I have wrote a few times about this subject on this site. Regarding “militant atheists” or “aggressive atheists” in the cannabis movement.
I will first explain why I have a problem with this, and then I will go in to some examples of this over my time involved with dealing with cannabis liberty.
First of all, it is important to note that liberty has been my purpose of being involved in cannabis activist, and I assume that is the intent of most people involved with cannabis activism.
I suspect that there are a lot of people involved for purposes that are not mainly about liberty. However liberty is usually the notion and intent driving cannabis activism these days.
With that, I believe that the more who are involved the merrier. Unless of course the people involved are pushing other agendas as I have saw a few times, such as pushing abortion or other conflicting or at very least completely separate issues.
When I say the more the merrier, I don’t care what your religion or political party is. If you want liberty and are willing to put some action behind that intent, then I believe we are fighting for the same cause. Liberty in general being that cause. My parameters are simple, I live by the non-aggression principle. It goes like this;
Libertarians oppose the initiation of force to achieve social or political goals. They reject “first-strike” force, fraud or theft against others; they only use force in self-defense. Those who violate this “non–aggression principle” are expected to make their victims whole as much as possible.
I don’t think that needs to be defined as a libertarian only principle, I think it is a good standard for society to work regardless of your political persuasion. Further more the NAP entails the right to live freely so long as you don’t harm any one else’s life, liberty or property. So I believe in liberty, with some standard rules. Not a free for all, do whatever you want type of liberty. More on that; Non-aggression principle – Wikipedia
With that in mind, I work with progressive liberals, socialists, communists, republicans, conservatives, libertarians, whatever. I tend to speak my mind, and not everyone is on board with respecting human life, respecting individual rights to self defense, rights to keep your earnings, etc. Some people have strong opposition to some parts of “choice” and/or “freedom”, yet still want cannabis liberty. Which I am 100% good with, and if they expect me or other to listen to their side tangents, then they should expect to get either feedback, or other people expressing their opposing views.
This is my problem with militant atheism in the cannabis movement. Is that militant atheists that I have witnessed in the cannabis movement are strongly opposed to activists who are outspoken theists. It’s like they can rant about atheism, and even slam Christianity, but they go out of their way to censor and/or silence theists. I have many examples that I have written about on this blog. Just do a search for “atheist” and/or “atheism“.
I made one incredible documentation of this during Hempfest 2008. This is where a few street preachers came to HempFest to share their idea of “good news”. They were polite, respectful, not shouting at anyone, not insulting anyone. However within a few minutes of their arrival, groups of atheists from the HempFest crowd surrounding them and started shouting insults and offering ad-hominem attacks about these Christians faith, using straw men arguments from the old testament, and cackling at how funny they thought that they were.
Mind you, this wasn’t just a few random attendees, this was older folks with HempFest staff jackets on etc.
The video above was my way of reaching out and rationalizing with the atheists at this crowd who attacked the Christians. I addressed all of their questions about the Old Testament, and explained to them why the Old Testament is not doctrine to a Christian or subscriber of the New Testament. The New Testament as well as the message of Jesus was opposed to religion and opposed to the useless (Hebrews 7) law of Moses.
Then there was the time that I was invited to be a part of a journalist group for cannabis liberty by two friends in the cannabis movement, however one of the founding members was an atheist named Steve Elliott who has quite a reputation. He insisted that I be removed from the group, and before I had even accepted the job (the no-pay job), I was kicked out. I had supported Steve and questioned some of his accusers when he was accused of beating his girl friend and other accusations, as they seemed a little dubious. However when he attacked my faith I was a little taken a back, and then it was shortly after that John Novak had invited me to be a writer and researcher for his 420 leaks group, and then shortly after that invite, I was uninvited and Steve Elliot wrote me with a smug and insulting departure message.
Then this brings me back to John Novak tonight, (fast forwarding through other episodes inbetween). Where John Novak asked a Biblical question (sort of a snarky, slight, and rhetorical). Other people gave their answers, I have no idea if any of them had their post removed. However after about 20 others had wrote, I wrote also, and I have a pretty thoughtful, respectful response to the questions. 30 minutes later, I went to check on the thread, because I was curious about John’s reply. But when I refreshed the page, my post was there, but then it disappeared upon the page refreshing.
So my answer to John Novak’s question was deleted, and I wish that I could retrieve it because I put some work into that post.
So here is my answer again. Before I remove John Novak as a connection on social media (this is not the first time he has censored me)
“Ok, lemme see if I have this straight…
God created a special tree with fruit that looked better than all the rest in the garden and told Adam that he would die on the day he ate it.
A snake told Eve that was not true, you won’t die today if you eat it.
She gave some to Adam. They ate it. Nobody died.
God finds out and and Adam blamed God and Eve for his actions.
Eve blamed the snake.
God punishes them all, including the snake.
Still, nobody died that day. So who lied?”
My response is:
That is a good question. However it begs of a negative answer, it is not a search for knowledge, but rather an insult.
There are many ways to look at this, but the answer I assume is not what you are looking for (based on deleting my post)
1. That you have too look at language in general. First of all word’s meanings change. This was written many thousands of years ago, yet just in our time here, many words have evolved or changed in meanings in just decades. For instance the word “religion”. Many people would only associate that with theism. However there are over 8 definitions of the word religion and only a few of those refer to theist based religion. For instance the Oxford’s advanced learners dictionary lists “atheism” and “agnosticism” as religion. I have posted about that on my website.
So we have words that evolve in our culture just over a few decades. How far removed are we in our culture from the meanings of the words like “death”, “die”, “good” and “evil”?
Not to mention the clarity of other words in the same verses.
I suspect between the translation and evolution of the meanings of words, we are not reading this the way it was understood 3500 years ago
2. What about the communication between the giver and the receiver and then the translator of the information?
A. You have the giver, apparently a complex creator of all things, something/someone beyond us and beyond our understanding. Think of us trying to communicate to an ant.
B. Then you have the receiver, who was a wildman in the wilderness basically, not what you would consider sophisticated by our standards or by the standards of people 3500 years ago
C. Then you have the translator, which is whoever wrote it down and then whoever translated it how many ever times. Be it first by word of mouth, then by written words.
This is coming from supreme being, to rustic wildman, to other less than sophisticated people
Somewhere there we are going to have a weak link dontchya think?
3. Years ago upon witnessing a free-for-all childish attack by dozens of Hempfest goers at a polite and well spoken street preacher, about these very topics. I made a video demonstrating what it is like to be a Christian/theist among atheists, and to explain the demarcation between the old and the new testament.
Because certainly there is a difference or they wouldn’t need any demarcation. If it was just one theme or purpose it wouldn’t need the demarcation. OLD/NEW
Anyway, this is that video to explain where atheists use straw man tactics to insult Christians.
I hate to delete John Novak. Why? Because he has been active and semi-effective in fighting back monopolization and cronyism in the Washington cannabis market. He and I have a lot of similar beliefs in that regard.
I don’t dislike John Novak but one for a friend (I would consider him a friend), and for a person who I have witness fight for free speech to first ask a question, and then delete the answer that was given in a respectful and intelligent manner. Well, I guess I just don’t have time to waste putting my thoughts down, and then having them evaporate.
So I bid him farewell. Peace
The point is, over 70% of the USA identify with Christianity, and even more are some variation of theists. To insult theists constantly, especially when trying to make social or political progress, it counter productive. You alienate the vast majority of the voting public from your causes and you, if you are constantly deeming their core beliefs. And for what reason? If the question that he asked was for the purposes of getting an answer, then why delete a considerate and well thought out answer from someone whom you have worked with, and been friends with for 8+ years?
It doesn’t make sense, and in my opinion this is why liberty is not achieved, but rather we get cronyism and monopolization and even more laws. If we worked together, we would make a bigger and better difference in achieving freedom.