Discouraging Bad Behavior By SJW’s


I don’t receive many comments on my posts. I ‘m not complaining about it, I’m not a player in the blogosphere like so many others. I do seem to have a somewhat regular readership though, and occasionally one of them will comment on a post that sets me to thinking.

A few days ago, I wrote this rant and actually received a couple of interesting comments. I was lamenting in the post the lack of strong voices, especially among atheists to stand up to the SJW bullies and call them out. I received the following comment from my friend Damion Reinhardt from the blog network SkepticInk that had me stop and think a bit more about what I was really attempting to say in the post.

Damion commented:

I cannot think of any major victories they have scored within organized atheism, other than very occasionally getting a blogger or public speaker blackballed.

That’s true but the idea that these bullies can even get away with that, rankles me.

I responded:

What bothers me most is that the major atheist/skeptic organizations will not denounce them: Lindsay, Silverman in particular. They have been roundly trashed multiple times by these people as well as their organizations and missions (remember Jamila Bey at CPAC? She hasn’t blogged at FtB since 3 March) and they remain mostly silent instead of calling them out for what they are: hateful bigots.

What I said is also true. These awful people have smeared many people over the last few years and have had a special animus toward anyone that happens to have a higher profile within atheism than the rest of us. Damion well knows this, not being one of the “big” names, they have smeared him on multiple occasions.

Why do these organizations continue to coddle these smear merchants? Why can’t they place them on the do not invite list to any of their events? That’s a question for the ages, I think. It’s perplexing to many of us that when wrongfully attacked, none of those on the wrong end of the SJW spearpoint will take any effective action.

Without some sort of sanction, event organizers only empower these dogmatists to continue their agenda of maligning otherwise good people. This needs to stop. Atheists need to take a careful look at the organizations they support and ask themselves if they want to support skeptical and atheist groups that do nothing to discourage this kind of behavior.

4 thoughts on “Discouraging Bad Behavior By SJW’s

  1. While I can sympathize with the idea of “sanctions” of one sort or another, I think it can be a bit of a slippery slope. You might want to reflect on these quotes:

    JS Mill:

    “The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”

    Thomas Jefferson:

    I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion.

    Christopher Hitchens on Thomas More, something that Dick Strawkins quoted recently in the Pit:

    but read the text of Robert Bolt’s wonderful play “Man For All Seasons”, some of you must have seen it – where Sir Thomas More decides that he would rather die than lie or betray his faith and at one moment Moore is arguing with a particularly vicious witch-hunting prosecutor (a servant of the king and a hungry and ambitious man), and Moore says to this man “You’d break the law to punish the Devil, wouldn’t you?” And the prosecutor, the witch hunter, says “Break it?” He says “I’d cut down every law in England if I could do that, if I could capture him.” And More says “Yes you would wouldn’t you? And then when you corner the Devil and the Devil turned round to meet you, where would you run for protection? All the laws of England having been cut down and flattened, who would protect you then?” Bear in mind, ladies and gentlemen, that every time you violate or propose to violate the free speech of someone else you, in potentia, you’re making a rod for your own back because the other question raised by justice Oliver Wendell Holmes is simply this: “Whose going to decide? To whom do you reward the right to decide which speech is harmful? Or who is the harmful speaker? Or to determine in advance what are the harmful consequences going to be that we know enough about in advance to prevent? To whom would you give this job? To whom are you going to award the task of being the censor?”


    • I’m not calling for silencing or restricting their freedom to say whatever they want whenever they want. What I’m calling for is for organizations they regurlarly slime to not invite them to events. That doesn’t mean they can’t blog, tweet, put on their own events (Like FtB has in the past), just that orgs that many of us pay to belong to don’t line their pockets and continue to make them believe they are empowered to be jerks whenever they so desire.


  2. If some of the things the usual suspects have said in the past weren’t the end of FtB, it is difficult to imagine that this will be. Then again, being attacked from within is a very different thing than being attacked from without. Pass the popcorn.


  3. The orgs are in a tough spot in that they are undoubtedly trying to grow their membership. If they thought that continuing to invite divisive bloggers would hurt them more than help them, I suspect they’d be less likely to do so.


Leave a Reply to vjack Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s