|
Tell Us What You Think
name: Chris Lindstrom
email: st.sam@internetarena.com
Tuesday, 11-Aug-1998 11:14 PST
If the Suns feel that "everybody" can easily
get a church bulletin, why don't they just offer
"family Sundays" and let everybody in for the
6 bucks?
name: Chris Kelly
email: ckelly@n-link.com
Tuesday, 11-Aug-1998 18:58 PST
Sadly, this kind of thing gives religionists a rallying cause; however,
I don't know how we can evolve from superstition and cradle-to-grave mind
control without these challenges. Carl Silverman is a model for all of us.
Hopefully, his stand will spark young minds to think, not just blindly follow!
name: Carlie Sims
email: csims@atheists.org
Tuesday, 11-Aug-1998 23:19 PST
Sooner or later the public is going to realize that people like
Silverman and others are not going to stand still, while religious
indoctrination is interfering with our daily lives. The act itself is
inference of indoctrination, preferred over other status(s). Since when
does it mean anything to say that if one attends church that they somehow
have some great moral character. I know people now that go to church,
who have a lesser character than others I know who do not. Not only that,
there's a possibility that a member or two who do go to church are begging
for extra bulletins, or stealing them to give to friends or relatives who do
not attend, just to get the discount. There's no honor among thieves...nor
churchgoers. Don't patronize any religious facility, I say. Once I started
to buy a stainless paring knife from a local hardware store (they were
displayed on the counter); I asked the lady was she selling them. She said
the church. I laid it back down. She asked if I wanted the knife; I said
no. Also, when buying postage stamps, I used to say "do you have any
other design when they had handed me a religious symbol stamp booklet.
Afterwards, I'd simply say up front, "give me a book of stamps, please
and no religious symbols." If failing to partonize enough, they'll
get the message. I say let's "meet at the poll(s)" and vote our
leaders out of office who do not listen to complaints of this nature.
Write a letter to the editor about it. Good luck, Mr. Silverman.
name: Joe Goodson
email: goodsja@okstate.edu
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 00:26 PST
They SHOULD be allowed to have "Faith Community Night," but DO NOT
have the right to charge different rates for people. If the discount
admission price is $6.00, why can't they just charge $6.00 for everybody?
name: Dave DeGroote
email: Dave@DeGroote.com
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 11:46 PST
This issue seems similar to the released time program
in Tennessee? They should be allowed to have discount
nights as long as any group that wants to can sponsor
them, which they probably wouldn't want to do.
One question - does the opposing team have anything to
say about the discounts?
name: David Morris
email: Camerare@itouch.net
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 11:54 PST
It's a good point that if somebody offered a discount at a baseball game for
being white, there would be no end to the outcry. People seem to look the
other way at public facilities when sublte religious benefits are offered
only to those who believe and yet the instant that the same benefits are
offered to non-believers you'd think the Pope had been murdered by heathens
judging from the outcry. Hypocrisy/religion...what's the difference?
name: Ed Buckner
email: edbuckner@mindspring.com
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 12:36 PST
The Christians who whine that they are persecuted,
despite their contradictory claim that they are in
the overwhelming majority in the U.S., make me
wary of claiming discrimination against those of
us who are irreligious. Nevertheless, the baseball
team offer of a discount for church bulletins
seems to be a pretty clear-cut case of impermissible
discrimination. I'd only change my mind if I could be
convinced that no parallel objection would be raised
against offering discounts to atheists or to
Caucasians or even to (exclusively) Methodists, say.
Ed Buckner
Atlanta Freethought Society
name: Jeff Moore
email: jeffmo@cfw.com
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 12:45 PST
I am totally against the use of public funds to try
to discriminate against anyone on the basis of their
religious beliefs or lack thereof. The only sticking
point (in my mind) in the Hagerstown case is the failure
of Mr. Silverman to attempt to comply with the spirit of
the promotion.
Why did he not bring *something* to the ball park to
illustrate whether or not true discrimination was occurring?
I view these kinds of promotions by sports teams and others
as a kind of "scavenger hunt". If I had been in the same
situation, there are so many more inventive things I would
have attempted to do. One could bring a pamphlet or bulletin
from a freethought church, or a copy of AANEWS, or a handwritten
manifesto on one's own metaphysical musings, or even one of
those "Do Not Remove" tags that appear in bedding materials,
and claim that it was a "bulletin" from the Church of St.
Mattress! (Hey, I sleep in on Sundays!) ;-)
name: Mark Thibodeau
email: tak@passport.ca
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 13:42 PST
I just wanted to say that while I am a staunch
atheist and fully support the separation of
church and state, I think going after such small
and meaningless targets is extremely counter-productive.
It gives we atheists the veneer of
the professional whiner. Are we to attack Ladies
Night at bars which recieved governmental
small business incentive loans? Are we to ban
church groups from renting public accomadations
in which to hold their events? I think we need to
take a stress pill and pick out fights a little
better. This is much ado about nothing.
name: Ryk Mulrine
email: pmulrine@csrlink.net
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 14:11 PST
This entire affair could have been prevented with
a miminum of forethought. Had the organizers asked
themselves questions about whether or not they'd do
the same thing for any other segment of the
population (no matter its size) they would have
seen how ludicrous such a proposal really is. As
it sits now, it's turned into yet another situation
where American citizens are criticized and attacked
for demanding the exercise of First Amendment rights.
name: Jeff Lewis
email: jklewis@televar.com
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 16:29 PST
This is an attempt to create peer pressure
favoring a religious belief by associating
the belief with something popular on its own
merits (baseball). No public money or facility
should use to create such peer pressure.
name: John Pizer
email: johnpizer@juno.com
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 16:46 PST
In addition to the tax funded stadium issue there is the fact that the
Baseball team is in the business of selling their entertainment to the
General Public, that is, open to all, and therefore they must treat all
members of the general public fairly and equally without discriminatory
favoritism for any one group.
name: Janis Goodall
email: Ariawind@earthlink.net
Wednesday, 12-Aug-1998 17:42 PST
I disagree with the other commenter about this being a minor thing, that
we should "pick our battles". It is precisely these kinds of
*community* events that we must stop. They happen in OUR communities and
affect us, and if we don't stop them here, where we live, where ARE we to
stop them?
Even though I don't enjoy baseball that much, I do think this kind of
'sprecial rights for religious believers' is unconstitutional and a clear
discriminatory practice. If they're going to have a 'bring a church bulletin'
night, then they should also have a 'bring an atheist publication' night as
well. Of course, they won't, and therein lies the rub, as others have
commented.
This *is* a battle that should be fought and I wish Mr. Silverman all
the best.
name: Bryan
email: tgrmrntrnr@aol.com
Thursday, 13-Aug-1998 02:16 PST
A promotion is done to appeal to a certain group. Ladies night at bars
discriminates against men. Discounts for senior citizens discriminates
against age (Tell that to the AARP). The promotion says nothing about
attending a religous service, only that a bulletin is required for a discount.
it is the same as requiring box tops or can labels. The use of a public
buiding or facility by a private company does not constitute public
accomodation.
name: Mark R. Hatlie
email: mark.hatlie@uni-konstanz.de
Thursday, 13-Aug-1998 07:57 PST
It will be difficult to determine if the results of such a poll are
representative of any group other than perhaps atheist websurfers.
Moderator: The poll results reflect
the views of the people who participated.
name: Phillip Posey
email: pposey@airnet.net
Thursday, 13-Aug-1998 12:29 PST
Get over it nonbelievers, live with it, there are more
Christians in this country than there are you people.
There should be non-believer discrimaintion in this country.
I would even go for a test of faith to get into the game.
name: Woodard R. Springstube
email: springst@jumpnet.com
Thursday, 13-Aug-1998 13:53 PST
I think that the real issue here involves the revenue
that the city gets from the team. If the discount
does not impact the revenue that the city gets from
the use of its facilities, i.e., if the city gets the
same rent each night that the stadium is in use, then
it is not a government support of religion. If, however,
the city gets a percentage of the gate, so that the
discount reduces revenue to the city, then it becomes
a government support of religion.
name: Mike Marincic
email: mmarinc1@san.rr.com
Thursday, 13-Aug-1998 14:31 PST
The simple fact that the baseball team is using a public facility, should
preclude that organization from discriminating in favor of church goers.
Even though these church bulletins are available to the public (believers
and non-believers alike), acquiring them involves actually going into a
church. For some Atheists, (myself included) going into a church where
religious symbols are displayed would be as intolerable as a Jewish person
being forced to enter a neo-nazi meeting hall where the swastika was
displayed prominently. If this comparison sounds harsh, it must be said
that religion has caused more pain, suffering and death than the nazis
ever did.
A simple solution to this problem would be for the team to change the
nature of the discount. Instead of giving discounts for just church fliers,
discounts could be given for ANY non-profit organization literature. This
would include churches (even though religion is one of the beggest
money-grubbing organizations in the world), and many other secular
organizations as well.
name: Kevin Sobiski
email: kjs@in.net
Thursday, 13-Aug-1998 16:57 PST
I don't know if this is wrong or not since it only involves
a church bulletin. It is kind of like a discount
if you have a receipt from a certain restaurant or
store that you don't happen to frequent. I mean
even a family that does have religious belief would
not get the discount if they do not happen to get
their church bulletins. I could just walk in the front door
of almost any church on my way to the game and grab
a bulletin and walk out. I think in this particular
case, I think it could fall on either side of the
thin line that separates discrimination from not
discrimination.
name: Miles P. Jensen
email: mjensen@earthlink.net
Thursday, 13-Aug-1998 19:09 PST
I think the first question is a poor one. It
doesn't address the issue. It should read
something like, "Should businesses that use public
facilities and are "public accommodations" be able
to offer special discounts to church goers and
exclude non-church goers from the discount?"
To this, I would answer, "no." I would agrue against
the position of giving everyone except the church
goers a discount as well.
name: Adam Turner
email: amturner@yahoo.com
Friday, 14-Aug-1998 00:02 PST
Of course this is only the tip of the iceberg.
I think people should have their gods, fight their
wars over them (with their own money and lives),
and find comfort and solace in their churches.
It gets may goat, however, when these ethereal
practices and beliefs take money from my pocket
if I don't go to their church. Funny, but a
believer of the islamic or hindu faith wouldn't
get the discount, either. Probably much to the
delight of many of those church goers.
name: Linda Sharlow
email: Linda_5@yahoo.com
Friday, 14-Aug-1998 21:40 PST
This is indeed a complex issue but there are two
things that make me say that it is discrimination.
The first is that it would be considered so if
they gave the discount only to whites (or any
race). The second is that they are partially
publically funded by using a tax built stadium.
It will be interesting to see where this goes.
name: susan
email: susan123@geocities.com
Friday, 14-Aug-1998 22:00 PST
So I guess you would complain if they offered
an "Atheist discount night"? :-)
name: Will Friday
email: designer@pixelator.com
Saturday, 15-Aug-1998 05:17 PST
We can see from this case that the practice of
descriminating against atheists is considered
appropriate by the very people who claim to
"love their neighbors". A fact we atheists know
well from experience. Our tax dollars which went
to build these public athletic venues are being
misused if the management uses them for such
blatant social engineering.
name: Nick Wiltgen
email: AirwaveBoy@aol.com
Saturday, 15-Aug-1998 06:58 PST
As far as I'm concerned, the baseball team can
discriminate against whomever they like. That is,
as long as they build their own private stadium
and keep their bigoted hands out of the tax
coffers. I'd never willingly support a pro-religion enterprise anyway.
name: Eugene Gavin
email: eugenex@hotmail.com
Saturday, 15-Aug-1998 07:16 PST
Special interest groups, religious,
social or demographic should not be
given or allowed special discounts or
privledges for any reason other than
simple charity and compassion for the
poor or physically challenged.
Discrimination is inherently evil and
should not be allowed. No one should
be taxed directly or indirectly and
then be denied or inhibited from free
use or access to the results of such
taxation.
name: Doris Ann Torres
email: DTorres@flashnet.com
Saturday, 15-Aug-1998 10:55 PST
I am 47 years old and I am an atheist.
I do not believe in virgin births,
heavenly beings, anyone sitting on a throne
in heaven, dead people stay dead.
However, I do feel that if anyone who is
uncomfortable in a organization that espouses
religious beliefs of any denomination, should
just withdraw from that organization,
especially if those religious beliefs have been
an engrained part of that body since its
inception.
I recently had to fill out a form out at work,
among the questions, was one on "what is your
religion?".
There was a spot for atheist and I marked that one.
No fanfare, no problem, just marked my spot.
name: Native_Indian_and_member_of_the_human_ra
email: cliffhanger@wsu.edu
Saturday, 15-Aug-1998 12:20 PST
Open an shut case, obviously if
(SPORT, SCHOOL, etc) clubs in the U.S. were allowed to practice this
ludicrous behavior there would be more than just court battles sparking up.
Maybe the Indians should give discounts to Indians
at bingo. *lol*
name: Michel West
email: leeb@teleport.com
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 00:04 PST
If this baseball team wants to continue this practice it should move to a
private field. If this is not a reasononable option then the practice should
stop. Public means everyone, not every Christian.
name: CMetteer
email: withheld by request
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 02:58 PST
Sorry but I can't agree with your bias against church-goers in special
promotions. Entities such as baseball teams "discriminate" all
the time in allowing only members of certain groups to have discount
admission on certain nights, such as guilds or unions. Little League baseball
teams, etc. Also, your view that the Suns are a "public" entity
and therefore must be prohibited from entering into a special promotion with
church-goers strikes at my deepest fear when American Atheists go to bat
(no pun intended, really) against items such as this. It's the blurring of
what is "public" and what is "entanglement of religion and
government" that frightens me. American Atheists have been pushing
farther from the line of battling entanglement (forced indoctrination,
required Scripture readings) to trying to separate any public utterance
outside of a church's (or synagogue's) walls. Such a push into overly broad
definitions pushes too much against the guarantee of religious expression.
A move to battle any and all public utterance actually leads to a type of
forced indoctrination itself, but one based on Atheist principles rather
than those of more mainstream religions.
Moderator: CMetteer was worried that I would
not publish his or her comment.
However, any well-thought-out opinion on any side of this issue is
welcome.
The only sure way to have your comment rejected is to stray off topic.
I may also leave comments out if too many people express the exact
same opinion.
name: David Linford
email: djl38@email.byu.edu
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 06:46 PST
The discounts offered by the team are valid since
the team is a private organization. As far as the
stadium being public property, this just
means that other organizations should have access
to it. Perhaps your organization could hold a
fund raiser there on non-game days.
name: Jonas Green
email: jgreen00@tiac.net
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 06:48 PST
This seems similar to a Wisconson case, where a
store owner offered free milk to members of his
own Church - Full Story Freethought Today.
Does the fact that the team recognizes
Church bulletins means they prefer believers over
non-believers, or those involved in community
over those who are not. Would they accept a
bulletin from a local Freethought Club as they
would a church bulletin?
What if the reason I am not a church member is
because there is no Church of my Faith available?
Suppose there were no Unitarian Churches in the
area, but I were a member of the Church of the
Larger Fellowship, would they accept a copy of
'The World'?
Would they accept a copy of Free Inquiry.
name: W Capehart
email: withheld by request
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 10:44 PST
The poll misses the a more basic idea before hitting the Church/State wall.
Public funds should not be used for these things in the first place.
Let a private group build their own stadium. Then they can sell seats at
whatever price to whomever they want. Then the buyer can take it or leave it
without lossing a dime of tax money that has better paces to be spent.
name: HIawatha
email: mixon@sopris.net
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 13:15 PST
I think everybody just has to lighten up here a little. There are ladies
days at major league games, and discount days for bringing a glove or bat.
Or how about being one of the first thousand through the gate, or a childrens
discount? Should I feel discriminated against because I am an adult white
male to poor to afford baseball equipment and perrenially tardy?
We don't need to find more reasons to fight each other over the issue of
freedom of religion or lack of. There are far more important battles to be
fought than this. Like it or not it's a free country for everyone. Quite
simply it means you have a choice. So If it offends you that this team
offers religious discounts don't attend. If I were you I would be more
concerned what this christian right controled congress is trying to do to our
schools.
name: Ryan Davis
email: bredfan666@aol.com
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 13:29 PST
It's getting frightening now. The churches are creeping in and twisting
alot of attributes to the system. Religion is NOT gonna be the brige to a
better future!!!!!! Thank you
name: Don Matlack
email: matlack@compuserve.com
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 14:20 PST
While the offering of discounts to one group clearly DOES constitute a form
of discrimination, it is not of a great magnitude. Unfortunately there are
a lot of these small discriminations out there.
The larger question is whether any person or business offering a product for
sale to the public ought to be allowed to offer that product to one person
or group for one price, and to another person or group for another price.
One can argue, and I believe, that discounts for store coupons are
discriminatory against those people who are too poor or too busy to buy
newspapers or clip coupons. (My wife doesn't buy it - and yes she clips
coupons!)
name: Bobby Branch
email: bobbranch@aol.com
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 15:20 PST
Ladies Nights....Seniors Discounts....Student Discounts....hmmmmm.
Mr. Silverman and his family were no more discriminated against than I was
when I was unable to get a senior citizen discount at a U.S. public park in
New Mexico two months ago, besides a church bulletin is no evidence of belief
in the one true God. The Bible clearly teaches us that there are many
unbelievers in the church today and God will not remove them in order to
keep from destroying the witness of the church.
name: Josh Kearney
email: jkkearne@eos.ncsu.edu
Sunday, 16-Aug-1998 18:46 PST
The central issue here is not one of non-belieiver
versus believer, but one of public versus private
gain. The Suns are a private organization and such
organizations have the right to discriminate
against whomever thay choose. I believe that is
fair and well within their rights. However, the
The Suns have no right to regulate access to a
public facility by any means. Furthermore, they
are not in any position to play the part of moral
entrepreneurs, especially when you consider that
the Suns are using a publicly funded facility for
their own **private** financial gain. If they
owned their own stadium, I'd let them do as they
wish, but this is not the case and our collective
tax dollars should not be used to promote or
discriminate against any particular group.
Go to Poll/Results.
![[back]](../backarrow.gif) Back
to Top of Forum.
![[top]](/uparrow.gif)
Copyright
© 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 by American Atheists.
|
