Black Atheists: Providing a Platform

I haven't has a chance to listen to the podcast, but I look forward to doing so as well as the other ones.

This is an issue that the church has also struggled with in recent years. A Church I was once a part of had a very diverse congregation and the leaders talked about how integrated our church was, but I told our pastor once over lunch that the entire board of directors (elders) were still lily white. Essentially what we had was a white-people's church that allowed racial minorities to come and, of course, tithe. They could also work in the church as teachers, greeters, ushers, janitors or whatever too... but the reigns of power were reserved for those white men we called elders.

I'm happy to say that since that day a few years ago that that particular church has made strides and the elders are more racially mixed... although they still don't have women on the board, but that gets into doctrinal and theological issues. The de facto truth is that women hold a lot of power there, but they just don't sit on the board.

At any rate, your method of approaching minority atheists and giving them a platform is really similar to RIck Warren's method from years ago that he used to build Saddleback and got rick selling books about. It makes sense.

My question is this when you apply Warrens' method to minorities specifically....

How is it possible to target minorities at all without tokenizing them? I mean, the church I was talking about earlier did this in the early days. They targeted minorities and then when the congregation became more diverse they would say things about it from the platform.

"Look around you at all of the different shades of color that we have here today. This is what the church is supposed to be!" and everyone would clap and cheer.

They meant well, but I always felt like we should have simply approached the broader community and allowed minorities to come if they wanted or not come if they didn't want, but that it shoudl have occurred more organically rather than "targeting" minorities.

I'm not sure that anyone can say or think anything close to, "I'm going to prospect this person based on his minority status" and at the same time value them as a person and not a token minority. I mean, I think that when we see a person as black, brown, yellow, red, female, handicapped, elderly or anything of the sort then we are happy with anyone who fits that status... without really valuing any one person in particular for who they are.

We are looking for their minority status for the purpose of making our group diverse rather than reaching for them based on their value as a person.

Basically what I'm saying is that most people who focus on "diversity" for the sake of "diversity" wouldn't approach those people if they weren't a minority.

"I wouldn't reach out to this person or assist them simply because I agree with them, but since they are a minority and i want to be diverse, I am going to reach out and work with them... for the purpose of diversity but not real unity."

It's sort of a paradox that we work for diversity, but in the process we can end up being less honestly diverse although on the surface we look and feel like we are more diverse.

For instance, when you say that you are going to pick out the minority atheists and give them a platform then you are giving them a platform BASED UPON their minority status and not solely on the quality of what they think and say. When you do that you are still using their minority characteristics as a basis for evaluating them even though those characteristics end up with positive outcomes.

That treats them like a token when true diversity would be you listening to atheists speak and teach... when you come across one that impresses you then you give them a platform based upon their mind. The diversity comes in when you do this irregardless of their color, gender or whatever makes them a minority.

"Hey, you had John Doe on your podcast. That's cool that you had a black atheist on."

"Oh yeah, he was black wasn't he? I didn't even think about that."

This would be a conversation that would show true, honest diversity... when their minority status doesn't have any effect positive or negative... when it truly becomes a non-issue.

"What I heard from the overwhelming majority of them was this: don’t elevate us nonchalantly and tokenize us."

Here I thought AA might be striking a real blow for diversity by refusing to categorize people based on their skin color, but in the next paragraph you essentially say 'send me some black people, so I can let them talk because they're black'.

As long we continue to insist on categorizing individuals into meaningless groups based on superficial qualities (e.g., skin color), we will always end up with people that are separated.

Blair Scott: “It is naive to think the groupings are not needed right now.”

Why, because you say so? You’re saying we need more racism to fight racism. You don’t fight something by making more of it.

Not because I say so. Because minorities say so.

If you honestly think this is racism then there is nothing I can say to you.

Know what would be a great podcast? A great podcast would be to bring on some theists who knew what they were talking about.. you know, normal, educated theologians who could conduct themselves professionally and with candor and have a show that discussed the differences in the two worldviews in a mutually respectful manner. I don't mean where the atheist is portraying the theist as a drooling, knuckle-dragging idiot and likewise the theist isn't portraying the atheist as a hell-bound evil sinner in need of their help. And then maybe the podcast could be distributed to listeners/readers of both theists and atheists alike.

The hurdle with that is actually finding the people to participate because so many atheists and theists harbor so much angst for one another that they justify so they wouldn't be able to rise above it enough to be civil and cooperative.

I've listened to the podcast finally and I didn't hear anything that would make my previous comments incorrect.

Basically what Mandy has said is that they have the Black Nonbelievers of America because they want to address the needs of black atheists because black atheists have different needs and experiences and etc.

What that boils down to is, "Blacks are different and unlike other races in many ways and need separate groups and places."

That is the same argument taken by people like Thurmond and Wallace and other segregationists to keep blacks separate from whites in schools and in society... because we're different.

"This is not a black separatist group..."
WHAT!?!?!
It is named BLACK nonbeliever....

Also, Mandy had the audacity to correlate Christianity with drug use and teen pregnancy in the black community. That is insane. It is the church that is working to provide addiction recovery programs and etc in the black community. The Civil RIghts movement was birthed in the black churches and most of its leaders were (and still are) ordained ministers in the Church. Often in black communities the church is the only provider of recreational and social activities.

Where are the atheist day centers in black communities?

You want to know what is in black communities that provide services for blacks?
Planned Parenthood.

Ben,
Do you know why blacks "come out of the woodwork" when you start a group that is named the "Black....whatever?"
Because those blacks hold bigoted views that tell them that only other blacks can serve their needs. That is a racists belief and when you cater to that you are encouraging their stereotype.

Having a black person speak out about their atheism might provide some benefits to AA, but recruiting somebody solely because of their skin color is racist, no matter how you try to spin it.

Well, you're certainly entitled to hold your incorrect opinion.