Image via Wikipedia

I've been busier at work than any previous time I can recall, and I have finally reached the conclusion that something has to give. I have been protecting my blogging time as long as I possibly can, but I can do so no longer. Don't worry - I'm not abandoning Atheist Revolution or anything drastic like that. However, I have decided to scale back the daily posting schedule I have been employing here for quite some time. I plan to post an average of one post every other day for the foreseeable future. I think this is doable and should give me back some desperately needed time. Thanks for understanding and continuing to visit.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Image via Wikipedia

Given that their bible commands Christians to kill non-believers, I suppose we atheists should consider ourselves quite lucky that this sort of thing does not happen more often. Sadly, there is nothing unusual about religiously-motivated murder. What makes this case out of Colorado noteworthy is that the gunman was quoted by witnesses as saying, "If you're not a Christian, you're going to die" as he opened fire.

Eldora manager Brian Mahon, fatally wounded by the gunman, identified himself as Catholic. Evidently, the shooter did not consider this sufficiently Christian.

Gunman Derik Bonestroo may have been many things. He may have been emotionally disturbed. But it seems that one thing is clear: he was a Christian terrorist.

H/T to Antimattr

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Tags: Christian, terrorist, Christian terrorist, Colorado, Eldora, Christians, murder, Catholic, crime

Image via WikipediaIt is time once again to revisit the platform on which I have been working gradually. In addition to (1) ending anti-atheist bigotry and (2) promoting reason and critical thinking, I am now ready to add the third plank: strengthening the separation of church and state. Although I suspect most readers of this blog will agree that this is an important goal, I also expect that some of you may disagree sharply with at least one aspect of what I will say below.

An American Tradition

Students of history know that the U.S. was founded as a secular democracy and that the importance of church-state separation was recognized by our founders. That is not to say that the decision to eschew a national religion was without controversy. And yet, is was no accident that the U.S. Constitution omitted any mention of gods.

That we have no national religion should be a source of pride. This is one of the central factors which distinguishes the U.S. from other Western democracies. The separation of church and state remains an important part of our national heritage.

Keeping Religion Out of Government

Separation of church and state means that the government is not allowed to establish a state religion. Moreover, it has typically been interpreted as prohibiting the government from elevating the status of one religion over others (or even religion itself over no religion).

When atheists receive public attention, it is most often for our efforts to have religious symbols removed from government property. Religious believers often view this as trivial meddling with tradition, but it is about protecting the Constitution and defending our American heritage.

The nativity scene in the public library or the Ten Commandments in the courthouse are problematic not because we want to abolish religion but because these are government buildings which are not supposed to show preference to any one religion. Either all sets of beliefs are represented or none are.

Keeping Government Out of Religion

What atheists do not spend nearly enough time talking about is the importance of keeping government out of religion as well. If we are serious about preserving the separation of church and state, we must educate religious believers about the perils of merging the two with regard to the harm sustained by religion.

It is for this reason that I think many of my colleagues in the atheist blogosphere are mistaken to call for churches to be taxed. I understand that this would cause many churches to go out of business, and I agree that this would be a positive outcome. However, taxing churches would remove any prohibition on their politicking. As long as we refuse to organize to counter such a movement, we better tread carefully here.

What Can We Do?

I suspect we could come up with a hundred ideas for preserving the separation of church and state fairly easily. Here are just a few:

• Join a national organization dedicated to promoting church-state separation, such as the Freedom From Religion Foundation or Americans United for Separation of Church and State. For some of the bigger cases, attorneys and lobbyists are necessary. These groups need our support.
• Get involved at the local level. When you encounter violations of church-state separation in your community, act. Ask questions, complain, write a letter to the editor, contact your elected officials, alert your fellow bloggers, etc. Our inaction often serves as implicit agreement that the violation is not important.
• Educate yourself and others about church-state issues.
  
• Connect with other church-state activists in your community.
  

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Related articles by Zemanta

• How to Defend Science Education in Your State
• Worst Field Trip Idea Ever
• South Carolina Nixes Christianist License Plates....
• My Letter to Governor Gregoire

Image via Wikipedia

It must be difficult to be a Christian extremist parent in 2009. First, those pesky public schools actually want to educate your children in science so they'll be able to compete in an increasingly complex job market. Second, some dare to teach method of sex education which have been shown to be...(gasp)...effective, instead of simply preaching "don't do it." And now, some schools have the nerve to realize that bullying detracts from the learning conducive environment they are trying to foster. What is a good Christian extremist parent to do? Oppose measures to reduce bullying, of course.

Evidently, last week's No Name-Calling Week was too much for some Christian extremist parents to swallow. Homosecular Gaytheist brings us the story of Linda Harvey from Mission America who is upset over efforts to reduce school bullying. The source of Ms. Harvey's displeasure is that reducing bullying interferes with the fundamental right of Christian children to spread anti-gay hatred and bigotry at their schools. You see, in Ms. Harvey's world, refraining from hurling homophobic insults at one's peers amounts to condoning the dreaded homosexual lifestyle.

Over at Friendly Atheist, Hemant shows us that Ms. Harvey has some company among the Christian extremist ranks. He brings us the story of Christian attorney, Brad Dacus, who echoes Ms. Harvey's fears about anti-bullying measures. In fact, Mr. Dacus is convinced that children prevented from bullying one another just might grow up tolerant. The horror!

They're promoting, all the way down to the first-grade level, children to read and be exposed to books and material that is pro-homosexual -- and it's all under the guise of opposing name-calling.

The truly mind-blowing part of this is that both Ms. Harvey and Mr. Dacus believe that by trying to reduce anti-gay bigotry, the schools are actually denigrating their religion. According to Dacus:

The alleged homosexual kids are not the only ones being bullied. There's [sic] kids of faith being called 'homophobic' and 'homophobe,' and yet those words and that name-calling is not under attack and is not being addressed by this alleged week of tolerance that's being pushed.

By labeling intolerance as intolerant, the schools are opposing Dacus and Harvey's brand of hate-based Christianity. Where is the outrage from Christians who do not want their religion equated with hatred and bigotry?

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Tags: Christian extremism, Christian extremist, bullying, school, education, Christian, Christianity, homosexual, homophobic, bigotry

Related articles by Zemanta

• Your federal tax dollars are going to abstinence-only clowns. (thinkprogress.org)
• Apparently Gay Students' Expulsion Upheld By California Courts (lafiga.firedoglake.com)

President Obama's acknowledgment that we non-believers exist was a small but positive step, even if the inauguration as a whole felt like way too much of a godfest. It is time to encourage the Obama administration to take another important step. What follows is a letter I am sending to President Obama at the suggestion of Atheist Ethicist. I have modeled it closely on Alonzo's letter but attempted to give it my voice as well.

Dear President Obama:

Like millions of Americans, I was happy to hear you acknowledge non-believers in your inaugural address. It was nice to be recognized as a worthwhile part of this great nation. I am writing both to thank you for including us and to ask you to consider taking another important step to signal that you value the contribution of all Americans.

You have held many events where people of faith have come together to discuss their visions of America, both through informal discussions and religious services. You have provided them with forums for sharing their views and their values, but have not included non-religious Americans.

Regardless of your intention, this exclusion communicates that atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, and freethinkers have little to offer in crafting a vision of America. It suggests that your administration considers values to be the exclusive purview of the religious community. We non-believers are also stakeholders in the future of our country, and we have much to contribute. We should be included in discussions of American values.

As a secular democracy, our government has no business promoting faith-based events. However, events focused around values which include representatives from the various faith communities and from communities of non-believers would be an effective solution. Everyone would benefit from such an inclusive gathering, religious and non-religious alike.

I hope you will cease to promote events which cater to religious believers while excluding non-believers and instead embrace an inclusive approach. This would send a powerful message that you value the input of all Americans and could do wonders in bringing diverse groups together in pursuit of common goals.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Related articles by Zemanta

• Reflections on the Inauguration (friendlyatheist.com)
• Obama's Acknowledgment of Nonbelievers is a Start (atheistrev.com)

Image via WikipediaJust when I was feeling discouraged, Austin Cline is there with some good news out of New Jersey to cheer me up. It seems that the town council of Newton, NJ, is going to abandon their 60-year practice of opening meetings with an explicitly Christian prayer all because an atheist complained. The atheist's complaint apparently promoted the council's attorney to investigate the matter. Sure enough, the sectarian prayer was in violation of the law. Rather than risk losing a lawsuit, the council wisely decided to drop the prayer.

As Austin points out, the good news in this case is tainted with the realization that the Newton town council knew full well that they were in violation of the law and would have been content to continue to ignore it had this brave atheist not complained. This is Christian privilege plain and simple.

Let this case be a reminder to all: when you see something that clearly violates separation of church and state, do something about it. Failing to do so only allows Christian privilege to persist. As Austin tells us:

Naturally all of this upsets many Christians because they don't like not being able to dominate society. It is, however, a situation they are going to have to get used to because non-Christians in America will not be willing to return to a second-class status. Christianity must cease to be a privileged class of beliefs, institutions, traditions, and people just as "male" and "white" must cease to be privileged classes in America. It will take a long time for this process to be complete, but it must happen.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Image via Wikipedia

Today is Super Bowl Sunday in the good ole' U.S. of A. My favorite team is not playing in the game. I do like the Steelers and generally root for them, but I think it is cool that the Cardinals defied expectations by making it this far. I'd probably cheer them on in today's game if I didn't know what I knew about Kurt Warner. Now I'm not sure I really care who wins. Maybe I'll watch some of the game, and maybe not. I haven't decided yet. I bring up the Super Bowl again because I have not stopped thinking about yesterday's post on the subject of faith in football. I'd like to continue with that subject in this post.

In a nation as nauseatingly religious at the U.S., it is only natural that sports and faith would blend. My neighbors pray for everything else which they regard as of any consequence, so why nit include victories by their favorite team?

Players and fans who pray for victory are sometimes mocked for wasting their god's time. Does not their god have more important things on which to focus? There is something truly sick about focusing one's prayers on sports outcomes when people all over the world are starving and being killed in armed conflicts.

Then again, praying for desirable outcomes of sporting events makes more sense in some respects than other sorts of prayers. Take today's game as an example. As time runs out, we will have one of two outcomes: a win for the Cardinals or a win for the Steelers. No other outcome is possible. This means that prayers expended on the outcome of the game have a much better chance of being granted than normal.

Of course, the prayers will not actually be granted, as there is nothing to grant them. But that isn't what matters here. What matters is that a sizable number of people who pray for their desired outcome will receive their desired outcome, strengthening their tendency to pray in the future.

In many ways, I think that the typical Christian is much smarter than most atheists give him or her credit. The Christian can pray for peace in the Middle East, winning the lottery, the end of global poverty, or some other unlikely event all he or she wants. It is not going to happen. At some level, I think that many Christians are aware of this. They may indulge in such prayers because doing so eases their guilt, but they do not really expect divine intervention on matters of consequence. This is why we rarely see truly faith-based investing, medicine, national defense, and the like.

If Christians are going to be somewhat choosy about what they ask of their god, why not ask the things that are likely to happen anyway? This maintains faith and wards off the creeping realization that the whole enterprise is a sham.

Subscribe to Atheist Revolution

Tags: Super Bowl, Steelers, Cardinals, Kurt Warner, faith, football, prayer, religion, pray, Christian