Two starkly different religious perspectives will congregate in DC this weekend, as the Rally for Religious Freedom and the Reason Rally will set up shop on Friday and Saturday afternoon, respectively. The gatherings look to advocate both awareness and tolerance for each viewpoint: for freedom to practice faith freely and for the liberty to reject the existence of a God. Though both rallies are intended to be peaceful demonstrations, the implications of their apposition might do more harm than good.

As atheists and conservative religious gather in convenient proximity, the drastic dichotomy between their motivations could betray the original intent of the “separation of church and state,” to prevent religious suppression, embolden the abilities of religious institutions and encourage free religious practice.

The Rally for Religious Freedom is about more than simply spiritual liberty. The rally’s website states that:

Thousands of Americans of all faiths will be participating in these peaceful rallies…to oppose the new mandate from the US Department of Health and Human Services that requires all employers provide free contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs through their health plans, even in violation of their consciences.

The will take place throughout the country, with demonstrations operating in locales as local as Walla Walla, Washington and as urban as downtown DC. Though clearly these protestors are using their rights to free expression and practice, imposing a religious agenda on public affairs can often cause a fair amount of discontent.

The Reason Rally, however, is not a demonstration regarding a specific issue or advocating a certain religious or political agenda. Its general aim is instead “to unify, energize, and embolden secular people nationwide, while dispelling the negative opinions held by so much of American society.” The rally, unlike the Rally for Religious Freedom, is focused more on the positive. Its intent is to improve the image of atheist beliefs and eliminate a stigma by promoting feel-good activities that do not belittle the faith of others, but instead reveal their own personal convictions in an orderly, diplomatic manner.

However, the leaders of the rally have invited, among several other speakers, Nate Phelps, who will discuss the dangers of religious zeal. Phelps’ father, Fred, founded the Westboro Baptist Church, and its current members have planned to protest the movement with their caustic dialogue on America’s sinfulness. Because of this, the rally organizers should proceed with caution. The decision to include Nate Phelps was bound to draw negative attention from his former organization, and the goodness of the rally’s intentions could be marred by a conflict with the protesters. More likely, any media attention will be diverted from the well-intentioned gathering.

So it seems one passionate organization is trying to accomplish something positive, and might be harassed by another that survives on negativity. Therefore, it is important for organizations like these to stay positive. Though both groups should certainly have the right to express their beliefs, a descent into negativity will simply categorize them as another “anti” organization that simply speaks against things with which it disagrees. Instead, both rallies should aim to provide solutions for future action. Demonstrating when you’re not happy with policy won’t change anything — but positive efforts towards real solutions will.

Protestors who arrive without positive alternatives might as well scream in the wind; to cause meaningful change, they must approach their objective with open minds and reasonable suggestions. This is not to say that we should ignore the rights to free speech and expression. Faith, whether it lies in a God, in reason, or in society, is an expression of positive thought. Protests and public displays betray that positivity, and instead run the risk of surrendering an organization to the realm of negativity, conflict, and spite.

Photo by Felicia Afuan