“Anonymous” Issues Ultimatum To “Graceless Sociopaths” at Westboro Baptist Church

Mashable reports that the hacktivists who form "Anonymous" have threatened Westboro Baptist Church with irreversible damage to their websites and congregation if they don't close their websites and cease their protests. Based on their experiences with Wikileaks opponents and in Egypt, they are obviously able to carry out their threat.

Given Westboro's antigay stance and protests at the funerals of soldiers and celebrities where they make frequent references to hate, hell and numerous slurs I don't imagine that many feel particularly sympathetic at the moment. That aside it does raise a question regarding the responsibility of society to protect free expression and to protect its members from abuse.

So is this a case of vigilante justice, repression of free speech or activists accomplishing what government and law enforcement can't do?

Wrestling with faith in Iowa

Faced with the choice of wrestling a female opponent, Joel Northrup decided that his faith and conscience wouldn't let him. So he forfeited the match.

Some may decry this as sexist; others may complain that his "right" to compete has been infringed upon and still more may declare him some sort of modern day "saint" for his "sacrifice.

All that aside, I think it was the proper outcome.

If Joel believes that his faith won't permit him to wrestle a female opponent, and varsity wrestling requires wrestling both male and female opponents, then Joel's faith limits his ability to wrestle at the varsity level. Rather than attempt to change the rules for everyone else, he accepted the limitation imposed by his faith and forfeited in such a way that he may win the consolation round (assuming no female opponents).

This is how religion should be treated in society, with everyone given equal access to opportunities, but people choosing not to act on some opportunities because of faith or other beliefs. This is pluralism. This is Humanism.

Looking at some of today's issues such as equal marriage and science education, the principle is the same-if religious believers feel that their beliefs don't allow them to share marriage with a same sex couple or to learn about Evolution, then they can live without civil marriage (still getting married in their faith tradition) and find an alternative educational path.
The early christians living in the pagan Roman Empire knew this when they avoided certain professions such as tutor, soldier and gladiator-let's hope their heirs can as respectful of modern secular society.

Can community develop around atheism?

Depends on your definition. If by "community", you mean an organized group or society, as the original Latin term communitas, then certainly it is possible. Atheist Nexus; Atheist Alliance International and American Atheists are three examples of such "communities".

If "community" brings to mind images of shared resources; common values and cultural elements; and social cohesion, then the question may be a bit trickier to answer. There is no question that many who self-identify as atheists have these sorts of relationships and interactions with one another.

The question is: are these interactions the result of shared "atheism" (defined as a lack of belief in a god or gods) or are they the result of shared positive beliefs that often accompany atheism (humanism; anti-theism; a commitment to reason, science, human rights, etc.)? Can a negative provide the impetus around which to form relationships? Or do they form as a result of the positive, shared ideas?

The idea has important implications for those wishing to forge closer ties between nontheists-rather than seeking to model an atheist community after an ethnic or religious group, with a core identity and belief set, it may be more practical (and effective) to conceive of a loose-knit coalition of communities built around key causes, values and ideas with strong interconnectedness.

These would be similar to a person's national identity in a modern pluralistic country where an individual's multiple roles and identities are infused by the concept of national identity, but not subject to it. The Internet itself also provides a useful model with high degrees of interconnectedness throughout the network while maintaining national and specialized networks within the overall structure. These networks meet specific needs while also serving as the Internet.

Thus nontheists can nurture community around science, justice, shared interests and any number of other elements while holding to a greater atheist identity. Greater, yet also more abstract with fewer shared cultural or intellectual elements. With this model, communities can develop and flourish with unique characteristics and trait, but the entire atheist population can benefit from the results.

Thoughts?