So you want to be a leader in the atheist movement? It could cost you.

Remember that time when you called Dawkins a prick (maybe even to his face)? Called Harris a tone-deaf Islamic bigot? Or perhaps you said a little something about Hitchens being a misogynistic self-absorbed pompous, war-mongering ass, who was too hard on his liver? OK, maybe that last one was just me. Now imagine someone suing you over it.

Bria Crutchfield is being sued for 50k.

A little background for those that don’t know:

The black atheist and secular community is small (but growing). Five years ago, it was much smaller. I joke about going to my first African American for Humanism meeting in DC in 2010, expecting to meet two more black atheists, only to be surprised to meet people like Norm Allen, Dr. Sikivu Hutchinson, Jamila Bey, Debbie Goddard, amongst other notables. Honestly, those were many of the names that got me up and active, later joining emerging names in freethought like Mandisa Lateefah Thomas, Donald Wright, and Kimberly Veal. Just about that time, there was a growing swell of visibility. Mandi and Kim were both leaders of BN (Black Nonbeliever) named groups, with one in Atlanta, and the other in Chicago. I got a chance to meet both of these incredible people in New York, when we worked together on the African American for Humanism campaign in 2012 (link below). It was a time of “positive energy”. The aforementioned campaign shed much needed light on the topic of secularism for people of color. We were growing and we got attention!

Enter “Bree” to the Movement…

I watched with glee, as a joyous mini-explosion of diversity happened in front me. Groups of black nonbelievers, meeting everywhere. It was 2012, when a wonderfully charismatic caring and compassionate Bridgette Bria Crutchfield introduced herself to me. I was speaking at an event where I was definitely a minority (nervous and alone). If you’ve ever met Mandisa, you know how she makes atheism approachable for other people of color, well Bree makes it feel like home. That’s needed in a secular movement that is often caustic to those with higher concentrations of melanin. Counseling consoling, giving advice, money, time, direction, etc. She puts herself out there. If you’re lost, she’s one of those beacons for new black atheist to find their way, often to other groups.

Now, according to those close to the situation, there was disagreement between interested parties, (it got ugly), resulting in Ms.Veal’s departure from BN. Bree subsequently became a leader and organizer within BN, launching her Detroit affiliation. The effective tension left several of the more prominent black groups across the secular spectrum divided. Some of it was ideology, but with such a small movement, loyalties, friendship, and fealties got in the way. Most of us realized that we should be working together, however the wall of separation was too big. We echoed much of what you saw in the larger secular movement where personalities became the focus, and the pertinent topics only served as sabers for veiled personal attacks. Unfortunately, the most widely used blade was the one topic we all believed in, “Social Justice”. Groups like BN, and their organizers, were attacked for not being vocal enough against injustice. “Where were you on Trayvon? Garner? Rice? (etc) Why no outcry and denunciation?!”… (though I’m paraphrasing a little). “Do you believe in social justice!?” (Of course). “Do you consider yourself a humanist!?” (Of course). “Then why isn’t it your number one priority!” It’s not that its not, but we differed on the ways of succeeding or fighting for it. We approach the problem differently.

That escalated quickly!

Some of the battle played out online publicly. The first major salvo erupted when one side called into a radio show back in December of 2014, to interrogate the other on how they planned to address social justice issues. Another online show, airing earlier this year, was dedicated to addressing the aforementioned show as a rebuttal and retort for other alleged statements. It was brutal. That show (which has since been removed) served to dress down the other side with slut shaming, allegations of impropriety, and a whole slew of personal attacks. It was difficult to listen to. Mandisa Thomas, who was one of the subjects of the show, stated this about it:

“I remember a few years ago when the ‘Black Atheists of Atlanta’ tried to publicly slander me through their short lived TV series. So I am no stranger to conflict within this movement. Friendships were formed; some were successes, and some were failures. It happens. The one thing I try to leave room for is the opportunity to rebuild if possible. But that isn’t always possible. This is a reality that I’ve come to accept”

Many believe that this online exchange is what has lead to the legal grievance. It was overwhelming watching this unfold, since most of the people involved (all sides) served to help many new black atheists. Like that old Hip Hop song by Gang Starr, it would’ve been hard for anyone to not “Take it Personal”.

On March 13, 2015, Attorney Joel Handler filed a case on behalf of Kimberly Veal against Bria Bridgette Crutchfield claiming Libel/Slander. Bria was subsequently served April 9, 2015. The amount sought, in excess of $50,001.

We have one freethought organizer suing another, for fifty large, seeking damages. This is big people money. I expect there will be more sides retrenched and redrawn along the way, but I don’t know where this lands.

Implications for others?

Let us go beyond the specifics of the case for a minute and talk about the possible ramifications. As I said, this is new territory for the movement. We have long enjoyed creative, destructive, and sometimes non-productive discourse in the secular community. We value free-thought and free-speech, pretty heavily, even to the point of supporting the rights of people we aren’t always proud of supporting. We are not always the best examples. We bicker, we argue, we grow, we put down, we restrict, we attack, but (there was a but in there somewhere) – we usually find ways to work with, or around, those people without landing in court. For most of us, it’s all unpaid volunteer work anyway, resulting in out of pocket expenses. Many of the small non-profit groups are really “not-even-close-to-PROFIT” groups, barely balancing their books. Most secular groups aren’t insured to handle suits of this magnitude, let alone individuals. And if they are, it’s usually from a religious threat.

Most recently, Stephanie Guttormson was named in a suit brought by Adam Miller, a Faith Healer, who she debunks pretty quickly in one of her youtube videos. Her legal fees are expected to be in the thousands. Bree’s, will too. Now, I’m not debating the validity of Ms. Veal’s suit, that’s not for me to determine, there’s a judge for that. I’m just wondering the effect of its precedence. My question is the implications on influencing actions. Unlike Stephanie’s case, this suit is from within the movement, which makes it newsworthy. Some people may argue that there Atheism or Secularism isn’t in itself movement, however those that organize, lead, gather, etc., would probably disagree. There are missions and goals (varying by group), that are trying to move people in a direction. Could this change how they work together?

Are we going to tiptoe around each other in fear of suit? Perhaps we’ll think twice before engaging with another group in partnerships. Maybe we’ll learn to couch our tongues better with more deliberate words (which wouldn’t be a bad thing), but that’s almost antithetical to the foundation of the movement. Tone policing is nice, until you’re on the other end. I personally still hold onto the hope, that things will somehow get settled before they get uglier and more expensive. If I’m pulling anything out of this situation, its two major reminders:

Paid or not, treat this movement, and the groups you work with, like it was any other workplace. Even if it means carrying insurance. Relationships, make this movement go round. Care for them.

In some ways, this has moved many leaders who haven’t spoken in years, to reconnect. And that’s a good thing. We need more bridges. Of course since this litigation is pending, comments have to be minimized.

Ms. Crutchfield’s comment on the matter:

“Thank you for the outpouring of love and understanding my privacy is of utmost importance, even more so.”

I can respect that. I expect similar from Ms.Veal.

I know Bree isn’t letting this distract her from the work ahead, she remains undettered and undistracted. I know this may be a private matter for one or both of them, but this may play out publicly.

Where you can help!

Kinda hard to take sides or not take sides in a situation like this, so I’ve tried to be as objective as I can. Regardless, one of our friends needs our help. Initial legal fees are expected to be about 10K.

If you know Bree, give.

If you don’t know Bree, give.

If you know someone she’s helped, give.

If you don’t know someone she’s helped, you need to get out more.

Like, really.

Here’s the gofundme link.

http://www.gofundme.com/u23bjb3

More information on the case:

https://w3.courtlink.lexisnexis.com/cookcounty/Finddock.asp?DocketKey=CABF0L0AACGDH0LD

Referenced Campaign:

http://www.aahumanism.net/info/about_aah

Disclaimer – Don’t sue me.