Don't forget to vote!


Don't forget to vote on our Blasphemy Challenge poll! The winner gets a free UNIFI T-shirt, which is a $10 value. In other words, the stakes are high, and we need you to vote!

Here are links to the entries:

I am Spartacus! - Trevor Boeckmann

Why I support blasphemy, and why you should too! - Cory Derringer


The Value of Irreverence
- Michael Dippold

Blasphemy: It's Better Than Skydiving or, People are Boring Crybabies - Seth Coster

A bit of blasphemy makes life more fun and sometimes makes people think - Ruth Walker

The poll can be found on the right side of your screen, directly under our fancy UNIFI logo. There are only 5 days left to vote, so you'd better do it soon!


Links for the Sabbath - 8/30/09


•UNIFI Root Beer Fest | Facebook Event
Date:
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Time:
6:30pm - 8:30pm
Location:
Lawther Field (behind Lawther Hall, near Schindler)
Cost: Dammit it's FREE so you have no excuses! See you there then?
•The Demystifying Adventures of the Amazing Randi | San Francisco News
It has recently been revealed that Randi has intestinal cancer and may be coming to the end of what can only be called an amazing life. The rest of this article (including videos) is worth a read but here is what he had to say about his post-death protocol:
Randi jokes that after he passes, his fans need not bother with grandiose gestures like establishing a museum of magic or burying him in an elaborate tomb. He has something more Amazing in mind. "I want to be cremated," he says with his signature dry, knowing charm. "And I want my ashes blown in Uri Geller's eyes."
•Homeopathy not a cure, says WHO | BBC

•Penn & Teller, Bullshit! The Vatican from Brewster on Vimeo.


•Atheists victorious - Judge orders 'Almighty God' in Kentucky unconstitutional | Examiner
According to AA, the "2006 law... blatantly mixes church and state, in defiance of the US Constitution." The law they speak of requires that the executive director of Kentucky's Homeland Security shall "[p]ublicize the findings of the General Assembly stressing the dependence on Almighty God as being vital to the security of the Commonwealth by including the provisions of KRS 39A.285(3) in its agency training and educational materials. The executive director shall also be responsible for prominently displaying a permanent plaque at the entrance to the state's Emergency Operations Center stating the text of KRS 39A.285(3)."

•Matt Lauer to look at the vaccine-autism "debate"? Oh, goody. | Respectful Insolence - Scienceblogs

•Atheism vs Theism may seem like a battle of wits involving only science, and debate. The real truth is far deeper and darker than this, and anyone who considers discussing atheism with a "person of faith" should consider this: | Reddit.com user:Ancient09
When you reject religion, it's not like - rejecting the earth is not flat for example. With something like this you can say "Oh ok, now I know" - but religion has a much darker and deep rooted hold on a person, and a much more profound effect.
•Illinois State Government Funds Religious Organizations with Taxpayer Dollars | Freedom From Religion Foundation

DID I MENTION THERE IS A KICKOFF EVENT WITH FREE ROOTBEER AND A CHANCE TO PLAY WITH THESE GLORIOUS BEAN BAGS THAT I SLAVED OVER FOR HOURS AND HOURS FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT!!!! YOU BETTER BE THERE!!! I'M GOOD..... SO YOU BETTER BE BRINGING YOUR A-GAME!!!

"Recognize that the very molecules that make up your body, the atoms that construct the molecules, are traceable to the crucibles that were once the centers of high mass stars that exploded their chemically rich guts into the galaxy, enriching pristine gas clouds with the chemistry of life. So that we are all connected to each other biologically, to the earth chemically and to the rest of the universe atomically. That’s kinda cool! That makes me smile and I actually feel quite large at the end of that. It’s not that we are better than the universe, we are part of the universe. We are in the universe and the universe is in us."
— Neil deGrasse Tyson


Stop Stealing Einstein!


I logged onto Facebook earlier today and noticed this status sitting on my newsfeed:
"is giving God the glory for his A on his organic quiz! I would have failed with out him. I am astounded by God faithfulness! 'My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.' -Albert Einstein"
Now, there's a couple things that really bothered me about this. First off, do you really think you'd fail a test without God? What does God think of everyone who failed that test? Does he just love you more? I digress.

What really got to me was the attempt to steal Einstein away from us God-less folks. This gentleman isn't the first to do it either, UNI Right to Life has been using Einstein's name as well. It's time to set the record straight on Einstein and religion.

Einstein was NOT religious by any means to today's standards. He was probably a pantheist or deist, seeing "God" in the organization of nature. This isn't any conventional "God," though.

What did Einstein really have to say about religion? Here's some excerpts.
"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."
"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
"The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am unable to take seriously." 
Dawkins has addressed this issue, as well. You can check out a bit of it here.


Open-Mindedness?


A video send our way by a UNIFI member. I think everyone else will enjoy it too.



Blasphemy Friday: Reddit Atheism Controversy


Recently the popular site reddit.com (similar to digg) has had a bit of controversy over their "front page" links. Let me explain how this works: Reddit is divided into sub-communities (called sub-reddits) which center around a single topic. In each community, users submit links, pictures, or other stuff that relates to the subreddit's topic. A user can subscribe to multiple communities, and have all the links from those subreddits appear on his/her top bar. For example, my top bar features the Atheism, Antitheism, Marijuana, and Worldnews reddits, among others. The main page also has a top bar, and it features the top ten subreddits. I'll let one of the site's programmers explain this part:

"Maintaining the list of front page reddits became tedious after a while, so we added a new algorithm to find the most active reddits automatically. This algorithm purposefully ignores the number of subscribers when choosing reddits since that number is so easy to game. The popularity of a reddit is based on the number of submissions, votes, and general level of activity of the reddit."

So basically, the top ten has nothing at all to do with how popular a reddit is, and everything to do with how active it is, which means that when people "vote down" a link that they don't like, it actually increases the activity on the reddit, pushing it up to the front page. The problem is that Reddit.com decided to remove 2 front page reddits from the front page: moviecritic and atheism. They did this because these reddits are not popular, only controversial. The atheism reddit is constantly under attack from down-voters, who (ironically) were responsible for placing it in the top ten:

"/moviecritic and /atheism aren't legitimate top ten reddits. They appeared that way because they were under attack, making them appear even more popular. Removing atheism from the top ten by hand isn't about censoring, it's about a shortcoming in our popularity metric. We'll fix the problem, and that'll be the end of it."

Reddit.com's plan is to fix their algorithm to reflect a subreddit's popularity, not it's activity. Several of our UNIFI members are divided on this issue: I personally think it's their site, and they have a right to say whether they want the top ten to be based on what is controversial or what is popular, and that so long as this applies to all reddits, there is no problem. Others think this was effectively censorship, and that the atheism subreddit should remain in the top ten. I was hoping for reader opinions: you know where the comment box is.


First it was Jesus, now it's atheists?


If there is one thing we know about Christianity, this is a religion that is not afraid of scapegoating. I mean, first they have one man take responsibility for everyone's sins, then brutally crucify him to absolve them of their own moral responsibilities. Now the Pope is taking it a step further. Yesterday the Pope stated,

"Is it not true that inconsiderate use of creation begins where God is marginalized or also where his existence is denied? If the human creature's relationship with the Creator weakens, matter is reduced to egoistic possession, man becomes the "final authority," and the objective of existence is reduced to a feverish race to possess the most possible.

Creation, matter structured in an intelligent manner by God, is entrusted to man's responsibility, who is able to interpret and refashion it actively, without regarding himself as the absolute owner. Man is called to exercise responsible government to protect it, to obtain benefits and cultivate it, finding the necessary resources for a dignified existence for all. With the help of nature itself and with the commitment of its own work and creativity, humanity is able to assume the grave duty to hand over to the new generations an earth which, in turn, the latter will be able to inhabit worthily and cultivate further.
"

Now hold on just one cotton-pickin' minute! Let's set aside the clear (and fairly ironic) attack on Capitalism, we'll leave that for a rainy day. Did the Pope just accuse atheists of being environmentally unfriendly? Not only is this specious speculation, I think the Pope is laying down the righteous blame to distract us from the real environmental disaster: the Vatican (it is sad that I feel the need to specify, but this is satire)! How many trees have been chopped down to print what is often bragged about as "the best-selling book of all time"?! Kindle doesn't light your fire? Never heard of audible.com, your holyness?

In all seriousness, though, this is another example of scapegoating on the part of organized religion as a whole and the Pope in particular. I wanted to use this new statement to emphasize a pattern of scapegoating that I believe is immoral: if one accepts God's law as just, then defying this law is immoral. How immoral is it, then, to ask another person to accept the responsibility for your own immoral acts? Perhaps they realize this; perhaps this is one more way for the pious to satisfy their quasi-masochistic need to be dirty and unworthy.


I'm not sure if this is good news or bad news


The Evangelical Lutheran Church of America has voted to allow sexually active, monogamous homosexuals to be ministers. The church apparently researched and deliberated this issue for 8 years before coming to its conclusion and repealing its rule that gay ministers must remain celibate.

As you can imagine, there is a very mixed reaction to this. The article I found here is from the Charleston Gazette, and it focuses heavily on the surrounding context within which this decision is taking place. Other churches, notably the Episcopal Church (the American branch of the Anglican Church) have made the same decision, while conservative churches such as the Methodist Church have moved in the opposite direction.

Now, is this good for our cause or not? Of course it is good that religious organizations are correcting their bigotry, but I can't help but feel like we are being shafted here. Did anyone else ever have one of those WWJD bracelets? What would Jesus do about homosexuals? From what I know of the Bible, I can't help but agree with the bigots: Jesus would not tolerate homosexuality if he existed.

So this is what happens: when the churches lose their intellectual honesty and decide to become more gay-friendly, they get the credit for this. A religion that has spent much of the past 2000 years torturing and burning heretics and oppressing women, people of other races, and homosexuals is finally growing up in the 21st century. This is a good thing. I only hope people are slow to forget the bigotry that has been so actively pursued by the church up to this point (and that continues in some denominations). It would be foolishly optimistic of me to hope that secular organizations such as UNIFI would get some kind of recognition for helping shift the cultural point of view.


First UNIFI meeting and changes coming to the blog!


Hello, all! Yesterday was our first weekly UNIFI officer meeting, and I thought I would fill our readers in on some of what is planned for UNIFI's immediate future. We had several non-officer members in attendance who contributed to the decision-making process (and I think they may have all been freshmen, how cool is that?).

We have several big events coming up in the next month. September 3 (a week from Thursday) will be our UNIFI Fall Recruitment Event! This event should be a really good time, we have ordered the root beer keg and plan on partaking in some drinking games with root beer! We will have a table in the Union to promote this event on 8/31 and 9/1 from 11-1 on each day, so if you would like to help staff the tables to hand out information to people in the Union, shoot us an email (it's actually quite fun).

Next is our first Grab A Brew, Share Your View of the year! This will take place in the hemisphere lounge of Maucker Union, and we've been trying a bit of a new format over the summer designed to bring you less open mic time and more discussion time.

Of course there is always the weekly brunch at Hy-Vee Sundays at 11. If you need or can give a ride to a brunch, post it on the wall for the facebook event, we make a new facebook event for every brunch.

Now we get to the exciting stuff! Trevor and I have been working really hard to get the 2nd Annual Spaghetti Dinner planned and ready to go, and it appears that everything is falling into place for this to be a really fun event! There will be free spaghetti, breadsticks, salad and pop at this event, and we will be selling UNIFI merch and giving away a few blasphemous door prizes. After the spaghetti, join the UNIFI officer corps for an evening of bowling! Huzzah! We'll be in the Union promoting this on 9/18 from 11-1, let us know if you would like to help out.

I don't know how much I am at liberty to discuss with you in terms of Blasphemy Day (September 30), so I will stick to what was briefly mentioned at the meeting: it will be awesome, fun and blasphemous... We'll be promoting this one in the Union on the day of the event (9/30).

I'm also really excited for some changes that may be coming to the blog: we discussed a weekly video update of what's going on here at UNI from the secular point of view, and maybe a sublink for FAQs, to which we can refer some of our Anonymous posters. Ideally this system would work like a net that filters the trolls: see a troll, refer them to the FAQ; see a legitimate critique, engage in discussion.

We're also going to see what we can do to get multiple posters on the blog. Since we have so many eager freshmen, it would be a travesty not to allow them to post their thoughts and opinions on the blog.

I'm really excited about our fall events, our new recruits, and this organization in general! This is going to be a good year, folks! If you have questions about the fall events or would like to help out at an event or with the Union advertising, email us at unifreethought@gmail.com.


Links for the Sabbath - 8/23/09


First and foremost.... Welcome back to school and Happy RAMENadan!

Project Steve

Yale Surrenders | Slate.com - Christopher Hitchens
"Yale University Press announced last week that it would go ahead with the publication of the book, but it would remove from it the 12 caricatures that originated the controversy. Not content with this, it is also removing other historic illustrations of the likeness of the Prophet, including one by Gustave DorĂ© of the passage in Dante's Inferno that shows Mohammed being disemboweled in hell."
Sam Harris on Real Time with Bill Maher


The Friendly Atheist under attack by Christian hate group | Des Moines Examiner
"According to Mehta, a high school math teacher, Higgins emailed his boss, his high school’s entire administrative staff, and every school board member to inform them about Mehta's private life as an atheist blogger. The attempt was to smear Mehta, claiming Mehta was unprofessional and unsuitable to be teaching because of his affiliation with atheism."

Logical Fallacies and How to Spot Them 


An Officer's Experience in Our Christian Military | Dispatches from the Culture Wars - Scienceblogs
"Mikey Weinstein asked me to pass along this statement from an Army officer and West Point graduate about the constant problems he has faced in the military from aggressive Christian superiors who have badgered him relentlessly about his own religious views. The whole thing is worth reading"
Praying May Increase Brain Power | Finding Dulcinea
"As Newberg’s new book, 'How God Changes Your Brain,' explains, religious individuals and 'even atheists can enjoy the mental benefits that believers derive from faith.' Exercises of faith such as meditation and prayer have beneficial effects on our brains, improving concentration and calmness. According to Reuters, brain scanners showed that 'intense meditation alters our gray matter, strengthening regions that focus the mind and foster compassion while calming those linked to fear and anger.'"
XKCD: Beliefs

•Q: What is the Vatican's age of Consent?
 Answer.

"Yet this is trash that the Church imposes upon the world as the Word of God; this is the collection of lies and contradictions called the HOLY BIBLE! this is the rubbish call REVEALED RELIGION!" - Thomas Paine


Door Decoration


So you're finally moved back into the dorms. You have all your stuff unpacked, room put together, everything looks great...sort of. Your new door has all this blank space with nothing to fill it. Never fear, UNIFI is here to help! Download our new poster and start promoting UNIFI on your door today!


A Freethinking opinion in the Northern Iowan


It's official, everyone: I am one of the new opinion columnists for the Northern Iowan this year! I'm really excited about this, as you can imagine. You can expect me to write roughly the same kind of content for the paper as I do for the blog, only a bit more polished and pretty, and limited to 500 words or so. I'll have an article just about every couple weeks, and I'll keep you updated on when they will be published. I can't wait to represent secularism in the pages of our campus newspaper!


A bit of blasphemy makes life more fun and sometimes makes people think.


By guest blogger Ruth Walker

About 50 years ago, my oldest brother told a joke at our parents' home (as if he'd heard it before):
People had lived and died for a long time and heaven was getting overcrowded so God told St. Peter to do something about it.
So when the next man died and came to the gates of heaven, St. Peter asked what he had done while he was on earth. The man said, "I was a lawyer and defended for free those falsely accused of crimes." St. Peter replied that he was sorry, but they already had more lawyers than they needed, so the man was sent to the other place.
A next man died and stood at the gates to heaven. When St. Peter asked what he'd done on earth, the man said, "I was a doctor who healed the sick and didn't charge the poor." St. Peter explained there were already plenty of doctors in heaven and besides, nobody got sick there, so sent the man to hell.
The next man who died was a minister and, of course they already had enough ministers there!
This went on and on until finally a man came who was accepted. When asked what he'd done on earth, he explained that he'd been a psychiatrist. "Wonderful," said St. Peter, "we really need you. You see, God up here thinks he's Dick Walker."
(My brother had heard my fiance say that he believed that God is in people.)

Several years ago I was amazed that a member of the Unitarian Universalists was upset (worried that a Christian visitor might be offended) when the following hymn (words written by a UU minister) was sung one Sunday morning. (My sister and mother, both Presbyterians, said they wouldn't be upset if we were singing it in OUR church. A Lutheran man I met while volunteering at a nursing home asked for a copy to use at his church!)

Coffee, Coffee, Coffee
(sung to Holy, Holy, Holy)
by Christopher Raible

Coffee, Coffee, Coffee,
Praise the strength of coffee.
Early in the morn we rise with thoughts of only thee.
Served fresh or reheated,
Dark by thee defeated,
Brewed black by perk or drip or instantly.

Though all else we scoff we
Come to church for coffee;
If we're late to congregate, we come in time for thee.
Coffee our one ritual,
Drinking it habitual,
Brewed black by perk or drip instantly.

Coffee the communion
Of our Uni-Union,
Symbol of our sacred ground, our one necessity.
Feel the holy power
At our coffee hour,
Brewed black by perk or drip or instantly.
A bit of blasphemy through the centuries has probably contributed to positive changes in religious people as well as being enjoyed by the rest of us.


Blasphemy: It's Better Than Skydiving or, People are Boring Crybabies


By UNIFI Director of Finance Seth Coster

We've heard a lot about the importance of blasphemy in preserving freedom of speech. I agree with this whole-heartedly. After all, nobody has the right to not be offended. And for that purpose, I support a lot of things that go against the norm. Public nudity? Bring it on! Why should someone be arrested for streaking across a soccer field? If people don't like it, they can look away (or cry themselves to sleep).

We've been throwing the idea of offense around for a long time as a culture, but what does it really mean? Public figures bend over backwards to avoid saying anything that would offend anyone, but why? What really happens in your brain when you are offended by something? There are typically two approaches to take if someone says something potentially offensive. You can laugh because of how absurd or untrue the offense is, or you can get offended. How do you decide how to react? Are you offended when something hits too close to home or when it makes you look at something from an uncomfortable angle? Listen, people, I just ask the questions. I don't answer them. I'm a free thinker, damnit!

So we don't know why people get offended for all the things that they do. And in all likelihood, they don't even know why they are offended, because they haven't thought about it. That's what people do: they avoid thinking about stuff. So what are the benefits of blasphemy? What do we gain by going out of our way to offend people?

In a nutshell, it's fun. Yes, it's also potentially life-threatening. But so is sky diving, and I know a guy who makes a pretty good living doing that! With blasphemy, though, rather than dying from a high-velocity meeting between the ground and your face, your death will involve being beaten by a mob of adults who have built their lives around wishing the world was a mystical fairy land created by a magical sky daddy. Hey, we all die some day. But with blasphemy, now you're in the driver's seat! Take charge of your own death! Enrage that mob!

I find blasphemy fun because it forces people who would otherwise be unengaged to participate in the discussion. According to a survey that doesn't exist, about 75% of people in the world are incredibly boring, timid, and live their lives based upon the expectations of others, going out of their way to avoid stepping on toes at all costs. People hate confrontation, and they most definitely hate having their ideas challenged. Or worse, publicly mocked. As we discussed earlier in the text, people will do anything to avoid thinking about stuff. So how can you get these boring crybabies in on the action? With blasphemy, that's how! What Christian wouldn't intervene and start an argument if she walked past a group of heathens playing Pin Jesus on the Cross or Eucharist Pong? That's a game I made up by combining beer pong with Eucharists. I'm not sure about the rules, but it sounds awesome.

Blasphemy allows us to ridicule things that are inherently ridiculous. Nothing about religion commands respect. Let's take Christianity as an example. A magical invisible man created the universe and then made a guy out of dirt! Then, he made a woman out of a rib! But then a mean, nasty talking snake convinced the woman to eat an apple that the magical sky man had created specifically for the purpose of not being eaten! Then, the magical sky man killed everything on the earth with water! Including fish! And at some point, a guy lived inside of a whale for a while. Then, the magical sky man raped a virgin and fathered himself, and then he turned water into wine and got nailed to some wood. There was also something in there about socialism and how it's good for society. The end!

If you can't see the ridiculousness in this story, then you are probably someone who has built your life around it. Stop and think for a second about this. It's dumb. I support blasphemy because it allows us to look at something and call it like it is. And yeah, it's pretty fun, too.


The Value of Irreverence




A Blasphemy Challenge submission by Michael Dippold.

When discussing blasphemy, most of the people that come to it's defense do so via free speech. It's as brilliant tactic, and I agree with basically everything that they have to say. Free speech is part of the foundation of America, and really, it should be a part of any free society. It's generally an easy position to defend too. Not many people (they do exist) would attack free speech outright; they might evoke the 'limits' on free speech, but they would be hard pressed to oppose it on principle.

There seems to be a common misconception about blasphemy, one which our side of the debate has thoroughly addressed, but which does not seem to be getting us anywhere. The misconception that I'm talking about it is what blasphemy is at the most fundamental level. I believe that we have, as a movement, conceded a definition that is hard to defend, and one that is plainly wrong.

If you ask a theist what blasphemy is, you'll probably hear something like "insulting someone's religion," or "making fun of people and what they believe." I would suggest that, while there is more than one definition of blasphemy, the one that is most commonly used by it's defenders is the following: "irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable"(merriam-webster). Now, if you check my source, you'll see that the commonly understood theist definition is also present. I would argue, however, that it's not the case that most people who defend blasphemy are defending a person's right to make fun of people, even if they believe that this right exists.

I suppose part of the confusion stems from the fact that atheists and theists have different values. What an atheist often sees as a good humored joke, or even a serious statement about the nature of the universe, a theist can often see as an insult. This fundamental disconnect leads to a lot of mistrust, and certainly does nothing to facilitate conversation. To all of the theists who wonder why we in the secular movement want to 'make fun of people,' my answer is that we don't. We might make fun of what people believe, just as you might make fun of an adult who believed in Santa Claus, leprechauns, Zeus or Bigfoot. To us these are all absurd beliefs if taken at face value; If their proponents could substantiate these beliefs with proof, the vast majority of us would be willing to listen.

Another disconnect between the atheist and the theist community is the extent to which we embrace skepticism. Many religious people accept the tenants of their religion as truth without demanding any sort of real proof. Atheists are generally more skeptical - we want to be convinced, not just be told and asked to blindly accept. We reject dogmatism on the grounds that it doesn't do anyone any good. No scientist ever got anywhere by refusing to alter his beliefs if the evidence turned against him. An obvious example of dogmatism in action is the trial of Galileo for heresy, a trial in which he was accused of challenging church doctrine by suggesting that the earth revolved around the sun. Now obviously there are not many people would still agitate for the geocentric model of the universe, but the fundamental issue in this example - dogmatism versus skepticism - remains as important today as it was when Galileo was around.

So if you take our definition of blasphemy, one that is far more charitable, it becomes easier to accept and embrace the idea. I do not generally condone accosting or insulting people, but I also do not believe in blind reverence for one's cherished beliefs. I believe in rigorous intellectual inquiry, even when some people might be offended by my attempts to arrive at the truth of any particular matter. I don't like to accept things just because I'm told to do so, and I would submit that for the sake of human progress, everyone should endeavor to be equally skeptical. Some blasphemy, just like some people, will always be immature - try not to take it too seriously. If your beliefs can be logically defended then you have nothing to be worried about, and that sort of logical and empirical accuracy is what we strive for.


Tolerance: The Illusion of Morality


We should extend tolerance to all religious viewpoints, no matter how much we may disagree with them. We do not know any more about the cosmos than someone from another culture or of another religion, who are we to judge their interpretation of spirituality?


This is the common argument for tolerance towards religion. “Who is my animist neighbor harming by believing the strange things she believes? So what if Joe Shmoe is a fundamentalist? Who are you to judge his beliefs?” The axiom of tolerance at all costs may appear to be moral to the casual bystander, but it directly contradicts the axioms of the humanistic worldview; if one is committed to the ideals of free inquiry (the reduction of human suffering and the furtherance of human endeavor) one cannot truly be tolerant of all worldviews, because some worldviews are not tolerant of these ideals.

At times I am reluctant to call myself a humanist. I do, however, have the conviction that people and their ideas—however naĂ¯ve, irrational and hateful they can be—are essentially all we have, and are therefore the only medium through which we can make the world a better place. Let me clarify: I believe history has shown us conclusively that divine intervention is a myth, and that humans are the only sentient beings capable of the destruction or salvation of civilization. I am optimistic enough to believe that through the process of free inquiry, we can use humanity’s ideas to make the world a better place. With that said, I hope to make it very clear that because of this, I as a humanist cannot reconcile my views with the relativistic idea of a priori tolerance.

The primary conflict between tolerance and humanism stems (as best as I can tell) from the clash between universalism and relativism. To be tolerant of religion just for the fact that it is religion is to be a relativist. The humanism that I subscribe to suggests that there are some worldviews that do people and society more harm than good, and thus should be openly subverted. (Note: if history has shown us anything, it is that a worldview should not be outlawed. There is a difference.) These include worldviews that lead people to commit crimes against humanity, including crimes against freedom or the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. This is why humanism is more ethical than tolerance: true tolerance would excuse the terrorists of 9/11. True tolerance would (and has) permitted rabbis to transmit genital herpes to infants during Orthodox circumcision ceremonies. True tolerance continues to allow the Catholic Church to pedal its genocidal dogma concerning condom use to people in the most AIDS-stricken parts of our world. True tolerance extends its support to the disgusting cultural practice of female genital mutilation, and to those women who would subject their female children to such a foul procedure.

I firmly believe that people should have the right to voice their tolerant opinions concerning these things, so long as we humanists have the right to show them how their beliefs are contributing to the suffering and death of millions of people. That is the difference between humanism and tolerance: humanism is the genuine commitment to free speech, inquiry and expression, while tolerance only superficially supports these freedoms. It is the view that even if you and I disagree, I should not admit to you that I suspect you are suffering from a delusion. This is how the idea that tolerance fosters freedom is specious.

A note to the dogmatically tolerant: if you are indeed a tolerant person, then it follows that you are in no position to ridicule or criticize my attack on tolerance, because it stems from my atheistic humanism. Intellectual honesty is better for humanity than mass delusion at the expense of countless lives and limitless suffering. By all means, I welcome criticism. Just know that by criticizing my critique, you are proving my point.


"Texas public schools now required to teach the Bible"


From the Dallas Atheism Examiner, read the article here.

Schools in Texas will be required to add an elective on teaching students about the Judeo-Christian religion. The teachers are not supposed to proselytize the religion; the stated purpose of the course is to educate students about the Bible "in an objective and non-devotional manner that does not attempt to indoctrinate students as to either the truth or falsity of the Judeo-Christian biblical materials"

Here is the red flag: the law allows other religions to be taught, but states that the Bible must be taught. Additionally, as the author of this article points out, "other elective classes may be cancelled because of this new class requirement. Schools are short staffed as is and are lacking funds yet they’re being forced to make room for the book that is the basis for Christianity."

Personally, I think Professor Daniel Dennett has a good idea: we should be teaching comparative religions and their philosophies, to include the option of nonbelief. This is not what this law is; there is nothing comparative about it.


Links for the Sabbath - 8/16/09


The Scripture Project | The Reason Project
Steve Wells, creator of the Skeptics Annotated Bible, Qur’an, and Book of Mormon has generously donated the full contents of his website to the Reason Project. Using this as a foundation, we intend to make the Scripture Project the best source for scriptural criticism on the Internet.

"1. Every SS-man is free to be a church member or not. This is a personal matter to be justified before God and his own conscience. 2. He is, however, not free to be an atheist; this be the only view of the world or religion which is not tolerated in the SS."

It's time for UNIFI to get tax exempt status and start playing the powerball... and praying to the FSM of course. Here is why.

“Can I Take Your Son To Church?” | Allied Atheist Alliance

Rollins on Evolution


Follow the links!

Ron Paul: Quackery Enabler, part II | Respectful Insolence, Scienceblogs
I noted at the time that, while numerous other bloggers had expressed concern about Ron Paul's--shall we say?--unusual beliefs, none of them realized just how much of a promoter of pseudoscience he was, how vigorously he promotes quackery. Indeed, you could look at Ron Paul as being the Republican counterpart of Senator Tom Harkin, only without the same level of clout and without the same level of cleverness that allows Harkin to cloak his promotion of pseudoscience as "health promotion." Instead, Ron Paul is once again enthusiastically trying to gut consumer health protections in the name of "health freedom."
You get two quotes this week!:
Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?
- Corinthians 10:22
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.
- Bertrand Russell


Another atheist celebrity


Bill Maher interviews Brad Pitt. Topics include religion, gay marriage, and legal marijuana!



French woman in "burkini" kicked out of pool


I know that there has been a lot of talk going around Europe about banning the burka. I'm also fairly sure Trevor has posted on this once. A pool in Emerainville, France kicked out a woman for swimming in a "burkini," a loose-fitting swimming suit that covers the face. The pool cited health and hygiene reasons for their decision. They felt that the burkini posed a health risk for the woman or the other patrons. It makes me wonder about the actual burka, and whether it should be banned. Should society be able to ban the burka on the grounds that it poses a health risk to the women involved or even a "health risk" to the society in general (it could certainly be argued that subjugating women is unhealthy for society). You can read the article here, let us know in the comments if you think Muslim women should be allowed to wear burkas (or perhaps whether Muslim men should be allowed to force their wives, sisters and daughters to wear them).


Prepare to be humbled.



"We succeeded in taking that picture [from deep space], and, if you look at it, you see a dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you know, everyone you love, everyone you've ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of all our joys and sufferings, thousands of confident religions, ideologies and economic doctrines. Every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilizations, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every hopeful child, every mother and father, every inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every superstar, every supreme leader, every saint and sinner in the history of our species, lived there - on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of the dot on scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner of the dot. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light.

Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity -- in all this vastness -- there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. It is up to us. It's been said that astronomy is a humbling, and I might add, a character-building experience. To my mind, there is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly and compassionately with one another and to preserve and cherish this pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known." - Carl Sagan


DART will run atheist ads



The Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority (DART) will be displaying the ads from Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers on Des Moines buses. If you emailed DART with your concern about their decision to pull the ads, you probably have an email like this one in your inbox (Italics mine):

Thank you for your email regarding the recent advertisements that the Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers had on some of the DART buses.



The recent controversy around the ad campaign that was accepted by our regional bus service has pointed out the need to update our advertising policies to better align with:



1) Our many other clearly stated policies regarding civil rights,
2) The state’s obscenity and profanity laws,

3) The diversity of a growing cosmopolitan region, and

4) DART’s objective to be the most progressive, growing transit system in the Midwest.



We never intentionally tried deny a person’s civil liberties and we are updating our policy to reflect our acceptance of advertising that is not obscene or profane (as defined by Iowa law). By honoring the freedoms protected through our shared civil liberties, DART, like other businesses that accept advertising, will be in the position of displaying messages and images that may be controversial or uncomfortable to some, but legal and protected by civil rights.


As a result, we are taking two actions you may have seen publicized:



1) The Iowa Atheist and Free Thinkers group ads that were contracted for and previously developed will be displayed on DART buses.

2) The DART Commission will receive a presentation from our legal counsel on creating a new DART advertising policy that very clearly communicates our position to uphold both civil liberties and the protection of citizens from that which is obscene or profane.



The Des Moines region, and the entire state of Iowa, is developing a positive reputation as a place that accepts diversity, new ideas and is civil in its discourse of even the most controversial of topics – for example, same sex marriages. DART demonstrated this same advancement on Monday by unveiling the first hybrid-electric bus in the state, so it is altogether appropriate for our policies to keep pace with this progress.

Regarding this issue, what groups choose to say or advertise may be of concern, but their right to say it – or in this case to advertise it - is a protected right. Our policy will be changed to reflect this stated belief.



Sincerely,



The Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority




I would like to point out two especially nice passages:

"By honoring the freedoms protected through our shared civil liberties, DART, like other businesses that accept advertising, will be in the position of displaying messages and images that may be controversial or uncomfortable to some, but legal and protected by civil rights." (my emphasis)

"...what groups choose to say or advertise may be of concern, but their right to say it – or in this case to advertise it - is a protected right. Our policy will be changed to reflect this stated belief." (my emphasis)

Way to go, DART!


Richard Dawkins interviews creationist John Mackay


This is another interview from Dawkins' newest documentary series called "The Genius of Darwin." This is part one, part two can be found here.



PZ's write up on the Creation "Museum"



From "Pharyngula"

"We visited the Creation "Museum" last Friday.

I'm careful to put the title in quotes, because it is not a museum in any respectable sense of the word. I knew this ahead of time; I had no expectation of any kind of credible presentation in this place, but what impressed me most is how far it failed to meet even my low hopes. They clearly want to ape a real museum, but they can't — their mission is the antithesis of open inquiry.

The guards are a clear example. Real museums have guards, of course: they're there to protect valuable exhibits from theft and vandalism. But real museums want their guards to be discreet and not interfere with the attendees appreciation of the exhibits. At the Creation "Museum", one of the jobs of the guards is to suppress criticism. They hover about in rather conspicuous uniforms, armed with tasers, and some use police dogs to check out the visitors. They don't want dissent expressed in their building, and they admit it themselves.

There was a lot of mocking inside the museum Friday (and to a lesser extent during Dr. Jason Lisle's noon lecture) by dozens of the 285 in the SSA group, and some of the mocking could be clearly heard by many of our guests (especially in our Noah's Flood rooms, but also in the Garden of Eden exhibit when words like "garbage" were uttered, etc.). Several times during the day we had to ask mockers to keep their voices down (I did it five times myself), but generally, it was more peaceful than what we expected (many blog comments from those who were coming were promising some very aggressive actions).

Think about the genuine museums you might have visited. Can you imagine the curators at the American Museum of Natural History being concerned that someone might openly disagree with an exhibit? Do you think Niles Eldredge bustles about the museum, shushing anyone who questions the displays? Would they turn away a visitor wearing a Jesus shirt, or one that baldly declared evolution is false? At real museums, the attitude would range from indifference to active encouragement of discussion. The Creation "Museum" cannot tolerate that."

Full article here.


Links for the Sabbath - 8/9/09


DART: Atheist group's ads will go back on buses. | Des Moines Register
An advertisement promoting a Des Moines atheist group will be put back on buses, Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority officials said Friday night.
“By honoring the freedoms protected through our shared civil liberties, DART, like other businesses that accept advertising, will be in the position of displaying messages and images that may be controversial or uncomfortable to some, but legal and protected by civil rights,” DART General Manager Brad Miller stated in an e-mail.
Expelled from the Creation “Museum” | Pharyngula.
Word on the streets is that UNIFI's very own Kari B was there and is planning on indulging us with a story on the whole trip. Unitl then check out this picture of PZ on a Triceratops just like our ancestors!




Penn and Teller - Bullshit - Organic Food pt. 1(Strong Language NSFW)


Mere Assertions | Dan Barker, Presid
ent of the Freedome From Religion Foundation
A criticism of Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis

An Honest God is the Noblest Work of Man | Nick C. - UNIFreethought

Peter Singer - The Life You Can Save | Point of Inquiry

The Strange Case of Francis Collins | Sam Harris - The Reason Project
In fact, to read The Language of God is to witness nothing less than an intellectual suicide. It is, however, a suicide that has gone almost entirely unacknowledged: The body yielded to the rope; the neck snapped; the breath subsided; and the corpse dangles in ghastly discomposure even now—and yet, polite people everywhere continue to celebrate the great man’s health.

'In God We Trust' Won't Be Added to Florida City Logo | Fox News

"I think well of all skepticism to which I may reply Let us try it. But I no longer want to hear anything of all those things and questions which do not permit experiments. This is the limit of my sense of truth for there courage has lost its rights" - Nietzsche


Why I support blasphemy, and why you should too!


“What is the freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist”
-Salman Rushdie

We all want to defend what we believe in. If you believe in a god, then you may occasionally feel called upon to defend the idea of that god. I often wonder why theists feel compelled to do so. Surely an omnipresent, omnipotent God could look after itself. As a Freethinker, I don’t believe in any gods. Freedom of speech, the spirit of free inquiry and uninhibited human endeavor are not omnipotent. They are not divine, and they are not capable of defending themselves. When neglected or questioned, they are incapable of inciting genocidal campaigns or conjuring cascades of fire and brimstone, worldwide floods, plagues or she-bears to murder or otherwise silence their opponents. Because they cannot defend themselves, if we Freethinkers were to neglect our ideals, they would lapse into extinction, and we would have scarce reason to expect them to rise again in three days. Though these ideals are not conscious entities, they are sometimes used by agents (us) to challenge or blaspheme organized religion. In fact, I would argue along with Salman Rushdie that without the freedom to blaspheme, there is no freedom of expression at all. I could have written this piece with reference to any of my cherished ideals listed above; however, in the interest of being concise, I chose not to stray from freedom of speech from here forward. I wish to show you why the cherished Western ideal of free speech is impossible without widespread tolerance for blasphemy.

As an American and as a human being, I firmly believe in freedom of speech. I value my right to say what I think. “The President is an idiot,” or, “Scientology is a cult.” Most people can look at either of these statements without thinking twice, but if I were to say, “Gods in all manifestations known to me are the imaginary products of superstitious minds. In particular the God of the monotheistic religions seems to be a cruel, megalomaniacal, childish and attention-whoring sadist that would not be worth my time or attention even if he existed,” there are those who would not extend to my statement the protections of the first amendment. I think the controversy surrounding the message is the reason such a message needs protection. Obviously, popular ideas do not need the same constitutional protection as unpopular ideas. The problem here is what John Stuart Mill called the “tyranny of the majority.” People have a tendency to try and stifle opposing or competing viewpoints. Because of this, without the protection of the law, the minority view would always be stifled by the majority one. This groupthink on a massive scale would lead to the stagnation of our culture and civilization. Clearly, the minority views and opinions must be protected from the tyranny of the majority. These are the ideas that go against the grain, so to speak. Very few people value blasphemy, and yet if we allow blasphemy to be suppressed, we allow freedom of speech to die.

This is why I support blasphemy. I support it because it is inseparable from the worthy freedoms of speech, thought, and expression. If you support these freedoms, think about what it would mean for our society if they were neglected. As previously stated, these abstract ideals depend on concrete agents (us) for their very existence. Imagine for a moment that you are a Christian living in a nation that is hostile to the Christian worldview. In much of the Muslim world, you can be punished (sometimes put to death) for blasphemy against Muhammad. For example, after Salman Rushdie’s publication of The Satanic Verses, there was a fatwa issued for his death by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who was at that time the supreme leader of Iran. Surely you can agree that this is unjust: no one should suffer death threats for writing a book, much less death threats from an organized government.

To conclude, I believe that blasphemy is a necessary part of free speech. I hope I have shown that if free speech is worth defending, so is blasphemy. If we become complacent in our defense of free speech, we may be in danger of losing it, as was recently the case in Ireland and has been the case for quite some time in the Middle East. Now, my reader, you must decide where you stand: unless you are a moral relativist or a hypocrite, you should see that if punishing blasphemous speech is wrong in Iran, it is wrong in the United States and everywhere else.


"It's about fucking time!"



I second that motion.


All Aboard the Blasphemy Bus!


A lawsuit over atheist bus ads in Indiana has been resolved in favor of the Indiana Atheist Bus Campaign. You can read a little more about it here. This is a sign of hope for us here in Iowa. As of five o'clock today, the issue over Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers' ads remains unresolved. They were able to meet with DART today in a face-to-face discussion, and have agreed to re-submit the ads for DART approval. DART is expected to release their decision on Monday concerning whether or not to run the ads.


Governor Culver Chimes in on Atheist Ads


He was "disturbed, personally" by the ads. I guess the religious crazies aren't only on the right. Culver even refused to comment whether he would have left the bus after seeing the advertisement.


Open Letter to the Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority


To whom it may concern,

My name is Cory Derringer, and I am writing to you concerning the recent controversy surrounding DART's decision to pull the atheist bus ads submitted by Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers. As an atheist and as the Vice President of the University of Northern Iowa Freethinkers and Inquirers, I am curious as to the justification behind this action, and slightly disturbed at the message DART seems to be sending concerning religion or lack thereof.

I sincerely hope DART had sufficient reasons to pull the ads, and did not do it merely because of customer complaints. It is my understanding that the ads, which read "Don't believe in God? You're not alone," were written with the express intent to be inoffensive. They make no statement concerning the existence or nonexistence of gods, and they are not directed at those who consider themselves to be religious. They merely state to nonbelievers that they "are not alone." The ad consists of a qualifying question, which makes it clear that the message is intended for nonbelievers, and a hopeful and inoffensive message to those nonbelievers that there are others who share the same views on religion, and that participate in society. It is a message meant to bring hope to the closeted atheist who is afraid to tell her family that she is no longer convinced that their interpretation of religion is correct. She is afraid that she will lose her close relationships with her family and friends because of her unbelief. That atheist would read the ad and be reassured that she is not alone, and that there are like-minded people among her company.

I have heard that DART continues to run ads from local churches. I hope this is not the case, because this would seem to send the message to commuters that DART is an organization that favors religion over secularism. If DART is a public company (which I believe is the case, though I could not confirm this information on the web site), and it is favoring a religious worldview over a nonreligious worldview, this could be interpreted as a violation of the accomodationalist interpretation of the establishment clause: the established interpretation of the First Amendment that prohibits government organizations from favoring one religious ideology over another with no identifiable secular purpose. I am curious as to the secular purpose behind the actions taken by DART. Regardless of whether DART is a public or private company, if these actions constitute discrimination against nonbelievers, then the actions are unethical.

I am not writing this email to stir up trouble, and I hope I am not giving that impression. I am merely concerned that DART may be allowing religious ads, but disallowing atheist ones because of the worldview they represent. This would only contribute to the unfortunate misunderstandings many people have about atheists like myself. Like many of my fellows, I do not mind seeing the religious ads so long as DART is willing to play fairly by allowing Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers to run godless advertising as well. It would seem, at least from what I have read, that this is not the case. I hope I am mistaken.

Respectfully,

Cory Derringer
Vice President, University of Northern Iowa Freethinkers and Inquirers


Iowa Atheist Bus Ads Banned


The atheist bus campaign has finally made its way to Iowa...sort of. Earlier this week, the Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers (IAF) launched a bus ad campaign in Des Moines to reach out to atheists. The ad, which read "Don't believe in God? You are not alone" was timed to coincide with the Iowa State Fair.

After less than a week of the ads being up, the Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority (DART) has removed them from buses claiming they were never approved in the first place. They also claim to have received an "overwhelming" number of phone calls in opposition to it. DART has religious ads and presumably plans to keep those up.

How about we give them our own "overwhelming" number of calls and emails? IAF is asking everyone to call DART at 515-283-8111 or send them an email at dart@ridedart.com.

As always, please be polite, rational, and non-threatening.

(Full story at http://www.kcci.com/news/20298174/detail.html)

EDIT: GREAT video on the situation.


The Power of Myth


Yesterday evening a man in Philadelphia entered a gym, turned off the lights, and opened fire on every inside. Three women were killed and ten more were injured. Afterwards, the shooter George Sodini turned the gun on himself. While this would be newsworthy on its own, the killer's blog makes it particularly noteworthy. The Google cache of the site is still available. In it, Sodini discusses his failure with women and becoming closer to God. His last blog post reads:

Maybe soon, I will see God and Jesus. At least that is what I was told. Eternal life does NOT depend on works. If it did, we will all be in hell. Christ paid for EVERY sin, so how can I or you be judged BY GOD for a sin when the penalty was ALREADY paid. People judge but that does not matter. I was reading the Bible and The Integrity of God beginning yesterday, because soon I will see them.

I'm often confronted by liberal believers who inquire why I can't just let religious folks be. They have something working for them, it gives them comfort, just leave them alone. This is exactly why I never will.



Richard Dawkins interviews Wendy Wright


This is a seven-part video series. The video below is part one. Try to resist the urge to "facepalm": there are so many of those moments that if you gave into the temptation every time, you may give yourself a headache.



Part 2 here.


Daniel Dennett: The folly of pretence


From "The Guardian"

The question: Should we believe in belief?

As I explain in the chapter by that title in Breaking the Spell, "belief in belief" is a common phenomenon not restricted to religions. Economists realise that a sound currency depends on people believing that the currency is sound, and scientists recognise that the actual objectivity of scientific studies on global warming is politically impotent unless people believe in that objectivity, so economists and scientists (among others) take steps to foster and protect such beliefs that they think are benign. That's acting on belief in belief.

Sometimes the maintenance of a belief is deemed so important that impressive systems of propaganda are erected and vigorously defended by people who do not in fact share the belief that they think is so important for society to endorse. For instance, imbecile monarchs have been kept on their thrones by widespread conspiracies of oblivion and deception when it has been deemed too socially disruptive to confirm to the populace what everybody suspects: the king is an idiot...


Full article here.


Christians flee after Muslims destroy Pakistani village


From Ucanews.com:

"KORIAN, Pakistan (UCAN) -- Smoke was still rising from the Christian village of Korian in Punjab province on July 31 after it was completely destroyed in a violent raid the previous night by thousands of Muslims.

Korian was home to about 100 Christian families, most of them laborers, who all fled the area in the wake of the attack. No one died in the incident.

The village in Faisalabad diocese was attacked after Muslims accused a family there of blasphemy. In all, 60 houses and two churches belonging to the Church of Pakistan and the New Apostolic Church were destroyed and livestock stolen.

"They have left nothing. My horse, my only source of income, has also been taken," said Shubaan Masih, a local Christian.

The mob also blockaded the road leading to the village for several hours refusing entry to police or firefighters.

Masih said the mob was armed with firearms and explosives. "They used trucks to break the walls and petrol to start the fires," he said. "We saved our lives only by hiding in the fields until three in the morning, when relatives arrived with vehicles to collect us. The children cried all night," Masih said..."

Full article here.


I am Spartacus!



In the next month, you're going to hear many defenses of blasphemy. Undoubtedly we will have members saying blasphemy helps us recruit members and challenges traditional thought. Personally, I don't buy it. Blasphemy can actually have the exact opposite effect. There are members of UNIFI who are turned off by blasphemy; imagine how believers will react. In many cases, we will solidify believers in their views because of our offensiveness. Now, someone is going to come along and say "But Trevor! If we can't shock them into thinking about their views, nothing will do it!" Again, I don't buy it. A vast majority of UNIFI members were religious at some point in their lives, but we broke away. It wasn't because someone spit on a Bible and we had to rethink everything. It was a slow process of intellectual examination until we finally arrived to where we are today.

So why am I making a submission today? Many of you know I'm a huge proponent of blasphemy; advocating some ideas so offensive members of the executive board have to tell me "no." I take a much different view of blasphemy than many members of UNIFI. To me, the point of being offensive is to protect free speech at any cost.

About a year ago, PZ Myers gained notoriety with what became known as "Crackergate." We have written extensively about it on our site and Google should be able to tell you the rest of it. Long story short, a Central Florida college student stole a Eucharist and was kicked out of his student government position, faced expulsion, and started getting death threats. Myers was outraged and got his own Eucharist to desecrate. As with most overtly offensive blasphemy, the atheist community was divided. Many jumped to Myers' aid while others called it deplorable. The Catholic community, including Bill Donahue, was obviously up in arms. For months, this was headline news in the atheist and Catholic community.

What else happened in these months? The atheist bus campaign started in the UK, launching similar campaigns across the country to build fellowship in the non-religious community. More atheist billboards went up across the country with quotes like "Imagine No Religion," "Don't Believe in God? You're not alone," and "Being a Good Person Doesn't Require God." I've written before about the need for community, but I can't stress it enough. We are an incredibly small minority in America. If we don't band together, we'll never accomplish the goals we desire. Plus, the importance of community for recruiting can't be understated. Christian college students immediately have a group of friends when they join Navs, or BASIC, or whatever. We need to provide that as well.

You're probably wondering how this relates to blasphemy. While PZ was desecrating a cracker, other atheist groups were building a community! While PZ was drawing Donahue's ire, we were growing! Certainly the bus and billboards drew criticism, but when some guy is sticking a rusty nail through your lord and risen savior, a snarky billboard takes the backseat. That's why I support blasphemy. Is it offensive for us to play Pin Jesus on the Cross? Absolutely, but if real dialogue and real growth occurs because our opposition is so offended by us they let something else slide, it was a success.

Blasphemy Day is often pitched as a defense of free speech and I couldn't agree with that description more. Blasphemy is illegal in Ireland and other countries will soon be joining them. It's easy to issue a fatwa against Salman Rushdie when he's the only guy writing a blasphemous book, or kill people when Jyllands-Posten is the only newspaper putting up blasphemous cartoons – but aren't these more palatable when we're letting students trade in their religious texts for porn in a "Smut for Smut" exchange?

In the 1960 film "Spartacus," the climactic scene occurs when the Romans ask the slaves to turn in Spartacus in exchange for leniency. In turn, all the slaves proclaim to be Spartacus to keep his identity secret and provide strength in numbers. Ladies and gentlemen, blasphemy is our chance to proclaim ourselves as Spartacus. We will commit blasphemy to stand with Salman Rushdie; to stand with PZ Myers; to stand with those murdered for standing up for women's rights. Protect every soul brave enough to question religion in the face of death by screaming out with blasphemy on September 30th, "I am Spartacus!"


Links for the Sabbath


Sorry I'm a bit late in the day.

Jury Convicts Father who Prayed his Daughter to Death

Strength in Numbers: More Scientology Defectors Come Forward with Accounts of Abuse


"Ex-Masturbator" T-Shirts? You're Pulling My...

Joan McAlpine: No Religion Should be Above Criticism


"Collision" featuring Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson. This is part one of three in the extended trailer:



Michael Newdow vs. Fox Anchor on Separation of Church and State:


On the design of the fly


Contrasting perspectives on the design of the fly. First (for teh lulz, as they say), Eddie Izzard on evolution and creationism, including the design of sharks and flies. I really enjoyed this bit, and I hope you will too:



On a more serious note, the following is from Mark Twain's Fables of Man concerning the designer of the fly. Twain is ruthless, scathing, and eloquent. I love it!

"Let us try to think the unthinkable: let us try to imagine a Man of a sort willing to invent the fly; that is to say, a man destitute of feeling; a man willing to wantonly torture and harass and persecute myriads of creatures who had never done him any harm and could not if they wanted to, and - the majority of them - poor dumb things not even aware of his existence. In a word, let us try to imagine a man with so singular and so lumbering a code of morals as this: that it is fair and right to send afflictions upon the just - upon the unoffending as well as upon the offending, without discrimination.

If we can imagine such a man, that is the man that could invent the fly, and send him out on his mission and furnish him his orders: “Depart into the uttermost corners of the earth, and diligently do your appointed work. Persecute the sick child; settle upon its eyes, its face, its hands, and gnaw and pester and sting; worry and fret and madden the worn and tired mother who watches by the child, and who humbly prays for mercy and relief with the pathetic faith of the deceived and the unteachable. Settle upon the soldier’s festering wounds in field and hospital and drive him frantic while he also prays, and betweentimes curses, with none to listen but you, Fly, who get all the petting and all the protection, without even praying for it. Harry and persecute the forlorn and forsaken wretch who is perishing of the plague, and in his terror and despair praying; bite, sting, feed upon his ulcers, dabble your feet in his rotten blood, gum them thick with plague-germs - feet cunningly designed and perfected for this function ages ago in the beginning - carry this freight to a hundred tables, among the just and the unjust. the high and the low, and walk over the food and gaum it with filth and death. Visit all; allow no man peace till he get it in the grave; visit and afflict the hard-worked and unoffending horse, mule, ox, ass, pester the patient cow, and all the kindly animals that labor without fair reward here and perish without hope of it hereafter; spare no creature, wild or tame; but wheresoever you find one, make his life a misery, treat him as the innocent deserve; and so please Me and increase My glory Who made the fly.
"


 
>