August 6, 2025 • 18 mins
A major Pride event just showed its true colors, gatekeeping an LGBTQ+ affirming atheist group. Recovering from Religion, a vital ally for those healing from religious trauma, was disinvited from St. John's Pride after initial approval—likely to appease religious groups. This baffling double standard, where a secular organization committed to dignity gets booted while commercial sponsors are welcome, smacks of hypocrisy. It raises troubling questions about who truly belongs at Pride and highlights a discomfort with non-religious voices, even when they advocate for core Pride values.
News Source:
LGBTQ affirming atheist group denied booth at St. John's Pride Festival
By Hemant Mehta for The Friendly Atheist
July 15, 2025
🔗 https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/lgbtq-affirming-atheist-group-denied
The Non-Prophets, Episode 24.31.2 featuring Cynthia McDonald, Flabbergasted, and Eli Slack
Pride Event Shuns Atheist Ally 🏳️🌈
Religious Gatekeeping at Pride? ⛪️
Atheists Banned from Pride Fest 🚫
RFR Booted: Pride's Hypocrisy Exposed 😤
No Room for Secular Healing at Pride? 🩹
Queer Atheists Disinvited by Pride 😠
Pride Chooses Bigotry Over Inclusivity 🤦♀️
Recovering From Religion Excluded 💔
When Pride Isn't for Everyone 🤔
Secular Voices Silenced at Pride 🤫
St. John's Pride's Troubling Move 🚩
Pride's Double Standard Revealed ⚖️
Allies Denied: The Pride Paradox 🎭
Is Pride Just for Religious Groups Now? 🙏
Truth Denied: Pride's Unfriendly Turn 📉
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-non-prophets--3254964/support.
News Source:
LGBTQ affirming atheist group denied booth at St. John's Pride Festival
By Hemant Mehta for The Friendly Atheist
July 15, 2025
🔗 https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/lgbtq-affirming-atheist-group-denied
The Non-Prophets, Episode 24.31.2 featuring Cynthia McDonald, Flabbergasted, and Eli Slack
Pride Event Shuns Atheist Ally 🏳️🌈
Religious Gatekeeping at Pride? ⛪️
Atheists Banned from Pride Fest 🚫
RFR Booted: Pride's Hypocrisy Exposed 😤
No Room for Secular Healing at Pride? 🩹
Queer Atheists Disinvited by Pride 😠
Pride Chooses Bigotry Over Inclusivity 🤦♀️
Recovering From Religion Excluded 💔
When Pride Isn't for Everyone 🤔
Secular Voices Silenced at Pride 🤫
St. John's Pride's Troubling Move 🚩
Pride's Double Standard Revealed ⚖️
Allies Denied: The Pride Paradox 🎭
Is Pride Just for Religious Groups Now? 🙏
Truth Denied: Pride's Unfriendly Turn 📉
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-non-prophets--3254964/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Wear them fans that y'all, I don't know, but the
boots on the ground decide to boots. A secular leaning
organization from a Pride event, Flabergastic has the story Flabbergasted.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Recovering from Religion, an organization that provides peer support and
resources for people who are questioning and deconstructing from their
religious beliefs, had their attendants at a Pride event and
Saint John's Canada rescinded. Recovering from Religion originally had their
attendants approved in early June. Than a month later and
less than two weeks prior to the event actually taking place,
they were informed that their attendance was rescinded, citing concerns
that Recovering from Religion was not in strong alignment with
(00:36):
the focus of their event. In response, Recovering from Religion
reach out multiple times to clear up what they saw
as a misunderstanding of their intent and mission. Saint John's
Pride responded to a singular message expressing concerns with what
they saw as combative language and refuse have any direct
communication with Recovering from Religion from that point on, and
still giving little to no meaningful explanation for why Recovering
from Religion was no longer welcome. Despite that, the co
(00:57):
chair of Saint John's Pride found time to have an
interview with a local radio station once the situation became public,
in which they stated that RfR was not part of
their community and did not have a connection with their community.
Language being used by Saint John's Pride had led people
to be concerned the RfR was disinvited because their attendants
may not have been seen positively by religiously affiliated groups
and organizations. The story is from the Friendly Atheists. I
(01:18):
haven't met that on July fifteenth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Oh what a tangle web we weave when we practice.
Speaker 3 (01:25):
Stuff and stuff?
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Yeah, I mean things, stuff and things, things and stuff.
This is insane. Oh MG. You know I have to
say this because, like you know, Recovering from Religion is
a foundation that partners with the ACA a lot, and
I know that we refer to them a lot, especially
on people on callin shows where people are calling in
(01:48):
looking for resources, especially in the process of their deconversion.
And you know, URFR has like great, wonderful different resources
that people can utilize in order to kind of help
them through the process, I mean a secular therapy project
also their call in line that they can do to
talk to people who are trained to work with folks
(02:12):
who are you know, going through their own deconversion. And
I know that one of the things that really hits
hard to meet specifically since I am you know, part
of the LGBTQI plus community as far as like an
allies concern and I work with them like in a
professional manner as a social worker. You know, I know that,
(02:32):
you know, just being privy to people who have you know,
come out to family and friends and all of a sudden,
you know, have been told just because they happen to
identify as lesbian, as gay, as trands, non binary and
the like, that you know, they have lost homes, they
(02:52):
have lost sheltered, they have lost you know, community, and
a lot of times, like you know, coming to a
space that is you know, secular was more inviting than
the ones who happened to be religious. Now I understand
that there are religious organizations and churches and things of
that nature who do embrace lgbt QY post community.
Speaker 4 (03:13):
And I'm grateful for them.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
But if we're going to be honest, that is not
in the majority, right, So it's kind of like sad that,
you know, a organization that has been around for a
long time, that has like multiple partners and also resources
to help people, you know, basically not only come out
of religion, but even like come out of the you know,
(03:35):
triggers that actually are against their own personal nature be
in this particular space with the point where they're disinvited
to a Pride event is actually appalling. And I do
apologize that I had to take some moments to say that,
but that was on my mind. Guys, I'm so sorry,
but no, I'm not sorry, but I just had to
(03:57):
get that out. Thank you for allowing me. But you know,
Fibergast that you introduce this segment, so I am curious
to get some of your thoughts on the story.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
When you first, could you please.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Elaborate, So, I mean, yeah, basically, it's a situation where
a Pride event has looked at an organization and has
decided at first to include them and then to take
that inclusion away. And generally, in that kind of situation,
you would expect some sort of explanation and the biggest
problem here is that there hasn't been one. There's lots
of very good reasons to exclude someone, even if they're
(04:36):
a good organization, but the way that it was done
is suspect, especially that in a lot of the communication
that has been made public that the language around why
they're not included is out of concern of religiously affiliated
people not being happy about it, and that's a problem.
And then they also talk about things like, oh, well,
(04:57):
you're not part of the community. Well, who gets it,
aside is part sufficiently part of the community. I'm a
member of the queer community, and like, do you get
to say that I'm not because I don't fit into
your bubble? And but bud Light does apparently because one
of their sponsors was bud Light. Bud Light is a
more queer affirming organization as far as they're concerned than
recovering from religion. So like, it doesn't make any sense.
(05:18):
It's like they're post talk justifying it to make a
particular group or people or organization happy, And that's problematic
because no one is no group is more harmed by
really well, there's lots of groups hard by religion, but
religiosity harms the LGBTQ community far more than almost anyone
else does. There is so much harm caused to the
(05:40):
queer community as a result of religiosity. And if you
have an organization that focuses on helping people with the
trauma that explicitly comes from religion at a pride of it,
you're like, nah, we don't need you here. Like, are
you actually serving the best interest of that community? I
would say you're probably not.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
I totally agree.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
I mean, like we have seen, like you know, I've
I've participated in a few pride events, especially with another
oral nonprofit organization that I used to work for, and
I've seen, like you know, the religious sell its gather
to say that hey, you attendees who are LGBTQI plus
(06:21):
affirming or even.
Speaker 4 (06:22):
Part of that community are all going to hell.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
You know, I don't feel like I say, it's like
people like yelling and screaming at you and all this
other stuff. And they said, well, the Bible says, and
I said, yeah, the Bible also says to dash baby's
heads against stones.
Speaker 4 (06:35):
How do you feel about that? Right?
Speaker 1 (06:37):
So, like, let's not even go there about what the
Bible says. But you know, but at the same time,
it doesn't give anybody creatives to be hateful. So like,
when you actually have like this like organization that is
like geared to really help people like like navigate through
these particular things, it's just like absolutely crazy that a
Pride event wouldn't even allow them to be there for
(07:00):
reasons that make no sense. I don't know you, I
helped me out. What were your thoughts.
Speaker 4 (07:04):
When you actually write this particular article.
Speaker 5 (07:08):
Firstly, it was surprising to me that they don't know
who RfR is because I'm not specifically familiar with any
examples of their work, but I know generally what they're about,
and I, like the author of the article, would think,
would assume that that's exactly who you would want at
(07:30):
such an event, because like how many people and I'm
asking genuinely because I don't know, but like how many
people are attending their first Pride event every year, like
after first coming out or after first leaving religion or
being kicked out of their home and having their entire
like religion and their community and their support never gripped
away from them, and they are like literally in a
(07:51):
progressing sense or in an ongoing sense, I mean to say.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Recovering from religion.
Speaker 5 (07:57):
And I would think that that's ex exactly who you
would want these types of events. That being said, Pride
events aren't for me. Like I've been to one and
it was a pretty gucci time, but like I was
there to like support like my friends and my partner
at the time, So like, I don't form an opinion
about who should and shouldn't be there.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
I didn't form one and and I won't.
Speaker 5 (08:19):
But I think about it, like if I was organizing
an event for like secular veterans, which is like a
label that I would claim, I would want RfR there
because I think that they do good work for people
that are secular that belonged to any other demographic. So
that's sort of where I landed it. They Perhaps it
seemed to the like organizers that RfR was coming off
(08:42):
as a sort of like do you have any idea
who we are? Sort of attitude, and that's that's unbecoming
of anybody.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
It's not a good look. But at the same time,
like do they have any idea who RfR is? Like
that was that's how I felt like.
Speaker 1 (08:57):
Reading, Yeah, I don't know, I don't I don't know
if they do. To be honest with you, like I
think this like a. I don't know, like a cursory
research would have just been like oh wow, these these
this organization is like really about, you know, affirming people
who happen to be part of the queer community, because.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
I know that they are. I mean like I had, like.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
A had gnawsy long conversations with doctor Darryl rhyd and
and also talk to Gail Jordan and Glenda her daughter,
and and you know, like and I mean like like
these they are super affirming when it comes to you know,
the LGBGQQ plus community, and they are They take a
lot of pride in that. So for like Saint John's
(09:39):
to say no, you're uninvited is like ridiculously But you know,
Fola Gas, I'm going to come back to you. I'm
going to ask a question and I want you to answer.
How can communities balance protecting vulnerable members from perceived harm
while uvoiding exclusion or gatekeeping then they hind your ally shit.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Yeah, I think it's just like any other relationship, any
good relationship. Anyways, It's about communication, right. You can't treat
situations like this as a tender profile where you just
like skim through when you're doing your investigation and skip
or pass right. The kicker here is that the initial
communication here really did seem to go well. Like they
accepted them, they were excited about it. There was even
(10:22):
conversations between the religious organizations that were part of the
Pride event and RfR. They were fine. So what could
RfR really have done better when they were seemingly ghosted
out of nowhere? So like it's when you're asking the question,
how do we balance these things? We balance them by
making sure we're communicating properly, to make sure we understand
where people are coming from. If there's you know, doubt,
(10:44):
when sometimes doubt can be valid. And that is actually
an issue with with rfrs. As those who are familiar
with RfR knows how affirming RfR is. But if you
don't know RfR, that might not be so easy to
find out. And that's fair, that's valid. So you have
the communication, you have conversation, you ask them, you look
into it. You don't just swipe left or right or
(11:06):
whatever one it is on tender. I don't know how
spen enough time on it.
Speaker 4 (11:08):
Apparently means left, I left right, aft.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Left or no whos left right?
Speaker 5 (11:17):
I agree though, I think because the organizer that did
the radio interview that I think we're going to talk
about a little bit, Like he mentioned, like the way
the way he's talking, it sounds like he's just doing
the best his best to protect like queer entrance people
in I think his local physical community is how I
interpreted what he was saying, whether or not from our community.
(11:39):
So I think it's just true that, like he wasn't
sure who they were, he would rather like the consequences
of being cautious and being wrong and like getting a
false positive, Like just like when our ancestors were watching
for predators in the bushes, the consequences of a false
positive are a lot more dire than the consequences of
a false negative. So I think that's just what it was. Like,
(12:01):
if you don't know who they are, just say that
that's fine. Ignorance is no problem. But when you make
decisions virtuous of that ignorance. Hi, the Vatican, I'm looking
at you, that's when we have the problem.
Speaker 6 (12:14):
You know, I see a lot of looking at the
Vatican slot.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
You know what was almost like it's justified or something.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
You know that far.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
Right there, you know, don't don't give me star talk
by folicism, I get triggered real quick, like cringe anyway,
But like I want to ask this question to both
of you, like ELI want to start with you and
then flabbergasts that I want to come to you.
Speaker 4 (12:40):
But what does transparency.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
Look like and dialogue clay when difficult decisions like this
are made in the community spaces, especially during events centered
around inclusion and support.
Speaker 5 (12:52):
Well, I think that undoubtedly there are people that live
in that area that we'll be attending that Pride event
that know who RfR is and because it was mentioned
that they're going to have their booth like off the
premises of the Pride event, but still nearby so that
people can get in touch with them if they happened
to be happened to come across them and want to
(13:12):
so they'll still be available. But I think there are
undoubtedly people who will be attending to know who they are,
and they are gonna want to know. They are gonna
want that transparency about like what actually happened here, Because
I agree with flabberg Acid that like it's it's super
strange if they just if they had initially like denied
their request to attend as a vendor because they didn't
(13:36):
know who they were fine that. I think that probably
would have been a lot less like turbulent if it
had just been an outright denial. But they approved it
and then came back later and was like, you know what, nevermind.
And I don't remember when it was mentioned, but it
was the.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
The idea of being off putting, I think to.
Speaker 5 (13:58):
Queer and trans led religious groups that might be attending.
They didn't want to be alienating to those groups, and
that was like, I think a primary justification given.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
So I think the transparency is going to be important.
What does it look like?
Speaker 5 (14:12):
I don't know because the two versions of the community
of the interaction that both RfR and Saint John's Pride
organizers are telling, these versions are already slightly different from
each other, so it's really difficult to tell at this
point what really actually was said or.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Have that's fair, What do you have? What are your
thoughts flabbergasted?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
I think whenever we're talking about transparency, full transparency always
is the best transparency, and a pride event is meant
to represent the community as a whole, and so you
should be able to justify to that community why anyone
is or is not included, especially especially in a situation
like this, right, you should be able to demonstrate and
explain thoroughly. And it's interesting because in the article they
(14:55):
say that, oh, well, all of our board meetings minutes
are available, we have full transparency. You can go to
our board meetings. You need to read them. Well I have.
I've read all of their board meeting notes going back
nine months, seven months, eight months roughly, and no, they
don't have full transparency. Not only do not have full transparency,
(15:17):
RfR is the only organization that they actually name specifically
as a vendor. They mention when before they approved them, like, oh, yeah,
RfR is an organization, do some investigation before approving them.
Then they get approved a month later, they just state
RfR had their stuff rescinded it. That's all they said.
No justification, no explanation, And they're going to point to
(15:39):
their board meeting minutes like they have full transparency. They don't.
And that's part of the problem, right, Like if it
was in there and there was a justification or an
explanation that you could point to and explain and be like, oh,
this is why this is a conversation we had, This
is what someone said specifically that made us concern. They
don't have any of that. So what kind of transparency
should you have? You should have full transparency because you
should be able to justify these decisions on behalf of
(15:59):
the people that you are supposed to be representing, which
is in this case, the entire Pride, the entire queer
community of your area, and you did not provide them that.
Speaker 6 (16:07):
Well, uh, chech and mate, may I say.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
I thought about or something?
Speaker 4 (16:15):
Yeah, like something like that.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Well, you know, guys, if you're interested, I do have
a final reflection about this whole shindik, if you will so.
Speaker 6 (16:26):
As a secular humanist, we champion open dialogue, inclusion, and
freedom of conscious It's troubling to see an organization like
Recovering from Religion an ally that supports the LGBTQ plus community,
excluded from Saint John's Pride event without a clear evidence
face rationale. As Flabbergasted aptly pointed out, rfr's mission is
(16:52):
not to evangelize atheism, but to offer support to those
recovering from religious trauma, something many individuals have painfully experienced.
Their presence at Pride could have been healing and affirming
for attendees navigating identity and belief instead of the decision
(17:12):
to exclude them. It suggests a discomfort with non religious voices,
even when those voices advocate for equity, dignity, and compassion.
Pride is meant to be celebrated of authenticity and shared struggle,
a space where all who genuinely support the LGBTQ plus
(17:34):
community can come together. That includes people of faith, and
it must include those without it to do otherwise replicating
the very exclusion that Pride exists to overcome. How can
we ensure that exclusion inclusion rather at Pride isn't limited
to certain beliefs, but instead extends to all those committed
(17:56):
to equality, healing and human dignity. And I just want
to also point out to you, dear viewer, that if
you are looking for resources coming out of religion and
also need a space where it's safe and then you
can talk to people, especially if you are experiencing exclusion
because of non belief or even exclusion because you're part
(18:17):
of the LGBTQIA plus community, please visit Recovering from Religion
dot org. They have resources, they have support groups, They
even have a phone line that you can call in
and talk to a volunteer, and they can even point
you out to other resources that can assist you with
navigating the process.
Wear them fans that y'all, I don't know, but the
boots on the ground decide to boots. A secular leaning
organization from a Pride event, Flabergastic has the story Flabbergasted.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Recovering from Religion, an organization that provides peer support and
resources for people who are questioning and deconstructing from their
religious beliefs, had their attendants at a Pride event and
Saint John's Canada rescinded. Recovering from Religion originally had their
attendants approved in early June. Than a month later and
less than two weeks prior to the event actually taking place,
they were informed that their attendance was rescinded, citing concerns
that Recovering from Religion was not in strong alignment with
(00:36):
the focus of their event. In response, Recovering from Religion
reach out multiple times to clear up what they saw
as a misunderstanding of their intent and mission. Saint John's
Pride responded to a singular message expressing concerns with what
they saw as combative language and refuse have any direct
communication with Recovering from Religion from that point on, and
still giving little to no meaningful explanation for why Recovering
from Religion was no longer welcome. Despite that, the co
(00:57):
chair of Saint John's Pride found time to have an
interview with a local radio station once the situation became public,
in which they stated that RfR was not part of
their community and did not have a connection with their community.
Language being used by Saint John's Pride had led people
to be concerned the RfR was disinvited because their attendants
may not have been seen positively by religiously affiliated groups
and organizations. The story is from the Friendly Atheists. I
(01:18):
haven't met that on July fifteenth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Oh what a tangle web we weave when we practice.
Speaker 3 (01:25):
Stuff and stuff?
Speaker 1 (01:26):
Yeah, I mean things, stuff and things, things and stuff.
This is insane. Oh MG. You know I have to
say this because, like you know, Recovering from Religion is
a foundation that partners with the ACA a lot, and
I know that we refer to them a lot, especially
on people on callin shows where people are calling in
(01:48):
looking for resources, especially in the process of their deconversion.
And you know, URFR has like great, wonderful different resources
that people can utilize in order to kind of help
them through the process, I mean a secular therapy project
also their call in line that they can do to
talk to people who are trained to work with folks
(02:12):
who are you know, going through their own deconversion. And
I know that one of the things that really hits
hard to meet specifically since I am you know, part
of the LGBTQI plus community as far as like an
allies concern and I work with them like in a
professional manner as a social worker. You know, I know that,
(02:32):
you know, just being privy to people who have you know,
come out to family and friends and all of a sudden,
you know, have been told just because they happen to
identify as lesbian, as gay, as trands, non binary and
the like, that you know, they have lost homes, they
(02:52):
have lost sheltered, they have lost you know, community, and
a lot of times, like you know, coming to a
space that is you know, secular was more inviting than
the ones who happened to be religious. Now I understand
that there are religious organizations and churches and things of
that nature who do embrace lgbt QY post community.
Speaker 4 (03:13):
And I'm grateful for them.
Speaker 1 (03:15):
But if we're going to be honest, that is not
in the majority, right, So it's kind of like sad that,
you know, a organization that has been around for a
long time, that has like multiple partners and also resources
to help people, you know, basically not only come out
of religion, but even like come out of the you know,
(03:35):
triggers that actually are against their own personal nature be
in this particular space with the point where they're disinvited
to a Pride event is actually appalling. And I do
apologize that I had to take some moments to say that,
but that was on my mind. Guys, I'm so sorry,
but no, I'm not sorry, but I just had to
(03:57):
get that out. Thank you for allowing me. But you know,
Fibergast that you introduce this segment, so I am curious
to get some of your thoughts on the story.
Speaker 4 (04:12):
When you first, could you please.
Speaker 2 (04:14):
Elaborate, So, I mean, yeah, basically, it's a situation where
a Pride event has looked at an organization and has
decided at first to include them and then to take
that inclusion away. And generally, in that kind of situation,
you would expect some sort of explanation and the biggest
problem here is that there hasn't been one. There's lots
of very good reasons to exclude someone, even if they're
(04:36):
a good organization, but the way that it was done
is suspect, especially that in a lot of the communication
that has been made public that the language around why
they're not included is out of concern of religiously affiliated
people not being happy about it, and that's a problem.
And then they also talk about things like, oh, well,
(04:57):
you're not part of the community. Well, who gets it,
aside is part sufficiently part of the community. I'm a
member of the queer community, and like, do you get
to say that I'm not because I don't fit into
your bubble? And but bud Light does apparently because one
of their sponsors was bud Light. Bud Light is a
more queer affirming organization as far as they're concerned than
recovering from religion. So like, it doesn't make any sense.
(05:18):
It's like they're post talk justifying it to make a
particular group or people or organization happy, And that's problematic
because no one is no group is more harmed by
really well, there's lots of groups hard by religion, but
religiosity harms the LGBTQ community far more than almost anyone
else does. There is so much harm caused to the
(05:40):
queer community as a result of religiosity. And if you
have an organization that focuses on helping people with the
trauma that explicitly comes from religion at a pride of it,
you're like, nah, we don't need you here. Like, are
you actually serving the best interest of that community? I
would say you're probably not.
Speaker 4 (05:56):
I totally agree.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
I mean, like we have seen, like you know, I've
I've participated in a few pride events, especially with another
oral nonprofit organization that I used to work for, and
I've seen, like you know, the religious sell its gather
to say that hey, you attendees who are LGBTQI plus
(06:21):
affirming or even.
Speaker 4 (06:22):
Part of that community are all going to hell.
Speaker 1 (06:25):
You know, I don't feel like I say, it's like
people like yelling and screaming at you and all this
other stuff. And they said, well, the Bible says, and
I said, yeah, the Bible also says to dash baby's
heads against stones.
Speaker 4 (06:35):
How do you feel about that? Right?
Speaker 1 (06:37):
So, like, let's not even go there about what the
Bible says. But you know, but at the same time,
it doesn't give anybody creatives to be hateful. So like,
when you actually have like this like organization that is
like geared to really help people like like navigate through
these particular things, it's just like absolutely crazy that a
Pride event wouldn't even allow them to be there for
(07:00):
reasons that make no sense. I don't know you, I
helped me out. What were your thoughts.
Speaker 4 (07:04):
When you actually write this particular article.
Speaker 5 (07:08):
Firstly, it was surprising to me that they don't know
who RfR is because I'm not specifically familiar with any
examples of their work, but I know generally what they're about,
and I, like the author of the article, would think,
would assume that that's exactly who you would want at
(07:30):
such an event, because like how many people and I'm
asking genuinely because I don't know, but like how many
people are attending their first Pride event every year, like
after first coming out or after first leaving religion or
being kicked out of their home and having their entire
like religion and their community and their support never gripped
away from them, and they are like literally in a
(07:51):
progressing sense or in an ongoing sense, I mean to say.
Speaker 3 (07:55):
Recovering from religion.
Speaker 5 (07:57):
And I would think that that's ex exactly who you
would want these types of events. That being said, Pride
events aren't for me. Like I've been to one and
it was a pretty gucci time, but like I was
there to like support like my friends and my partner
at the time, So like, I don't form an opinion
about who should and shouldn't be there.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
I didn't form one and and I won't.
Speaker 5 (08:19):
But I think about it, like if I was organizing
an event for like secular veterans, which is like a
label that I would claim, I would want RfR there
because I think that they do good work for people
that are secular that belonged to any other demographic. So
that's sort of where I landed it. They Perhaps it
seemed to the like organizers that RfR was coming off
(08:42):
as a sort of like do you have any idea
who we are? Sort of attitude, and that's that's unbecoming
of anybody.
Speaker 3 (08:48):
It's not a good look. But at the same time,
like do they have any idea who RfR is? Like
that was that's how I felt like.
Speaker 1 (08:57):
Reading, Yeah, I don't know, I don't I don't know
if they do. To be honest with you, like I
think this like a. I don't know, like a cursory
research would have just been like oh wow, these these
this organization is like really about, you know, affirming people
who happen to be part of the queer community, because.
Speaker 4 (09:15):
I know that they are. I mean like I had, like.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
A had gnawsy long conversations with doctor Darryl rhyd and
and also talk to Gail Jordan and Glenda her daughter,
and and you know, like and I mean like like
these they are super affirming when it comes to you know,
the LGBGQQ plus community, and they are They take a
lot of pride in that. So for like Saint John's
(09:39):
to say no, you're uninvited is like ridiculously But you know,
Fola Gas, I'm going to come back to you. I'm
going to ask a question and I want you to answer.
How can communities balance protecting vulnerable members from perceived harm
while uvoiding exclusion or gatekeeping then they hind your ally shit.
Speaker 2 (10:01):
Yeah, I think it's just like any other relationship, any
good relationship. Anyways, It's about communication, right. You can't treat
situations like this as a tender profile where you just
like skim through when you're doing your investigation and skip
or pass right. The kicker here is that the initial
communication here really did seem to go well. Like they
accepted them, they were excited about it. There was even
(10:22):
conversations between the religious organizations that were part of the
Pride event and RfR. They were fine. So what could
RfR really have done better when they were seemingly ghosted
out of nowhere? So like it's when you're asking the question,
how do we balance these things? We balance them by
making sure we're communicating properly, to make sure we understand
where people are coming from. If there's you know, doubt,
(10:44):
when sometimes doubt can be valid. And that is actually
an issue with with rfrs. As those who are familiar
with RfR knows how affirming RfR is. But if you
don't know RfR, that might not be so easy to
find out. And that's fair, that's valid. So you have
the communication, you have conversation, you ask them, you look
into it. You don't just swipe left or right or
(11:06):
whatever one it is on tender. I don't know how
spen enough time on it.
Speaker 4 (11:08):
Apparently means left, I left right, aft.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
Left or no whos left right?
Speaker 5 (11:17):
I agree though, I think because the organizer that did
the radio interview that I think we're going to talk
about a little bit, Like he mentioned, like the way
the way he's talking, it sounds like he's just doing
the best his best to protect like queer entrance people
in I think his local physical community is how I
interpreted what he was saying, whether or not from our community.
(11:39):
So I think it's just true that, like he wasn't
sure who they were, he would rather like the consequences
of being cautious and being wrong and like getting a
false positive, Like just like when our ancestors were watching
for predators in the bushes, the consequences of a false
positive are a lot more dire than the consequences of
a false negative. So I think that's just what it was. Like,
(12:01):
if you don't know who they are, just say that
that's fine. Ignorance is no problem. But when you make
decisions virtuous of that ignorance. Hi, the Vatican, I'm looking
at you, that's when we have the problem.
Speaker 6 (12:14):
You know, I see a lot of looking at the
Vatican slot.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
You know what was almost like it's justified or something.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
You know that far.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
Right there, you know, don't don't give me star talk
by folicism, I get triggered real quick, like cringe anyway,
But like I want to ask this question to both
of you, like ELI want to start with you and
then flabbergasts that I want to come to you.
Speaker 4 (12:40):
But what does transparency.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
Look like and dialogue clay when difficult decisions like this
are made in the community spaces, especially during events centered
around inclusion and support.
Speaker 5 (12:52):
Well, I think that undoubtedly there are people that live
in that area that we'll be attending that Pride event
that know who RfR is and because it was mentioned
that they're going to have their booth like off the
premises of the Pride event, but still nearby so that
people can get in touch with them if they happened
to be happened to come across them and want to
(13:12):
so they'll still be available. But I think there are
undoubtedly people who will be attending to know who they are,
and they are gonna want to know. They are gonna
want that transparency about like what actually happened here, Because
I agree with flabberg Acid that like it's it's super
strange if they just if they had initially like denied
their request to attend as a vendor because they didn't
(13:36):
know who they were fine that. I think that probably
would have been a lot less like turbulent if it
had just been an outright denial. But they approved it
and then came back later and was like, you know what, nevermind.
And I don't remember when it was mentioned, but it
was the.
Speaker 3 (13:53):
The idea of being off putting, I think to.
Speaker 5 (13:58):
Queer and trans led religious groups that might be attending.
They didn't want to be alienating to those groups, and
that was like, I think a primary justification given.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
So I think the transparency is going to be important.
What does it look like?
Speaker 5 (14:12):
I don't know because the two versions of the community
of the interaction that both RfR and Saint John's Pride
organizers are telling, these versions are already slightly different from
each other, so it's really difficult to tell at this
point what really actually was said or.
Speaker 4 (14:28):
Have that's fair, What do you have? What are your
thoughts flabbergasted?
Speaker 2 (14:31):
I think whenever we're talking about transparency, full transparency always
is the best transparency, and a pride event is meant
to represent the community as a whole, and so you
should be able to justify to that community why anyone
is or is not included, especially especially in a situation
like this, right, you should be able to demonstrate and
explain thoroughly. And it's interesting because in the article they
(14:55):
say that, oh, well, all of our board meetings minutes
are available, we have full transparency. You can go to
our board meetings. You need to read them. Well I have.
I've read all of their board meeting notes going back
nine months, seven months, eight months roughly, and no, they
don't have full transparency. Not only do not have full transparency,
(15:17):
RfR is the only organization that they actually name specifically
as a vendor. They mention when before they approved them, like, oh, yeah,
RfR is an organization, do some investigation before approving them.
Then they get approved a month later, they just state
RfR had their stuff rescinded it. That's all they said.
No justification, no explanation, And they're going to point to
(15:39):
their board meeting minutes like they have full transparency. They don't.
And that's part of the problem, right, Like if it
was in there and there was a justification or an
explanation that you could point to and explain and be like, oh,
this is why this is a conversation we had, This
is what someone said specifically that made us concern. They
don't have any of that. So what kind of transparency
should you have? You should have full transparency because you
should be able to justify these decisions on behalf of
(15:59):
the people that you are supposed to be representing, which
is in this case, the entire Pride, the entire queer
community of your area, and you did not provide them that.
Speaker 6 (16:07):
Well, uh, chech and mate, may I say.
Speaker 2 (16:14):
I thought about or something?
Speaker 4 (16:15):
Yeah, like something like that.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Well, you know, guys, if you're interested, I do have
a final reflection about this whole shindik, if you will so.
Speaker 6 (16:26):
As a secular humanist, we champion open dialogue, inclusion, and
freedom of conscious It's troubling to see an organization like
Recovering from Religion an ally that supports the LGBTQ plus community,
excluded from Saint John's Pride event without a clear evidence
face rationale. As Flabbergasted aptly pointed out, rfr's mission is
(16:52):
not to evangelize atheism, but to offer support to those
recovering from religious trauma, something many individuals have painfully experienced.
Their presence at Pride could have been healing and affirming
for attendees navigating identity and belief instead of the decision
(17:12):
to exclude them. It suggests a discomfort with non religious voices,
even when those voices advocate for equity, dignity, and compassion.
Pride is meant to be celebrated of authenticity and shared struggle,
a space where all who genuinely support the LGBTQ plus
(17:34):
community can come together. That includes people of faith, and
it must include those without it to do otherwise replicating
the very exclusion that Pride exists to overcome. How can
we ensure that exclusion inclusion rather at Pride isn't limited
to certain beliefs, but instead extends to all those committed
(17:56):
to equality, healing and human dignity. And I just want
to also point out to you, dear viewer, that if
you are looking for resources coming out of religion and
also need a space where it's safe and then you
can talk to people, especially if you are experiencing exclusion
because of non belief or even exclusion because you're part
(18:17):
of the LGBTQIA plus community, please visit Recovering from Religion
dot org. They have resources, they have support groups, They
even have a phone line that you can call in
and talk to a volunteer, and they can even point
you out to other resources that can assist you with
navigating the process.
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!