Spread the Word Week One

So, thus begins Spread the Word, a hopefully weekly segment in which people will essentially blog, but with visual aids. Welcome to the talking points of the future, brought to you by your new Talking Points coordinator!

Here are some links to sites that I used in gathering info - there's good stuff here:
Abuses of Religion on the Campaign Trail

The Survey .

Enjoy the first Spread the Word segment everyone!

~Meryl

On Christmas

I've never been a textbook Democrat; though I consider myself to be in line with the party on most issues, I would describe myself as socially (gasp!) conservative.  My Christian faith is tremendously important to me.  I am saddened when greedy corporatists and extreme secularists trample Christmas underfoot in favor of the politically-correct "Holiday" season.  I am equally angered when pseudovangelists like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell turn a beautiful faith into a bastion of ignorance and discrimination.

In that vein, I have thought about what the spirit of Christmas means to people.  To me, it is a celebration of the birth of Christ, and a time for family togetherness.  For others, it a garish symbol of crude commercialism.  This season has its commercial excesses; the advertisements, the gifts, the (annoying) carols on the radio can cause a person to lose sight of the true meaning of the holiday.  But just because part of the holiday has its problems does not make the whole thing worth discarding.

When we put aside the bells and whistles that accompany Christmas, we see that charity is the true sentiment of the holiday.  We give gifts to our family and friends to as an expression of generosity and a desire to please them.  We donate food and money to people who need it.  The spirit of Christmas is embodied by the bell-ringing Santas who line the streets of America's cities in the month of December.  It is at Christmas more than any other time of year that we think of the less fortunate, within our country and around the world.  Or at least, we ought to.  

Though we are divided by our faiths, our politics, our races, and our life experiences, it is charity that brings humanity together, more than anything else.  In 1984, Bob Geldof and several dozen other musicians recorded "Do They Know It's Christmas?", bringing tremendous worldwide attention to the famine in Ethiopia.  Within weeks of the song's release, millions of dollars in aid had been raised for the famine's victims.  The people who received this aid did not ask whether it had come from Christians or Jews, Americans or Europeans, whites or blacks.  They just knew that it had been sent by people who, despite being far removed from the famine, nevertheless wished to relieve their suffering.  The sentiment of charity is one that we can all get behind at Christmastime, no matter what sets us apart.

Merry Christmas.  Whether or not you celebrate the holiday, may the true spirit of the season be with you tomorrow and every day of the year. 

Romney and Atheists

All the talk about Romney's big religion speech leaving out atheists and agnostics is, to my mind, overblown -- one of the wonderful things about being an atheist is that we generally don't give a damn what other people think about us. Why should I care whether some mediocre Republican functionary takes the time to talk about my beliefs?

That said, it's a little unnerving when they start to imply that religious faith is somehow a prerequisite for public life. The fact that George H.W. Bush in 1987 could get away with saying "I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots" is obviously worrisome, and Romney exhibits a muted form of the same prejudice:

In recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong. [...]

We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.'

Well, fuck you too, Governor.

But really, what's offensive about this is not so much its attitude toward me as its attitude toward reality. To suggest that religious faith is a prerequisite for liberty is, well, it's false. I really like the way the Washington Post editorial board put it:

"Freedom requires religion, just as religion requires freedom," Mr. Romney said. But societies can be both secular and free. The magnificent cathedrals of Europe may be empty, as Mr. Romney said, but the democracies of Europe are thriving.

It's a matter of time before America catches up with the rest of the First World in terms of secularization -- the proportion of nonreligious people in America nearly doubled between 1990-2001 and is presumably still on the rise (though we have a long way to go compared to even the Brits, 44% of whom identify as nonreligious) -- so I don't worry too much about it. The kind of rhetoric we get from Romney, not to mention the more extreme theocons, will seem laughably anachronistic within a few decades. Still it'd be nice if our political leaders could at least perform the basic intellectual task of separating moral & ethical principles from religious dogma; is that so much to ask?

Just No

I'm not usually a go-to guy when it comes to arguments about evolution, creationism, materialism, etc. I'm a Government major. I am about as qualified to discuss matters of science as your Aunt Ethel from Sandusky who thinks thunder is the sound of God bowling.

Yet even I can read a blogpost like this one, written by Michael Egnor of the intelligent-design-promoting Discovery Institue, and realize almost immediately that it is a steaming pile of nonsensical garbage masquerading as philosophical/scientific argument. Moreso than usual. This simply must be seen to be believed.

Egnor is riffing on a speech given in Minnesota by Pharyngula's PZ Myers, which Egnor did not see (understandably, this is the first problem with his argument); it sounds by most accounts like a perfectly sensible discussion of neuroscience and how the mind can be explained as chemical processes without religious mystery. Egnor, however, took it to be a session of atheist/materialist agitprop and objected strenuously. Myers, in response, wrote a restrained post wherein he described what he in fact said at this speech; but Myers did not bother to directly engage the addled Egnor, because Myers is a smart and busy man with many important things to do.

On the other hand, I carry no such burden. So I invite you to join me, over the jump, in looking at the terrifyingly bad reasoning of the Discovery Institute's golden boy. If you are in a shriveled, demoralized heap by the end of this post, wondering helplessly at the state of the world, I will have done my job...

Read more »

Speaking of God

I might be alone in thinking that the coin-printing error Raul pointed out below is, however accidental, a definite step in the right direction. (Seriously, guys. Separation of church and state. This one is pretty fucking obvious.)

But regardless of your opinion on government-mandated monetary theism, this
is big news:

On Monday, March 12, the Secular Coalition for America will make history by announcing the name of the first openly nontheistic member of Congress.

Per their press release, this seems to be the result of a contest they held last year, with a $1000 reward, to effectively "out" an atheist/agnostic member of Congress (such as gay rights activists have been doing, with mixed success, for the past few decades) -- although this release also describes their Mystery Congressman as "openly" nontheistic, so hopefully it's a mutual rather than a malicious thing.

Anyway, I'm very excited about this, both as an atheist and as a lover of religious freedom -- in an era where a majority of Americans would refuse to vote for an atheist president, and public school teachers are being fired for "enticing children into witchcraft," anything that hints at acceptance of nonbelief in the public sphere is laudable. Hopefully this Secular Coalition thing is legit and will be able to garner real publicity (i.e., not just unhinged bloggers).

Meanwhile, political junkies get to play the predictions game: who is it? The libertarian blog I found this on suggests, without any corroboration whatever, that it might be Massachusetts' own Barney Frank... as cool as that would be, I'd rather it was not the case. Why? Because Barney Frank is already the most awesome congressman ever, and we need to spread the love around a bit.

Anyway, it seems to be a big day for atheists and a bad day for God. Personally I hope these trends continue. After all, what's the worst that could happen? ...

Update (3/12/07): It's Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), who is 75 years old and has been in Congress (representing part of the San Francisco Bay Area) since 1973, consistently ranked among the body's most liberal members. He's apparently a "nontheistic Unitarian". Bravo, Rep. Stark!

Now in 2007 ... Jesus?

Every year comes in with its entourage of predictions and resolutions, and, in keeping with this, the AP has conducted a whats-a-gonna happ'n? survey, so that those of us fools who, you know, prefer to make predictions on actual evidence can be told what's likely to happen by the gestalt powers of man-on-the-street groupthink. Shamefully, there are no stock tips in the predictions.

There is, however, the giganto-massive guh-huh-WHA? that any clearlthinking adult will stumble into halfway down the article: apparently, one in every four Americans think Jesus will be walking the earth by this time next year.

Come again? Clearly this is one of those articles that should be prefaced at the beginning by "please install spittle protector on screen before reading." It's hard not to be shocked by the fact that a full quarter of our country legitimately believes that a man dead now for two millenia will likely be strolling around the Earth within a year. There's a lot of smart Christians out there, but I'm willing to be that most of them aren't really expecting to call up Jesus to ask for gift-buying advice next December.

It's easy to file this fact up in "depressing realizations about the world" along with the fact that Rivers Cuomo thinks that Panic! At The Disco is 'avant-garde', but I would suggest this one belongs better under the "massively worrisome catastrophes" file cabinet.

How did this happen to our country?

The Secularist Crusade Triumphs Again

(Title paraphrases a comment on GOP-open about this story.)

The Crimson notes in a web update tonight that, in tonight's FAS meeting, the controversial "Reason & Faith" requirement was dropped from the new Core Curriculum. (For background, here, here, here, here, and here are some Crimson articles about it.)

Good riddance. This is a college, not a seminary (anymore); FAS made the right decision. Frankly, "Reason" and "Faith" are two words that should not coexist in the same sentence, let alone course title -- I feel bad for that poor ampersand, what with all the cognitive dissonance it must have been going through. Run along, little ampersand! Run free!

Seriously, though. This would have been a big step backwards, an unnecessary concession to an ethic that simply does not belong in higher education. Religion obviously demands study, as a driving geopolitical and anthropological force, but to enshrine it in on its own unimpeachable pedestal -- alongside reason, no less -- is anti-intellectual and counterproductive. The Gen. Ed. Task Force got it right in saying that religion "can be readily accommodated in other categories."

...As for the rest of the new proposed Core, it's pretty similar to what we have now, save that Lit & Arts has been gutted down to one credit, two foreign languages will be required, and History has been subsumed into some kind of amorphous Social Studies-type blob. I'm eager to hear what Ben White has to say about this, since he knows his stuff on Core issues.

For something a little less inflammatory ...

.... let's try religion! No?

Anyhow, Nick Kristof had an op-ed about reconciling humanism with fundamentalism which Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Daniel Dennett replied to.

It's an interesting and not a little disturbing issue to think about here at Harvard for those of us who are have an equally firm belief in scientific rigor and political reality.

Nice guys they are...

FROM THE POLITICAL WIRE:

White House Dismissed Evangelicals as "Nuts"

David Kuo, who worked in the White House Office of Faith Based Initiatives, "says some of the nation’s most prominent evangelical leaders were known in the office of presidential political strategist Karl Rove as 'the nuts.' National Christian leaders received hugs and smiles in person and then were dismissed behind their backs and described as 'ridiculous,' 'out of control,' and just plain 'goofy.'"

"More seriously, Kuo alleges that then-White House political affairs director Ken Mehlman knowingly participated in a scheme to use the office, and taxpayer funds, to mount ostensibly 'nonpartisan' events that were, in reality, designed with the intent of mobilizing religious voters in 20 targeted races."

------------------------------------------------

And I always thought they were on the same team. As much as I'm not crazy about voters who make their decisions on a purely religious basis, the Administration is treating people like trash--"their" people. In any case, those the White House deems 'nuts' are still people. Don't get me wrong--it's not like I don't think politicians use people. But this is just despicable.

Ji-Harvard

"OHH FUCK NO NO THEY'RE GONNA SHOOT ME NO NO DON'T PUT ME IN THERE NO" is what the crazy guy in the Metallica T-shirt screamed, as at least seven or eight police officers wrestled him onto a bench outside the Charles Hotel and hauled him feet-first into a waiting Cambridge PD wagon. "AAAAAAAA FUCK!"

Behind him, a man with unwashed long hair chanted "Down with Christians, Down with Jews" repeatedly, as the photographers and cameramen swarmed. The WRKO reporter standing beside me asked if I'd seen what started it, and I gave him the same answer as everybody else: "no, although I noticed that guy earlier because he was wearing chains on his shirt." Such great insight on our part.

And that was pretty much the highlight of today's protest. Whatever President Khatami said inside the Forum -- I didn't go in, and I don't really care -- the nature of the protest outside paints a much grimmer picture for the Iranian question. Thoughts and experiences after the jump (click "read more").

Read more »