Archive for April, 2011

« Older Entries

Get Out Of Life Free?

Posted in Religion with tags , , , , , , , on April 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(Editorial Comment from  host RJ Evans on his American Heathen® radio show – Air Date 04/29/11)

“Pray for me.” These words fill me with horror.  For they are the last written words of a southwestern Minnesota girl by the name of Paige Moravetz, age 14.  What was supposed to be, by all appearances, a sleepover with her girlfriend Haylee Fentress, turned out to be a secret suicide pact between two best friends, a date with finality.  Bullied by students at the middle school they attended, two beautiful little girls fought to hold onto their dignity.  But, in the end, they felt they could no longer bear the weight of life’s cruelty. Instead of reaching out for help, the two girls decided life wasn’t worth living.  Their decision, and the haunting last three words Paige Moravetz wrote in her suicide note, have possessed me for this past week.  I know the desperation of false hope.

When I was a teenager, the same age as Paige and Haylee, I too decided that life wasn’t worth living.  But, in my case,  the pain had nothing to do with being bullied. Nevertheless, my pain and their pain, and the pain of millions of other teens, was/is very real. Suicidal thoughts, actions… they somehow become the ultimate panacea. Regardless of circumstances, our immature minds at that age cannot comprehend the finality of death, the absoluteness of the end of life. Fantasies of death… of looking down from some supernatural perch to see throngs of people, who did us wrong, being forced to live with the guilt of  our passing and their transgressions against us… This is somehow very comforting to our young minds.  Add to this euphoria, an all-powerful being who embraces the downtrodden in a heavenly abyss, void of pain and suffering, and the enticement to surrender to life’s challenges becomes palatable, and for some, easy.  This begs the question: Is religious belief sentencing children to death?

When I was 14 years old, thoughts of suicide were never far from my mind.  In fact, it was more than that.  I continually dreamed of escaping the pain of my childhood dysfunction by taking myself out.  I was a believer back then.  The idea that jesus, that a god, had a wonderful place for me… I would imagine the look on my parents face as they looked down at my empty shell lying peacefully in a coffin.  I wanted to look down and see them crying, to see them feeling guilt and shame.  I wanted them to suffer as I suffered.  I wanted all the kids who had picked on me, ignored me, shunned me… I wanted all of them to feel my pain, my suffering.  I would imagine the scene at my funeral, and all the folks who really loved me blaming all those who discarded me.  All the while, I would also imagine being comforted by my jealous, vengeful,  and all-powerful god.  This powerful and compelling  notion, a dream of being held tightly in the arms of an all-powerful being,  of the living forced to endure my pain in their lives… It made it very easy.  Yes, it made it very easy.  My first fist full of over the counter sleeping pills almost did the trick.  And, then a second, and then a third, and then a fourth…  Or, how about the time I slammed 100 extra strength Tylenol with a can of Hawaiian Punch,  a quick get out of life free card on the way to an everlasting life with the only one who loved me.  Yes.  Jesus was the answer to my pain.  Death wasn’t death at all.  It was simply a way to escape the ravages of my life. Jesus would comfort me.  Heaven awaited me.

The Bible says nothing against the act of suicide.  You won’t find a single scripture that forbids it.  Yeah, you’ll find one that suggests it isn’t a good idea.  But, it is just a suggestion after all.  In fact, the Bible touts death as good.  Yeah, it’s bad if you die at the hands of god.  But, when the just die, well… it was simply their time, god works in mysterious ways,  and heaven awaits those who are just.  Children are just, aren’t they?  Indeed, their innocence precludes them from being damned.  Unless, of course, they smite their parents. However, Jesus loves the little children and heaven is a wonderful place.  What about life?  Well, it’s ok, but there are so many wicked people in the world.  In fact, we’re all born wicked, sinful, broken.  Confusing isn’t it?  When one considers how confusing it is for adults, and the myriad of interpretations of the bible bantering about… Imagine how confusing it is for a child.

What did Paige believe?  What did Haylee believe?  Did they believe in life after death?  Were they taught about jesus and god, heaven and hell?  Did they embrace the indoctrination and use it to justify their escape, as I did?  Did they envision themselves looking down from some heavenly perch watching throngs of people who did them wrong hanging their heads in guilt and remorse for being so cruel and uncaring?

Paige wrote on her Facebook page, “I’m so nervous and I just want to get it over with. I love you, Paige.”
What was she nervous about?  I know what Paige was nervous about.  I was anxious to get it over with as well. Although  I didn’t know what to expect, I knew what I had been taught about Jesus, and that was all.  The questions that went through my mind back then were numerous. Would it hurt to die? Would god greet me when I was dead?  Would he be mad or would he hug me?  What would heaven really be like?  Or, would I go to hell?  Does Jesus love me?  What will my folks think and do?  And, on and on and on and on… The questions were endless.  Nervous? Yes.  And, it’s to be expected.  But, not for the questions as much as the built-in natural process of survival.  Self-preservation.  But, can self-preservation be trumped by religious conviction?  Unfortunately, it’s too late to ask Paige or Haylee.

Children are impressionable.  They are easily manipulated.  If they are taught that there is life after death, they will believe it and hold onto it.  It is this idea… life after death, and the idea that a god exists who will embrace them, love them, and shelter them from harm… these are reasons for a child to run away from life when life seems unbearable.  Given the right circumstances children, and adults, will use their religious belief as a utopian safety net, sparing them the pain and cruelty of life. Their threshold for reality is lowered.  Whether it’s to fulfill a passion for martyrdom, or escape life while punishing those left behind, death by suicide is an allure that cannot be minimized. Religion feeds irrational thoughts, and reality loses its importance. But, in reality, heaven and hell are not options.  They are toxic ingredients of the poisonous brew that is religion.

How did I survive attempts to end my life?  It wasn’t jesus or god, or any supernatural entity that kept me alive.  It was medical science, skilled human beings, self-preservation, and a lot of luck.  Fortunately for me, I managed to survive long enough to mature and see through the heavenly charade.  But, I can’t stop thinking about two little girls who, if they only understood the gravity, the finality, the reality of death, the fiction of religion… If they had only taken one moment to reach out, to ask for human intervention, human compassion, human love, the touch of a human hand, a human embrace…

The only hope we have my friends… the only hope children have… in reality… is us.

Whose Side Are You On?

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , on April 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following commentary is part of a weekly series called “Reflections” by John Mill.  John is a noted free thought advocate and broadcaster.  His series airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Air date of this particular segment: 04/29/11)

When I make a mistake, and I can’t wiggle out of it with some clever excuse, I own up to it and take the criticism. Even though it hurts my ego to be wrong, when I am wrong – and I’m wrong more than I care to admit – I apologize and strive to do better in the future. What irks me more than being wrong is being wrong because I was insufficiently skeptical. Imagine that! An atheist who is insufficiently skeptical! But when you find some “fact” that supports your side, you kind of want to defend it like you’re defending your home; it’s hard to let go.

This is John Mill and let me give you an example: when I was creating the Freethought Almanac back in 2003 and 2004, I found a quote from the Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan, who is credited with being the first to circumnavigate the earth, that was just perfect: “The church says the earth is flat,” wrote Magellan, “but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the church.” I included it in the Almanac with glee.

But in reading casually about the life of Magellan, I came to find the quote didn’t seem to fit. It is fair to say that Magellan believed in God – Magellan’s will, written in 1519, shows he was quite obviously a firm believer in God and Jesus. He paid some monks on his departure to pray for his success. He managed to have many of the native peoples he encountered on his voyages baptized into the Catholic faith. But then the real test came: I read enough of Romance languages to be able to spot this quote or something like it in the writings of Ferdinand Magellan, even if written in Portuguese. But though I searched the collection at the Library of Congress, I could not find the original that was quoted by Ira Detrich Cardiff in What Great Men Think of Religion (1945).

As Freethinkers, we’re on the side of a cause, but we’re neither Right nor Left. And we’re also committed to truth, reason, democracy and ethical behavior. People already think Freethinkers are evil; it doesn’t do for people to think we’ll lie to promote our cause. When “our side” gets it wrong, and doesn’t come clean, that taints every one of us. And that makes me angry.

Let me give you an example. I get upset with David Barton misrepresenting history; but I will not tolerate lying from anyone, even those with whom I agree most of the time. Take Dan Barker, prominent atheist and co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation. In a May 1995 article published in the FFRF journal, Freethought Today, Barker responded to the Oklahoma City terrorist attack on the Murrah Federal Building that same year, asking, “When extremists from predominantly Moslem countries commit violence, many in the media refer to them as ‘Islamic terrorists.’ Why is no one calling the Oklahoma City bombing suspects ‘Christian terrorists’?”

I think the two chiefly responsible for the deadliest terrorist attack on American soil until 9/11/01 – Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols – were terrorists. I agree the incident was horrible. But were McVeigh and Nichols Christian terrorists. Were they motivated by religion? It’s not that I give any quarter to religious bigots. I’ve searched all over and I cannot find sufficient evidence to pin this crime on Jesus Juice.

Those on the religious right wing are understandably desperate to distance their creed from such a crime. That leads them to utter non-sequiters such as Jimmy Li saying, “How anyone could say McVeigh was a Christian is beyond this writer’s mind. His action and deeds definitely does not [sic] reflect that of a virtuous believer.”  Although Li fails to make the connection between virtue and belief in a skygod, his next point is credible: Dan Barker quotes no source for his assertion that McVeigh and Nichols were Christian, at least in the fundamentalist sense.

Indeed, there is a lot of evidence to the contrary: McVeigh and Nichols were first and foremost anti-government militia sympathizers, and only incidentally associated with any hostile religious movement. McVeigh was reared Roman Catholic, rejected his religion and admitted to being an agnostic; Nichols converted to religion in jail, which means he didn’t have much belief before. Both were inspired by The Turner Diaries, which depicts a violent revolution in the United States, leading to the overthrow of the United States federal government and, ultimately, to a race war leading to the extermination of all Jews and non-whites. The author, William Luther Pierce, writing under a pen name, was founder of “Cosmotheism,” a religion based on white supremacy, pantheism, eugenics, and National Socialism.

That Timothy McVeigh subscribed to some kind of religion is true. Lou Michel and Dan Herbeck, author of American Terrorist: Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma City Bombing (2001), in writing their book spent hours interviewing McVeigh and 150 other people who knew him. Michel and Herbeck write,

McVeigh is agnostic. He doesn’t believe in God, but he won’t rule out the possibility. I asked him, ‘What if there is a heaven and hell?’
He said that once he crosses over the line from life to death, if there is something on the other side, he will — and this is using his military jargon – ‘adapt, improvise, and overcome.’ Death to him is all part of the adventure.”

Furthermore, although he was inspired by hatred of the US government, wanted revenge for the botched FBI and ATF raids on Ruby Ridge and Waco, and wanted to “wake Americans up,” there is no evidence that the “Christian Identity” part of McVeigh’s militia association was a motivator: in fact, he pretty much rejected the Christian part and subscribed only to the white supremacist Identity part.

Finally, neither McVeigh nor Nichols ever admitted to killing out of religious motives. At the time of the bombing, neither even considered themselves Christians. And on the two occasions when McVeigh had the opportunity to explain himself, at his sentencing and his execution, thee was no mention of Jesus. So, until I hear compelling evidence to the contrary, such as some positive statement of Christian belief and some indication that Christian belief drove these criminals to terrorism, I can only call the Oklahoma City bombing a terrorist attack, not a Christian terrorist attack.

That said, you may wonder if I think there really are any Christian terrorists? Yes. But they admit it – like those religious extremists who attack reproductive health clinics that provide abortion services and shoot the doctors who work there. And, to a lesser extent, those creationists and other Christian anti-science bigots who would turn back the clock on the science and empiricism that make the longevity, prosperity, health – and yes, the morality – of the modern world possible. Or anybody who uses a moral crusade to kill or deny rights to anybody they don’t agree with, so long as it’s done in the name of Jesus.

Now Dan Barker has never, as far as I know, owned up to his mistake, made because he was insufficiently skeptical. But he is right on one point: he says that God certainly could have prevented what we humans consider an immoral killing (with our puny sense of morality that is defiantly independent of our belief in a skygod). Yet God did nothing. So we should never be asking God for comfort. Believers, he says, should be asking God, “Whose side are you on?” This is John Mill.

This Week In Freethought History (April 23-29)

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , on April 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following  is a transcript of a LIVE broadcast by John Mill. John is a noted free thought advocate and broadcaster.  “This Week In Freethought” airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Air date of this particular segment:  04/29/11)

Here’s your Week in Freethought History: This is more than just a calendar of events or mini-biographies – it’s an affirmation that we as freethinkers are neither unique nor alone in the world, no matter how isolated and alone we may feel at times.

1. Last Saturday, April 23, we had two birthdays—

It was on April 23, 1858, that German physicist Max Planck was born. Although the son of a law professor, and a gifted musician, Planck turned to physics and thermodynamics, invented quantum theory, and developed a formula to predict how the radiation an object emits is related to its temperature, known today as Planck’s Constant. Planck received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1918. Though publicly he wrote (1932), “Religion belongs to that realm that is inviolable before the law of causation and therefore is closed to science,” one biographer observed that Planck was “far removed from all dogmatic, mystery-mongering beings.”  Planck’s God, it seemed, was nothing more than an “ideal Sprit.” His beliefs could be described as pantheist, but certainly not Christian. His idea of faith was akin to having a working hypothesis. Planck did not believe in a future life.

And it was on April 23, 1564, that the greatest poet and playwright in the English language, William Shakespeare, was baptized, so this is taken as his birthday. He is known to be the author of about 38 plays, 154 sonnets, two long narrative poems, and several other poems. His plays are performed more often than those of any other playwright and have been translated into every major living language. Because few records of Shakespeare’s private life survive, scholars have freely speculated about his religious beliefs. Whereas scholars such as William Birch (1848) suggested The Bard may have been an atheist, and even the Catholic Encyclopedia wonders if  Shakespeare was not infected with the atheism, which was rampant in the more cultured society of the Elizabethan age – and other scholars note his absence at church services Shakespeare’s religion, like other details of his lightly documented life, remains an open question. All we can say with certainty is that, in a time when it was a serious offense to be an unfaithful Christian – note the suspicion which fell on Christopher Marlowe – and to skip church services, William Shakespeare said some things no Christian should have said and failed to do some that a Christian should have done.

2. Last Sunday, April 24, was the 211th anniversary of the founding of the oldest federal cultural institution in the US, and the world’s largest library, the Library of Congress (1800). The Library’s current collection of 147 million items includes materials in 460 languages — not only books but maps, monographs, dissertations, periodicals, voice and music recordings, and 14 million images — is not only a magnificent monument for modern times: the Library of Congress is the largest library ever to exist. The collection and recording of the sum of human knowledge for the betterment of humankind was not a high priority in the Ages of Faith in Christian Europe, or for most of the history of the Muslim East. It was never considered that humanity could be improved — the idea of human progress was a secular humanist achievement. It is therefore dishonest to crow about the great libraries of the Middle Ages, and the romantic fiction of the monks preserving the classics, without telling us just how many volumes these so-called “great” Christian libraries comprised. In the solidly Christian period of 500 to 1300, not a library can be found in all of Europe with more that 2,000 volumes, many of them copies of the same title. In the greatest abbey of the 13th century, the Abbey of St. Gall, not a single monk could read! The 18th century Enlightenment, which Immanuel Kant aptly described as “man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity,” brought real scholarship and dissemination of knowledge to large numbers of people.

3. Last Monday, April 25, was the 58th anniversary of the article published in Nature magazine describing the structure of DNA in terms of the now-familiar double helix – by James D. Watson and Francis Crick. True scientists both, they characterized their discovery as a scientific theory, meaning that their assertion is not only subject to independent verification, but also innately falsifiable; both won the Nobel in 1962. In 1996 Richard Dawkins interviewed James Watson for a film broadcast by the BBC and wondered if Watson knew many scientists with strong religious convictions. “Virtually none,” said Watson. “Occasionally, I meet them and I’m a bit embarrassed because I can’t believe that anyone accepts truth by revelation.” Likewise, Francis Crick, who published a book, The Astonishing Hypothesis (1994), in which he states, “The Astonishing Hypothesis is that You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.”

4. Last Tuesday, April 26, was the 1,890th birthday of the 16th Roman Emperor, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus (121). Marcus had the bad fortune to inherit the Empire during a dangerous age. And it was to Marcus that the Christian apologists Justin Martyr (103-165) and Athenagoras of Athens (133-190) defended Christianity (Apology, 176/177). But Marcus had no patience with any kind of superstition, saying, “I learned from Diognetus not to give credit to what was said by miracle-workers, and about the driving away of demons and such things.” It is instructive to note that the Christians had to defend themselves against the charge of atheism, not because they believed in no god, but because they believed in the wrong god(s)! Of the Stoic-Epicurean Emperors, he was the most characteristic of that philosophy. He didn’t believe in immortality and, in his Meditations, written in Greek, he conspicuously neglects the idea of a supreme being. The Meditations are still read today, but the apologetics of Justin and Athenagoras are not.

5. Last Wednesday, April 27, was the birthday of two famous Freethinkers—

It was on April 27, 1759, that English feminist and radical Mary Wollstonecraft was born. She was largely self-educated and an unusual student, with the radical idea that women should be educated on a par with men. Wollstonecraft opened a school in Newington Green with her friend Fanny Blood, whom she met in 1775. The school closed within two years, but Wollstonecraft found she had a talent for writing, and publishers to promote her, so she published her theories in Thoughts on the Education of Daughters (1786).  Her social ideas were even more unconventional. Wollstonecraft argued that to obtain social equality society must rid itself of the monarchy as well as the church and military hierarchies, which prompted one critic to describe her as a “hyena in petticoats.” She continued to argue that the rights of men and the rights of women were the same rights. This culminated in her Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1792, the seminal document in the history of modern feminism. Wollstonecraft associated with a radical intellectual group including Thomas Paine and William Godwin, whom she later married. Like her friend Fanny before her, Wollstonecraft died of complications associated with childbirth ten days after she gave birth to the future author of the classic novel Frankenstein.

It was also on April 27, but in 1822, that the 18th President of the United States, Ulysses Simpson Grant, was born Hiram Ulysses Grant. As commanding general of all the Union armies during the American Civil War,at the close of the War, he was the most popular man in the country. He was elected president and served two terms, from 1869-1877. Although he was a strong supporter of civil rights for Southern citizens of African descent, his administration was marred by a tolerance of corruption, so that he left office as unpopular as he was popular when first elected. The legend that Grant was a heavy drinker is oddly tied to the legend that Grant was a devout Christian. General Henry W. Halleck once remarked that Grant was remarkably sober for “a man who is not a religious man.” Hamlin Garland’s biography claims Grant “subscribed to no creed.” Grant was not a member of any church. Grant was, however, a staunch defender of church-state separation. In a speech in Des Moines, Iowa, in 1875, he unequivocally supported public schools over religious schools, saying, “I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason’s and Dixon’s, but between patriotism and intelligence on one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other… Encourage free schools, and resolve that not one dollar of money be appropriated to the support of any sectarian school… Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the Church, and the private schools, supported entirely by private contributions. KEEP CHURCH AND STATE FOREVER SEPARATE.” In his final days, a Rev. Dr. Newman hovered over him like a buzzard, unsuccessfully trying to convert Grant before he died. As he lay unconscious on his deathbed, as often happens to skeptics and freethinkers, Newman baptized Grant without his permission. Grant awoke suddenly, so the story goes, and announced that he was “surprised” that such a liberty had been taken. He may have used a stronger word.

6. Yesterday, April 28, marks two theological anniversaries—

It was on April 28, 1738, that Pope Clement XII issued the first papal decree against the Freemasons an organization of obscure origins, possibly as a survival of the Ancient Roman guilds or unions that supported the craft and its members. Modern Freemasonry only dates from 1717, with the formation of the Grand Lodge of England. Clement’s condemnatory Constitution insisted on the objectionable character of societies that commit men of all or no religion to a system of mere natural righteousness, without reference to Mary or Jesus or even the Pope. It wasn’t until 1877 that the French variety of Freemasonry cut out references to the “Grand Architect” and, consequently, declined to require a belief in God or immortality. This caused a split between the English-speaking and the French-speaking lodges. Though decrying the secrecy of Freemasonry, the Catholic Church apparently has no problem with its own secret organizations, such as Opus Dei — founded in 1928 and claiming several members in the highest reaches of US government — although Catholics finesse this by calling their own organization “private.”

It was on April 28, but in 862, the bishops of Lorraine, in the Synod of Aachen, approved a divorce between King Lothair II and his wife Theutberga, so that he could marry Waldrada and get an heir. This pretty much puts the lie to the Roman Catholic Church’s claim of taking a hard line against divorce, or rather, promoting the “indissolubility of marriage.” There is no evidence from pre-Christian times that allowing divorce led to evil or even immorality, and plenty of evidence from the Christian era that the reverse is true. The Church really only began to impede divorce in the 9th century, and it wasn’t until the 11th century and the time of Pope Gregory VII (Hildebrand) that marriage and divorce were really regulated, along with the celibacy of the clergy. Nobody took to well to either innovation. Or, as Ambrose Bierce would put it eight centuries later, the people followed the teachings of the Church in this respect, “in so far as they are not inconsistent with a life of sin.” Divorce was finally, after a long struggle, officially forbidden by the Council of Trent, 1545-1563. But there were always ways around that, if not by legalisms making the marriage null and void in the first place, which became a vast profit center for the Church; then by lack of “internal consent”; or by threat of force, as King Henry VIII learned. This really improved the morals of Europe by ushering in about two centuries of adultery, natural and unnatural vice, and flagrant prostitution — until the Age of Reason arrived and shamed the heads of church and state into curtailing these excesses.

7. Today, April 29, is the feast-day of the Abbot of Cluny known to the Catholic Church as St. Hugh the Great. He was born into a noble French family in 1024 and died on the 28 of April 1109, when the Benedictine Abbey of Cluny was 200 years old. The period in which Abbot Hugh lived was the beginning point of the so-called Age of Chivalry! As Thomas Bulfinch describes it, “Chivalry … framed an ideal of the heroic character, combining invincible strength and valor, justice, modesty, loyalty to superiors, courtesy to equals, compassion to weakness, and devotedness to the Church.” In fact, the next 300 years of Christendom were characterized in the noble and knightly classes (and both sexes) as steeped in corruption, theft, violence, and every imaginable (and some unimaginable) sexual deviations, including rape, incest, pederasty, prostitution and general sexual license. This behavior was so generalized that, time and again, the contemporary chroniclers of not only France, but Spain, England and Germany complain of it. The only behavior that was not tolerated was infidelity to the Church: the troubadours were bawdy song-singers; no contemporary writer mentions a knight-errant; the attempted reforms, such as the creation of the Knights Templars, were quickly sunk in corruption.

We can look back, but the Golden Age of Freethought is now. You can find full versions of these pages in Freethought history at the links in the American Heathen blog, which take you to my blog, FreethoughtAlmanac.com.

Slaying The Green Dragon: Environmental Science Misinformation Linked To Religion

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on April 29, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following is a transcript of  a commentary made by co-host Dr. Charles A. Doswell III (2Buck Chuck). Air date of this particular commentary: 04/29/11)

RJ has invited me to offer my views on a topic that has recently caught his attention:  that is, an effort by a coalition between the religious right and the CNP (aka the GOP) to squash what they refer to as the Green Dragon.  The idea is that environmentalism, evolutionary science, and global climate change science (as embodied in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC) represent some sort of devil-inspired “liberal” cabal to both bankrupt corporate America and simultaneously to wage war on Christianity.  It seems that some Christians actually were embracing principles of environmentalism, including efforts to mitigate the impacts of global climate change.  Faith-based environmentalism was a specter the CNP fears, as its corporate sponsors would be inconvenienced by having to reduce their massive profits in what many corporations have characterized as draconian environmental policy changes.

Thus, we have the so-called “Cornwall Alliance” led by E. Calvin Beisner who “… asserts that God has placed all of nature at the disposal of humanity.”  This is the classical biblical notion known as dominionism:  that we humans have the god-given right to use or abuse the Earth to any extent we choose.  Dominionism has its roots in Genesis 1:26:  “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.  And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ “

I suggest that our listeners might explore the Web for insights regarding this partnership between politicians and religious fanatics.  I’m not going to use my time to make you all aware of the dirty history of the Cornwall Alliance and its partners.  Rather, I want to comment on the attempt by the religious right to cast environmentalism as an opponent to religious faith.

This alliance is both figuratively, and arguably literally, a match made in heaven!  It links the authoritarian principles of religious faith with the most rapacious, cynical,  and callous political figures who are the beneficiaries of policies favoring corporate America.  George W. Bush was their perfect president, combining born-again fundamentalism with a profound fondness for oil money.  Both the fundamentalist religious zealots and the CEO’s ruining the American economy without apparent consequences share a common cause in condemning policies clearly associated with the so-called liberals.  It’s those freethinkers we need to smash, and the way to do it is to rouse the righteous in a jangling jihad against anyone who dares to challenge the ascendancy of the deity and the existing economic system.  By the way, that economic system actually is quite far from a truly “free” market.  No, this economy is about welfare for the rich, seemingly without concern for what crimes they might perpetrate on the rest of us.

Freethinkers, in their tree-hugging and alarmist statements about global climate change, might interrupt the gravy train that flows out of the taxpayer’s pockets into corporate executive bank accounts. As Watergate’s “Deep Throat” (FBI assistant director, Mark Felt) in the movie All the President’s Men admonished:  “Follow the money.”  From CEO coffers, the cash flow enters the political arena on behalf of the CNPers, who not coincidentally, are big supporters of privileges associated with churches – notably, their tax-exempt status.

As I see it, the sad part of the situation is that this effort to support global climate change denialism and eviscerate environmental protection has harnessed science’s uncertainties against the scientists.  Since science makes no absolute claims, CNP politicians can drag their feet over implementing any substantial “green” policies – that is, anything that would favor the environment.  They claim to want to see more compelling scientific results, but it’s just a stalling tactic.  This is a cynical manipulation by masters of obfuscating rhetoric to create doubts in the minds of the under-educated American public about the science that underlies environmentalism.  Scientists always operate under uncertainty and rarely, if ever, make absolute claims.  Scientists can be brushed aside by those whose biblical texts and political cynicism make them bloated with unsubstantiated certainty about their pseudo-scientific claims in opposition to the scientists.  They don’t hesitate to argue that they know, with biblical absolutism, what is best for America.  And the public seems inclined to believe them to a degree that leaves freethinkers astonished.  Freethinkers can ask embarrassing questions, which makes them a target!

David Barton (Founder and president of WallBuilders – an organization claiming to be “dedicated to presenting America’s forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on the moral, religious, and constitutional foundation on which America was built.” – a thinly-disguised fundamentalist christian organization) accuses scientists of ignoring anything that does not support their worldview and manipulating data to support it, while complaining that it is all a plot to increase government control and play God.  This is the most astounding case of the pot calling the kettle black I’ve ever seen!  It’s the religious right and their corporate partners who are manipulating the truth to support their worldview.  It’s they who claim to know absolute truth.  And yes, they seem to be acting as if they are implementing the will of their almighty deity.  They’re narcissistic to an extreme, and their rhetoric projects their very own flaws onto their opponents.

In a society dominated by christians, this conspiracy between the religious right and their political representatives to link environmentalism with atheism is disturbing.  If we as Americans allow this to prevent implementing environmentalist policies, we’re going to deserve what happens to us as a consequence!

Great Spasms of Intolerance

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , on April 29, 2011 by hewhay

(The following commentary is part of a weekly series called “Yahweh Speaks” by Yahweh.  Yahweh is an assumed name to protect his identity on-line.  He is a noted  free thought advocate and Constitutional attorney.  His series airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Airdate 04/29/11)

The history of mankind is replete with great spasms of intolerance.

The Hebrew myth text some call the Old Testament is virtually a blueprint for intolerance at its  worst: stoning, fratricide, patricide, and genocide.

Let us examine an horrific example.

Gen 14:13
“Then one who had escaped came and told Abram the Hebrew, for he dwelt by the terebinth trees of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol and brother of Aner; and they were allies with Abram.”

So, in the time of Abraham the Hebrews and Amorites were allies.

But, by the time of Joshua the Amorites fell so far out of favor with the Hebrews and the genocidal god they had divined that Joshua slew them ALL~~~, every man, woman and child.

And not only did the Hebrews slay every man, woman and child, but their god suspended the laws of nature so the Hebrews would have more daylight to find, see and  slaughter them all.

Joshua 10:12

“Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon.”

13

“And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.”

40

“So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded.”

History tells us this  wholesale slaughter is not unique to the Hebrews .They, too, were slaughtered by the Egyptians. And although the Babylonians slaughtered many, many more were taken into captivity. The Assyrians also slaughtered and captured the Hebrews. The Romans , in about 70 a.d. actively dissembled the Hebrew state and drove them from Jerusalem and Israel.   Then the Romans turned to the Christians and began to slaughter and persecute them. Within centuries  the Christians were in ascendency and they began to persecute and slaughter in the name of their Lord.
Then,various Christian sects began to persecute and slaughter eachother and used  the Civil authority, the power of government, to do so.

By the 18th century this bigotry and persecution had ensconced itself on the American shore to such an extent that James Madison concluded, “During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.” (Memorial and Remonstrance).

As Justice Story said, “The Catholic and the Protestant had alternately waged the most ferocious and unrelenting warfare on each other; and Protestantism itself, at the very moment, that it was proclaiming the right of private judgment, prescribed boundaries to that right, beyond which if any one dared to pass, he must seal his rashness with the blood of martyrdom.”

Despite the words of Madison, the words of Story and the actions of our Framers, bigotry and intolerance persisted in America: Africans were enslaved, women disenfranchised and  considered property, “Chinamen”  and “Mics” brought here to labor, but treated as subhumans, and so on and so on.

A Great Civil War, Constitutional Amendments, Landmark Supreme Court decisions, bold Federal Legislation have all fought back against this history of intolerance.

But, certain parts of human nature remain as atavistic traits, lurking, brooding, waiting to unleash  its terror against others~~~ the different, the outsiders, the unfavored, the “unchosen”. A credo  threads its way through the  historical tapestry of  intolerance:Blame a different minority for all problems, and wrap the accusatory finger in the drapery of  religious mysticsm and inerrancy.

And how does this manifest itself in 21st century America? By the Rabid Religious Reich physically and legally lashing out at gays, lesbians, women exercising choice,immigrants, muslims,  and non xtians…

Yet, some might counter that the RRR is not slaughtering others, that they are only exercising their “god given” , and Constitutionally recognized right to organize, speak, participate and pass legislation.

But, this ignores several salient facts. There have recently been, in the name of religion, acts of violence against “outsiders”.There are “holy wars” now on-going.  More importantly, human nature has not changed in thousands of years ,and if the Rabid Religious Reich finally gets full power they will inevitably arm themselves with all the terror of civil authority and exterminate those who doubt their dogma~~~all in accord with and sanctioned by their blueprint, their Ancient Myth Text.~~~ and it will make the internecine warfare we have seen for decades in the Middle East look like a king of the hill fight in a playground sandbox.

“But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god.It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

Minute Maniac #12

Posted in Politics, Religion on April 27, 2011 by RJ Evans

Freedom, Liberty and Jackassery

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 22, 2011 by RJ Evans

(Editorial Comment from  host RJ Evans on his American Heathen® radio show – Air Date 04/22/11)

Tonight I want to ask the question… Can freedom and liberty exist under the notion of a god?  I hear it all the time… “One Nation Under God”.  “America, land of the free…”  “…where freedom rings”.  I’m going to show, without a shadow of a doubt, that freedom and liberty cannot exist under any notion of a god.

Let’s start with the 10 Commandments. This particular document is said to be the end all be all foundation of our country as touted by christians here in America.  We are, after all, “One Nation Under God” and we are “Indivisible” But are we really?  I say no.  Here’s why.  The first of god’s commandments states: “I am the Lord your God”. Without my consent, sans my reasoned and rational approach to carefully selecting who I choose to represent me in this democratic republic, some jackass is claiming that he’s the boss. And, never-mind the fact that no one can see, hear, taste, touch, or measure the existence of this particular jackass.  Nope.  It’s just assumed that this jackass exists. Now, there are millions of other American citizens just like me who think this jackass is nothing more than a myth. Some of us lack belief in any jackass’ existence, while others believe in different mythological jackass’ other than the “christian” jackass claiming power over everyone else s jackass’. But, in the end, all of us who don’t believe in the “christian” jackass have been denied our democratic right to choose who leads us right out of the gate. This creates a fairly significant political, social and religious divide. Therefore, the idea that we are “indivisible” is false.

How about freedom and liberty? Let’s look at the second commandment. “You shall have no other God’s before me”.  This commandment really underscores my claim that freedom and liberty cannot exist under the notion of a god.  Here we have a declaration by the “christian” jackass that states unequivocally that any other mythological jackass is invalid, therefore, if anyone believes in another jackass, or none, they are automatically in violation of the “christian” jackass’ edict.  Therefore, freedom to worship other jackass’, or not worship any jackass,  doesn’t exist.  This violation carries over as a restriction on freedom of thought.  No freedom and liberty here.

How about the fourth commandment? “Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy”  Someone really needs to show me the freedom in this one.  I can’t find it.  The christian holy day has been assigned to Sunday on the weekly calendar.  It’s an obvious random choice.  From Wikipedia.org:

“The earliest attestation of a seven-day week associated with heavenly luminaries are from Vettius Valens, an astrologer writing ca 170 AD in his Anthologiarum. The order was Sun, Moon, Ares, Hermes, Zeus, Aphrodite, and Cronos. From Greece the planetary week names passed to the Romans, and from Latin to other languages of southern and western Europe, and to other languages later influenced by them.”

When one considers the fact that the “christian” jackass supposedly rested on the seventh day, and the weekdays are numbered by Abrahamic religions, with Sunday being the FIRST day… then Saturday should be the day of rest, the Sabbath day… right?  Well, in any event, no one took a vote on it so the rest of us are forced to observe a day of rest.  Of course, you should know what blue laws are,  and that there are a whole host of other religiously associated jackasserys that plague the day with restriction.  Freedom?  Liberty?  Nope.  Not here.

But, let’s get down to some basic logic problems with skydaddy belief and the notion that folks are free.

One of the biggest arguments issued by “christian” jackass followers is the idea that the jackass gave human beings free will.  This argument claims that human beings were given an opportunity to make decisions independent of any restrictions commanded by the holy jackass.  In fact, it is this very notion of free will that motivates christians around the world to portend that our freedom is issued by the jackass, and that our human rights extend from its proclamation. But, there are a whole bunch of problems with the idea.

First and foremost is the fact that, according to the jackass’ holy text – a book only worthy of examination for its dark humor and astoundingly harsh and inhumane treatment of human beings – the jackass knows everything before it happens.  If the jackass knows everything before it happens, then the jackass knows every decision anyone has ever made, or will ever make, before the decision was, or is even, considered.  If the jackass knows what someone is going to do before they do it, then the idea that one is free to decide is false.  Any decision is automatically predestined and therefore it is no longer an individual’s decision.  The jackass has already programmed everyone to do what the jackass wants them to do.  Where’s the free will?   In the end the jackass knows everything before anything happens.  The jackass already knows who’s with him and who’s not… by design.  Everyone is already screwed out of their freedom.

Second on the list of logic problems with jackass worship and freedom has to do with interpretation and compliance.  Jackass worship allows for too many interpretations of words and sentences from the same book. While it may appear that freedom is at work here, the reality is that any decisions a believer makes with regard to interpretation of scripture are already predestined. Let’s start with the fact that, according to scripture, everyone is born evil. And, the threat of hell fire and damnation for NOT making a right decision is the jackass’ method of manipulation to frighten believers into compliance.  Compliance with what?  How can anyone comply with automatic built-in ignorance and pre-destiny? They are already born evil, and the jackass already knows every decision they will ever make!  Any scriptural interpretation isn’t even a crap shoot!  The jackass followers are already condemned by the predestination assigned by the jackass! The jackass already knows who’s with him and who’s against him! Therefore, any notion that there is freedom in interpretations is moot.  Apparently the outcomes of any interpretation of scripture will be false, and therefore freedom to choose correctly is impossible, and useless.  With all decisions known by the jackass beforehand, and all interpretations pre-destined due to foreknowledge by the jackass, the only free will available is that of the jackass’!  In a nutshell… the jackass has rigged the game so freedom is nothing more than an illusion, a shell game, and the jackass is the only one that knows the final outcome.  Freedom and Liberty? Apparently “Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose” – Me and Bobby McGee-

Americans have fallen for the ultimate parlor trick.  Freedom and liberty under the auspices of a holy jackass cannot exist.  If one simply looks at the facts, the illogic of such a claim, and realizes the exclusionary nature of any jackass worship, the rigged game is revealed.  Freedom and liberty are not a pre-destination.  Freedom and liberty are unrestricted and unknown until they are realized and achieved. They are inherent to human existence, but only if one acknowledges that they are a product of existence and not the assigned privilege of a parlor trick.

No Intelligence Displayed

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 22, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following commentary is part of a weekly series called “Reflections” by John Mill.  John is a noted free thought advocate and broadcaster.  His series airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Air date of this particular segment: 04/22/11)

This week was the third anniversary of the release of the documentary film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008). And if you thought the issue of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution went away after the Dover School District decision in 2005, you haven’t been paying attention. This is John Mill and I can tell you the debate lives on in Tennessee, where a bill passed the House of Representative last Thursday, April 7, to protect teachers who challenge the theory of evolution – and it was revealed in January that 13% of high school biology teachers – biology teachers! – actually back Biblical creationism.

And Expelled, winner of the 2009 Faith and Freedom Award, is a rallying point of the pro-Intelligent Design crowd. In it, actor and co-writer Ben Stein hosts the debate as one between the proposition that life on earth was the design of some unnamed intelligent designer vs. the theory that life evolved through undirected, natural processes. He charges that several academics have been “expelled” for challenging “Big Science” on the issue of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution, that is, for daring to take the Intelligent Design side.

If Expelled were an honest documentary, Stein and his production team would have interviewed those claiming to have been expelled, then looked for documentary evidence that this was directly as a result of a denial of academic freedom, then found those responsible for the expulsions and wrested an on-camera explanation from them. But they do not even attempt to do this – they pretty much take it on faith. Worse than that, the very premise of the film is biased: if anybody can be said to have been “expelled” for trying to get a hearing for Intelligent Design, the reason would not be denial of free speech or stifling of academic freedom: the reason would be as simple as scientists failing to actually do science!

If Expelled were an honest documentary, and Intelligent Design really is a scientific theory rather than a religious doctrine, then Stein and his production team would have done two things: (1) they would have stayed far away from pointing out the atheism of several high-profile evolutionary scientists, such as Professor Richard Dawkins, and (2) they would have identified the Intelligent Designer. They do not even attempt to do this. And not only is Evolution tied to Nazism, Communism, eugenics and abortion, but the film harps on the atheism of Intelligent Design’s enemies, and even goes so far as to point out the word “Creator” in the Declaration of Independence.

One of the funniest moments in the film is how one of the Intelligent Design advocates finessed the 2005 “Dover School District” decision. In which not only did ID get a well deserved legal drubbing as a “theory” but the dishonest religious motivations behind it were clearly exposed. This advocate just said court cases don’t matter!

But here is what does matter: If this were an honest documentary, and Stein and his production team were sincere in their assertion that Intelligent Design is a competing theory to Evolution and deserving of debate in academia, they would have spent at least a few of this film’s 90 minutes giving us an idea of what the Intelligent Design theory actually explains: that is what a theory does. Expelled does not state a theory for Intelligent Design, or raise one testable claim, or identify the Designer. Who is he? The question assumes the answer is a “who” and not a “what.” Even if we admit an Intelligent Designer, then what? There’s no need for science! Intelligent Design is a science stopper!

Expelled is, from main title to end title, only a heavy-handed criticism of Evolution. If I wanted to convince people that my book is the Great American Novel, then, instead of letting everybody read it, I spent all my time vilifying its detractors, should I be surprised that nobody takes me seriously?

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed portrays itself as a voice crying in the wilderness. It is instead an insincere, factually challenged polemic in the form of a whiny complaint. Expelled should have been called, “No Intelligence Displayed.” This is John Mill.

This Week In Freethought History

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , on April 22, 2011 by RJ Evans

(The following  is a transcript of a LIVE broadcast by John Mill. John is a noted free thought advocate and broadcaster.  “This Week In Freethought” airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Air date of this particular segment:  04/22/11)

Here’s your Week in Freethought History: This is more than just a calendar of events or mini-biographies – it’s an affirmation that we as freethinkers are neither unique nor alone in the world, no matter how isolated and alone we may feel at times.

1. Last Saturday, April 16, was the 167th birthday of French writer, critic and Nobel Laureate Anatole France (1844). The struggling writer began as a journalist, and married Valérie Guérin de Sauville, who was wealthy enough to mentor France and get him noticed, so that he could make his breakthrough in 1881. He was to have many lovers, both concurrently and after his wife’s death. It is not surprising, then, that France once said, “Of all the sexual aberrations, chastity is the strangest,” and “Religion has done love a great service by making it a sin.” All of France’s novels were unabashedly pagan, in addition to lampooning clerics and Christianity. In the 1920s his writings were put on the Index of Prohibited Books by the Roman Catholic Church. It was Anatole France who said, “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.” And also (perhaps thinking of religious belief), “If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.”

2. Last Sunday, April 17, was the 1153rd anniversary of the death of Pope Benedict III (858). He had been elected in 855. The period in which Benedict lived is known popularly as the Dark Ages. Benedict’s three-year custody of the keys of Saint Peter was unremarkable but for his efforts to curb the excesses of the likes of a powerful subdeacon named Hubert. Writing to all the archbishops and bishops of France, Benedict said: “…we hear that the cleric Hubert … is sunk in such filth that he has no share in eternal life. … he does not scruple to spend his days with actresses, women who ruin souls and bodies and drag them down to the lowest depth … and that he is for ever committing murders and adulteries, vile fornications and intolerable outrages. And not only this but we have many witnesses that he has debauched the monastery of St. Maurice … The resources that once supported servants of God are now squandered upon whores, hounds, hawks and wicked men.” Was Hubert’s conduct uncommon? In fact, he was a member of one of the highest noble families in France and brother of the Queen. Monk-chroniclers of the time tell us that statutes had to be passed barring clerics not just from having female housekeepers: these housekeepers could not even be a mother, a sister or an aunt! Indeed, there were stories circulating about Hubert’s less-than-holy relationship with his royal sister!

3. Last Monday, April 18, is notable for two events—

It was on April 18, 1857, that American trial lawyer Clarence Darrow was born. In his first most famous case, he saved Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb from execution for the murder of 14-year-old Robert Franks. While Leopold and Loeb were guilty, Darrow’s motivation was not to free murderers but to protest executions. His twelve-hour summation is the most eloquent attack on the death penalty ever delivered in an American courtroom. But it was in 1925 that Darrow came in direct contact with the conflict between religion and reason when he defended Tennessee science teacher John T. Scopes for teaching the theory of evolution. Scopes was convicted, but the world read of and listened to the famous “monkey trial” and Dayton, Tennessee, became a circus. During the trial, Darrow said, “I do not consider it an insult but rather a compliment to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure – that is all that agnosticism means.” A tireless fighter for the rights of the powerless against the powerful, Darrow said, “I don’t believe in God because I don’t believe in Mother Goose.”

Coincidentally, or not, it was on April 18, 2008, that the documentary film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed was released in the United States. You can read more about this in my “Reflection.”

4. Two more anniversaries were marked last Tuesday, April 19—

It was on April 19, 1993, that federal government forces with tanks, gas and guns invaded the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. During a 51-day siege the “Ranch Apocalypse” was burned to the ground and 76 Davidians, twenty of them children, along with their 33-year-old leader, David Koresh, died. The Branch Davidians were formed in the 1950s and the media dutifully demonized this offshoot of the Seventh-Day Adventists: as narcotics traders, child molesters, and a suicide cult. Their leader, David Koresh, was portrayed as a gun-crazed prophet with delusions of Christhood. The confrontation between the male-dominated, gun-toting government officials and the male-dominated, gun-toting Davidians began on Sunday, 28 February 1993, but six Davidians and four Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents were killed. Smarting from the hit they took on the first day of the siege, and impatient for action, the feds broke negotiations with the Davidians, refusing to listen to any more “Bible babble” from Koresh. Waco stands today as a massive breach of civil rights against a relatively harmless Christian sect and an abuse of government power. If it can happen to Christians, in this nation of churchgoers, are atheists safe?

The Waco siege reached into the brains of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, who three years later perpetrated the most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Oklahoma City Bombing. David 2 will have more on that in his “Real History 101,” later on tonight.

5. Last Wednesday, April 20, brings us two more connected anniversaries—

Last Wednesday, April 20, was the 122nd birthday of German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler (1889). While in jail for treason in Germany – he was plotting to overthrow the German Weimar Republic by force – Hitler began dictating Mein Kampf (My Struggle). Hitler’s key uniting precept was his scapegoating of Jews for all of the troubles in economically depressed Germany. Hitler’s Catholic upbringing, coupled with a disbelief that a Jew could really be a German (much like George H.W. Bush’s disbelief that an atheist could really be an American), informed his opinion. Hitler wrote, “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” He was clearly no atheist, but was Hitler a Christian? He was never excommunicated, even though the Vatican knew much of his policies and activities. The only major complaints from Rome regarded interference in Church matters. And those were largely silenced by the 1933 Concordat with the Vatican, under Pope Pius XII, which to Hitler meant that the Catholic Church recognized the Nazi state. It would seem that Hitler’s most anti-Christian statements were delivered when he saw interference from the Roman Church (and all religion) as a threat to his control of the state. And Hitler would not have been successful without the support of German Christians. However, Adolf Hitler perpetrated a serious Catholic sin when he committed suicide on 30 April 1945.

It was 12 years ago last Wednesday, April 20, that two students at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, brought guns and explosives instead of textbooks to school (1999). After their rampage, which left 12 students and a teacher dead, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris took their own lives. They had planned their massacre for over a month – even making a videotape to reveal their motives on March 15 – and timed it for Adolph Hitler’s birthday. Several politicians and religious leaders made some rather slippery claims that the incident, which has come to be known simply as “Columbine,” constituted some message from God that our nation has strayed from the path of righteousness. However, Klebold and Harris were not Satanists, or witches, or neopagans, they were certainly not lacking in religion and they came from intact homes. The real reasons Klebold and Harris made thirteen victims on this date in 1999, were probably just as they claimed in their video: years of ridicule, social ostracism in school, and easy access to guns.

6. We keep returning to this theme… It was 56 years ago yesterday that Inherit the Wind, the play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee dramatizing the famous Scopes “Monkey Trial” in the summer of 1925, opened at the National Theatre on Broadway (1955). It is a mistake to take Inherit the Wind at face value, as a clash between two pop stars of the 1920s (Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan) or as a clash of cultures, intellectual vs. religious. The 1950s were a time of cultural anxiety and anti-intellectualism in the US, brought on by the crusade of Sen. Joseph McCarthy and his colleagues on the House Un-American Activities Committee. Although the playwrights mock the fundamentalism of the William Jennings Bryan character, they are really focused on defending freedom of thought in a time of anti-communist hysteria. They have Drummond (the Darrow character) say to the jury, “Yes there is something holy to me! The power of the individual human mind. An idea is a greater monument than a cathedral. And the advance of man’s knowledge is more of a miracle than any sticks turned to snakes, or the parting of waters. … Gentlemen, progress has never been a bargain. You’ve got to pay for it. … Darwin moved us forward to a hilltop, where we could look back and see the way from which we came. But for this view, this insight, this knowledge, we must abandon our faith in the pleasant poetry of Genesis.”

7. Today marks two more anniversaries—

It’s American actor Jack Nicholson’s 74th birthday (1937). Nicholson has been nominated 12 times for Academy Awards, winning for Best Actor playing a rebellious psych patient in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and playing a misanthropic, obsessive-compulsive novelist in As Good as It Gets. For the 1983 film Terms of Endearment, playing a dissipated astronaut, he won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor. Nicholson has depicted a variety of other characters, from a drop-out lawyer in Easy Rider, a burned-out detective in Chinatown, a hotel caretaker slowly going insane in The Shining, just your average horny devil in The Witches of Eastwick and a scheming Marine general in A Few Good Men. In an 1992 interview in Vanity Fair magazine, Nicholson said, “I don’t believe in God now,” but he added, “I can still work up an envy for someone who has a faith. I can see how that could be a deeply soothing experience.” This quote might have informed the screenwriter of Nicholson’s 2007 film, The Bucket List, in which Nicholson’s character, Edward Cole, says, “I envy people who have faith, I just can’t get my head around it.”

And finally, it was 147 today that the US Congress passed an act requiring the Director of the Mint to develop designs for the one-cent and two-cent coins that, for the first time since the nation was founded, included a recognition of God (1864). Replacing the Latin motto, E Pluribus Unum, “Out of many, one” – was one that everyone could read, if not subscribe to: “In God We Trust.” How did this happen? Then-Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase received a multitude of appeals from Christians. The most persuasive one appears to have been from a Rev. Watkinson: “You are probably a Christian,” wrote Watkinson. “Would not the antiquaries of succeeding centuries rightly reason from our past that we were a heathen nation?” Watkinson urged replacing the Goddess of Liberty with a religious slogan on US coinage. But Watkinson was not finished with Secretary Chase: “This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed.” And even though the motto was conceived by a cleric, recommended for its religious purpose, and adopted precisely to acknowledge the Judeo-Christian God, several federal courts have since ruled that “In God We Trust” is not a religious phrase! What’s troubling is that Nazi Germany had a very similar motto: Gott mit uns (“God with us”). I suppose the Nazis, too, have been spared the “ignominy of heathenism”!

We can look back, but the Golden Age of Freethought is now. You can find full versions of these pages in Freethought history at the links in the American Heathen blog, which take you to my blog, FreethoughtAlmanac.com.

Establishment—”No Standing” Part II

Posted in Politics, Religion with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 22, 2011 by hewhay

(The following commentary is part of a weekly series called “Yahweh Speaks” by Yahweh.  Yahweh is an assumed name to protect his identity on-line.  He is a noted  free thought advocate and Constitutional attorney.  His series airs on my American Heathen® internet radio show. Airdate 04/22/11)

Last week I discussed the atrocious Supreme Court ruling which said , in essence, taxpayers had “no standing” to challenge an Arizona Statute that gave “tax credits” to religious schools, because purportedly the aggrieved  taxpayers had not been forced to actually pay anything out of their pockets.

The breathtaking inanity of that decision was presaged by James Madison in his famous, “Memorial and Remonstrance”:

” Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?”

The unreasonableness and the purposeful duplicity of this legislation and the Supreme Court’s ruling is amply demonstrated by the following: every “three pence” a religious institution receives for purported “school instruction” by way of “tax credit” money FREES UP another “three pence”, at least, for religious proseltyzing; and every “three pence” of “tax credit”  money NOT received by the Treasury means an ADDITIONAL “three pence” of tax money that must be made up through other tax policy; i.e taxing the people.

Perhaps worse still, is that this “no standing ” policy  has already spawned  further insidious results.

Just 10 days after that US Sup Court decision,  a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago, citing the Arizona case,  ruled 3-0 that the Freedom From Religion Foundation and its plaintiffs do not have standing to continue their challenge of the 1952 congressionally enacted National Day of Prayer  Act, which requires the President to issue a proclamation exhorting citizens to pray.

The appeals court overturned the district court’s strong ruling in favor of FFRF’s challenge, FFRF v. Obama, by U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb in April 2010. Crabb ruled the National Day of Prayer as enacted by Congress was unconstitutional: “In this instance, the government has taken sides on a matter that must be left to individual conscience.” Crabb added: “The same law that prohibits the government from declaring a National Day of Prayer also prohibits it from declaring a National Day of Blasphemy.”

“…the government has taken sides on a matter that must be left to individual conscience. When the government associates one set of religious beliefs with the state and identifies nonadherents as outsiders, it encroaches upon the individual’s decision about whether and how to worship.”

Crabb noted a National Day of Prayer was no more within the purview of government to declare than encouraging “citizens to fast during the month of Ramadan, attend a synagogue, purify themselves in a sweat lodge or practice rune magic.”

Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals said:

“Standing is the first question because, unless the case presents a justiciable controversy, the judiciary must not address merits. …(The National Day of Prayer Act)imposes duties on the President alone. It does not require any private person to do anything—or for that matter to take any action in response to what the President proclaims. If anyone suffers injury therefore, it is the President, who is not complaining. No one has standing to object to a statute that imposes duties upon strangers.”

“Plaintiffs contend that they are injured because they feel excluded, or made unwelcome, when the President asks them to engage in a religious observance that is contrary to their own principles. It is difficult to see how any reader of the 2010 proclamation would feel excluded or unwelcome…”

“If this means that no one has standing, that does not change the outcome. The Supreme Court has concluded that ‘the abstract injury in nonobservance of the Constitution asserted by . . . citizens’ in general is not a species of ‘injury in fact,’ even if the upshot is that no one can sue.”

That’s right, folks, that’s where we are headed~~~where NO ONE can sue over establishment issues~~~unless the Government literally shows up at your door and at the point of a bayonet or  at the end of a gun barrel makes you contribute “three pence only for the support of any one establishment…”, or  coercively forces you to participate in some religious activity.

But, I submit even then— even then these christo-fascists in the legislatures and on the Court will still poo poo the notion of establishment by saying, “even then you don’t HAVE to contribute or participate— you can GO TO JAIL~~~or DIE!”

To them I say, “DIE you rat bastards and YOU GO TO (your) HELL!”

“But is does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god.It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”

« Older Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 160 other followers

%d bloggers like this: