Atheists as "Future Targets"

[NMMNG]

These are high school children.

Via Friendly Atheist

Sometimes, it pays to track online mentions of the organization you work for. The Secular Student Alliance’s Jesse Galef (who also contributes to this site) saw a Tweet this morning which included this image:

MY FUTURE TARGETS :)
I’ll pray for you.

Every indication is that the person tweeting was talking about converting them to Christianity, not shooting them. But, as JT Eberhard notes, if the tables were turned and an atheist called members of a Christian group “targets” and posted their picture, there’d be a *huge* outcry. (And rightfully so.)

So how do you handle this?

JT and Jesse figured out who made the tweet, what school she attended, and they alerted the principal to the Tweet along with a note indicating why they were taking precautions about this — more from a anti-bullying stance than a “call the cops” one. I think that was the right move — not ignoring the message and not overreacting to it by any means.

<snip>

if the tables were turned and an atheist called members of a Christian group “targets” and posted their picture, there’d be a *huge* outcry.

Indeed there would. But there are probably people out there who wonder why anybody's offended that some sweet Christian wants to pray for and try to bring a group of atheists to Jesus (if that is all the person wants to do). They just can't see why it's offensive, and even frightening, to be "targeted" like that. Just because you're different. Just because you don't believe in gods.

[Hydra]

1. The fact that it's considered "normal" to be a Christian

And "abnormal" or "dangerous" to question a myth is more than a little scary when you look at it from an outside context.

It's always been this way though, I think- the idea that someone would dare question "accepted wisdom" has always been a valid reason to torture someone to death to some people.

[NMMNG]

5. Dissent is intolerable

Orthodoxy must be enforced at all costs.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

2. Not saying the post isn't true

But showing an image in Excel with some text underneath seems a little weird. Why would the person put that data into Excel, then take a picture of it with an external camera, then post it to Twitter?

Just seems really, really odd, and the skeptic in me is throwing up a red flag. One of the people from the photo has posted a response to the blog post, which lends some credence to the story, but I'm still questioning it.

[NMMNG]

3. My only guess

Possibly the person "targeting" the atheists was creating a spreadsheet so she could list and check off each of the students as she did whatever she intended to do to them.

[darkstar3]

9. It REALLY strikes me as a yearbook building method

Look at the tabs underneath. They all have abbreviations for student organizations. I'm thinking someone on the yearbook staff thought it would be effective to place the pics on the same sheet as the names to ensure accurate labelling (and programs for actual creative work are expensive), and I think another yearbook student decided to "get clever."

[EvolveOrConvolve]

10. You know, I think you're right

I spent some time on the yearbook staff (back in the days when cut-and-paste actually required cutting and pasting), and the categories seem to back up your notion.

Still, why would someone tech-savvy enough to post on twitter take a physical photo of the screen instead of just doing a screen cap?

[darkstar3]

11. A school computer with free and unencumbered access to twitter? Nah.

Now an iphone with a twitter app that allows photos to be automatically tweeted? Sounds like an idea.

[Goblinmonger]

13. I teach high school.

A lot of kids don't even use the Internet interface for Twitter but do it all on their phone.

[limpyhobbler]

4. I hope the authorities are taking this seriously & investigating whether it is a threat of violence.

n/t

[msongs]

6. so did these students give their permission to posting their pic on the net? nt

[NMMNG]

7. Even if they had previously

I doubt they did for the Tweeter's purpose.

[mindwalker_i]

8. The Christian kid will grow up to be beautiful lion food n/t

[MarkCharles]

12. How offensive these Christians can be! When I see the word "target', ..

I think of another famous born again Christian and her political rifle "target" on Congresswoman Giffords.

[NMMNG]

16. This image comes to mind

[humblebum]

21. And the atheist who did the shooting. nt

[Goblinmonger]

14. No True Atheist is a Packer fan. n/t

[NMMNG]

15. I couldn't speak on such matters

I don't like sports at all. :shrug:

[trotsky]

20. Your declaration is correct. n/t

[Quartermass]

17. On the word target.

Remember the pro-life website that was keeping track of doctors being harassed and killed?

That's why it's offensive.

And "I'll pray for you" is offensive because it means that person will not accept you for who you are and will harass you until you conform. These people do not value individuality.

To steal a line from the X-Men First Class movie:

Atheist and PROUD!

We shouldn't have to hide.

[Jim Lane]

18. I don't think it's that clear.

I, for one, would not be offended if a religious person promised to pray for my conversion. (As best I can recall, none ever have. Should I be offended that they don't think I'm worth saving?)

"Target" is ambiguous. When I was part of a group doing voter registration, and someone referred to finding "targets" (meaning unregistered voters who might be signed up), the context was clear, and anyone who thought we meant Second Amendment remedies would have been daft. In the abortion example you mention, the context is also clear, in the other direction. When abortion doctors are actually being murdered, no one could use "targets" without being aware of that context.

In the tweet about atheists, I don't see that kind of context. Saying that someone wants to shoot people is a pretty heavy accusation, so I come down on the side of not interpreting the tweet that way unless there's evidence to the contrary. Here, there's an obvious nonviolent interpretation (people to be prayed for or proselytized). I would presume that interpretation to be the one intended unless there were some reason to think otherwise.

[Iggo]

19. "...Here, there's an obvious nonviolent interpretation..."

Okay.

But there's also an obvious violent interpretation. Nothing wrong with erring on the side of caution here.

Investigate!

[NMMNG]

23. I do find it pretty offensive

I, for one, would not be offended if a religious person promised to pray for my conversion.

It's demeaning for others to presume they know what's best for me, and to ignore my desires by working to turn me into something they want me to be (even if it's via something as useless as prayer).


Should I be offended that they don't think I'm worth saving?

I don't need "saving" and neither do you. The sort of people who push "saving" don't care one whit about either of us. They're only thinking about themselves and pushing their beliefs on everyone.

[NMMNG]

22. Good point

Remember the pro-life website that was keeping track of doctors being harassed and killed?

That's why it's offensive.

That's why I find it scary. RRRW Christians are known for targeting people they "disagree with" for harassment and even violence.