A trio of prominent atheists have resigned from the Freedom From Religion Foundation's board of honorary directors following the non-profit's decision to double down on censorship and "extreme gender activism."
Just hours apart, evolutionary biologists Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne, and psychologist Steven Pinker announced they no longer wished to be associated with FFRF, though they each made it clear they still supported the group's core mission of maintaining separation of church and state.
Coyne was the first to go, tendering his resignation early on Saturday morning following a dispute over an article he wrote for FFRF's Freethought Now! website on December 26. In the piece, titled "Biology is not bigotry," Coyne defended "the biological definition of 'woman' based on gamete type." It was penned as a response to a piece by Kat Grant that essentially argued that a woman is anyone who says they are.
Following backlash, FFRF pulled the article and released a lengthy statement reaffirming its commitment to supporting the LGBTQIA+ community.
"Despite our best efforts to champion reason and equality, mistakes can happen, and this incident is a reminder of the importance of constant reflection and growth," Co-Presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor wrote. "Publishing this post was an error of judgement, and we have decided to remove it as it does not reflect our values and principles. We regret any distress caused by this post and are committed to ensuring it doesn't happen again."
In a post on his own blog, Why Evolution is True, Coyne shared the email he had sent Barker and Gaylor declaring his resignation and explaining why he made that decision.
"That is a censorious behavior I cannot abide," he wrote, reminding them that they had originally allowed him to post the article. "I was simply promoting a biological rather than a psychological definition of sex, and I do not understand why you would consider that 'distressing' and also an attempt to hurt LGBTQIA+ people, which I would never do."
He went on to argue that "the gender ideology which caused you to take down my article is itself quasi-religious, having many aspects of religions and cults, including dogma, blasphemy, belief in what is palpably untrue ('a woman is whoever she says she is'), apostasy, and a tendency to ignore science when it contradicts a preferred ideology."
"This was in fact the third time that I and others have tried to warn the FFRF about the dangers of expanding its mission into political territory," Coyne added. "But it is now clear that this is exactly what you intend to do. Our efforts have been fruitless, and if there are bad consequences I don’t want to be connected with them."
Pinker was the next to go, lamenting the fact that FFRF was "no longer a defender of freedom from religion but the imposer of a new religion, complete with dogma, blasphemy, and heretics."
"There are not the values of not the organization I have supported for twenty years," he added, "and I can no longer be associated with it."
Dawkins echoed their sentiments a short time later.
"Publishing the silly and unscientific 'What is a Woman' article by Kat Grant was a minor error of judgment, redeemed by the decision to publish a rebuttal by a distinguished scientist from the relevant field of Biology, Jerry Coyne," he wrote in an email to the co-presidents. "But alas, the sequel was an act of unseemly panic when you caved in to hysterical squeals from predictable quarters and retrospectively censored that excellent rebuttal. Moreover, to summarily take it down without even informing the author of your intention was an act of lamentable discourtesy to a member of your own Advisory Board. A Board which I now leave with regret."
