Know Your Proofs of God

You'll find more smart whimsy at Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal.

The Boston Atheist: July 13 - 19th, 2008

UPCOMING EVENTS
Programs to look forward to this month: an evening get-together for drinks and blasphemy, on July 21st at the Redline in Harvard Square, and an Atheist Brunch on the 27th at the White Horse in Brighton. BA member Sarah Tractenberg is hard at work organizing our first film festival, which should go up next month. She's made use of your suggestions to develop a program, has secured screening permissions, and is now pulling together a good location. When details have been finalized, I'll send invitations out to this mailing list, and will also be advertising the event in hopes of having members of the public join us for movies, food, and conversation.

PROTESTING WOO-WOO IN ALASKA
I'm writing to you from Anchorage, Alaska, where the moose ply the glacier-fed streams, the noble salmon roams the forests, and men hawk six-foot lengths of whale baleen on street corners (really). I spent a few pleasant hours wandering among the booths of a weekly weekend merchant fair downtown. Vendors were selling elk and caribou burgers, all variety of trinkets and carvings made from fossilized mammoth ivory or walrus tusks, and the usual hodge-podge of trade goods: knives, scarves, handbags, and baseball hats. I would have liked to bring back a polished oosik, but they are more expensive than you might expect. Would you believe, that there was, on the day I was walking through downtown, a protest against Scientology in Anchorage? I do now know whether the Guy Fawkes-mask-wearing protesters are directly affiliated with the group Anonymous which has been organizing protests in Boston but if not they certainly are adopting their model. The protest isn't just an expression of distaste for the Scientology brand of crazy; in the past few years, Scientologists have been peddling their wonky detox system, called Narcanon, among addiction-ravished population of poor Alaskans. It's good to want to provide support services to people struggling with addiction. It's bad to want to replace medical therapies with a system that is as medically fantastical, psychologically damaging, and autonomy destroying as Narcanon. As I drove past the Alaska protesters, I honked my support. - Zachary Bos, Director of Boston Atheists

ATHEIST DAYS 2008
The members of the Beltway Atheists group – for secular-minded citizens near Washington, D.C. – are organizing a first-ever "Atheist Days" festival. Visitors are invited to travel down to Half Moon Beach in Virginia, pitch a tent at the campgrounds there, and enjoy music and entertainment all weekend long. The event takes place from August 15th through August 17th, and it is highly recommended that you get a ticket now if you intend to attend.

WHAT, BIAS? IN THE HERALD?
In her column titled "The Star(bucks) Stop Here," Boston Herald writer Margery Eagan reveals that she, too, subscribes to a common prejudice: that atheists are latte-swilling urban foot soldiers in the assault on good ole American salt-of-the-earth Christians whose caffeine of choice comes, one assumes, from Dunkin Donuts only. Eagan asks, "Do you want to sit next to totally pretentious secular humanists, agnostic/atheist effete pseudo-elites (Starbucks)?" God no, who would. The article is now available for reading online only with a Herald subscriber code; however, the comments section is worth reading for the range of responses -- outrage, bemusement, confusion.

THE DEFAULT POSITION
David Nicholls, the president of the Atheist Foundation of Australia, has penned an eloquent op-ed explaining his view that atheism quite as unconventional as some folks might have it.

AN OBJECTIST CRITIQUE OF ATHEISM
BA member Dan Caless has sent in a link to the blog of Diana Hsieh, in which the "overworked graduate philosophy student" author argues that the "New Atheism" that has been prominent in the news in the past few years, via the activities of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and Sam Harris, fails to meet the challenge put to it by the religious apologetics of Dinesh D'Souza and other commentators – the challenge of understanding the source of values and morality. Hsieh constructs a straw-man version of atheists, however, in order to evaluate atheism (as if it were a homogenous philosophy?) as being less objective and rational than Ayn Rand's Objectivism. Hsieh's blog post is interesting if for no other reason than for being a succinct example of the most common kind of wrong-headed objection to atheism – namely, that atheists are relativists or nihilists.

A NEW ATHEIST BOOK
San Francisco Bay-area Atheist and prolific letter-to-the-editor writer David Mandell has written and published his first book, "Atheist Acrimonious." In David's own words: "This book is for the religious and the non-religious. Atheist acrimonious means an angry atheist; and why should I be angry? For one, I was brainwashed as a child into the Jewish religion and suffered because of it for over 35 years. Now that I am an atheist, I am still suffering but for different reasons. Atheists throughout history have been killed, hated, discriminated against, abused and tortured by religionists. And today it is still going on! It is time for all this to stop! I am the winner of the 2002 American Atheists "Letters to the Editor" contest. In my book there are over 70 published anti-religious "Letters to the editor", exposing my anger. Also included are many dedicated atheists with articles, essays, poems, quotes, songs, stories, and dialog. This is a one of a kind book because of its unusual contents. It is straightforward in the explanations and honest in its contents. It is a book of knowledge and should be read in the schools. It is dedicated to atheism in the hope that atheists come out of the closet."

SCIENTISTS' SUPERSTITION IN INDIA
BA member Raja Bhattacharyya has brought to our attention an interesting survey from the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture (ISSSC) about the worldviews and opinions of scientists from India. Here are some highlights:

49% scientists of a country as important as India in today's world believe in prayer as efficacious traditional, alternative curative and diagnostic techniques? Homeopathy being the other; 50% Indian scientists believe in this

44% India's scientists approve a degree course in Vedic Astrology

41% scientists approve the rituals of Indian's space scientists going to a Temple called Tirupati to seek the blessing of Lord Venkateswara before launching the rocket and satellite.

Raja writes: "A stunning survey! Although surveys are not always reflection of reality, but this one is fascinating, and very depressing to me in particular. The matter is more depressing, because this is a survey of 'scientists.'"
Many thanks to Raja for passing this along, and to Debasis Bhattacharyya, who works with the Rationalist Society of India out of Calcutta, for bringing it to his attention originally. James Randi, in his weekly "Swift" newsletter, has often praised the incredulity and integrity of Indian skeptics and rationalists whose willingness to challenge the superstition and fundamentalism common in Indian culture puts them at great professional risk. I think this survey is uplifting news – not because we should be gladded by the high proportion of Indian scientists who reportedly believe in a lot of woo-woo, but because such surveys are being conducted at all. "Sunshine is the best disinfectant," I agree – the mystical attitudes which congregate like condensation in the dark spaces of culture quickly evaporate when exposed to skeptical inquiry. At a time when religious leaders – Christian, Muslim, and Hindu – in India are mobilizing against education officials and modern textbooks for promoting "atheism" and "secularism" (as opposed to superstition and false history?), such dissent is even more dangerous, and more necessary. A little Googling will quickly alert you to the conflict between modernity and myth in Indian classrooms, e.g. the current fracas in Kerala.

ATHEISTS IN LOWELL NEED AN ORGANIZER
The Atheist Meetup of Greater Lowell is still in need of an Organizer. If you'd like to coordinate monthly meetings and additional activities as the occasion calls for it, let me know so I can put you in touch with members of the group and acquaint you more fully with the responsibilities involved.

A quote from Mitchell Cohen

"In my view, a secular state needs a humanist basis. Yes, that means that I think secular humanist culture should be privileged in liberal democracy (or in what I would prefer, social democracy) but not religion. The reason is that it can encompass religious lives, whereas religious culture cannot do the same for secularism and atheism."

-- quoted in "The New Atheism" for the Winter 2008 issue of Dissent

Faithlessness and the Founding Fathers

In her most recent About.com: Christianity newsletter, Mary Fairchild exhorts readers to commemorate our nation's origin "in the spirit of the founding fathers." By implying that this spirit is a Christian one, however, she is mistaken. Either she is unaware that the founders of early America were far more freethinking than her or your fellow believers, or, she is willing to ignore a preponderance of historical evidence in order to rally her audience to the belief that their faith was shared by these great leaders. In case the former explanation accounts for her lapse, I wrote to her to share the following quotes assembled by Steven Morris for a 1995 article in "Free Inquiry", titled "The Founding Fathers Were Not Christians." They're also of certain interest to all red-blooded American Atheists:

1: THOMAS PAINE
"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of...Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."

2: GEORGE WASHINGTON
The first president of the United States, never declared himself a Christian according to contemporary reports or in any of his voluminous correspondence. Washington Championed the cause of freedom from religious intolerance and compulsion. When John Murray (a universalist who denied the existence of hell) was invited to become an army chaplain, the other chaplains petitioned Washington for his dismissal. Instead, Washington gave him the appointment. On his deathbed, Washington uttered no words of a religious nature and did not call for a clergyman to be in attendance.

3. THOMAS JEFFERSON
"The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ levelled to every understanding and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticisms of Plato, materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from its indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power, and pre-eminence. The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus himself are within the comprehension of a child; but thousands of volumes have not yet explained the Platonisms engrafted on them: and for this obvious reason that nonsense can never be explained."

4. JAMES MADISON
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise." ... "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."

In her email, Fairchild mentions a letter which John Adams wrote to his wife. Perhaps she are unaware that his wife was particularly pious and devout? It's conceivable that Adams was deferring to his wife's religiosity when he made the suggestion that Independence Day "ought to be commemorated as the day of deliverance by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty." Certainly such an idea was uncharacteristic of him, as can be seen in this final excerpt from Morris' compilation:

5. JOHN ADAMS
John Adams, the country's second president, was drawn to the study of law but faced pressure from his father to become a clergyman. He wrote that he found among the lawyers 'noble and gallant achievements" but among the clergy, the "pretended sanctity of some absolute dunces". Late in life he wrote: "Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, "This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it!"

One might recall from junior-high civics class that it was during Adam's administration that the Senate ratified the Treaty of Peace and Friendship, which states (in Article XI) that "the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."

I hope, but cannot expect, that Fairchild will in the future give her audience a more historically accurate perspective on the religious views of the founding fathers.Their religious beliefs were quite alien from those she holds, and I think it is likely that they would be quite intolerant of her efforts to align their actions and pronouncements with her doctrines. But this should be no reason for anyone to celebrate less patriotically on the 4th: the deeds of the founding fathers were worthy of our respect and admiration, regardless of their creeds.

A final note. Fairchild writes at About.com: Christianity that "many of the founding fathers of the United States of America were men of deep religious convictions based in the Bible and their Christian faith in Jesus Christ." I won't outright deny this -- my knowledge of history perhaps isn't as deep as yours -- but I can dispute it, with a simple question about the professional roles available to a certain class of citizen in that time: what else was an intellectually-minded man to do? If he was not a lawyer or a merchant, he was bound to be a clergyman. But less important than the actual distribution of authentic religious belief among the founding fathers, is the corollary to your statement. If it is undeniable that many of the founding fathers were men of religious conviction, it is equally undeniable that many of the founding fathers rejected religion.

I hope that Fairchild, and the many thousands of Christians who receive her newsletter, can honor the virtue and legacy of skeptics, freethinkers, deists, agnostics, and atheists, with as much enthusiasm as they celebrate the legacy of the Episcopalians, Lutherans, etc., found among the founding fathers. The good fortunes and freedoms of our United States is due in large part to the work of men who had courage enough to reject the supernatural, at a time when doing so came at great cost, in order to build the world's first first modern democratic republic upon a sound, secular foundation.

For those who want to learn more, here are the sources which Morris gives in his article. It's quite an exciting bibliography, for anyone looking for summer reading.

Sources:
1. From: "The Age of Reason" by Thomas Paine, pp. 8,9 (Republished 1984, Prometheus Books, Buffalo, NY)
2. From: "George Washington and Religion" by Paul F. Boller Jr., pp. 16, 87, 88, 108, 113, 121, 127 (1963, Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, TX)
3. From: "Thomas Jefferson, an Intimate History" by Fawn M. Brodie, p. 453 (1974, W.W) Norton and Co. Inc. New York, NY) Quoting a letter by TJ to Alexander Smyth Jan 17, 1825, and "Thomas Jefferson, Passionate Pilgrim" by Alf Mapp Jr., pp. 246 (1991, Madison Books, Lanham, MD) quoting letter by TJ to John Adams, July 5, 1814.
4. From: "The Madisons" by Virginia Moore, P. 43 (1979, McGraw-Hill Co. New York, NY) quoting a letter by JM to William Bradford April 1, 1774, and "James Madison, A Biography in his Own Words," edited by Joseph Gardner, p. 93, (1974, Newsweek, New York, NY) Quoting Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments by JM, June 1785.
5. From: "The Character of John Adams" by Peter Shaw, pp. 17 (1976, North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC) Quoting a letter by JA to Charles Cushing Oct 19, 1756, and "John Adams, A Biography in his Own Words," edited by James Peabody, p. 403 (1973, Newsweek, New York NY) Quoting letter by JA to Jefferson April 19, 1817, and in reference to the treaty, "Thomas Jefferson, Passionate Pilgrim" by Alf Mapp Jr., pp. 311 (1991, Madison Books, Lanham, MD) quoting letter by TJ to Dr. Benjamin Waterhouse, June, 1814.

Ellen Johnson to Leave Post as President of American Atheists

[from The Board of Directors of American Atheists]

To Members and Supporters of AMERICAN ATHEISTS...

I want to take this opportunity to tell you about some of the important changes now taking place at American Atheists.

Following over 13 years of outstanding service to American Atheists and the cause of State-Church Separation, Ellen Johnson is leaving her post as President of the organization. Her tenure in this position was marked by some of the most amazing and historic events in our movement's history.

She stepped in following the tragic disappearance of our founder, Madalyn Murray O'Hair and her family, and oversaw the relocation of the American Atheist Center and Charles E. Stevens American Atheist Library and Archives (CESAALA) to New Jersey. She organized the Godless Americans March on Washington, and brought together our nation's diverse and sometimes fractious community of Atheists, Freethinkers, Secular Humanists and other nonbelievers. She testified twice before the National Commission on Civil Rights, and made hundreds of media appearances on prime time and cable news TV programs. Ellen also mobilized Atheists and other secularists throughout the nation to speak out on the vital First Amendment issues of our time.


And with all of this, she managed to coordinate the hectic daily activities here at the American Atheist Center.

In the spirit of obtaining all that she (and any other Atheist) can from one life the elegant, energetic and outspoken Ms. Johnson will now focus her passions on a new adventure. Just what that might be we do not yet know. We know, however, that it will be something splendid!

Ellen, who will remain on the Board of Directors, is succeeded by long-time member Frank Zindler.

There have been three presidents of American Atheists since its founding over four decades ago -- Madalyn Murray O'Hair; her successor and son, Jon Garth Murray; and since 1995, Ellen Johnson. They left, as the saying goes "big shoes to fill." We are confident that Frank is fully prepared for this new challenging role. He has a distinguished academic career as a former biology professor, linguist and bible-era historian. He has authored numerous books and articles dealing with a wide range of subjects, everything from the alleged historicity of Jesus to the on-going controversy over teaching creationism in our public schools. His tenure as an activist with American Atheists goes back over 30 years. Frank is a nationally-recognized speaker and debater, and has served as an eloquent spokesperson for our organization.

Frank Zindler will serve as President Pro Temp until a suitable replacement for this office is found. The day-to-day operations at the American Atheist Center will continue -- and so will our activism!

Other Officers and Directors will be staying on as well. Dave Silverman, who has done an outstanding job as our Communications Director, will continue to be the "public face" of American Atheists, working closely with Frank to make sure that our message gets out to the media and others who shape public opinion. Board member Edwin Kagin will remain in his important post as National Legal Director. The American Atheist magazine and all of the other benefits of membership will continue. And so will our efforts to represent you in the important fight for state-church separation, Reason and the civil rights of Atheists.

We're hitting the ground running, folks! The baton is passed -- and we'll continue our all-important work.

Thanking you in advance for your support!

Alive Mind's new "Secular Philosophy" site

The following notice comes to us through the Boston Atheists email account:

Alive Mind has launched "Secular Philosophy," a site dedicated to the exchange of ideas and debate relating to all things secular with an emphasis on philosophy. You will find exclusive films, books and blogs by Daniel Dennett, Colin McGinn, Massimo Pigliucci and Mark Rowlands, as well as the Center for Inquiry’s Point of Inquiry podcast every Friday evening. In addition, we have acquired the exclusive rights to release on DVD The Atheism Tapes, the source material companion series to Jonathan Miller’s ground breaking A Rough History of Disbelief, which aired on PBS. The Atheism Tapes, produced and hosted by Jonathan Miller with the BBC, compiles off -the-record interviews with six of today’s leading men of science and letters: Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Colin McGinn, Arthur Miller, Denys Turner and Steven Weinberg, who discuss their personal intellectual relationship to non theism from a wide range of perspectives.

If you have any questions, contact Elizabeth Sheldon via email: elizabeth [at] lorberhtdigital [dot][com].

Make a Call For Bill 1031

I've gotten a message from Greg Epstein, and thought it would be good to pass this along. The MA State Senate is voting TODAY at noon on Bill 1031, which would allow Humanist celebrants to officiate at weddings in MA, without the very cumbersome and non-equal special pre-approval process currently required. Just a handful of quick phone calls could help influence the MA State Legislature to provide marriage equality...for the non-religious! But you'd need to call TODAY by noon.

As is not often the case when dealing with government -- five minutes of your time could make a real difference.

The members of the Judiciary Committee can be found at the Massachusetts legislator directory. Each of their links leads to their contact information; the first group of members is Senators, and the second group of members is Representatives. When you call, you may simply say:

I'm calling for [Sen X or Rep Y]; I support Senate Bill 1031, regarding Humanist wedding officiants. It is important to the very significant percentage of the population in Massachusetts who identify as Humanist, secular or otherwise non-religious are able to have a wedding that meets their family's needs, with equality and dignity."

If you intend to contact one or more Committee members, it is important that you do so ASAP, so that the contact has been made before the hearing.

A new site: Apex Naturalism

Will Davidson -- a name you will have seen on the BA mailing list -- write to share news of the new online magazine he is publishing. The contents of Apex Naturalism will differ from other Atheist websites in a couple of ways, he writes:

First, there will be new content every day in the form of articles, essays and videos. It is an interactive site in that people who register will be able to comment on any of the content. Second, This will be a multi-dimensional site. In addition to articles about atheism, there will also be content about Science, new technologies, Nature and politics. I recognize that atheists have broader interests than just the atheist movement. I believe this online magazine can be a forum by which we can explore all the different forms of non-belief from traditional Atheism to Religious Naturalism as well as providing a vehicle for the education and support of reality-based initiatives worldwide.

Will welcomes suggestions for content, and invites anyone interested in becoming a contributor to contact him via email: will [at] apexnaturalism [dot][org].

Christian complaints against atheistic haters

Last month, a conscientious Christian name Philip Rowe was motivated to write in to the Alabama Anniston Star in order to share his opinion of Atheists as angry, embittered, and despairing creatures. He writes:

Outspoken atheists are haters. They try to convince us that there is no God or say that Jesus is a fraud because they despise us. Atheists have the right to believe whatever they want, but when they push those beliefs onto believers, the motivation is hatred. Jesus tells us that we cannot serve two masters. He says we will love one and hate the other. Whether you believe it or not, the central messages of Christianity are salvation, restoration and, ultimately, unprecedented joy. Christians reach out to people to share this good news. Outspoken atheists seek to rob people of their hope. They offer no alternative, only misery and despair.

Blair Scott, the Alabama State Director for American Atheists, dropped me a line to alert me to this case of misunderstanding, and to point out his response:

A recent letter-writer stated that atheists despise Christians and are haters. The writer’s main point seemed to be that if atheists debate religious issues with believers, then the motivation is hatred. The writer seemed especially fond of the word “pushy.” Does that make pushy Christian proselytizers hateful? Would he apply the same standard to his own faith? I am an atheist and I do not hate the writer or other Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Wiccans, etc. I love all human beings equally, even if I disagree with their theology. My car has been bashed in with baseball bats. Bibles left on my front porch. A cross planted in my yard. Death threats received via e-mail. Nasty notes left under my windshield wipers. My children harassed and picked on at school, and much more. I know all about religious hatred. Luckily, I do not paint all religionists with the same brush because of the actions of some of their ranks. But I must ask, what is the writer’s motivation to rail against atheists if not hatred? I can assure the writer and Anniston Star readers that such hatred is NOT coming from the atheists.

Unfortunately, the mistaken belief that Atheists seek to replace religion with despair and nihilism, is widespread and deep-rooted. For my part, I think the most effective counter-example to this kind of prejudice is just the public display of godless virtue. It becomes increasingly difficult for such claims to seem credible when we keep on being tax-paying, vote-casting, old-lady-helping, puppy-loving, respectful, considerate, engaged, and upstanding neighbors.

The Star ran another response to Rowe's letter, from citizen Russell Buckalew, on the same day. One line in particular strikes me as worth consideration: "I believe that our country's future depends upon the frequent and vociferous expression of differing points of view, lest we become a homogeneous society, lacking the diversity that is the source of our national strength."

The journalist Christopher Hitchens has a comparison
between American-style pluralism and theocratic line-toeing: "On one side, the ethics of the multicultural, the secular, the skeptical, and the cosmopolitan. ... On the other, the arid monochrome of dull and vicious theocratic fascism."

I cringe when Christians rail about the threat of Atheism, and frame their complaint in terms of Constitutional freedoms. How many of them realize that their demands for preferential deference align them with Islamist tyranny? We must be grateful to Russell Buckalew and Blair Scott for speaking out against local forms of religious totalitarianism. What starts small will quickly, if unchallenged, become large, become a cultural norm, cloak itself in the false legitimacy of tradition, and encroach further and further on Constitutional freedoms intended to protect any dissenting few from an unrighteous many.

The Boston Atheist: January 20 - 26th, 2008

A TOAST TO DARWIN
Looming major on the godless horizon is the Darwin Day celebration at Redline next month. It is, in the words of organizer Tom Clark, an occasion to "encourage organizations and individuals to celebrate Science and Humanity." We'll be gathering with other secular-minded, science-lovin' products of evolution, to raise a glass on the occasion of Charles Darwin’s birthday! Free admission, appetizers and birthday cake, plus food and drink at regular prices. Guests are invited to bring toasts, poems, limericks, readings, stories, songs, Darwin impersonations, and whatever else might add to the festivities as we honor the man who put us in our rightful, natural place. Join us on Tuesday, February 12th, at 7 pm at the Redline Bar in Harvard Square, Cambridge.

BOSTON ATHEISTS LADIES NIGHT
Under the joint auspices of Boston Atheists and Skepchick.org, several of our Boston Atheists have decided to host a "ladies' night" as a chance for women atheists, skeptics and freethinkers to gather together for camaraderie and conversation. Having noticed that, in general, more men tend to attend Atheist meetings, they have decided to join forces with Skepchick.org to get more women atheists and skeptics out in numbers. That will provide them with the opportunity to discuss issues related specifically to women and atheism. It is not, however, intended to be a splinter group or to encourage gender separation; on the contrary, they hope this meeting will encourage more women to attend the regular Boston Atheist meetings in greater numbers! The first such event will be held at BA member Danielle's house. There'll be wine, snacks and desserts. Feel free to bring any interesting skeptic / atheist reading matter along. Since this is the first meeting of its kind, we can discuss what people would like to get out of future ladies' nights. If you have any questions, get in touch with one of the organizers, Nora and Danielle, via the Meetup site. Nora asks that those interested in attending please RSVP to delaney_nora@yahoo.com so they can gauge numbers. "Ladies Night" will take place next Thursday, January 31st, at 7 PM, at Danielle's apartment; information and RSVP instructions are at the Boston Atheists calendar.

BODY, MIND, AND STUPID EXPO
Emily Maloney, writing for the very excellent magazine The Smart Set, reports on her encounters with pet psychics and aura cleansings on a visit to the "Body, Mind, and Spirit Expo" in Oregon last month. I think she mixes a laudable compassion with her skepticism -- even as she easily sees the absurdity of, for example, the purported healing powers of a photocopy of a handprint, she writes kindly of the credulous:

... now that I am a few days away from the expo, it seems clear that some people just want to be forgiven for backing over their cats in the driveway, or else they want to hear they were Joan of Arc in a past life, if only because in this life they are speech therapists for the school district who seriously value their summers off. Their basements flood in the winter. Their little brother can’t stop going to jail. They are allergic to wheat gluten, and no matter how hard they try not to be, they are apple-shaped. I forgive them all.

AMERICAN ATHEISTS CONFERENCE
The 34th National Conference of American Atheists has been scheduled for March 21st-23rd in Minneapolis, MN. At the conference, Atheists will gather for workshops, panels, and other activities, as well as talks by such noted speakers as Prof. Richard Dawkins, AA president Ellen Johnson, Prof. Jack David Eller, Frank Zindler and Dennis Prager. Anyone interested in being a part of the political and civic activism growing among the Atheist community in this country should strongly consider attending.

ON FAITH
The Washington Post's "On Faith" section has over the past year become a destination for news and commentary on religion and irreligion on America. Some of it is inane -- for example, the post in which neo-pagan pundit Starhawk declares that Thomas Jefferson was "deeply religious," even as she frames the debate over the separation of church and state as being between factions fighting over whether to amend the Constitution in favor of Hera or Pan. Some of the content, though, is quite engaging. In this video, journalist Christopher Hitchens discusses being moral without believing in any god. When the media abandon any test for truth in order to seem more progressively pluralistic, then we listeners, viewers, and readers have to do the tiresome work of separating wheat from chaff ourselves. Is there any newspaper out there willing to identify fluff as fluffy, mythology mythical, and religion as fantastical?

A NEW BOSTON ATHEISTS TRACT
Last Friday, I discovered a Christian witness tract on an empty seat in the subway. After a moment spent wondering whether Jesus of Nazareth should be sent a citation for littering, I put the piece of propaganda in my pocket. When I read it later, I was offended by its poor production quality, unstylish prose, and most of all by the malevolent threat of eternal damnation in the Christian hell which the author offered to all readers who have not yet joined a Baptist church and begun tithing regularly. As an Atheist, I think I can do anything better than a Christian*, so I set myself to the task of producing a better version. You can view the fruits of my labor at the Boston Atheists website, links below. The original is titled "Hell -- It's Not a Joke!", and my new version is called "Hell -- It Isn't Real!" Please distribute as you see fit, and let me know if you have any ideas for a NEW tract.

[* = This is something I obviously do not believe, but I like from time to time to try on the stereotypes in order to remind myself just what the community of believers thinks of all of us out here in the frozen barren wastes of disbelief.]

HUCKABEE WANTS A HOLIER CONSTITUTION

"... that's what we need to do -- to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards so it lines up with some contemporary view."

So says Republican candidate Mike Huckabee. I think the above-mentioned Starhawk has a point: why should it be a given that we are going to rewrite the Constitution according to the Jewish sky god? I think we've been overlooking all that we stand to gain by returning to the worship of the Babylonian Marduk, whose ruthlessness might very effectively advance our national goals domestically and abroad. Huckabee's stumping for Jehovah; but I'll keep my vote in reserve, waiting for a candidate to appear who represents the Marduk constituency. I'll give you a dollar if you can tell me succinctly how the Tablet of Destiny differs from the Bill of Rights in any significant way. Alright, so that's all a bit silly. But Huckabee is a myth-believing moron who is somehow commanding huge support from myth-believers throughout the country, and that is more than a little troubling.

UNSCRUPULOUS ATHEISTIC STRATEGY
Yale Divinity student Gabriel Michael, writing in the Yale Daily News, makes a good point: that 'evangelical atheism' is more effective at galvanizing the faith of reactionary theists, than it is at convincing believers and the undecided that atheism is a correct worldview. This is a point I have heard made by many cool-headed, dispassionate commentators offering their opinion on the increasingly visible and vocal Atheism of the past year. But they're all wrong: not in saying that zeal and rhetoric are poor substitutes for philosophy, but because they either imply or declare that Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, Dennet et al are *merely* zealous. All those writing against the "New Atheism" sidestep the brunt of the atheists' attack by claiming to detect a distasteful tone in their opponents, and thereafter condescendingly decline to take into account the arguments being made. Sorry, folks... you can't call for a time-out just because the other team is getting ready to mop the floor with you. If you don't like playing rough enough to win, then you better be prepared to leave the field in defeat. Ironically, most of the "vehement atheists" I've read this year have been far more civil and accommodating in their discussion than their religious detractors. By "playing rough" I refer to such low-down and barbaric tactics as "using rational arguments," "relying upon logic," and -- worst of all -- "treating mythology as incredible."

The Boston Atheist: December 16 - 22nd, 2007

SHOCKINGLY, POPE CALLS ATHEISTS EVIL
Earlier this month, Pope Benedict XVI spoke less well than his name promises (pun!), proclaiming in the second encyclical of his papacy that "the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice" are properly attributed to atheism. Those that put their faith in human reason, he explicitly argues, are well-deserving of the "trail of appalling destruction" that followed the French and Communist revolutions. I thought you should know what we're shouldering the blame for now. Is Lucifer not pulling his weight these days?

SECULAR STOCKING SWAG
Greg Beato writes in Reason Magazine that we Atheists aren't properly kitted out. Culture wars are waged in the marketplace, not only of ideas, but of crappy knick-knacks. "Atheists," he writes, "are still in the pop Dark Ages"...

Their T-shirts aren’t as visually appealing, their tchotchkes aren’t as diverse, and their rock bands aren’t spreading a 110-decibel message of rational humanism. It’s time to evolve past the Darwin Fish and fill up nonbelievers’ stockings with atheist junk that’s as gloriously profane as the junk blessed by Jesus.

So! Here's a few sources for godless gift gear:
* Mugs, T-shirts, stickers, emblems, and other progressive and freethought items from http://EvolveFISH.com
* A nice mix of irreverent, defiant, hostile, and proud products can be found at the Atheist Café Press shop
* Bart Meltzer from American Atheists recommends that we check out the Naughty & Nice list being circulated by the Christian conservative group Liberty Counsel, a group of lawyers who are devoted to "restoring the culture one case at a time by advancing religious freedom, the sanctity of human life and the traditional family." Their Nice category is full of retailers who have not been cowed by us Atheists into denying their faith, and openly acknowledge and even celebrate Christmas in their stores. The Naughty category, on the other hand, is full of shops that instruct their employees to keep things on a more secular keel. This is very helpful; to think we might have had to do the work of finding all those Naughtily realty-based retailers on our own! Thanks, Liberty Counsel, for directing us to those businesses which value everyone’s ideas.
* If you were wondering were to find Atheist holiday cards, you might have some luck at http://www.atheistholidaycards.com. The American Atheists sell similarly themed cards, as well.
* Jon Gledstone's utterly PC nativity card is explained at The Sun.
-1. Finally, the Evangelical Atheist a few years ago compiled a nice list of thoughtful gifts for your Atheist loved ones. It's still a great source for ideas!

PONDERING AN ATHEIST PRESIDENCY
Writing in the Houston Chronicle, Beverly McPhail bravely ventures into the hypothetical minefield: "Suppose we elected an atheist president?" According to her analysis, "journalists and voters would have to focus on substantive policy positions held by candidates rather than their professed beliefs." Our political system, in short, would run to chaos.

JESUS RIDES A DINOSAUR
NOT on my list of recommended holiday purchase: The Beginner's Bible Coloring Book, a sample of which can be seen at Flickr. I stumbled across this howler while browsing Dr. JonboyG's photo gallery of shots snapped off at the Creationist Museum. I especially enjoyed the triceratops wearing a saddle, for God so loved his children that he gave them herbivorous, ceratopsid ponies.

THE POINTLESS NEGATIVITY OF... WE ATHEISTS!
P. David Hornik, writing for The American Spectator, can't see what Atheism has to offer, other than negation: "do not feel what you feel, do not believe, do not hope, there's nothing out there, our (self-)limited minds comprehend everything there is and it's not much; above all, do not seek a consciousness beyond your own." His is an earnest, genuine, and I think sadly mistaken understanding of what Atheist represents as a worldview, and what kind of beliefs about itself the world is prepared to support with true facts. Give his article a read, and if you're feeling in an expository mood, I invite you to share with the mailing list what you think Atheism has to offer, other than negation.

"YOU HIT HIM IN THE ME APPLE"
A fundamental point that is often overlooked as believers battle nonbelievers over the existence of gods or the truth about human origins is that when you set aside our respective worldviews, we're all basically the same. This sameness mostly manifests itself at dysfunctional family get-togethers.

ATHEISTS IN LOWELL NEED AN ORGANIZER
The Atheist Meetup of Greater Lowell is still in need of an Organizer. If you'd like to coordinate monthly meetings and additional activities as the occasion calls for it, let me know so I can put you in touch with members of the group and acquaint you more fully with the responsibilities involved.

PROGRAMS FOR 2008
Dinner parties, pub nights, movie screenings, book clubs, protests or teach-ins, trips to museums or speeches, or debates, the deployment of BA information tables at local festivals and public gatherings, charity or service events, special BA-only seminars on science, philosophy, or politics, meetings with government representatives to articulate the Atheist perspective on community and state issues... what do YOU want the Boston Atheists to do in 2008? Let me know, or contribute to the discussion on the mailing list. I've got plans in mind for quite a few activities, but I can't meet your needs and fulfill your expectations if I don't hear from you.

A Conjecture

Is it the case that, because the burden of proof is carried by the party claiming the actuality of any event with low initial probability, atheism does not need prior demonstration? Discuss.

The Boston Atheist: November 18 - 24, 2007

A LAMENTED LAPSE
The last BA bulletin was too many weeks ago, and in compiling this one, I have discarded many notes and links which I had intended to share with the BA membership but which during that long interval grew stale. It was a bumpy start to the semester here at work, but I've emerged from the busyness and you'll be seeing regular newsletters once again. Part of the busyness was related to the BA: I've been working on the website, putting together pages and assembling content. I'd be grateful for any feedback, editorial or philosophical, I can get on my explanation of the asterisk as our logo.

THE GOLDEN COMPASS
I propose that we attend next month's opening of "The Golden Compass" en masse. To be clear, my own motivation would not be to affirm Pullman's message against organized religion, however much that mission aligns with my own beliefs. Instead, it would be my goal to shore up the box office despite the campaign against it. Religions that campaign against their critics, instead of embracing and responding to criticism, are contrary to the principles of free inquiry and dissent that are the strength of American culture.

In a news release dated Nov. 2, the Catholic League president Bill Donohue decried Pullman's "appalling deceit." He said:

The last thing Pullman trusts is the people. That is why he tries to sneak his atheism in back-door to kids. If he had any courage, he’d defend his work, but instead he continues to do what he does best—practice deceit. This is the same man who boldly exclaimed a few years ago, ‘I’m trying to undermine the basis of Christian belief.’ Now he says that it is undemocratic of us to issue a consumer’s alert (we've published a booklet on his work) that exposes his hatred of all things Catholic. We at the Catholic League never had to run from our work. How pitiful it is to see a grown man slip kids his poisonous pill and then pretend he trusts the reader. We are so happy to have ripped the mask off his face. And the movie doesn't even open for another five weeks! This is going to be a good ride. Hope Pullman is up to it.”

It isn't hard for us to recognize that his group's "consumer alert" is unapologetic censorship; but what of those million subject to such repressive messages every week at Mass? Pullman's comment on the League's furor, incidentally, is impressively respectful of independent thinking:

“Well, you know I always mistrust people who tell us how we should understand something. They know better than we do what the book means or what this means and how we should read it and whether we should read it or not. I don’t think that’s democratic. I prefer to trust the reader. I prefer to trust what I call the democracy of reading. When everybody has the right to form their own opinion and read what they like and come to their own conclusion about it. So I trust the reader.”

I've added this event to our Meetup calendar for December.

ASK A BOSTON ATHEIST
In another sign of progress as we move toward the January roll-out of the new Boston Atheists website, I've posted the first of our frequently-asked-questions for the Ask An Atheist page. I'm continually adding to these, so email me whenever you have the urge to add to what I expect will become a compendious resource. Many thanks to our own Ken Granderson and Patrick Julius, president of the Secular Student Alliance at the University of Michigan, for being the first to contribute.

RANDI RIPS ON RON'S RAMBLES
[By James Randi, excerpted from the SWIFT newsletter, Nov. 15 2007]
You just can’t make Scientology look sillier than it already is. To prove that contention, I ask you to read the following seven sentences written by L. Ron Hubbard, excerpted from his “Route to Infinity” lectures – which title, alone, shows the inanity of the man and his words. I opened a Hubbard book at random just to show an inquirer at the JREF that none of Hubbard made any sense, and got this:

In interpersonal relations, you will notice that when you have a person agreeing on a decision, you will get action.[1] If a person agrees on a decision, you will get action if it’s an action decision, and if it’s a "not to be" or an inaction decision, you will also get the inaction.[2] In other words, you get what you want by bringing to pass an agreement.[3] This is very, very important in interpersonal relations and is actually the one problem of interpersonal relations.[4] You’ll find all arguments are based upon an inability to agree.[5] You will find that all friction which occurs between an individual and a group, an individual and another individual or a group and a group is simply on this basis of disagreement.[6] And this disagreement comes about because of a divergence of decision.[7]

A simple analysis, by the numbers:

1. Well, maybe. But hardly surprising.
2. Yep, that’s so very true, but I believe you just said that...
3. Also very true, but you also just said that…
4. You mean there’s only one problem in interpersonal relations? Now, that’s real news!
5. Seems to me that I also already knew that.
6. Also, maybe.
7. Well! I knew we’d arrive at a momentous conclusion, after all!

(As an aside, I think that in this text and what follows, L. Ron really meant to say, “relationships,” rather than “relations” – but he was the writer, not I.)

Folks, though this seems a very juvenile technique, it’s very effective. The evangelists discovered this very basic system, long ago: Tell people things that are perfectly obvious, things with which they’ll certainly agree, tell them the same thing more than once, and then when you present them with your concluding point, it appears to have been arrived at from building on the previous statements, while in actuality it has no more status or import than the inane points made in leading up to it. Hubbard’s next paragraph, even more obscure than the last one just quoted, reads:

Now, a decision is very difficult, sometime [sic], to reach. But this is one of these hidden things, actually, in an argument. You are arguing with somebody. If you will isolate out of the argument the decisions for action or inaction – you see, a decision can be for action or a decision can be for inaction – and if you have selected out the action and inaction decisions which you want effected, the argumentation will be minimal because you have clarified the problem of interpersonal relations before you have tried to practice interpersonal relations on this problem. You've clarified the problem. "Exactly what do I want this person to do?" or "Exactly what do I want this person not to do?" And from there you base your arguments....

This is typical of what you’ll find in Hubbard’s ramblings, almost incoherent platitudes that give a superficial appearance of profundity, but are excellent examples of what Shakespeare described in Macbeth:

It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

WESTERN CULTURE NOT JUST A CHURCH
Writing in the Autumn 2007 issue of City Journal, Theodore Dalrymple argues that to regret religion is to regret Western civilization. What a rich, fallacious, and argumentatively sneaky a claim! Christopher Hitchens has a response: "How horrible it would be if we were condemned to live in this posture of gratitude, permanent gratitude, to an unalterable dictatorship, in whose installation we had had no say, and let me add, the worst of that would be if that dictatorship was benign -- that is what would make it insufferable. The story is a fairy tale made up by fallible and opportunistic human beings."

RESPECT THEIR AUTHORITY
Dalia Nammari, reporting for the Associated Press in the Boston Globe, writes that squads of Ramadan police have been deployed in the cosmopolitan city of Ramallah on the West Bank. The members of the squad "appear to be an attempt by President Mahmoud Abbas's West Bank government to challenge the monopoly on religious righteousness claimed by the militant group Hamas, the rival ruler of Gaza." Police spokesman Adnan al-Damari explains that "The duty of the morality police is to preserve public manners in public places and to preserve the feelings of the people who are fasting ... Violating the holiness of Ramadan is a violation of people's freedom." (Whose freedom is being violated by my neighbor's garish Christmas light display? Lock 'em up! They're suspect, I tells you.) This news from Palestine should be a reminder that it is not religion per se that is an obstacle to freedom in society, but religion as a power wielded by politicians over their constituents and against their opponents, by adults over youth, by majorities against minorities. Religion without power is just a kind of private silliness. Religion in the public sphere is prejudice with a club. [Source: Boston Globe, 9/28/07]

"THEY WANT TO TAKE GOD OFF THE DOLLAR!"
I was led to the piety squad article after reading a post at meetanatheist.com, run by Alan, "a Southern bohemian artist and Mensan living a religion-free life in the Bible Belt of America." Alan also links to YouTube, where a someone remixed a biased report from CNN earlier this year about the persecution of atheists. In the original CNN broadcast, the panel excoriates non-believers.

FLUTTERING IN THE DOVECOTES OF THE DELUDED
In his review of Christopher Hitchens' god is not great for the Times Literary Supplement, Richard Dawkins calls the book "a splendid, boisterously virile broadside." Another reason to keep it in mind for the gift-giving season!

ON THE AIR: ANSWERS IN ATHEISM
You are hereby reminded to support the soon-to-be-award-wining call-in Internet radio show Answers in Atheism, streaming live from Union, Kentucky, thus dispelling at least one myth about the mindset of folks in that lovely part of the country. AIA streams almost every Thursday evening, 7:00pm to 8:00pm ET. Listeners have the enticing opportunity to call-in for questions, conversations, and shout-outs ("Hey Bahston!") by calling toll-free 877.814.9287. You can also send comments to be read on-air by emailing theshow@answersinatheism.net

STOMP OUT ANTI-ATHEISM
Snopes.com, the urban legends investigation clearing house, posted in September a saber-rattling letter to the editor, in which the author suggested we "stomp out atheists in America." Although the Snopes team determined that the author meant the letter as a spoof, they report that the sentiment is not uncommon:

Given the plenitude of e-mails we've received over the years expressing the very same sentiments as this letter, it apparently does reflect the genuine opinions of a not insubstantial readership base.

DI-POLAR MONISM IS COOLER THAN IT SOUNDS
Some of you were fortunate to attend Dr. Wesley Wildman's lecture, "Spirituality and the Brain: A Revolutionary Scientific Approach to Religious Experience," at the beginning of October. That talk was part of a year-long series on religious experience sponsored by the Psychological and Religious Well-Being Project at Boston University. More information and streaming of the lectures can be found at www.bu.edu/danielsen/research/trl. Funding for the series comes from the Metanexus Institute (http://www.metanexus.net/Institute/) and the John Templeton Foundation (http://www.templeton.org/). Both institutions are often seen contorting the results of otherwise respectable researches into alignment with the pronouncements of the faithful. This untenable habit has been declaimed throughout its long history; to give just one sufficient response, here's Joseph McCabe in 1933: "The truth is that science and religion are permanent rivals, and will continue to be so as long as the belief in God and immortality is based upon realities which also fall under the consideration of science." Incidentally, the revolutionary approach advocated by Dr. Wildman was not a new methodology, but a new terminology. He made quick work of the notion that advancements in imaging technology and our increasing sophisticated knowledge of the brain have led to a confirmation of the spiritual component of religious experience. The revolution he proposes is a rebranding of experience as di-polar monism. Monism, since experience is a single kind of phenomenon -- an interior process of the brain, modulated by stimuli, and mediated by nervous tissue -- with two aspects, the material and the phenomenological or experiential. Depending on whether you approach religious experience from the top, studying the self-reports of meditators and true believers, or whether you take the bottom-up route and investigate the neural correlates of ecstasy, out-of-body moments, etc., you're looking at the same thing, says Wildman. I think di-polar monism is a savvy position to stake out, one that defuses the outrage of theists who rally against marauding materialism, and one which accommodates the perceived complexity of our inner life.

CREATIONISM IS FINALLY FUNNY
Over at Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, cartoonist Zach Weiner argues that archaeopteryx would not have been very patient with the claims of contemporary Creationism.

PUNDITS ON FAITH
The Washington Post is sponsoring an online panel discussion of Christopher Hitchens' claim that "Religion is violent, irrational, intolerant, allied to racism and tribalism and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry, contemptuous of women and coercive toward children. There is a lot to sort through there, with responses by Richard Dawkins and Greg Epstein, ongoing blog commentary by BU assistant professor of religion Donna Freitas (local color!) and Columbia University professor Randal Balmer, who cautions that we should beware secular fundamentalism. Which phrasing, by the way, I find terrifically dishonest rhetoric that dismisses without consideration the reasonable disagreement atheists have with theists.

The Boston Atheist: August 26 - September 1, 2007

FURTHER SCRUTINY OF SCRUTON
In the last Boston Atheist bulletin, I directed your attention to Roger Scruton’s discussion in Prospect Magazine of the connection of the human and the sacred. I enjoyed batting around some responses to his article when we last met. My main objection is mainly to his assertion that there is a valuable “kind of knowledge and understanding that comes to us through the experience of sacred things.” Begging the question, the knowledge that comes from which kind of sacredness? The world’s religions have diverse and incompatible means for connecting to the sacred: animal sacrifice vs. animal veneration; peyote vs. temperance; erotic congress vs. abstinence. Maybe different kinds of sacredness pass on different kinds of knowledge, but if that’s the case, what kind of sacred knowledge should be obeyed in the halls of power, in the boardroom, the courtroom, the legislative chamber, the Oval Office? If we go to the sacred as a source of useful knowledge, we shall have to choose between two unattractive options:

1) a theological relativism in direct competition with scientific empiricism, so that the contradictory knowledge of different sacred traditions are resolved by fiat as being ‘different paths to the truth’ and sacred diversity is valued over truth

2) a Balkanized society in which different communities form around different sacred truths and compete with each other; pity those secularists among them whose only source of knowledge is objective inquiry, and who must hope that their faith-filled leaders are accommodating of their unbelief.

Either we are a single culture united in diffidence toward the truth, or a culture divided by our allegiance to incompatible truths. Neither option is attractive.

That there are so many potential sources of the sacred (and that the term itself can be applied to whatever experience blows the believer’s hair back) means that sacredness is a poor source for the sort of knowledge that we need in order to make important decisions. The three situations Scruton gives as examples of sacredness—birth, copulation, and death—are rich with meaning that has nothing to do with consecration. I think Scruton loves believing; I think he is addicted to the private satisfaction known only by those who are assured of possessing the rare and subtle Truth, and doesn’t realize he gets it’s the wrong way around. The intensity of love, sex, birth and death isn't important because it's sacred; rather we call it sacred because it's important. If Roger Scruton were as scrupulous a philosopher as he is an Anglican, he’d have never made this elementary mistake.

PAUL GILBERT’S ATHEIST RADIO
Down in New Zealand, Paul Gilbert has started a music station devoted to Atheism. It's called The Pagan Station and is freely available on live365 internet radio. Paul has many hundreds of Atheist, Free-Thinker & Pro-Science songs in his library, so there's plenty of variety already, but new material is being added every week thanks to the help and generosity of listeners worldwide. To have a listen, go straight to http://www.live365.com/stations/paganstation. Registration is free and straightforward. In keeping with the sciencey theme, I've uploaded two music files to the BA Meetup site: They Might Be Giants' "Why Does The Sun Shine?" and Tom Lehrer's "The Elements." Download them from http://atheists.meetup.com/59/files.

"BURN DOWN THE THINKERIES!"
Jonathan Gottschall reviews a tempting new book in his essay “Burn Down the Thinkeries!,” appearing in this week’s Skeptics’ Society newsletter. He begins by starts by reminding us of Aristophanes’ 5th century comedy The Clouds, in which the playwright lays satirical waste to the phrontistera operated by Socrates and other Sophists. In these “Thinkeries,” “any ambitious young scoundrel” can be taught to “seem right in any argument, no matter how wrong. The play ends with an ex-student, who has come to understand the institution’s true nature, setting fire to the Thinkery and inciting his fellow citizens to drive the sooty knaves from town with stones.” According to Gottschall, author Frederick Crews, in his new collection of essays Follies of the Wise, “performs a similar public service, figuratively speaking: he sets fire to corrupted Thinkeries.” The modern-day Thinkeries that Crews is set to skewer are those institutions manifesting “most of the features that characterize religious fanaticism, such as undue deference to authority, hostility toward dissenters, and, most basically, an assumption that intuitively held certitude is somehow more precious and profound than the hard-won gains of trial and error”; they have a ruinous penchant for guruism and question-begging, and little regard for the basic lessons of Reasoning 101.” [Source: eSkeptic, 08/29/07]

“GOD AND THE COSMIC BIG BANG”
Brian Quail of Glasgow wrote a letter to the editor of the Scottish paper, The Herald, defending the reasonableness of belief: "Following Aristotle, St Thomas Aquinas gives five proofs for the existence of God. The first is the argument from causality, to which I have referred. To argue against causality is to argue against all science and rational thought." Aquinas argument, known to Muslim philosophers as the Kalam cosmological argument, and by other names in other traditions, isn't the slam dunk Mr. Quail thinks it is, nor does the Big Bang 'mirror and triumphantly vindicate' Aquinas's logic. The comments are a hoot. [Source: Canada.com, 08/13/07]

The Skeptigator blog had a different response to the same editorial:
In question is the comment by Dawkins of Gould, “I simply do not believe that Gould could possibly have meant much of what he wrote in Rock of Ages.” This bothers me as much as Hitchens claiming that Martin Luther King, Jr. was some kind of secular humanist cloaked as a pastor. No Hitchens, MLK Jr. was a Christian pastor whose beliefs (while certainly humanist) were informed by his religion (at least his interpretation of his religion). Claiming MLK Jr. is a humanist first and second only consequentially Christian is a bit disingenious, IMO.

THE ANTI-ATHEISM BACKLASH CONTINUES
Steven Plaut, a professor of business administration at Haifa University, is a regular contributor to FrontPage. This week in The Jewish Press, he launches a comically disordered and abusive attack on Richard Dawkins and the spate of "Three Cheers for Atheism" books. It's rife with straw man arguments, no true Scotsman evasiveness, and other familiar fallacies. I encourage everyone to read his head-shakingly confused essay as part of our campaign to better know the anti-rational enemy. In his discussion of Dawkins' argument that theology is not needed to foster morality, Plaut perplexingly dismisses benign secular alternatives to the Ten Commandments, such as "Do not overlook evil or shrink from administering justice", with a single derogatory syllable: "Yawn." This from the author that accuses Dawkins of failing to take seriously the arguments of his opponent. Near the end of his diatribe, Plaut briefly mentions Rabbi Nathan Slifkin, who has been critical of Intelligent Design's attempts to argue for God’s existence from the gaps in scientific knowledge. Slifkin argues that there is "proof of God and His presence in the parts of the universe that have been understood and explained; that is, in the miracles of mundane and ordinary life." Therefore, Slifkin would conclude, a superfluous god is a necessary god. QED. Such are the astounding feats of rationalization possible when you absolutely gotta believe. [Source: The Jewish Press, 08/29/07]

ATHEISTS IN LOWELL
If some of you are in the mood for travel, or are already near there, consider stopping by the September meeting of the The Atheists of Greater Lowell at The Java Room on September 5th, at 7 PM. Ginger Ale Plaza, Route 110, 14 Littleton Road, Chelmsford. The organizer of their group, which like ours is an affiliate of American Atheists, is Steve Berthiaume. He posts news and commentary at http://lowellatheists.blogspot.com.

CHECK OUT: Steve B is also one of the contributors to AtheistParents.org. The site has not been updated recently, but the forums are active and of certain interest to those of you who are currently raising or considering producing offspring. Spread those skeptical genes!

Craft the Vote!

From a Slate feature by Jessica Vitkus, showcasing the ways to increase civic participation via handicrafts.

The Boston Atheist: August 12 - August 18, 2007

IS ATHEISM AT THE WHEEL WHILE REASON SLEEPS?
Roger Scruton, writing in Prospect Magazine, is not surprised that "decent, skeptical people, observing the revival in our time of superstitious cults, the conflict between secular freedoms and religious edicts, and the murderousness of radical Islamism, should be receptive to the anti-religious polemics of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and others." Is he right, do we need an intervention by true reason, lest we be pushed by demagoguery into a irreligious nightmare.

The title of Scruton's essay is "The sacred and the human." I take his point to be that when the rabid 'new atheists' denounce religion, they are attacking a straw man that bears no functional resemblance to the mature and measured practices of actual believers. Biologist PZ Myers calls this a courtier's reply, referring to the rationalizations sputtered by the members of the Emperor's court when confronted by someone so audacious as to point out His Majesty's nakedness. Gordon Lynch, writing on The Guardian group blog "Comment is free", makes just this kind of mistake when he leaps from the observation that Dawkins writes books to the conclusion that the new atheism is of a kind with the media-savvy televangelists: "The sheer ferocity of many of the atheist critiques of religion also suggests that we are not in the territory of reasoned debate, but witnessing the birth pangs of a new, anti-religious cultural identity."

In the comments following Lynch's article, one writer says it is difficult to imagine an atheist hijacking an airplane or blowing up a bus. That's not true at all. Who among us can't imagine an anti-religious zealot with the poisoned will enough to build a bomb and explode it among Catholics in Mass or Muslims in mosque? I am surprised that Scruton doesn't predict this scenario as one of the monsters brought forth in the sleep of our collective reason.

TONIGHT'S MEETING
This evening, I'd like to consider the increasing visibility of atheism, aspects of which are touched upon by all of the above authors. We will gather at seven in the private dining room at MC2 American Bistro in the Cambridge Marriott; ask for our group or my name at the hostess station when you arrive to be taken there. I shall have brought copies of the several articles mentioned here, and will read out a brief response, my own hope for a secular future -- which looks very little like Scruton's patronizing caricature. When we talk tonight, let us talk about what role atheists should take in deciding the future structure of the state and culture, and what principles should govern that future. Anyone wishing to step up on the soapbox to give their own thoughts on the matter will be invited to do so, before we table discussion and enjoy our usual relaxed godless gossip. You'll find these several articles related to this theme at http://atheists.meetup.com/59/files/, in PDF format.

OUR NEXT MEETING
Would anyone like to host a viewing of "The God Who Wasn't There" at their home in the first week of September? The next scheduled dinner meeting will be September 18th, at Boston Beerworks. Please suggest your preferred alternative location! RSVP at http://atheists.meetup.com/59/calendar/6159830/.

CHECK OUT: The Atheist Discussion Group (ADG) of Greater Boston.

"ALL THE MISTAKES OF THE GODLY ARE MERELY METAPHOR"
In a blog post, the aforementioned Myers makes the point that people who kneel in prayer are NOT behaving metaphorically: "... if this god is a metaphor, why are people always building real monuments and cathedrals to him, and donating real money and effort to his worship? Why not just stay home on Sundays, watch football, and say you're metaphorically being religious?" The faithful really do tithe, vote according to the convictions of their faith, and infect their children with the toxic idea of original sin. [Source: Pharyngula, 07/18/07]

"THE AGNOSTIC'S PRAYER"
From Roger Zelazny's novel Creatures of Light and Darkness, 1969. The book was just reprinted after being notoriously hard to get ahold of for many years. This sacred muttering might be the most famous prayer in all of science fiction and fantasy.

Insofar as I may be heard by anything, which may or may not care what I say, I ask, if it matters, that you be forgiven for anything you may have done or failed to do which requires forgiveness. Conversely, if not forgiveness but something else may be required to insure any possible benefit for which you may be eligible after the destruction of your body, I ask that this, whatever it may be, be granted or withheld, as the case may be, in such a manner as to insure your receiving said benefit. I ask this in my capacity as your elected intermediary between yourself and that which may not be yourself, but which may have an interest in the matter of your receiving as much as it is possible for you to receive of this thing, and which may in some way be influenced by this ceremony. Amen.

CANADIAN ATHEISTS NEITHER DISAPPEARING NOR REPRODUCING
This article, about the stability of Canada's atheism population, makes the important point that atheists represent all socioeconomic classes, and come from every walk of life. The affirming message I see in this demographic data is that no matter who you are, where you come from, or what you do, there's no reason to think you can't begin to think more rationally about the meaning of life. A gem of a quote from the study's author, sociologist Reg Bibby: "You may be a non-believer but that doesn't mean you're going to trash your grandma's long-held beliefs when you get together for a family reunion." [Source: Canada.com, 08/13/07]

"IGNORING CENTURY'S GODLESS ATROCITIES"
Episcopal priest Borden Painter wants to block our movement into an increasingly rational, secular future. The inevitable outcome of such a campaign, he argues, is genocide and oppression. He feigns a willingness to consider his opponents, quoting Hitchens' "god Is Not Great": "All that the totalitarians have demonstrated is that the religious impulse - the need to worship - can take even more monstrous forms if it is repressed." Thus we return to Scruton's argument, that religion isn't about God, it's about the inborn need to be worship the sacred. By the way, Painter's opinion is ignorant, angry, prejudicial rubbish -- check the comments for confirmation, where the words "disingenuous," "dumb," and "yikes" are characteristic of readers' responses. [Source: Hartford Courant, 08/05/07]

Evolution, Religion and Free Will

I've uploaded to the Meetup files directory a fascinating article about belief among prominent scientists. In "Evolution, Religion and Free Will," authors Gregory Graffin and William Province examine the surprising views on how religion relates to evolution, as are held by some of the most eminent evolutionary scientists. One interesting finding: "Evolutionary scientists are strongly motivated to ameliorate conflict between evolution and religion." Though such professionals discount the existence of personal gods or the possibility of life after death, they nonetheless see no incompatibility between scientific knowledge and religious beliefs. Goes to show that social and cultural pressures to conform to and not confront the prevailing "wisdom" can lead to all kinds of dissonant cognition among those persons who most deeply understand the nature and origin of our human selves, the

If you have difficulty accessing the article, please contact me at bostonatheists@gmail.com, and I will be glad to send the PDF to you directly.

The Boston Atheist: July 29 - August 4, 2007

FOXHOLE ATHEISTS FACE FRIENDLY FIRE: Bart Meltzer, coordinator of state and regional operations for American Atheists, asked that I send along a message from AA Military Director Kathleen Johnson, who is currently serving on active duty in Iraq. Following her report you'll find a link to the article she mentions from Stars and Stripes.

Per Kathleen's request, please send any emails of encouragement to the brave young soldier mentioned below via Kathleen. Kudos to this brave young soldier for having the courage to stand up for his beliefs and right to express them freely in the face of such drastic opposition. Kudos to the other brave soldiers who had the courage to participate. Let him know he's doing work in the service of a far greater good than the shockingly tyrannical, and unsurprisingly pious, officer who disrupted their meeting. If you have a perspective on this report, I strongly encourage you to forward it to the Boston Atheists mailing list by sending an email to atheists-59@meetup.com. We know how unwelcome vocal atheism can be in the workplace, academe, and civic life -- it should be no surprise that members of the military can be just as hostile toward nonbelievers.

Bart shared his opinion on the matter: "If all Atheists stood up for their beliefs and were as vocal as these soldiers we would not be facing the discrimination we are facing today. We would be perceived as a much larger majority that should not be trifled with. I'm proud to be a part of the national organization that fights for the civil rights of Atheists in the face of this discrimination." The large majority Bart mentions is that eclectic group of forty million Americans, united only by disbelief. If there is to be a future in which religious institutions are displaced by civic organizations, in which faith is rightly disenfranchised, and in which belief is become only a historical fact, those forty million Americans need to coordinate their desire to work against the nearly-universal fallacy that religion is necessary. Give this young soldier your encouragement and your support; let your atheist neighbors know that you share their intolerance of this kind of bigotry. If we're going to come out of the woodwork, an email is an easy way to start. Here's Kathleen's report:

One of our members, a young Atheist enlisted soldier, thought he would like to see if he could generate some interest in MAAF [Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers] meetings at his Forward Operating Base (FOB) here in Iraq (not the base I'm at, by the way). He got things coordinated and started hanging flyers, and after weeks of having to re-hang his flyers almost daily because some vandal kept tearing them down, he finally succeeded in having a small MAAF meeting. I wasn't there because the meeting wasn't on my FOB, but I knew he was holding it and was expecting to hear from him after the meeting. Keep in mind that this young soldier did everything right - he went through the Chaplain's office and jumped through all the hoops it takes to legally hold meetings that are religiously or philosophically based. Four soldiers attended this meeting - all of them very junior enlisted soldiers with the exception of one Major (an O-4), who claimed to be a "freethinker". Well, to make a very long story a little shorter, the Major turned out to be a fundamentalist Christian who verbally berated the other attendees, accused them of plotting against Christians and disrespecting soldiers who have died protecting the Constitution, and threatened them with punishment under the UCMJ for their activities (said they were "going down") and said he would do whatever it took to shut the meetings down. Keep in mind that by this point, he had two of the attendees (one soldier fled when the shouting started) standing at the position of attention so that he could yell at them, berate them, and humiliate them. This apparently went on for several minutes at which time the Major shut down the meeting by saying he wasn't some "push-over Chaplain" and that he would not tolerate the meetings to continue. The young MAAF member who hosted the meeting is absolutely freaked out about what happened, but he said he's going to continue with the meetings and isn't going to be bullied by the prayer warriors. I've advised him to immediately notify the Chaplain sponsor of what happened to get guidance while I try to figure out what to do next. I should hear something back from him tonight sometime and there's even a small possibility I might be able to score a mission to his FOB and attend one of his meetings in the next few weeks (if I do, I'll meet with the Chaplain in person). As for immediate action, he's going to get me the names of his Chaplain sponsor and the name of the officer who disrupted the meeting. My intent right now is to make a formal report to the most senior Chaplain I can find along with possibly an Equal Opportunity complaint against the officer if we can get him fully identified. I may not be eligible to make that complaint because I wasn't there, but I can at least smooth the way for this young troop to make one if he elects to. At the very least, I can make the EO office formally aware of what happened there. More info will follow when I get it, but right now, feel free to disseminate this information since I've intentionally sanitized it for names and locations.

Related items include Staff Sgt. Gene Horrigan's letter "Read the Constitution" in response to Spc. Matthew B. Cravens' letter "Atheist 'revival' bad for U.S." Also of interest are "Camp Quest is legal"by Spc. Jeremy Hall; "Religions' 'dangerous attitude'" by Senior Airman Matthew Frazee; and "Our country's values" by Michael Breslin, all at this page. Please let me know if anyone finds a link to the original article, "Atheists are happy campers at Ohio retreat," which appeared in the July 8th issue of that paper.

• COMING EVENTS: The Boston Atheists will take to the lanes next Friday, August 10th, at Boston Bowl. (RSVP) Guests are of course welcome. The following Tuesday, the 14th, we'll be meeting at the MC2 American Bistro in Cambridge for a salon-style discussion of a topic to-be-determined this weekend. (RSVP)
• "A TEACHER WITH FAITH AND REASON": Jeff Jacoby is an inimitable columnist, though for reasons of taste rather than skill. In this latest dispatch from the hinterlands of intellectual credibility, he wistfully wishes for a science as informed by spirituality as was Newton's, thus confusing cause with coincidence and suggesting that his awareness of the scientific enterprise is about 330 years behind the times. Boston Globe, 07/22/07
• "CREATION SCIENCE 101": Tongue-in-cheekiness by guitar-totin' teacher Roy Zimmerman.
• THE OUT CAMPAIGN: Says Fark.com: "Atheists urge atheists to come out of the closet by wearing an 'A' to make it even easier for fundies to round them up and stone them as required by the Old Testament." Do any designers want to try designing an atheist pride shirt that is just a little less ugly?
• HELP WANTED: Camp Quest of Michigan is seeking one or two responsible males or females who are unafraid of commitment to volunteer as camp counselors for one week this August. Atheists preferred, but will consider all freethinking applicants. Immediate openings available due to 11th-hour cancellations by soft, spineless wannabes. If you are interested, contact Len Zanger, Director of Camp Quest: 248-330-5061. Spread the word as you see fit.

Responding to Mary Fairchild

In this post, I don't tackle theology or politics, analyze current affairs or ask questions of ultimate concern. In this post, I'm going to talk about vent about an email I got this morning from About.com: Christianity moderator Mary Fairchild; for such venting was the blog invented.

Mary is sweating bloody bullets -- it seems the Church is once again being threatened by the cosmic might of U.S. representatives. One wonders why her omnipotent deity doesn't simply smite the armies of secularization, instead of waiting for the pleading prayer of the pious to pass a critical threshold before acting to preserve religious liberty. Mary's panicked report:

If the plan proposed in H.R. 1592 (The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007) is passed in Congress tomorrow (May 3, 2007), according to its opponents, it will severely hinder religious freedoms, including the ability to openly express the doctrines and beliefs of the Christian faith.

Already on the website poll, more of the About.com Christians have voted that H.R. 1592 is not going to undermine freedom. Now, I don't think it's prudent to legislate civic values, but I am bemused by the spectacle of Mary's histrionic performance. She writes:

What happened to America? I thought we had religious freedoms here, not to mention free speech? What do you think? Is it a crime to be a Christian now? Should believers be prosecuted for expressing the convictions of their faith?

One hopes that the answer to her question, "What has happened to America?", is that we are beginning to want to shrug off the cloak of idiocy called dogma. Just as we have religious freedom, there is a freedom from religion -- don't be surprised if the modern population realizes is far more free without religion than with. We have free speech -- don't be surprised if others exercise that freedom by making speeches declaiming the untruth of the Bible (and the Torah, and the Book of Mormon, and the Vedas, and the Qu'ran, etc).

I wrote a little note to Mary, confront her with a different perspective:

I fully believe that adults should have religious freedom. For if I would grant myself the authority to permit or prohibit certain actions as a campaign against nonsense, I'd be hard put to explain why my neighbors would not have a similar authority. And surely they'd soon begin to call my habits nonsensical and therefore prohibited as well. As I do not trust the voting public to leave me unmolested, I shall continue to support the broad protection of civil liberties. So believe what you will; worship as you like. But don't expect that I'll be as willing to acknowledge your "right" to cultivate in your children all the old superstitions, prejudices, and cosmological confusion that we call "church," or that I see some compelling legal reason to exclude anti-gay and anti-female (to name two of many biases) from public criticism.

Believers should, indeed, be prosecuted for expressing their convictions -- for those convictions are medieval, false, and injurious to civic health, and deserve to be prosecuted in the court of public reason. Let us hope that judgment is passed in favor of reality, and that religion can finally be sentence to eternal ignominy, as one of those curious institutions that any society must grow out of if it is to call itself truly civilized.

I don't think this bill should pass, but neither should we be afraid to be increasingly intolerant of rationally indefensible belief in our daily private lives.

From a Jewish Atheist

Robert Wolfe contacted me last week, asking that I spread the word about his new project: The Jewish Atheist Website, http://www.kofersite.com. He writes:

I see a need for a better understanding of Jewish history and tradition within the atheist movement. Because both Christianity and Islam are derived in one way or another from Judaism, there is a certain tendency among atheists to blame the Jews for the power and appeal of the God idea. Yet despite its theistic image, Jewish tradition also contains a powerful anti-theistic current, one which is reflected in the considerable percentage of Jews who consider themselves atheists or agnostics. My website seeks to explore the roots of this anti-theistic current and bring out some of its aspects and manifestations.

There'll be more from Robert, as well as a commentary on his website, in the forthcoming issue of Boston Freethought. If you are not already on the mailing list, please send a message to bostonatheists[at]gmail.com and let us know to which email or mailing address you'd like the newsletter to be sent.