Ideally the UAAA would pose questions at SU forums about this referendum along the lines of questioning the necessity for the space, who’s pushing for the space, who will control bookings for the space (the Chaplaincy may not be as favourable to atheists/humanists booking it versus religious groups), and so forth. Those questions in the forum, and in print, will lead to a greater dialogue over the legitimacy of the Chaplaincy (which I think should exist, but with a Humanist chaplain), prayer space on campus, etc. Dialogue is almost always good (at very least for getting the UAAA press and therefore members). Then, further action would depend on what the answers are to the questions and whether the referendum passes.

I’m an atheist, but I’m with Ryan on this; it’s a bit spiteful to oppose the project solely on the basis that it has a prayer space, isn’t it? I certainly wouldn’t have opposed SUB just because it has chaplains’ offices.

I’m going to be perfectly honest. I am offended by the anti-religious sentiment of many atheists that goes beyond the undesirable aspects of some faiths. There is a desire to suppress and compartmentalize religious faith into a purely private activity just like everything else in our highly managed technological society. There are plenty of good religious people that are being alienated by this attitude prevalent in an overzealous secular left. There is no room, apparently, in the camp of those who make claims of diversity and “thinking for yourself” for an actual diversity of thought and opinion.