and tribalism.

It's where interSectionAlity inevitably leads. It doesn't matter what the organization is, when the chronic victims show up they are going to try to silence views that do not recognize their rightful place in the victim heirarchy.

 

[bclemms]

why would the 'atheist community' have a specific stance on transgender people in sports? i mean, that's just an odd thing to even choose a side for

Because they are trying to legitimize themselves as a real religion.

 

[Taurus]

Because they are trying to legitimize themselves as a real religion.

In a world where a fictional construct can have a religion, I suppose not having a religion can be a religion, too.

 

[Bleu Raeder]

In a world where a fictional construct can have a religion, I suppose not having a religion can be a religion, too.

If it walks like a duck....

They even have a 501(c)(3) for tax exemptions, just like any other religious "community"

 

[bclemms]

Because they are trying to legitimize themselves as a real religion.

Sometimes I crack myself up, this was one of them. So many different angles covered in 11 words. It certainly wasn't meant to be taken seriously.

 

[SystemShock]

but atheism is not a religion....at least, it shouldn't be...

it appears that it's headed that way though

Atheism is not a religion, but it appears this particular group of atheists (ACA) is heading into an area where social ideology overcomes rational thought; i.e., they have started to act like religious sects act.

 

[SystemShock]

If it walks like a duck....

They even have a 501(c)(3) for tax exemptions, just like any other religious "community"

Who's got tax exemptions for what?

Edit: Unless I am reading this wrong, according to the IRS, that's a tax exemption for organizations which include "charitable, religious, scientific, literary, and other"