NPR story
Steve Kelley
I heard this on NPR's Weekend Edition Sunday and thought you all might
find this interesting.
www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17558400
--
Steve Kelley
Mike
[QUOTE
A growing number of young people now identify themselves as non-
believers, and some colleges have responded by adding so-called "atheist
chaplains" to their staff. Harvard now has an atheist chaplain, who helps
students celebrate the holidays without violating their core (non)-
beliefs.
/QUOTE]
Maybe its just me, but all I see here is an attempt to insert religious
control mechanisms into places where religion has no place. Its a bit
like employing convicted rapists as rape survival councilors IMO.
--
*===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
*===( http://www.badphorm.co.uk/
*===( http://www.zenwalk.org/
axlq
Mike <N...@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>[QUOTE
> A growing number of young people now identify themselves as non-
>believers, and some colleges have responded by adding so-called "atheist
>chaplains" to their staff. Harvard now has an atheist chaplain, who helps
>students celebrate the holidays without violating their core (non)-
>beliefs.
>/QUOTE]
>
>Maybe its just me, but all I see here is an attempt to insert religious
>control mechanisms into places where religion has no place. Its a bit
>like employing convicted rapists as rape survival councilors IMO.
It's just you.
If the "chaplains" are themselves atheist, what's the problem?
If, instead, they are religious chaplains who are trained to be
openminded and respectful of the diversity of religious viewpoints
in the student body, what's the problem?
Either way, atheists have a resource that was formerly available
only to theists. For many students, being in college is the
first time ever living away from home, totally new and strange
environment, with lots of stress. Having a chaplain to talk to on
occasion can be a good thing.
-A
Mike
> In article <l5v7k.13891$E41....@text.news.virginmedia.com>, Mike
> <N...@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>>[QUOTE
>> A growing number of young people now identify themselves as non-
>>believers, and some colleges have responded by adding so-called "atheist
>>chaplains" to their staff. Harvard now has an atheist chaplain, who
>>helps students celebrate the holidays without violating their core
>>(non)- beliefs.
>>/QUOTE]
>>
>>Maybe its just me, but all I see here is an attempt to insert religious
>>control mechanisms into places where religion has no place. Its a bit
>>like employing convicted rapists as rape survival councilors IMO.
>
> It's just you.
Ya think?
> If the "chaplains" are themselves atheist, what's the problem?
No such thing as an atheist chaplain.
> If, instead, they are religious chaplains who are trained to be
> openminded and respectful of the diversity of religious viewpoints in
> the student body, what's the problem?
Not fit for purpose. This would be as inappropriate as an atheist
preaching evangelical gospel.
> Either way, atheists have a resource that was formerly available only to
> theists.
What? Access to religion-based advice?
> For many students, being in college is the first time ever
> living away from home, totally new and strange environment, with lots of
> stress. Having a chaplain to talk to on occasion can be a good thing.
>
No. Having a support agent would be a good thing. The LAST person to put
in this particular job is somebody with religious convictions. No way
could they do that job in those circumstances without compromise.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=chaplain&x=&y=
chaplain
1.an ecclesiastic attached to the chapel of a royal court,
college, etc., or to a military unit.
2.a person who says the prayer, invocation, etc., for an
organization or at an assembly.
ecclesiastic
a member of the clergy or other person in religious orders.
Extending your logics here, somebody who asks "Do you want fries with
that sir?" is qualified to work as a grief councilor as they have work
experience interacting with the public. Whats wrong with a job title/
function based on what is required by the students? Why a "chaplain"?
Thats clearly a religious function.
How about "student support worker"? Again, when the function here not
only does not required religious connections, but actually DIScludes
religious involvement, why oh why, from all the possible job titles, from
all the possible fields available to pull in an effective support worker,
does it have to be a "chaplain"?
The only conclusion I can draw here is that this is, as I've said, an
attempt to insert religious interference where it isn't needed or wanted.
Your argument against this isn't doing too well so far.
Emma Pease
> Responding to Steve Kelley:
>
>> I posted this last Monday and it has not yet appeared. I'm trying again
>>
>> I heard this on NPR's Weekend Edition Sunday and thought you all might
>> find this interesting.
>>
>> www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17558400
>
> [QUOTE
> A growing number of young people now identify themselves as non-
> believers, and some colleges have responded by adding so-called "atheist
> chaplains" to their staff. Harvard now has an atheist chaplain, who helps
> students celebrate the holidays without violating their core (non)-
> beliefs.
> /QUOTE]
>
> Maybe its just me, but all I see here is an attempt to insert religious
> control mechanisms into places where religion has no place. Its a bit
> like employing convicted rapists as rape survival councilors IMO.
Probably not. The Harvard chaplain position referred to is for a humanist
chaplain and has been in existence since 1974.
http://www.harvardhumanist.org/
I would say the 'Harvard now has an atheist chaplain' is a bit misleading
unless one includes now as being for the last 30 years. The first one,
Thomas Ferrick, is a former catholic priest turned humanist. The second,
Greg Epstein, is a secular humanist jewish rabbi. Both seem to be
non-theists.
Emma
--
\----
|\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
|_\/ Die Luft der Freiheit weht
axlq
Mike <N...@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>Your argument against this isn't doing too well so far.
Neither is your knee-jerk reaction to anything smacking of religion.
For decades, the military has employed chaplains trained to deal
with, and respect, service men and women with all manner of
religious beliefs, including Wiccan, Pagan, Satanist, and even the
lack of belief. Introducing the same concept into universities
is simply implementing an idea that has been tried and proven
reasonably effective already.
-A
Mike
> In article <hF58k.14835$E41...@text.news.virginmedia.com>, Mike
> <N...@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>>Your argument against this isn't doing too well so far.
>
> Neither is your knee-jerk reaction to anything smacking of religion.
Ok, now pull up the comments you snipped out, and explain the term "knee-
jerk reaction" and why you considered this accusation appropriate here.
(Curious how defensive you are about this, and how reactive you've been
so far.)
> For decades, the military has employed chaplains trained to deal with,
> and respect, service men and women with all manner of religious beliefs,
> including Wiccan, Pagan, Satanist, and even the lack of belief.
> Introducing the same concept into universities is simply implementing an
> idea that has been tried and proven reasonably effective already.
>
> -A
Your comment "and even the lack of belief" indicates you see those who do
not indulge in what is in essence wishful thinking are somehow "missing
something". (Pssst! Your bias is showing!)
And once again you fail to (refuse to?) take on board that anybody
employed as essentially a religious advisor is not the best guy to act as
support to atheist students, or to anybody who does not indulge in belief-
regulated life decisions. That is why, in the material you chose to
ignore and snip, I outlined this particular point very clearly. Why did
you ignore and snip that, I wonder?
Do you need the essential material you ignored and snipped reposting?
I could make it simpler if you need that?
Charles & Mambo Duckman
>>Your argument against this isn't doing too well so far.
>
>
> Neither is your knee-jerk reaction to anything smacking of religion.
>
> For decades, the military has employed chaplains trained to deal
> with, and respect, service men and women with all manner of
> religious beliefs, including Wiccan, Pagan, Satanist, and even the
> lack of belief.
So what? The organization notoriously known for its spending on $600 hammers
wastes more taxpayer money on unnecessary bullshit and just because they
allegedly don't discriminate while they spend money on superstitious
bullshit, this somehow makes it OK?
> Introducing the same concept into universities
> is simply implementing an idea that has been tried and proven
> reasonably effective already.
Tried and proven? For doing what exactly? At best, chaplain "services" can
be described as poor man's psychiatrist or some Deepak Chopra self-help crap.
And even if these chaplain "services" can be smuggled in as some battlefield
death-grief-loss consolation program, how does this translate into the
university arena?
--
Come down off the cross
We can use the wood
Tom Waits, Come On Up To The House
David V.
>
> Neither is your knee-jerk reaction to anything smacking of
> religion.
>
> For decades, the military has employed chaplains trained to
> deal with, and respect, service men and women with all manner
> of religious beliefs, including Wiccan, Pagan, Satanist, and
> even the lack of belief. Introducing the same concept into
> universities is simply implementing an idea that has been
> tried and proven reasonably effective already.
In my 10 years with the US Navy I found all the chaplains to be
respectful of my Atheism. One even made sure "Atheist" was on my
dog tags. He was the Jewish chaplain. Nice guy.
--
Dave
"A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is
putting on its shoes."
Mark Twain
Paul Ciszek
>In article <hF58k.14835$E41...@text.news.virginmedia.com>,
>Mike <N...@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>>Your argument against this isn't doing too well so far.
>
>Neither is your knee-jerk reaction to anything smacking of religion.
>
>For decades, the military has employed chaplains trained to deal
>with, and respect, service men and women with all manner of
>religious beliefs, including Wiccan, Pagan, Satanist, and even the
>lack of belief.
Poor choice of example, I'm afraid. Non-believers are being told
that non-believers have no place in the army--and since you can't
quit the army, that means you're supposed to become a believer
pretty damn quick if you know what's good for you.
>
>-A
>
--
Please reply to: | President Bush is promoting Peace and Democracy
pciszek at panix dot com | in the Middle East by selling Weapons to the
Autoreply is disabled | King of Saudi Arabia.
axlq
Mike <N...@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>Your comment "and even the lack of belief" indicates you see those who do
>not indulge in what is in essence wishful thinking are somehow "missing
>something". (Pssst! Your bias is showing!)
Ad hominem. Yawn.
>And once again you fail to (refuse to?) take on board that anybody
>employed as essentially a religious advisor is not the best guy to act as
>support to atheist students, or to anybody who does not indulge in belief-
>regulated life decisions. That is why, in the material you chose to
>ignore and snip, I outlined this particular point very clearly. Why did
>you ignore and snip that, I wonder?
Because I tend to ignore posts that start out fulminating and go on
from there. You're lucky I read as far as the second paragraph in your
reply. Apologies if I missed a point buried in your prior rant.
I agree that a religious advisor may not be the best support person
for non-religious students, for the record. However, painting all
religious advisors with the same brush, as you have done, is a
logical fallacy not worth addressing further.
-A