Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
May 30, 2025, 06:38:10 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Non-profit startup  (Read 3781 times)
jehu
Administrator
Regular (15-99 Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 94



« on: February 27, 2008, 12:54:25 pm »

Lately I've been thinking more and more about forming a non-profit advocacy group for religious disaffiliates. There's a need that groups like CAN used to fill, like monitoring, but also the "market" has shifted: it seems that walkaways are the main group lacking a unified source of services. You can get news from Rick Ross, you can get counseling at Wellspring, you can use the internet and form coalitions like Anonymous for protest, and if you're lucky, someone might be able to recommend other services, depending on who you talk to and what the service is.

It seems like a multi-faceted approach is best. Disaffiliates have a wide variety of transitional goals. Some want to just get "plugged in" to a new place of worship, some want to protest or otherwise draw attention to institutional flaws to promote change, some want to engage in a dialogue or counseling that will help them draw upon lessons learned and appreciate the positives of their experience, and others have intense feelings and needs which they wish to confront or change before firming up longer term goals. A flexible umbrella organization would be necessarily diverse to fill needs for religious disaffiliates as a whole, and require some peer oversight to ensure the organization truly represents the disaffiliate community proportionally and with a sense of unity.

One does not want to go the way of CAN by allowing legal liabilities, and yet a strong mainstream organizational voice for advocacy seems to be lacking. By emphasizing speech and other personal rights instead of force, advocates should be able to avoid the pitfalls of the past.

I guess the question is, how would one best achieve these goals?
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1