Leviticus 12


Just wanted to share. It is verses like these that make me embarrassed that I ever even suggested that I followed this complete and utter bullshit. I am willing, however, to have this explained to me. I'm sure that I am taking it out of context or something :\. Either way it still says that children should undergo ritual genital mutilation and that period blood is unclean but i digress... Any takers?

Purification After Childbirth
 1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. 3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. 4 Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. 5 If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding.

 6 " 'When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering.7 He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood. 
      " 'These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. 8 If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.' "


Blasphemy Friday: Geocentric Universe


The idea of Blasphemy Friday is rooted in the conviction that nothing is sacred, and that everything is open to question and inquiry. The idea of Blasphemy Friday is that there should be no sacred cows. Nothing should be held dogmatically. With that in mind, I wanted to do something different for this week's post. I'm not sure if my fellow Freethinkers will love or hate this idea, but I find it entertaining and supportive of the idea of Blasphemy Friday. If there are no sacred cows, then even our own convictions and conclusions are open to scrutiny. Even our most basic assumptions and ideals can be questioned. This week I present blasphemy against science!

This is a video by a geocentrist (yes, they do still exist), explaining how he can scientifically prove that the Earth does not rotate. There are 3 more videos, the first can be found here.



Beware the spinal trap



(Note: this is the infamous article on chiropractic that got Simon Singh sued. It is being reposted all over the web today by multiple blogs and online magazines.)

Some practitioners claim it is a cure-all, but the research suggests chiropractic therapy has mixed results - and can even be lethal, says Simon Singh.
You might be surprised to know that the founder of chiropractic therapy, Daniel David Palmer, wrote that "99% of all diseases are caused by displaced vertebrae". In the 1860s, Palmer began to develop his theory that the spine was involved in almost every illness because the spinal cord connects the brain to the rest of the body. Therefore any misalignment could cause a problem in distant parts of the body.
In fact, Palmer's first chiropractic intervention supposedly cured a man who had been profoundly deaf for 17 years. His second treatment was equally strange, because he claimed that he treated a patient with heart trouble by correcting a displaced vertebra.
You might think that modern chiropractors restrict themselves to treating back problems, but in fact some still possess quite wacky ideas. The fundamentalists argue that they can cure anything, including helping treat children with colic, sleeping and feeding problems, frequent ear infections, asthma and prolonged crying - even though there is not a jot of evidence.
I can confidently label these assertions as utter nonsense because I have co-authored a book about alternative medicine with the world's first professor of complementary medicine, Edzard Ernst. He learned chiropractic techniques himself and used them as a doctor. This is when he began to see the need for some critical evaluation. Among other projects, he examined the evidence from 70 trials exploring the benefits of chiropractic therapy in conditions unrelated to the back. He found no evidence to suggest that chiropractors could treat any such conditions.
But what about chiropractic in the context of treating back problems? Manipulating the spine can cure some problems, but results are mixed. To be fair, conventional approaches, such as physiotherapy, also struggle to treat back problems with any consistency. Nevertheless, conventional therapy is still preferable because of the serious dangers associated with chiropractic.
In 2001, a systematic review of five studies revealed that roughly half of all chiropractic patients experience temporary adverse effects, such as pain, numbness, stiffness, dizziness and headaches. These are relatively minor effects, but the frequency is very high, and this has to be weighed against the limited benefit offered by chiropractors.
More worryingly, the hallmark technique of the chiropractor, known as high-velocity, low-amplitude thrust, carries much more significant risks. This involves pushing joints beyond their natural range of motion by applying a short, sharp force. Although this is a safe procedure for most patients, others can suffer dislocations and fractures.
Worse still, manipulation of the neck can damage the vertebral arteries, which supply blood to the brain. So-called vertebral dissection can ultimately cut off the blood supply, which in turn can lead to a stroke and even death. Because there is usually a delay between the vertebral dissection and the blockage of blood to the brain, the link between chiropractic and strokes went unnoticed for many years. Recently, however, it has been possible to identify cases where spinal manipulation has certainly been the cause of vertebral dissection.
Laurie Mathiason was a 20-year-old Canadian waitress who visited a chiropractor 21 times between 1997 and 1998 to relieve her low-back pain. On her penultimate visit she complained of stiffness in her neck. That evening she began dropping plates at the restaurant, so she returned to the chiropractor. As the chiropractor manipulated her neck, Mathiason began to cry, her eyes started to roll, she foamed at the mouth and her body began to convulse. She was rushed to hospital, slipped into a coma and died three days later. At the inquest, the coroner declared: "Laurie died of a ruptured vertebral artery, which occurred in association with a chiropractic manipulation of the neck."
This case is not unique. In Canada alone there have been several other women who have died after receiving chiropractic therapy, and Edzard Ernst has identified about 700 cases of serious complications among the medical literature. This should be a major concern for health officials, particularly as under-reporting will mean that the actual number of cases is much higher.
If spinal manipulation were a drug with such serious adverse effects and so little demonstrable benefit, then it would almost certainly have been taken off the market.

Simon Singh is a science writer in London and the co-author, with Edzard Ernst, of Trick or Treatment? Alternative Medicine on Trial. This is an edited version of an article published in The Guardian for which Singh is being personally sued for libel by the British Chiropractic Association.


The Holy Bible: A Book Review


Sorry for the brief post today. I found this on Reddit and it made me laugh, so here you go. It's a book review on The Holy Bible by cracked.com. I think he goes a little too easy on it, but it's still a fun read, in my opinion. You can check it out here.

Don't forget to submit your positions on blasphemy for our UNIFI Blasphemy Challenge! I know I'll be submitting mine soon :).


"Science is in the details"



Sam Harris recently wrote an article concerning President Obama's choice to nominate Dr. Francis Collins as the director of the National Institutes of Health. As always, Harris is concise and direct in his commentary. Are there implications of our President publicly endorsing a theistic evolutionist? Are there moral implications of Dr. Collins' views on God and science? "If moral law is just a side effect of evolution, then there is no such thing as good or evil. It's all an illusion" -Francis Collins.

See what Sam has to say.


Science: It works, bitches!


In this video, Richard Feynman explains how discovering the "rules" of nature is similar to watching a game of chess when one doesn't know the rules: it's a process of discovery, not revelation.



In this context, where science is represented by the discovery of the rules, religion could be more accurately represented by declaring the rules when it has no control over them:

"How many needless assumptions must be made, and how much contortion is required, to receive every new insight of science and manipulate it so as to 'fit' with the revealed words of ancient man-made deities? How many saints and miracles and councils and conclaves are required in order first to be able to establish a dogma and then--after infinite pain and loss and absurdity and cruelty--to be forced to rescind on of those dogmas?" Christopher Hitchens, God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.


Links for the Sabbath - 7/26/09


•How did Adam and Eve's kids have kids?



•Wis. Father Say Sickness as "Test of Faith" | abc News
A Wisconsin man accused of killing his daughter by praying instead of seeking lifesaving medical help considered her illness "a test of his faith," a prosecutor told jurors Saturday.

•Richard Dawkins under fire: Ready, Aim, Miss. | The Economist


•Brad Pitt: 20% Atheist, 80% Agnostic. 

Never mind the fact that he misses the distinction. I know this is non-news, but I am comfortable enough in my sexuality to say he is handsome enough that I think everyone should care just a little bit. 


•My name is Nick and I'm an atheist. | UNIFreethought.com (yeah that's this site!)
"...or materialize a plague of rabid dick-biting dobermans..." (how's that for a teaser?!)





•The Courtier's Reply | Pharyngula (This is a classic and everyone must read this!) 


•Another blog to follow(but us first!!!) http://unreasonablefaith.com/


"With soap, baptism is a good thing." - Robert G. Ingersoll


Unreasonable Faith: "Suffering is God's Plan?"



I really like this post by Unreasonable Faith, it manages to make a good point at the expense of the Catholic Church, which is always a good thing :). Whether or not you are a supporter of euthanasia or assisted suicide, you can surely appreciate the "facepalm" that results as your body automatically reacts to the stupidity and cruelty of the late Pope John Paul II's quote.


Blasphemy Friday: Adultery with a Married Muslim Woman


On July 2, a 24 year old Danish man was put into the hospital after having sulfuric acid poured down his throat. The attempted murder was very possibly an "honour" attack.

As always, what crime deserves such drastic, life-ending actions? Adultery. More specifically, adultery with a married Muslim women. Now, I don't condone adultery (though I do question the female's say in her marriage), but I highlight this story questioning if adultery demands murder attempts?

Here is the Guardian article.

Oh, he was also stabbed.


Thinking About My ENTIRE Family Tree


Most of you are aware that I'm a biologist (OK, a *student* but with the number of hours I have, I should have 3 PhDs), and that my area of interest is primarily evolutionary biology. And like a good little scientist, I read publications related to my field several times a week. I just finished a pretty big binge, and my brain is exhausted. But one final thought just filled me with so much awe and childish wonder that I had to write SOMEthing.

As I sat there reading on my couch, scratching my cat behind her ears, the little booger looked up at me. And I thought, "Awww, my friend likes me." Then I thought about what I was reading and remembered that she's not just my friend -- my pet. She's my cousin. Not figuratively. She is literally my cousin (yours, too, by the way). A literal relative, just like the people I see at my family reunion. If we traveled backwards in time, at some point, we would eventually encounter *something* that was the last living creature to be both her ancestor and mine. And this is in the exact same sense that my grandmother is the common ancestor of a first cousin and I. She's not a first cousin for sure. Something like a 25 millionth cousin would be closer to the actual relatedness, but an actual relative, nonetheless. It gave me pause to think about my cat in that way; as family. And to think about how her branch of the family has historically made their living very differently from my (our) branch of the family.

Then I got up to grab something to drink, and an even more incredible thought hit me as I looked out the window. That tree over there... right over there in front of The Blue Room... is also my cousin. Literally my actual relative. Now THAT branch of the family (ba-dum-CHING) makes its living VERY differently from me or Megara, but it is related to both of us. *Equally* related to both of us, I might add. At SOME point, there existed a single-celled organism that was the last individual to be the ancestor of me, the red maple tree in front of The Blue Room, and Megara. It was also the ancestor of most other multicellular organisms, of course. But think about this: at this point, where we're looking at the last individual to be the ancestor of all three of us; when that cell divided, one of the daughter cells went on to become the ancestor of all trees and no cats or humans, and the other cell went on to become the ancestor of all cats and humans, but no trees. It's really an astounding thought when you realize that this event HAD to have happened, and that individual organism actually HAD to have existed.

This is the kind of thing that appeals to my intellect. This is why I study and hope to teach evolutionary biology. It is a grand, satisfying, and fulfilling view of life to have and I want to share it with as many people as possible.


What’s New on UNIFreethought.com


This week has been an eventful few days for UNIFreethought.com. On Tuesday there were a few big additions to the site I wanted to make sure you know about.

First is the "Calendar" link in our link bar. UNIFI now has a public Google calendar that will be updated regularly with events throughout the year. If anyone wants to add this calendar to their own Google Calendar, contact us and I'll give you an invite. Hopefully this can replace Facebook event invites for those of you without Facebook.

Another new feature is the "Call Me" button on the right side. If you ever want to get in touch with UNIFI and email, Facebook, Twitter, blog comments, and visiting our office isn't your thing, click the button and you'll be connected to UNIFI. In all seriousness though, real-time communication is perfect for anyone wanting to learn more about UNIFI or how to get involved.

Our final new feature is the Paypal Donate button on the right side. This year UNIFI will be expanding our activities significantly. We're hosting a nationally-renowned speaker, putting on major events, and expanding our reach into the community. All of this costs UNIFI money and we appreciate any donations to continue these efforts.

You may have noticed we've also begun adding subdomains in the last couple months and we'll be escalating this effort as well. Currently http://brunch.unifreethought.com, http://GABSYV.unifreethought.com, http://Facebook.unifreethought.com, and http://blasphemy.unifreethought.com are all functioning. My goal is to have any keyword followed by unifreethought.com working by the time school starts up. If you have any suggestions, let me know – in fact, call me!


As a Freethinker Myself…


"So this is a day when you go around bashing and making fun of others belief? Very "freethinking". Perhaps you should change the name of your club?" -Anonymous
"I believe that I presented a balanced opinion, stating pros and cons of the argument. As a site for "Freethinkers" I thought everyone could appreciate that." –Anonymous
"What if I'm a freethinker and a Christian?" –A mother at orientation
For a group calling itself the UNI Freethinkers and Inquirers, we are terrible at explaining what a freethinker is. It seems nearly every other comment on our blog is an anonymous shot mocking our "freethinking" mantra or a Christian starting a comment with "as a freethinker myself." I'm getting tired of it. A freethinker doesn't accept every proposition on equal footing and a freethinker doesn't adhere to dogma.

So what is a freethinker? Personally, I support the Meriam-Webster definition:
"one who forms opinions on the basis of reason independently of authority ; especially : one who doubts or denies religious dogma." 
It's important to remember freethinking exists outside of religion as well. Freethinkers look skeptically at superstition and alternative medicine and come to their conclusions based on reason. They don't need to present a balanced argument on the pros and cons of superstition and they don't need to put the belief or lack of a belief of superstitions on equal ground. When one proposition is based in reason and the other lacking, a freethinker is certainly able to "go around bashing and making fun" of the latter without betraying the title. A freethinker values reason and logic above everything.

A freethinker rejects dogma. In order to value reason and logic, a freethinker must be free to consider different thoughts. That's not to say, again, that these thoughts must be held on equal grounds. Once you commit your life to a religion with dogma, you cease to be a freethinker. You're no longer able to examine the existence of heaven or the existence of God. You take these ideas on faith through an authority. This is the antithesis of freethinking.

That's why I'm so proud to be a freethinker; it's a way out of faith. Dan Barker sums up my thoughts on faith quite well:
"Faith is a cop-out. It is intellectual bankruptcy. If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits."
This is why I'm a freethinker and I hope you are too. Question everything and remember "the unexamined life is not worth living." Be proud to call yourself a freethinker.


Jerry Falwell on "Spiritual Mathematics"


The late, great charlatan himself explains that poor people are poor because they do not give him more money.


My Open Letter to the Spencer School Board


Dear Sir or Ma’am:

I am a student at the University of Northern Iowa and the President of the UNI Freethinkers and Inquirers. This student group consists of over two hundred non-religious members dedicated to science and reason. We have a wide variety of members from all over the state, including Spencer. I am writing to express my concerns of the “Religious Liberty Policy” being considered by the Spencer School Board.

I applaud the Board for attempting to give religious liberty in the classroom and assuring students know their first amendment rights. However, there are a few clauses that concern me and open your school district to legal action. I hope this letter can make you aware of potential problems and lead to a better policy benefitting the students of your district.

Section four of the proposed policy would permit the graduating class to have a benediction and/or invocation given by a student volunteer. In 2000, the United States ruled on a similar case in Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe. In the majority opinion, Justice Stevens wrote that such a policy would give a perceived “seal of approval” from the school district. Such a majoritarian policy also silences the opinions of non-religious students.

Section seven of the policy would add two new classes to the curriculum. The first is the “Bible in History and Literature.” Having a course focused solely on Christianity will be alienating to students who adhere to different religious texts. The University of Northern Iowa, along with many other schools, offers a “Religions of the World” course instead. I encourage the Board to consider this alternative.

The other course to be added to the curriculum is “Critic of Darwinism.” This appears to be another attempt to get Creationism or Intelligent Design back into the classroom. In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, Judge John Jones predicted such a tactic writing “ID's backers have sought to avoid the scientific scrutiny…by advocating that the controversy, but not ID itself, should be taught in science class. This tactic is at best disingenuous, and at worst a canard. The goal of the ID [movement] is not to encourage critical thought, but to foment a revolution which would supplant evolutionary theory with ID.” Such a course also ignores the consensus in the science community in favor of evolution.

Thank you for considering these suggestions. Please contact me if I can be of any assistance.

Sincerely,



Trevor Boeckmann


Send God a message from me: "Thanks, and fuck you"


Our thoughts remain with the Iranian demonstrators, who are suffering through what can only be described as hell to gain the rights we take for granted. Take a moment and reflect on how lucky you are: as Richard Dawkins has pointed out, there is a vast ocean of possible genetic combinations, each one producing a different person, and everyone that has had the infinitesimally improbable honor of finding themselves to be players in this wonderful, horrible game of life are collectively nothing greater than the foam on the surface. Take a moment to be simultaneously grateful and sickened that the same serendipity that has granted you life and landed you in the Western world during the Information Age (in a time and place where your human rights are largely observed) has burdened others of no lesser merit than yourself with the Herculean hardship that is Islamic theocracy.

As you read this, demonstrators are being killed in Iran for the crime of dissent against a corrupt government. It is very possible that as you read this, an Iranian woman who took part in said demonstrations is being forced to partake in the vile consummation of a temporary marriage, licensed so that she may be legally raped, and thus legally executed. Tonight you and I will sleep well in our warm beds because we cannot hear her screams and sobs. I hope you will never know what it feels like to eat your last meal, knowing that it is laced with sleeping pills to keep you from fighting back too fiercely. I have never sank to the point of wishing for death, and I cannot begin to imagine how it would feel to have the fulfillment of this wish preceded by acts of unspeakable humiliation and torture. Thank whatever gods you believe in that you are not this woman, but please do not fail to ask yourself the tough question: why does anyone have to be this woman? I hope you lose a minute of sleep over this.


Links for the Sabbath


I only have two this week. Pay special attention to the second.

Church puts foot in mouth over a 9 year old Brazilian girl's abortion
A child of 9 years was found to be pregnant with twins after being raped by her stepfather. As a result of the abortion, the girl's entire family and the doctors involved have been excommunicated from the Church, but the girl was spared the penalty because she was under the age of 18. How compassionate: they would spare her the excommunication, but not the (probably lethal) ordeal of childbirth at the age of nine or ten years of age.

Under Sharia Law, girls who are virgins may not be executed. The solution? Rape.
You may remember a week or two ago I wrote an essay entitled "On the Effects of Religion." In this essay, I mentioned misogyny and the overt oppression of women that often stems from fundamentalist religion. This is one example. In Iran, as you know, political demonstrators are being executed as you read this. However, under Sharia Law, girls who are virgins may not be executed. The solution to this is to license a temporary marriage between the girl and a prison guard that is consummated the evening before the execution. The article I linked to above contains parts of an interview with a man whose job was to license these temporary marriages. Keep in mind that this was originally printed in the Jerusalem Post, so there is a potential for bias.

Here is an excerpt from the interview: "I could tell that the girls were more afraid of their 'wedding' night than of the execution that awaited them in the morning. And they would always fight back, so we would have to put sleeping pills in their food. By morning the girls would have an empty expression; it seemed like they were ready or wanted to die.

"I remember hearing them cry and scream after [the rape] was over," he said. "I will never forget how this one girl clawed at her own face and neck with her finger nails afterwards. She had deep scratches all over her."


The man interviewed was later arrested by the Iranian government for helping one of the victims to escape. If all of this is true, the corrupt Iranian government has institutionalized rape to justify murder. Our thoughts and hopes continue to be with the demonstrators in Iran.


Announcing the First Official UNIFI Blasphemy Challenge!


It’s your chance for fame, infamy, and (best of all) free stuff! UNIFI is now accepting submissions for our first ever Blasphemy Challenge!

September 30th is International Blasphemy Day, and this year UNIFI will be participating. We’ll roll out our schedule of events as the date approaches, but more importantly to us right now is the philosophy behind it. Blasphemy has been getting a bad rap recently. Some countries have banned it; even here in the US, intolerance for blasphemy has been the source of countless death threats. So why is blasphemy important? Why are we choosing to go out of our way to offend people? That’s where our challenge comes in.

In the next month, write up why you support blasphemy and send it to UNIFreethought@gmail.com. We’ll periodically post them on the blog and eventually vote for a winner. Need some inspiration? Check out the Blasphemy Day Facebook group, Cody Hashman’s explanation of Blasphemy Friday, or PZ Myers’ defense of Crackergate. There’s no length restrictions, but keep in mind our goal is to give a defense of blasphemy to non-UNIFI members; no one will be willing to read a novel to hear it.



The Rules:

1. Submissions will be accepted until August 18th.

2. After submissions end, any member of the Facebook group as of July 18th will be able cast a vote for their favorite. If you don’t have Facebook but would still like to vote, please contact us.

3. Whichever submission receives the most votes at the end of voting will receive a free Blasphemy Edition UNIFI t-shirt.

4. After the contest ends, the UNIFI Executive Board will vote on a submission to link with http://Blasphemy.UNIFreethought.com. This link will be publicized on Blasphemy Day as our defense of why blasphemy is important.

5. We welcome submissions against Blasphemy Day. However, while they will be posted, they will not be eligible for prizes.

6. UNIFI reserves the right to remove any submission from the contest if the content is found to be plagiarized.


Sup Creationists?


Can't become different species they says. Only changes within the species they says.

A new study shows even a single gene change affecting feather color can lead to different bird species. Check out the full article here.


The Evolution of Creationism


This is an awesome video, and it accurately demonstrates the non-theory of Intelligent Design.




"The importance of Daniel Radcliffe's atheism"


As many of you have heard (did we do a post on this?), Daniel Radcliffe, the star of the Harry Potter movies, recently outed himself as an atheist. The question now is whether this will effect the box office sales of the newest Harry Potter movie which was released last night. The preliminary indication is that it will not. According to coventrytelegraph.net, the pre-release sales were on pace yesterday to beat out Twilight and become the third best pre-release seller of all time. This columnist from the Philadelphia Atheism Examiner thinks that Radcliffe's atheism will not hurt ticket sales because fans who would boycott the film on the basis of his atheism are probably already boycotting because they believe the books are the work of Satan. On the other hand, the author points out, this may get some of Radcliffe's fans thinking about the possibilities of godlessness. Other atheist celebrities listed in the article are Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, John Stewart and Bill Maher (you're kidding!).


Darwin Week Honored as "Best Event"


On June 25th-28th, the Center for Inquiry held its annual Student Leadership Conference in New York. CFI is one of the world's largest secular non-profits and has student outreach branch which UNIFI works with.

We received an email today announcing that at this conference, UNIFI was honored with the "CFI Campus Award for Best Event" for Darwin Week. I want to thank everyone for all the work they did to help out. Darwin Week was a massive undertaking and without the speakers, volunteers, and everyone who attended the events, it would have all been for naught.

Now UNIFI has a reputation to maintain, and from the work our officers have been doing this summer, I have no doubt we will. Again, congrats and thank you to everyone that made Darwin Week great.


New Group, Atheist Ireland, Backed by Dawkins


Irish secularists are rallying after the passage of the Blasphemy Law last week, which makes the "crime" of blasphemy punishable by a fine of up to 25,000 Euro and also legalizes the confiscation of blasphemous material by the (thought) police. Here is an article with full details of Atheist Ireland's reaction to the law. Professor Richard Dawkins has thrown his support behind the group and stands in firm opposition to the new law: "It is a wretched, backward, uncivilised regression to the middle ages. Who was the bright spark who thought to besmirch the revered name of Ireland by proposing anything so stupid?"


Links for the Sabbath


Atheists Win Bus Battle in Halifax

"In God We Trust" Engraving Approved for CVC

LOLJesus.com
I plan on using some of these for a future Blasphemy Friday :).

Biblical Ways to Acquire a Wife

Mr. Deity Episode 1: "Mr. Deity and the Evil" (video)
This is a very funny series about Mr. Deity (the creator of the universe), Larry (his assistant), (Jesse ("actually, it's 'Jesus'"), and Lucy (fer).

Christopher Hitchens discusses the real intelligent designer
Christopher Hitchens is, in my opinion, a Badass Motherfucker. He is without a doubt my favorite counter-apologist, and I highly recommend his book (the audiobook on iTunes is narrated by him, an added bonus if you like hearing British people talk).


Blasphemy Challenge (Teaser)


Hello all, sorry for the late post, just got home from work :). I just wanted to wet your appetite for blasphemy by teasing our upcoming Blasphemy Challenge! All I can say is that it will be fun and blasphemous, and that we want YOU, our readers, to get involved! That's all I can say at this point, we'll release more details a little later in the month!


Blasphemy Friday: Ireland Defames Freedom of Speech to Protect Religion


Ireland has made blasphemy illegal as a part of its Defamation Act. Blasphemy has actually been Constitutionally prohibited in Ireland since 1937, however the Constitution does not provide details. It only lists it as an offense that is punishable by law. The previous blasphemy law was enacted in 1961, but was ruled unenforceable by the Supreme Court in 1999. Here is a sample of the text from the law, posted on the Reconstructionist Christian site Palibandaily.com:


36. Publication or utterance of blasphemous matter.
(1) A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000. [Amended to €25,000]
(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.
(3) It shall be a defence to proceedings for an offence under this section for the defendant to prove that a reasonable person would find genuine literary, artistic, political, scientific, or academic value in the matter to which the offence relates.
37. Seizure of copies of blasphemous statements.
(1) Where a person is convicted of an offence under section 36, the court may issue a warrant (a) authorising any member of the Garda Siochana to enter (if necessary by the use of reasonable force) at all reasonable times any premises (including a dwelling) at which he or she has reasonable grounds for believing that copies of the statement to which the offence related are to be found, and to search those premises and seize and remove all copies of the statement found therein, (b) directing the seizure and removal by any member of the Garda Siochana of all copies of the statement to which the offence related that are in the possession of any person, © specifying the manner in which copies so seized and removed shall be detained and stored by the Garda Siochana.
(2) A member of the Garda Siochana may (a) enter and search any premises, (b) seize, remove and detain any copy of a statement to which an offence under section 36 relates found therein or in the possession of any person, in accordance with a warrant under subsection (1).
(3) Upon final judgment being given in proceedings for an offence under section 36, anything seized and removed under subsection (2) shall be disposed of in accordance with such directions as the court may give upon an application by a member of the Garda Siochana in that behalf.



There are several reasons that this law is a horrible idea. Not only does it limit freedom of speech (an atrocity in and of itself), but it leaves the definition of blasphemy to be determined by religious groups. Who else could determine what causes “outrage” or what is “held sacred?” Additionally, the law allows police to seize blasphemous material if they have reasonable suspicion that you possess such material. If you live in Ireland, be careful about the books you bring home, and even more careful who you talk about them to. You never know, the Ministry of Justice could be breaking down your door, looking to confiscate your banned books. I never thought a country in the Western World would come up with something so medieval. Hopefully this travesty of a law will either be repealed or ignored. The organization Atheist Ireland has announced that it plans to publicly test the law. We’ll see how that goes.


Is this heaven? No... it's Iowa


If a pastor on the Spencer School Board gets his way, public school children will soon be subjected to prayer, intelligent design's triumphant return to the classroom, and a new-found focus on the Bible in school.

Yesterday the Des Moines Register broke the story which has left my e-mail inbox full all evening. You can read the story here. The school drafted a "Religious Liberty" bill of rights of sorts which would have some terrible consequences for students. The document is a couple of pages long and attached to the above link; I encourage everyone to read it for themselves.

The idea of the document is fine; establish the lines the Constitution sets up for religion in the classroom. Students should know they have every right to pray, read their Bible, or even proselytize their friends. The problem is the actual changes they plan to implement. It's important that we don't just combat these changes because you don't like them, though. There's legal precedent very much in our favor on many of these changes. Let me present them to you:

Unconstitutional Change Number One

4. Graduation Exercises and other Extra-Curricular Activities

  1. Content of speeches by private individuals will not regulated on religious content.
  2. School will permit the graduating class to choose whether to have an invocation and or benediction to be given by student volunteer in a non-proselytizing and nonsectarian manner.

  • Court Precedent: Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe
  • The situation: In 2000, the United States Supreme Court was faced with a very similar situation. The Santa Fe School District had a tradition of allowing students to give an invocation at the start of football games over the PA system. Nearly identically to Spencer, Santa Fe allowed students to pick who they wanted to give the invocation and that student chose what to include. Like Spener, Santa Fe had requirements that it be non-proselytizing and nonsectarian.
  • The ruling: In a 6-3 decision, the Court held this practice was in violation of the Establishment Clause. In the majority opinion, Justice Stevens wrote “the delivery of a message such as the invocation here–on school property, at school-sponsored events, over the school’s public address system, by a speaker representing the student body, under the supervision of school faculty, and pursuant to a school policy that explicitly and implicitly encourages public prayer–is not properly characterized as “private” speech.” The opinion also noted that “regardless of the listener's support for, or objection to, the message, an objective Santa Fe High School student will unquestionably perceive the inevitable pregame prayer as stamped with her school's seal of approval.”

Unconstitutional Change Number Two

  1. Employee Expression of Personal Religious Beliefs

b. Answering questions from students about faith. Teachers may choose to

answer questions from students about personal faith issues.

  • Court Precedent: Downing v West Haven Board of Education
  • The situation: A teacher wore a shirt to class with the expression “Jesus 2000.” The school told her to cover it, but she claimed it was her freedom to express her beliefs.
  • The ruling: While at the high school, whether he is in the classroom or outside of it during contract time, [a public school teacher] is not just any ordinary citizen. He is a teacher . . . . He is clothed with the mantle of one who imparts knowledge and wisdom. His expressions of opinion are all the more believable because he is a teacher. The likelihood of high school students equating his views with those of the school is substantial…Moreover, a public school teacher’s shirt prominently bearing the words ‘JESUS 2000 - J2K’ can be reasonably viewed as a governmental endorsement of religion.

Unconstitutional Change Number Three

  1. Electives to be offered at Spencer High School:

2. Critic of Darwinism, a scientific approach. (provide a balanced review of evidence for and against the theory of evolution, using texts which include “Darwin’s Black Box” by M. Behe)

  • Court Precedent: Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District
  • The Situation: The Dover School District wanted to teach their alternative to evolution (in this case, Intelligent Design) in public schools.
  • The Ruling: “Accordingly, we find that the secular purposes claimed by the Board amount to a pretext for the Board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom, in violation of the Establishment Clause.” The important point being intentions matter…and these intentions are obvious.

For the rest of changes, always look to the baseline for Church and State interactions: The Lemon Test. In the next few days, UNIFI will detail how we’ll be responding to this attack on the separation of Church and State. In the meantime, get informed and get your opinion known.



On the Effects of Religion



(Inspired by Christopher Hitchens)

When I tell people that I’m an atheist, the discussion that follows is most often centered on evidence for and against the existence of their interpretation of God. Very rarely do we get past the arguments of whether gods exist, and get to the effects that widespread belief said gods has on our everyday lives. A couple of months ago at Grab A Brew, Tyler Vincent said something that really stuck with me: “Ideas have consequences.” Even if no gods exist, even if every religion in the history of the world is founded out of a combination of wish-thinking, fear of death, sexual repression and misogyny, these ideas of gods still have consequences for everyday people. For today’s post, I want to ignore the question of whether there is a God or any gods at all. I want to examine the consequences these ideas have on us all.

Religion has at times been the manifestation of humanity’s ugliest inner fears and desires. It is a clear example of the two-edged nature of mankind’s evolution: the same fear of death and of the darkness and of the unknown that has benefited us in the past by allowing us to stay weary of predators has sadly and ironically caused us in a more civilized time to bring death, darkness and ignorance back into our world. By seeking to overcome death, there are those who have brought it on others in the form of the Crusades and the Inquisition. By seeking enlightenment, there are those who have worked to plunge our culture back into the dark ages with “Abstinence-Only” sex education, the moronic and mendacious movement of so-called “Intelligent Design,” and the sanctimonious genocide that is the Pope’s position on condom use in Africa. Religion (as well as nationalism, racism and tribalism) has warped the “safety in numbers” mindset that has served our ancestors so well and turned it into an out-group hostility that allows us to lead our children in songs about bloody massacres (Battle Hymn of the Republic, Joshua Fought the Battle of Jericho). Regardless of whether they are true, religions have not brought out the best in us as a species. This could be due to the fact that religions treat the human soul as damaged goods to begin with.

All religions from Judaism to Scientology instill a belief that people are fundamentally flawed, and that the only way to fix your soul is through their rituals, their prayer, and (especially in the case of Scientology) their offering plate. Is it not possible that from this belief in the fundamental malign nature of humanity stems genuine masochistic tendency and the decline of mental health? I am not claiming that religious people are crazy, merely that religion (like smoking) should maybe come with a Surgeon General’s warning. After all, it always seems to be the religious people who blow up clinics, kill abortion doctors, burn witches, oppress women, and suppress freedom of speech. This last action is so often associated with Islam, but it should be noted that Christian groups often cry for censorship of contrary viewpoints also. For example, the Facebook group “Fuck Jesus Christ,” which was created to champion freedom of speech against religion (similar to Blasphemy Friday), is the target of constant attempts at censorship. The group has been shut down so many times that the description section now includes instructions for how members should reconvene in the event of another shutdown. So rarely do we hear about the militant atheist who was planning on blowing up the Creation Science Museum or trying to deny people their civil or human rights.

Of course, this post would not be complete without a segment about religious sexism and the consistent oppression of women in most of the world’s religions. This ranges from the controversial Burqa of Islam to the menstrual purification baths of Hasidic Judaism. Perhaps one of the most overlooked examples of this is from the Garden of Eden (my favorite fable, as many of you would guess), where Eve is not only created from a part of Adam, showing her subservience to him, but is the first to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. She then tempts her husband into eating the fruit as well, leading to (or perhaps merely exemplifying and perpetuating) the interpretation that women are inherently more devious than men and are always trying to tempt them (there really isn’t a masculine version of “temptress,” is there?).

And so I end this post with a reworking of Pascal’s famous Wager: what do we have to lose? If we are right and there is no god, then by discarding religion, we take a step down the long path that leads to a world without tribalism, sexual repression, the oppression of women or the suppression of individual freedoms. If we are wrong and there is a god, and further if we are very wrong and there is a Christian God, would he really send everyone in the world to Hell if religion disappeared from the face of the Earth? If so, is He a God that is worth our praise in the first place?


Legal Jihad


The radical Muslims have found yet another way to attempt to stifle freedom of speech and freedom of the press. It is referred to as "Legal Jihad," and it is the same practice that Scientology has been actively engaged in for some time. You can read this full article concerning legal jihad and a case that was brought against an online journalist because he exposed two groups' links to Hamas and Al Qaeda. Seven Islamic groups sued him for defamation, but the Texas court ruled that there was no basis for the lawsuit.


Happy Birthday, UNIFI Director of Outreach!




Happy 20th, Kari!


World's Oldest Bible Published in Full Online


This is an article by the Telegraph about what scholars refer to as the Codex Sinaiticus, a Greek bible from the 4th Century, which has just been published online. This has required the collaboration of scholars in Germany, Egypt, Russia, and Britain, because each country has in its possession one piece of the book. The tome in its entirety is now available to read online (if you can read Greek). To see it or learn more about it, you can follow this link to the main site.

"As it survives today, Codex Sinaiticus comprises just over 400 large leaves of prepared animal skin, each of which measures 380mm high by 345mm wide. On these parchment leaves is written around half of the Old Testament and Apocrypha (the Septuagint), the whole of the New Testament, and two early Christian texts not found in modern Bibles. Most of the first part of the manuscript (containing most of the so-called historical books, from Genesis to 1 Chronicles) is now missing and presumed to be lost." (Taken from the main site)

What is interesting and exciting from my point of view is that the Gospel of Mark is a few verses short: it does not include Jesus' resurrection, according to the Telegraph article. If this does turn out to be true, that means that the oldest known manuscript of the Gospel of Mark does not include Jesus' resurrection. It speaks less against liberal Christianity than it does against those who would take the Bible as the literal Word of God. If this is true, I anticipate hearing the following claim from fundamentalists: "It doesn't matter that the resurrection was not included in the first manuscripts of Mark, God inspired later copiers to tamper with it."


Links for the Sabbath


God smites 1, injures 27 at church 4th of July festivities

The best caller ever! (The Atheist Experience)
(video)
The Atheist Experience is a television show in Austin, TX that is geared toward a Christian audience from a secular perspective. Callers ask a panel of atheists questions about atheism or religion, and the panelists respond.

Evolution CAN Increase Information (video)
This is a great video from youtube user Shanedk. It won the award for "Most Intellectual Pwnage" in the Youtube Pwnage Olympics. It shows an example refuting the common creationist claim that random variation cannot produce new information. In this case, there is a bacteria that has developed the ability to digest nylon, a completely artificial substance developed in the 20th century.

Religious Right Smear Attempt Displays their Unapologetic Bigotry


The FSM watches over 4th of July festivities (pic)

Public Schools are Evil
They teach our children the lyrics to Moby songs and tell them that bestiality is okay!


Science and Revelation




After Wednesday’s post, which drew some heated comment discussion and negative feedback from a fairly close friend, I decided to (just once) take the time to write a blog post specifically for Christians. This does not entail changing the idea of the post I wanted to write for today, only reframing it so the goal is to actually reach a Christian that may be reading this, as opposed to passing the idea to another atheist who would eventually use it in conversation. An idea that I encounter fairly often when discussing religion with Christians (most often when said Christians identify as evangelicals) is that the Bible as inspired by God is a more reliable interpretation of reality than science because the Bible is the inspired word of God, whereas science is constantly changing and is therefore less reliable. At first, this seems to make sense. The vast majority of the ideas that scientists have come up with have been wrong, and have subsequently been replaced by new ones that we may one day find to be wrong as well. By contrast, the Bible is not up for peer review: God has no peers qualified to do the job. The word of God is, many Christians would argue, final. In this post, I want to show why the scientific outlook is a more reliable indicator of reality than the Bible. I want to do this in a transparent, open, and non-threatening manner. I will often write out my thoughts on a matter in parentheses for the sake of transparency, if you wish to skip them for the sake of flow, feel free. The idea that science is reliable even though it is frequently falsified may seem counterintuitive or alien at first, but I sincerely believe that the scientific method of falsifiable conclusions based on the available evidence is, in the end, a better mechanism for finding the truth about the world we live in, and I would like to show you why.

To begin, let us equate Scripture and Science as guesses about the nature of reality (some of my skeptical friends are cringing at this idea, but I want to demonstrate a point, and this will hopefully make it more convincing in the end). You, as a believer, most likely do not equate the two as guesses about the nature of reality. After all, a man’s guess would be infinitely less accurate than God’s “guess” (I use the word “guess” purely as a figure of speech, and do not wish to enter the discussion of whether the Christian God can or does guess). The reason I equate the two as guesses is that the end result for any guess (or proclamation) will be decided by our observations of the world around us. By that, I mean that if I were to guess or proclaim that the sky is green, this proclamation would only last until someone pointed out that the sky is in fact blue. If we begin by placing science and scripture on an even ground as proclamations or guesses, then the evidence will tell us which is correct.

Here is where we come to the crucial difference between scripture and science: science is by nature falsifiable; it is open to changes in the evidence. Let’s say I am a scientist 400 years ago, and I put forth the hypothetical hypothesis that the sky is green. Seth (another scientist) shows me that my hypothesis is false, and that based on the available evidence at the time, the sky seems to be red. Red Sky Theory goes around for several hundred years, because no one can falsify it. Then a brilliant scientist named Will uses the increased knowledge of his day to falsify Red Sky Theory and puts forth his own hypothesis of a blue sky. Knowledge that is falsifiable, and yet has not been falsified, is the closest we can come to knowing the truth about the color of the sky. If I were to say, “The sky is just an illusion, it doesn’t matter what color it is because we are brains in a vat,” this is an unfalsifiable guess, and to that extent it is weak, because it is untestable. I have just put forth a guess that (from the point of view of the scientist) is worthless. For this reason, some leading scientists are religious: they believe in the unfalsifiable tenets of their religion that have no bearing on science.

The problem for scripture is when it tries to assert too much and goes from unfalsifiable and irrelevant to science (as in the Triune God-head, which does not necessarily conflict with science) to falsifiable and wrong in the light of the evidence. An example of this is Young Earth Creationism. This is a falsifiable interpretation of scripture that dates the Earth at 6-10,000 years old. We now have evidence from every science from Astronomy to Biology, Geology to Zoology that the Earth is much older than that. This is falsifiable evidence that has built up over decades (simultaneously and independently in each field). There is no current empirical evidence to suggest that the Earth is much younger than around 4.5 billion years.

Consider this: if we put science and scripture on equal grounds as guesses about the nature of reality, the evidence will bear out the truth. Because of this, the person who is willing to change their guess in accordance to the evidence is going to be more likely to eventually discover the whole truth. If Trevor and I both made random guesses at the exact ingredients necessary to make an apple pie, we would have approximately the same chance of being right. But let’s say we discover new evidence that we are both wrong: if I stick to my original guess and claimed it was correct in the face of evidence, while Trevor altered his guess in accordance to the evidence, Trevor would be closer to the truth. And so over the course of a long period of time and a growing collection of evidence, Trevor will move closer and closer to the truth if he is willing to change his conclusion to match the evidence. Meanwhile, I stick to my conclusion, and I am no more right than I ever was.

Now that I have demonstrated the principles at work here, I hope we're on the same page: when faced with two competing views, the view that is willing to adapt itself to evidence is the view that is more likely to be correct. Now we must ask ourselves, if science and scripture began as guesses on equal ground, which one is vindicated by the evidence? Well in all fairness, both early science and scripture seem to suggest that all life forms originated on Earth in their present state. Both science and scripture were wrong here, but science is willing to change its hypotheses and theories to fit the growing mountain of available evidence in favor of evolution, whereas the word of God is unchanging, and therefore will never move closer to the truth. So I leave you with a final question: if the word of God is demonstrably wrong (as in the case of evolution), but still unchanging, what does that say about its ability to be an accurate indicator of reality? Think about it.


Blasphemy Friday



We haven't really done anything to blaspheme Islam for a while. I wanted to post the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, but we already did that. Then I wanted to superimpose a sexy, scantily-clad supermodel into a mosque, but I suck at photo-editing. In the end, I thought this cartoon was both funny and blasphemous.

Additionally, here is a link to an article on the Atheist Bus Campaign in the UK, which has been drawing very strong criticism as of late from individuals claiming that the bus campaign is breaching ethics and violating human rights.


Atheist donor makes Olbermann's list of "Worst Person in the World"


This isn't what you think. He is not condemning this person to the list because of the donation. In-fact I don't think he is much of a god fearing man IMHO and I have seen ads for The God Delusion during his show. What he is condemning this person for, is for remaining anonymous when donating to a cause that explicitly designed to make it more acceptable for the non-religious to come out of the closet. The juxtaposition of these two facts makes the donation almost counter productive. I wish this person would set an example by getting rid of their shroud of anonymity whilst donating to something that they evidently care enough about to give $10,000 to. I am not normally for this, but I would out this person if I knew them.

At the same time I understand the situation this person is in as I am sure many non-religious people do. And it is unfortunate that this is a cause that needs to be donated to (In-fact I would like the UNI busses and a float in the Sturgis parade to have similar ads/statements). But, please bite the bullet this time, I beg you. Whoever you are.

The part I wish for you to see ends at 32 seconds and there is no need to watch the rest. 


I have already gotten opposition to this opinion and applaud any comments, anonymous or not.


These People are Geniuses



There exists a business called Eternal Earth-Bound Pets, USA. You may have figured this out from the name, but this company is made up of people who are both atheists and animal lovers, who, for the nominal fee of $110.00, will rescue a Christian's pet after he/she is Raptured. However, the deal is only good for ten years. If the Rapture does not occur in the next ten years (a gamble these individuals are already taking), you must renew your service with another $110.00. They seem to be a legitimate enterprise, and claim that in the unlikely event of the Rapture, they have your pet's best interests at heart. Check out their home page and their FAQs.


 
>