Church-State Separation

It is a truism that religious bigotry and the entitlement mentality of the wanna-be theocrat grow strong in our small community school boards. It's relatively easy to get elected to a school board as a trustee, and in a small town most folks think just like you do.

Imagine the surprise of the Wylie, TX School Board trustees when during a bond meeting, School board member Ralph James tried to begin the meeting with a recitation of with The Lord's Prayer. He had got out "Our Father..." when bond committee member Mikki Lewis stood up and said very loudly, "Excuse me?"

Mikki Lewis is Jewish. Her husband is a Catholic. Her father is an atheist, and his parent were orthodox Jews.

[link] ...it wasn't on the agenda, and it surprised me," said Mrs. Lewis, a mother of two in the Wylie school district.

"I wasn't there to pray or practice my religion," she said.

Afterward the committee decided to have a "moment of silence" instead of a prayer. Mrs. Lewis then emailed the superintendent to discuss her protest. However, instead of a reply from the superintendent, she received a response from school board trustee Sue Nicklas - who does not seem to get the whole "U.S. Constitution, First Amendment" thing.

[link] "I must share with you first and formost [sic] that there are many people who are praying for you," Ms. Nicklas wrote. "In ten years as a trustee of the Wylie school board, you're the first parent to complain about a prayer, and the very first person in my 68 years that has ever had the audasity [sic] to interrupt God and one of His children in prayer."

Ms. Nicklas said Mrs. Lewis "doesn't set the agenda for meetings. We are elected by the people ... in the community."

Wylie is a Christian community, Ms. Nicklas said.

"You go with the culture and customs of the community," she said.

Uh, no.

You see Mrs. Grundy, that's not the way it works. Christianity isn't "more equal" than every other religion out there, and because of the First Amendment, U.S. citizens have a reasonable expectation that we won't be preached at by our elected officials. Quite frankly, no one gives a flying fudge sickle about your self-righteous proclamation about "many people praying for" Mrs. Lewis. Jesus! How arrogant can a person get, anyway?

Tell me the truth, Sue - is that part of your publicly elected secular job description as a Wylie ISD school board trustee? To organize voodoo chants against the unbelievers? I don't think so.

It isn't "audacity" that made Mrs. Lewis speak up after four years of cowed silence, Mrs. GrundyNicklas - it was a sense of outrage! A sense of injustice perpetrated by the bullying 400-lb gorilla of the Christian majority!

Here's a little secret I can let you in on, Sue: You don't get to be "more equal" than everyone else. You don't get to have the privilege of including your own personal wacky religious rituals in public meetings. Period. The end. Yes, yes, even if you have wink-wink, nod-nodded at it for 10 years. Just because you and your fellow Christian theocrats have been breaking the law for ten years does not magically make it legal.

Also, your tut-tutting at Mrs. Lewis was truly despicable. She is the one trying to get you to follow the law - YOU are the one breaking the law.

For the sake of our Constitution, I sincerely hope the citizens of your school district vote you out at the next election.

Yesterday, July 8, 2008 the U.S. Government attorneys filed a motion to dismiss atheist soldier Specialist Jeremy Hall's case against Major Freddy Welborn and Secretary Of Defense Gates. (Here's a copy of the memo supporting the motion to dismiss in PDF format.)

Their reasons? Why, Specialist Hall cannot show that he was "injured" by Major Welborn, or that his non-existent "injury" would be likely to happen in the future. Also be cause he didn't use the Army's intra-military grievance procedures to redress his complaint before contacting the MRFF and filing suit in Federal court.

Yeesh. This is turning into a mess. If you are in the military, then military procedures need to be followed, even if they are stupid - as they were in this case. I can sympathize with Specialist Hall - and the reasons why he didn't go through normal military channels to address his grievance are crystal clear. I mean, it's like asking the fox to investigate himself for stealing the chickens from the hen house. Sometimes you just have to squawk loud enough so that the farmer comes out to see what all the commotion is about.

But, as much as it pains me to say it, I'm afraid that Jeremy and the MRFF are going to lose this one.

No matter what his reasons were, or how much sense it made to avoid going through military channels at the time - and make no mistake about it, it did make sense at the time - the fact remains that he should have gone through those channels first, then filed suit afterward if his complaint was not resolved to his satisfaction.

The military rules are not perfectly set up to allow a grievance like Jeremy's to be fairly investigated and acted upon. That much is perfectly clear. However, ignoring the rules was not the right course of action. It just gave the U.S. Attorneys all kinds of legalese and bureaucratic bullshit ammo to use to dismiss the case.

Now NOTHING will get fixed, and the Christian fundamentalists who run our military will continue doing what they do, treating non-Christians of any stripe as second-class citizens and soldiers.

I'm not saying I like it, but it is what I think is going to happen. I admire Jeremy for his willingness to stand up for our country and for our constitution, but I don't think that a victory is in the cards.

This time, anyway.

Ah, yes, gotta love them churches what thinks they's above the law:

Burlington May Stop Archdiocese Radio's Use Of Tower

The town of Burlington is trying to prevent the Archdiocese of Hartford from using its radio tower on Johnnycake Mountain because of its recent decision to pull ecumenical programming from the airwaves.

The town believes the transformation of WJMJ-FM from an ecumenical station to an all-Catholic station violates a 1987 agreement between the town and the archdiocese over the use of the tower, First Selectwoman Kathleen Zabel said.

"It's a black and white matter," Zabel said. "[The archdiocese] is in violation of the stipulated agreement."

They're the church - the Most Holy Roman Catholic Church - so of course they can do what they want.

This is my first original post, so I hope I get the damned thing right.

Did you know that the Texas Supreme Court takes separation of Church and State very seriously? They do, really. In fact, they take SoCS so seriously that they ruled that they couldn't let a church be punished for abusing a girl because "the case unconstitutionally entangled the court in religious matters."

In a 6-3 decision, the justices found that a lower court erred when it said the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God's First Amendment rights regarding freedom of religion did not prevent the church from being held liable for mental distress triggered by a "hyper-spiritualistic environment."

So the Church's freedom of religion does mean that they can get away with abusing a girl (they call it "exorcism"), cutting and bruising her, and scaring the hell out of her (no pun intended). Ruling otherwise infringes not only on their rights, but "entangles the court in religious matters."

A petition has sprung out of The Pledge Project by Alonzo Fyfe, the Atheist Ethicist.

[link] Congress undermined American unity in 1954 when it added "Under God" to our Pledge of Allegiance and again in 1956 when it replaced our 175 year old national motto, E Pluribus Unum ("Out Of Many, One"), with "In God We Trust", thus demoting to an implied outsider status the agnostics, atheists, deists, polytheists and other citizens who do not ascribe to this theology. Ideological contention is a necessary and desired result of the freedoms that are the real source of our unity and strength. These laws, by claiming that our unity rests on disregarding the reality of such sincere individual disagreement, are self-defeating.

I urge you to click the link and sign the petition. It won't change anything, but it might make you feel better.

The Pledge Project got me thinking about much the same sort of thing last week. But instead of starting a petition, I created a venn diagram. (Because that's what I do.) I was going to do something with it, but then remembered how lazy I was, so I just saved it on my hard drive to never be opened again. But I dug it out, finished it and I present it now, for your enjoyment. (It may not seem like much, but that says a great deal about how interested, engaged and excited I am by the whole Pledge Project thing.)

By sporkyy

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — The school board of a small central Ohio community voted Friday to fire a teacher accused of preaching his Christian beliefs despite staff complaints and burning the image of a cross on students' arms, according to the Associated Press.

The back-pedaling and loud protestations of injured innocence by this wack-job's attorney and friends are certainly amusing.

[link] John Freshwater discussed his creationism beliefs, disregarded evolution and failed to follow the standard curriculum while teaching eighth-grade science at Mount Vernon Middle School, board officials said.

An investigation revealed he continued teaching his beliefs even after he was ordered to stop, the Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch reported Saturday.

The investigation found Freshwater said homosexuals are sinners and branded crosses into some students' arms, the board said.

Freshwater's attorney, R. Kelly Hamilton, said his client's rights to practice religion were infringed and he plans to call for a hearing with the school board to fight the dismissal.

Hamilton said the allegations are "fabrications created by a couple of students … Not a single child has ever been harmed."

"Well, except for the whole 'burning a cross in their forearm' thing, yeah. Except for that." continued Freshwater later. "But that was really just, um, a science experiment. Yeah! That's it! That's the ticket!

"You can ask my wife - ah, um, ah... Morgan Fairchild!"

All I can say is that if my kid had come home with anything at all fucking burned into his arm by his teacher, then I would have gladly gone to jail for assault. However, the teacher would have gone to the hospital with multiple injuries and burns made with the same tool that he used to burn my child.

Paraphrasing Connecticut Alderman Greg Morehead:

[link] I'm going to use the power of my elected office to push my own wacky religious views onto public school students - for the children.

He's responding in the comments now, so head on over and let him know your feelings about his great plan.

Jeff Mullin is a "Senior Writer" for the Enid, Oklahoma News & Eagle newspaper. A few years ago he wrote an article "poking fun" at atheists for having the unmitigated gall to suggest that traditional god-belief was exactly the same as belief in an Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be Her unseen curly mane.) He subsequently received a letter from an atheist who asked him what gave him the right to ridicule atheists for their lack of belief?

Nothing, apparently. He just likes to ridicule atheists. So, nice Christian guy that he is, he decided to do it again. This time in a column dripping with insincere pity for the poor, deluded atheists.

How very thoughtful of him.

More below the fold...

In what will undoubtedly be used to fire up the faithful about "judicial interference", the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled for the separation of church and state:

3rd Circuit: Coach's Moment of Silence Constitutes Endorsement of Religion

In a closely watched school prayer case, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a New Jersey high school football coach's First Amendment rights were not violated when school district officials ordered him to stop his practice of getting on bended knee with his players as they bowed their heads for a moment of silence before a game.

Reversing a lower court's decision in favor of East Brunswick High School football coach Marcus Borden, the appellate court found that since Borden had led the team in prayers for 23 years, his new practice of engaging in the silent acts of "taking a knee" and bowing his head would be reasonably perceived as an endorsement of religion.

Illinois state Rep. Monique Davis has apologized to Rob Sherman, who has graciously accepted her apology, for attempting to deny him his civil rights in a public hearing that he was invited to testify before last week.

Apparently it's OK to be a bigoted, unconstitutional, theocratic asshole if you're having a bad day.

One of our favorite guys, Rob Sherman, testified before the Illinois House State Government Administration Committee on Wednesday related to Gov. Rod Blagojevich's proposed $1 million grant intended for Pilgrim Baptist Church, and was blindsided by wackjob theocrat Rep. Monique Davis who seems to think that atheists don't have any right to exist, and that we are "dangerous to children".

[link] Davis: I don’t know what you have against God, but some of us don’t have much against him. We look forward to him and his blessings. And it’s really a tragedy -- it’s tragic -- when a person who is engaged in anything related to God, they want to fight. They want to fight prayer in school.

I don’t see you (Sherman) fighting guns in school. You know?

I’m trying to understand the philosophy that you want to spread in the state of Illinois. This is the Land of Lincoln. This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in God, where people believe in protecting their children.… What you have to spew and spread is extremely dangerous, it’s dangerous--

Sherman: What’s dangerous, ma’am?

Davis: It’s dangerous to the progression of this state. And it’s dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists! Now you will go to court to fight kids to have the opportunity to be quiet for a minute. But damn if you’ll go to [court] to fight for them to keep guns out of their hands. I am fed up! Get out of that seat!

Sherman: Thank you for sharing your perspective with me, and I’m sure that if this matter does go to court---

Davis: You have no right to be here! We believe in something. You believe in destroying! You believe in destroying what this state was built upon.

You can listen to the whole sordid thing here.

(Tip of the ballcap to Twitter and Hemant!)

I hate April Fools Day. I'm cynical and skeptical enough as it is, and when 4/1 rolls around, I tend to dismiss almost *everything* I hear or read in the news.

Combine that with never quite being sure when some religion is real or some kind of elaborate hoax (I mean, Scientology? Mormonism? Raelism? It's a joke, right?), and when someone sends me something like this, I really wonder:

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to step into two free speech cases, one involving a church that wants to place a religious monument in a park and the other on payroll deductions for labor union political activity.

Officials in Pleasant Grove City, Utah, asked the court to step into the lawsuit brought by the religious group known as Summum, saying that if the group prevails, governments would be inundated with demands to display donated monuments.

I find myself conflicted. I have no ready resolution to my problem. As it says in my introduction on the sidebar, I'm a liberal libertarian with conservative leanings. What that really means is that I'm a registered Independant who doesn't concur with the party platform of the Republicans and Democrats. I am, with caveats, an Objectivist. I may address the hows and whys of those tenents at another time. I promised my conundrum though, and here it is.

These parents allowed their child to die because of their religious beliefs. They allowed a sentient being, a person with their whole life ahead of them, to perish because they believed that if their daughter was worthy, or their prayers fervent enough, she'd be healed by their magic sky fairy. They have murdered their daughter. I use that term, murder, intentionally. They have willfully denied their daughter medical care and because of that she is no more. This is especially tragic to me given that I'm an atheist. Without an afterlife to "live" for, or to transit to post-death, this result, death, is the worst outcome possible in my view. The parents failure to obtain proper medical care for a perfectly treatable condition is a travesty of both life and liberty.

The "State" is not necessary for many things. We are an over-regulated people in America. We have laws governing many of our behaviours. Of these laws, I believe most to be at best unnecessary, at worst intrusive. My conundrum lies in the straight fact that I'd like what these parents have done to be illegal. I WANT state intervention because I can't think of another way to handle such a case. This couple's daughter should be alive today. I'm not feeling my libertarian edge right at this moment and I'd like it back. Help?

(This post is part of the Blog Against Theocracy Blogswarm.)

OK, now that I have your attention . . .

. . . let's talk about sex. Or, more accurately, how religious nuts want to control your sex life, your access to information about sex, and your sexual health - all through the government.

Theocracy, anyone?

Specifically, I want to talk about how some in the health-related professions think that they should have the "right" to deny you services or information if something about your sex life disagrees with their religious beliefs.

First off, here's a nice bit from Illinois:

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — A group of pharmacists asked the Illinois Supreme Court on Tuesday to throw out a rule that forces them to dispense emergency contraception despite moral objections, claiming it amounts to illegal coercion.

OK, one more for John Shore, the folksy, friendly Christian apologist. He doesn't seem to be getting it.

John wrote a post on his blog called "Inquiring Atheists Want to Know: What, Exactly, Was the Sacrifice Jesus Made?. Atheists responded in the comment section. One in particular, "Instrumann", responded quite forcefully, with the correct argument; that is, that atheists are NOT "angry at God". Rather, we do not believe that God exists. So, how can we be angry at an imaginary magical being? What we are angry at is the fact that believers in this magical man in the sky influence the laws that are passed in our society, and sometimes insist that everyone kowtow to their own particular flavor of religious fairy tale.

[Instrumann] I don’t hate god. That’s a ridiculous statement. I don’t believe in any god so how could I hate one? I hate the fact that so many people invest so much of their time and energy believing fairytales and living their lives according to the rules of the fairytales.

I have to share my world with lunatics, simpletons, delusional people and people who are just too lazy to bother questioning what’s been force fed to them since they were kids. I do hate that fact.

John Shore, responding to Instrumann's comment, had this to say:

[John Shore] The harshness of your proclamation does compromise you being taken seriously. It’s too mean. Once you show people such bilious disrespect, you kind of forfeit your own right to be respected. Which is kind of a shame, because (as you know) there is much reasonableness to all you’ve said.

John, he was not showing anyone "bilious disrespect". He wasn't respecting your wacky religious beliefs, and he explained exactly why he does not respect them.

Listen very carefully, John. He is certainly disrespecting your magical thinking, but he is not disrespecting you.

I am the same way. I am kind to people, and I respect them as human beings. But my respect for them as people does not automatically spill over into respect for any strange, weirdo idea that happens to pop into their heads. For example, one of my dearest friends in the world is a believer is astrology. She is one of the few folks outside my own family that I would quite literally do anything for, up to and including giving my own life for hers if it came down to that. However, I will also tell her that I think she's being an idiot when she starts yacking-on about star signs and "readings".

Do I respect her? Absolutely. Do I respect her belief in astrology? Emphatically NO.

The problem is that religious beliefs in our society have traditionally been given a free pass - essentially having an unspoken immunity from criticism. So, when one of us dirty, nasty atheists says something critical about your beliefs, you seem to consistently misinterpret it as a personal attack.

It's just the way you were raised, John. Just the same way that you were raised to believe in magical sky men.

But we won't sit down and shut up any longer. Your fairy tale has too much influence on my life and on the lives of my family for me to keep quiet about it any more.

THAT is what all the comments are about. We are trying to stem what we see as a massively irrational and dangerous tide coming in that threatens us and our families personally. We are doing it by disagreeing with your ideas.

And you know what? Except for a few isolated lobbying groups, we are mostly doing it with words. Blogs, comments, books, and articles. There are no "militant" atheist groups - unless you stretch the meaning of the word "militant" completely out of shape until it ceases to have any real meaning at all.

Respect, in some situations, is given freely - like the respect that I give to every human being by the simple virtue of them being human.

Ideas have to earn my respect. Yours have not.

Most of the time I have nothing but nice things to say about Ellen Johnson. She's an intelligent, brave, proud spokesperson for atheists. I probably agree with her 98% of the time. But, I don't know what the hell she is thinking in this instance.

I couldn't disagree more. Not voting is the best way to make politicians continue to ignore us. I am frustrated by the same things Ellen is. However, it makes no sense at all to forfeit my vote, as a protest. That's the worst idea I've heard in a while. Write in Richard Dawkins' name or something, but don't sit home.

DENVER - Carrying a family Bible, a state representative-elect (Douglas Bruce) kicked a photographer who took a picture of him during a statehouse prayer — then was sworn into office.

***

When Rocky Mountain News photographer Javier Manzano took his photo during the traditional morning prayer, Bruce, who was standing, brought the sole of his shoe down hard on the photographer's bent knee.

Don't do that again," Bruce told him.

Later, Bruce refused to apologize.

"I think that's the most offensive thing I've seen a photographer do in 21 years," he said. "If people are going to cause a disruption during a public prayer, they should be called for it. He owes an apology to the House and the public."

Oy. Hey, Representative Bruce, you know that there is more than one part to the US Constitution's First Amendment, right? Just in case you've happened to forget, here's the full text:

Amendment I

Dawn Sherman, the 14 year old student in Buffalo Grove High School in Illinois who is fighting a mandatory moment of silence law, is getting hammered by the incredibly intolerant, misinformed, "persecuted" Christians who are willing to throw away their civil rights because they happen to be in the majority at this moment.

Stop by the comment area over there and show Dawn some support.

Yes it's true. Is anyone really that surprised? Why is it that the most famous people to endorse Ron Paul are Vox Day (of WorldNutDaily) and Tucker Carlson? Oh, I almost forgot about the John Birch Society.

In his latest rant Vox claims that PZ Myers "doesn't even try to make sense" (about Paul):

PZ needs to travel more. Living as he does in rural Minnesota, he has absolutely no idea how migration - not immigration - is completely destroying civilized cultures everywhere from Scandinavia to San Antonio.

Let me be clear. I don't think our current border control policies amount to anything more than lip service, but Vox is suffering from a severe bout of xenophobia. Completely destroying civilized cultures? Yes, illegal immigration should be an issue to be concerned about but let's try to keep the hysteria under control. More ranting about PZ: