INQUIRER Volume 2, Issue 6 June, 1999 A Thumbs Up Publication Editor:
Gerald Dantone Art Design: John R. Wilmarth Copyright LISH 1999 (All
articles in this newsletter may be reprinted by organizations affiliated with the Council
for Secular Humanism with a reciprocating reprinting agreement with LISH, so long as the
article is used in full and with complete crediting. Edited versions can be used with
written permission.)
Please feel free to contribute articles to Long Island Secular Humanists Email InfidelsRe@aol.com that may be of interest to
humanists! Topics encouraged include the "Ten Commandments" legislation now in
Congress, and other freedom of religion issues. Also articles on humanistic ethics and
values would be great! Thanks!
1 School Vouchers
2 Witches Scare Barr
3 History Teaches Nothing
4 Catholics Versus "New Age"
5 Officer Volpe & Jesus
6 Gay Adoptions
7 Pope Visits Romania
8 Exorcist Killer Going Free?
9 No Good Deed Goes Unpunished
10 Reform Jews Unreform
11 What's the Beef?
12 Letters to the Editor
13 End note: Teletubby Hit ListNEW YORK AREA SKEPTICS (NYASk) The New York Area Skeptics is a terrific organization that should appeal to many secular humanists. Associated with CSICOP, founded by Paul Kurtz, the group has monthly meetings and a newsletter that deals with claims of the paranormal, medical quackery and any other topic that calls for a critical examination. They meet at the Plainview-Old Bethpage Public Library, 999 Old Country Rd., Plainview, Nassau County. For info call 201 379-3408 or visit the website @ www.liii.com/~nyask. Become a Member of LISH Don't get left out! The First Annual LISH summer picnic, this year dedicated to the memory of Robert Ingersoll, has been planned for late July and only LISH supporters may attend! If you and your family would like to meet other humanist families, please respond ASAP! Membership also entitles one to use of the LISH Freethought library, mailed newsletters and invites to non-public functions, dinners, and perhaps movies and plays as well! Only members may vote at upcoming elections of LISH officers. Dues will go to defray the costs of creating and mailing the newsletter, publicizing meetings, developing a youth program, guest speaker expenses and contribute to the beginning of a fund for a Center For Inquiry, Long Island. Only $35 for full family membership for one year, or $10 per year for the newsletter only, free until September 1999. Send a check with your name, address and phone number, to LISH, Box 119, Greenlawn, NY 11740.
SCHOOL VOUCHERS By Gerry D
A recent editorial in Newsday promoting an experimental school voucher plan for New York City was distressing, not for what it said, but for what it did not say or even address. First, let this be clear: all voucher plans are not equal. There is no inherent objection to constitutional and fair voucher plans. Most plans however, are neither fair nor constitutional. But I will leave it to others to point out that most voucher plans seek to funnel money into the pockets of those who already send their children to private schools. Also I will leave it to others to point out that the "competition" between public and private schools as proposed by most plans is unfair for a number of reasons, and that no study has proven voucher plans to be effective. I will point out, however, that the ultimate and stated goal of most voucher advocates and indeed the goal of those plans constantly proposed is to promote religious instruction to students at taxpayer expense. Yet I will not even bother to argue the obvious constitutional problems regarding public monies paying for the promotion of religion. I will simply ask, why would anyone even want to promote the further growth of religious schools? This is a serious question as we in our society choose whether to live cooperatively with each other or instead try to claim more territory for each individual religious subculture to dominate. Are we really going to learn how to behave well toward each other together in religiously segregated classrooms? Aren't vouchers going to promote the numerous denominations of the numerous religions to build their own schools where students will never interact with those of different faiths? Will separate schools based on religion lead Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hindus and others toward understanding and cooperation or competition for societal dominance? As a child given public school "release time" at the local Catholic Church, I was the target of ridicule from other non-Catholic Christians in my class. The election of John F. Kennedy was a particularly difficult time for me as one of only a few Catholics in my local public school. Yet the source of the anti-Catholic bias was not the public school system. The source of the bias was the religious instruction of my fellow student's own churches. My own personal religious instruction was no more conducive to a better society. It included a nun repeating the centuries old "blood libel" myth promoting anti-Semitism and the teaching that all Protestants were damned. I too would be held accountable if I ever attended a Protestant religious service! Intermarriage with another non-Catholic Christian was forbidden. I was made to understand that battle lines were drawn. So will separate religious schools promote a better society? The answer should be obvious. The very fact that somehow it is claimed that there is a Christian morality, a Muslim morality, a Jewish morality and even more denominational moralities is an indictment of these concepts of morality. There are truly only the common decencies between all humans, transcending faith-held beliefs, which can insure the continued existence of our species. There can be no resolving disputes regarding the nature of God and what, precisely, are his sacred laws. We can agree, to a great extent, on what it is to be decent to each other, however. There is no dispute, for example, that murder and theft are wrong and should be illegal as well as morally condemned. This collective wisdom of the human race is an invaluable resource that we should not denigrate in comparison to supposed revealed truths. Let us not promote with tax dollars the further segregation of our society, this time on a religious basis. What we need to do is precisely the opposite. [TOC]WITCHES SCARE BARR By Gerry D
According to published reports Republican Congressman Bob Barr, from Georgia, has protested to the Secretary of the Army, Louis Caldera, and a commander at Fort Hood, Texas, the sanctioning of the practice of witchcraft on military bases which is claimed to be a religion by the practitioners. According to Mr. Barr, Wiccan religious celebrations at Fort Hood set "a dangerous precedent" that could lead to "all sorts of bizarre practices being supported by the military under the rubric of religion." Can't allow that, can we? Only unless the bizarre practices are Christian in nature, apparently. Congressman Barr said, "If military personnel who consider themselves witches want to practice such nonsense outside of their military service, the Constitution may be construed to allow them to do so. The military, however, does not operate under the same restrictions as society in general and it is difficult, if not impossible, to make the case that encouraging the practice of bizarre rituals makes a positive contribution to combat readiness," says Mr. Barr. Of course, though Mr. Barr is an accomplished attorney, he cannot see the error in his logic. Would he ever allow Christian practices to come under such attack in any area of American life? Never! He is a leading proponent of school prayer where the bizarre practice of begging an omnipotent being to help win football games or the lottery is acceptable! And here is the crux of his blindness -- Christianity is truth, and error has no rights. In other words, freedom of religion, ideally, it would seem, to Rep. Barr, extends no further than "correct" religions, or in other words, some forms of Christianity, and possibly some forms of Judaism. Other beliefs are not religions, but instead, "superstitions." Sadly, the evidence is that he is far from alone is this kind of thinking. Since Rep. Barr started this furor, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Association has stated that "until the Army withdraws all official support and approval from witchcraft, no Christian should enlist or reenlist in the Army and Christian parents should not allow their children to join the Army." Twelve other conservative religious groups, according to published reports, joined in on this call for a boycott, including the Christian Coalition, Traditional Values Coalition, and the American Family Association. Weyrich called the inclusion of the Church of Satan in the Army chaplain handbook "a direct assault on the Christian faith that generations of American soldiers have fought and died for." Oh, really? If anyone really believes that there is no cause for alarm, please keep in mind that these organizations have a lot to say about whom gets elected in America. If we are not vigilant, perhaps the following excerpt from the bible would be made law: Exodus 22:18 -- Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. [TOC]HISTORY TEACHES NOTHING By Gerry D
Another month, another school shooting. In a depressing rerun of more pointless school violence, a Georgia 15 year old brought two firearms to school and proceeded to shoot six fellow students before surrendering. The first reports indicated the shooter was despondent over a breakup with a girlfriend. Despite warning signals that other students are now relating, such as the shooter bringing a gun to school recently, there was no intervention. Could it be that such signals are so common as to pass by unnoticed by other students that age? Why can't such blatant signals be acknowledged? Other lessons also seemed to have not been learned. For example, as in the previous tragedy, the media publicized the name and story of the shooter and created a kind of notoriety that may be valued by the impressionable. It is becoming apparent that even infamy breeds envy and that copycats are created by this kind of publicity. The media has done nothing to mitigate this. Is it really necessary to publicize the name and life story of the perpetrators? As in previous shootings, other students viewed the shooter as an outsider or weird, but again, how many students are viewed that way? And as we continue to see from each tragedy, poverty is not at the root of these outbursts, with reports that the shooter's family, as in the tragedy in Littleton, Colorado, was well off financially. In this shooting, the family and shooter were active with their church, in this case the local Catholic Church. Of course, this also explains nothing. The one common element that seems to matter to all of these tragedies is access to guns -- apparently the shooter easily obtained the guns from home. That the shooter had easy access to guns does not mean we should not look at all the other aspects of our culture and moral upbringing of our children. But it does seem to indicate that until we achieve an unlikely perfection in raising our children, it would be best that access to guns is made as difficult as possible for the morally immature. History will teach nothing if we refuse to learn. [TOC]CATHOLICS VERSUS "NEW AGE" By Gerry D A
Federal District judge has ruled that the Bedford, NY Central School violated the separation of church and state when it "encouraged" students to engage in activities which included the construction of Hindu statues and a quasi Earth Day New Age style "prayer" to nature. Catholic parents who objected to the semi-superstitious rituals and occult items that are contrary to their faith brought the suit. The America Catholic Lawyers Association represented the plaintiffs. The actual practices involved were fairly innocuous and could have been interpreted as mere information as opposed to encouragement. Be that as it may, the interesting twist is that for decades, few if any Catholic groups ever objected to the actual encouragement and even celebration of Catholic and Christian religious practices in schools. Christmas, Easter and other religious ideas have been staples of the classroom for many years. To this day, students receive numerous days off in conjunction with religious holidays. The Catholic Church is fully behind using public monies to pay for religious education in this country even though that is unconstitutional. I would not call this neutrality, consistency or fairness on such religious matters. That some Catholic parents went ballistic over some minor superstitious practices displays the hypocrisy behind much of religious belief. There is no real intent at creating a cooperative community of humanity - the real objective of most religions is domination. This petulant lawsuit should be remembered the next time that someone objects to a real abuse of the secular nature of the state. Let's see who's promoting separation of church and state then. [TOC]OFFICER VOLPE & JESUS By Gerry D
By now, we all know that Officer Justin Volpe has pleaded guilty in the infamous Abner Louima prisoner-torture case. An interesting side story was his treatment of another prisoner that same evening, Patrick Antoine. According to Mr. Antoine, and not contradicted by anyone, is the following account as reported in the Daily News: Mr. Antoine stated in court he had been beaten on the street by Officer Volpe. In the station house, he too was led to the bathroom, but met a different fate. "He (Volpe) went to the mirror, he touched his face. He told me he was sorry. He told me he was like someone who was going crazy." Volpe asked him why he "was following this shameless person?" a question Antoine did not understand. Then Antoine stated that Volpe noticed Antoine's crucifix. "He asked me if I believed in Jesus," Antoine testified. "I said, 'Yes.' He told me he believed in Jesus, too. Then he told me that if someone hits him, he hits them back. He told me to forget about it." As Linus, of the comic strip Peanuts might say, "the theological implications are staggering." Besides the possible hypocrisy, ignorance and pointlessness of Mr. Volpe's brand of Christianity, one wonders if he's ever done violence before on the basis of a person's perceived belief or non-belief. Imagine the uproar if Officer Volpe had beaten Mr. Antoine after the same answer. How far behind would Gary Bauer, Pat Robertson and the Rev. Graham be talking about the need for Christians in the police force? The question would now be "should non-believers be cops?" Now imagine what might have happened if Antoine had answered "no" to the question. It is not beyond the realm of possibility to imagine that Volpe would have beaten him as he beat Mr. Louima. What was the point of asking the question after all? Now if that were the case, it would still be truly ridiculous to question whether Christians should be cops. If only non-believers or non-Christians could be assured of a similar fair assessment. [TOC]GAY ADOPTIONS By Gerry D
The Associated Press has reported that an Indiana man who gained statewide attention by fighting attempts by a gay couple to adopt an 8-year-old girl under his foster care is now charged with molesting her. Earl (Butch) Kimmerling, is a 51-year-old school bus driver who adopted the girl with his wife, and has confessed in a videotaped interview to molesting the child, according to Anderson, Indiana police. The Kimmerlings and their pastor, Brad Brizendine of Center of Faith Church, launched a campaign opposing homosexual adoption last August. That's when they found out the girl, who they had cared for over more than 5 years, would be reunited with her three younger brothers and placed with a homosexual Indianapolis couple. Not to belabor the obvious, but it would seem that their victory in at first preventing the reuniting of the family was most likely based on prejudice against gays, fueled by religious belief. Gayness and pedophilia are often linked in the mind of the religious fanatic, although heterosexual child abuse is seemingly overlooked. Will this episode change anything? What are the reader's opinions on gay adoption? Write or email us! [TOC]POPE VISITS ROMANIA By Gerry D
The Pope has traveled to Bucharest, marking the first appearance of any Pope in any Orthodox Christian country since the schism in 1054. It was reported that the Pontiff hoped to improve relations between Orthodox and Catholic Christians. Complicating the visit, unfortunately, was the war in neighboring Yugoslavia, where Serbian Orthodox Christians were ethnically cleansing Muslim Kosovars from their own homes. To keep religious tensions to a minimum, the Vatican agreed that the Pope would not visit heavily Catholic areas in the country and limit the stay to the Orthodox dominated Bucharest. While visiting, the Pope raised the thorny issue of the more than 2400 churches seized from Eastern rite Catholics and given to the Orthodox Church after World War II. The patriarch of the Orthodox Church has, in the past, been accused of collaboration with the Communist government of Ceaucescu, which was overthrown in 1989. It would seem from this history that a common belief in the divinity of Jesus has not been enough to bring the two sides together after almost 1000 years, or raise societal ethics either. Moral systems should not divide humanity, but division is inevitable when correct belief in a supernatural "fact" is a primary component of such a system. There is no way to find common ground since compromising a Word of God would be necessary. This is a compromise most religious systems have not been willing to make. [TOC]EXORCIST KILLER GOING FREE? By Gerry D
When a religious person claims to speak with or have a personal relationship with God, they are often viewed as either a) being highly moral, or b) being nuts. It is interesting that many people will lean from one view to the other based on precisely what "God" seems to be telling them! If god tells them to play defensive end for the Green Bay Packers and win a Super Bowl, they are community leaders, receive commercial endorsements and are looked upon as moral leaders. On the other hand, if "God" tells one to kill the evil demons living in one's daughter, they are mentally unstable. Yet winning Super Bowls is hardly what one would expect God to spend time on, since there is no reason, anyone could possibly detect, for god to favor one team over another. Well, that is, except for the presence of a certain defensive end, depending on the year, of course. However, ridding the world of demons is Godly work and unless one is a non-believer in demons, why is that claim so often dismissed in a society filled with believers? Anyway, Vivian Miranda, of Sayville, Long Island, killed her daughter Charity because she believed her daughter was possessed by demons. Instead of determining whether demons exist or not, the courts found her "not responsible" by reason of mental defect and sent her to a state mental facility. Three months later, she has been found to be in "remission" and could be set free soon. That, apparently, is the law. Her other daughter Serena, who assisted her mother, was sentenced to a number of years in jail for her part in the killing. Apparently she did not talk to God personally, but instead believed her mother. Often, one hears of the benefits of religious belief. Apparently, a religious dementia has saved Vivian Miranda from serving years in prison for the torturous murder of her youngest daughter. Her obedient daughter, on the other hand, will spend years in prison for her meek acceptance of her mother's testimony of a religious experience. And of course Charity Miranda, remains dead, a victim of a primitive religious belief. [TOC]NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED By Gerry D
The Catholic Church as an organization likes to claim it has some kind of mission to serve the suffering. It does boast hospitals, and other charitable organizations that do this kind of work. However, to receive government funding in this country, it may not hire in a discriminatory manner (which it may prefer to do) and must serve all comers, regardless of faith, which it does willingly for the most part, the better to spread its word. But all too often, this service is tainted or apparently not the real concern after all. Is it a fair assessment to say that service to the suffering takes a back seat to restrictive dogma? At Corpus Christi Church in Rochester, NY, the Rev. James Callan was removed last year after spending over 20 years making it a model of charity and service to the needy. By all accounts, this was a dynamic and helpful leader more interested in good deeds than correct dogma. In the beginning of his tenure the parish was dying, and services were poorly attended. Under Callan's leadership, his ministry developed a national reputation for community involvement and assistance. The Bishop giving the order for his removal did not challenge this fact. Instead, the problem was Father Callan's use of women in church services, his outreach to gays, including blessing gay unions, and the giving of communion to non-Catholics. Note that in none of the above situations was any harm being committed to anyone on this earth, in this life! The role of women was particularly galling to the Vatican, where it was suspected the orders to remove this priest originated. Imagine; this priest was actually doing good deeds, but this was not enough! In the face of all of Rev. Callan's good deeds, he was still removed for committing a form of invisible harm to an unseen and omnipotent deity. Further, four of his staffers have since been fired and have now brought suit against the diocese for wrongful breach of contract. Hours after the suit was brought, Father Callan was excommunicated. According to Church teachings, it could be argued he is doomed to eternal punishment. If the Church truly believes that such pain is the destiny of those excommunicated, one wonders what could more cruel? Would that make the person or persons who decide to excommunicate someone the most cruel person or persons on earth? Is there any way to deny that the professed goal of a mission to serve the suffering here on earth came in a distant second to preserving dogma? [TOC]REFORM JEWS UNREFORM By Gerry D
It takes courage to change a tradition, a sacred tradition in particular, and Reform Jews have made a valiant attempt to update their beliefs in light of the collective genius of human wisdom. However, as they continue to be the target of abuse from Orthodox and more fundamental Jewish denominations, are they caving in? At an annual convention in Pittsburgh, the Central Conference of American Rabbis ratified a new "Statement of Principles" that emphasizes the value of tradition, proclaims the importance of studying Hebrew and commits Reform to practices such as wearing yarmulkes and keeping kosher. In the past, traditions that regulated diet, ritual purity and dress were ``entirely foreign to our present mental and spiritual state," the Reform's founders had previously declared. Not anymore! Fortunately, the 1999 statement is not binding, so that each Reform Jew will decide how much of the tradition to adopt. Much of the debate at the conference concerned the policy on marriage to non-Jews. Some participants were concerned that the section could be interpreted as condoning intermarriage, when their intent was instead to welcome non-Jews who are willing to convert. Imagine! They are attempting to gain credibility with other Jewish religious groups by not condoning intermarriage! It is obvious that this attitude will not bring greater understanding and cooperation between all peoples of the world, but then again that is not the purpose of religion. Despite these attempts to conform, Rabbi Avraham Ravitz of Isarel's strictly Orthodox United Torah Judaism party, dismissed the new Statement of Principles as ``just words.'' The statement will mean something, he said, when Reform Jews "return to observing mitzvot," the Hebrew word for deeds prescribed by religious law. Ravitz also said Reform's shift will not affect the rancorous "who-is-a-Jew" debate in Israel -- and won't change the fact that conversions conducted by Reform rabbis still do not meet traditional requirements of Jewish law. Despite the new concessions to the past, Reform Jews are still not Jews according to Rabbi Ravitz. There is an important lesson to be learned here about the impossibility of ultimate understanding between people of differing faiths -- even when the faiths are only a little different. Religion may indeed bring those who believe in the "correct" religion "closer to God," whatever that means, but it certainly does not bring humanity closer together. [TOC]WHAT'S THE BEEF? By Gerry D
The debate over gays and sin should be over by now. It is practically the year 2000 and much of humanity STILL cannot figure out that there is something wrong with a supposed moral system that calls something evil for no other reason than it offends an omnipotent being. What's going to happen to God if people have gay sex? Will he die? No. Will he be grossed out? Maybe. Is that it? Shoot, the eating of squid grosses ME out but I never would punish someone else eternally for eating that sewage. I mean, they're not forcing me to eat squid. Is someone forcing the Omnipotent One to have gay sex? Anyway, the Rev. Fred Phelps, possibly the world's most anti-gay human, is, not coincidentally, a very religious Christian person. He actually protested the funeral of Matthew Shepard, the young man murdered because he was gay, in Wyoming. This is what Phelps said: The funeral has been "turned into an insane orgy of homosexual lies." The parents of the murder victim "failed to raise that child in the nurturing admonition of the Lord. They ought to be profoundly ashamed of themselves." Now we all know that Phelps is an extreme case, but the essence of his point, that Matthew Shepard, murdered for being gay, was a sinner, is going to hell and is deserving of his eternal damnation, is very orthodox. Most Christians may agree in all ways with the above, after sanctimonious condemnations of the murder itself. What is different about Phelps is that he seemingly relishes the problems that other Christians, who prefer their religion humanized so that life on this earth is tolerable, generally attempt to overlook. The problem is this: this god is a cruel blankety-blank for sending people to eternal punishment for offending his delicate sensibilities. I'm not sure exactly what the beef is with Phelps from other Christians: If gay sex is an abomination, as the Bible plainly says, why can't God invent AIDS to kill them? People believe in miracles for the good and suffering for the bad, isn't that why so many people pray? Well, if gay sex is an abomination, as is Nazism, for example, why can't God help beat the Nazis and also help kill gays? Finally, if salvation is through grace and faith, exactly who can say that Phelps does not believe in Jesus? Exactly what would Phelps have to believe that he does not already believe in order to be rewarded with eternal bliss? And by the same token, if Matthew Shepard, slain gay person, never repented his gayness, isn't he in hell where Phelps, someday, can look down and laugh at his torment? Will the killers of Shepard convert to a deep belief while in prison? They'll be saved for sure if they do, isn't that theologically correct? All the tormentors, according to orthodox Christian belief, of Matthew Shepard, would wind up in heaven for their deep faith, their asking for grace and for their beliefs. And poor Matthew will be burning in hell if this is all true. Why would anyone want this to be true? Humanism is much more comforting to most people's sensibilities. There is no deity to offend so that we judge each other on the basis of our treatment of each other. Under this standard, Matthew Shepard is indeed an innocent victim, and can be mourned without reservation, and his tormentors be judged deserving of justice, not eternal bliss. [TOC]LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Your meeting "Why Be Good?" the nature of ethics and morals with and without religion delivered as advertised. You managed, I am glad to say, to keep the discussion focused. Comments contributed from the floor were insightful. I still have an up feeling for the camaraderie radiated by all present. Very best regards, Hugh R., Flushing, NY I knew such a meeting would involve all who were present and indeed nearly everyone had something to say. We could have gone on for another two hours without a problem! G.D.Dear Friends, thank you for the information about your activities. I live in California and am unable to participate in your affairs in person but thank you for including me in the correspondence of the organization. Anybody who can help rid us of the oppressiveness offered by religion in general but from the right-wing religious nuts in particular is certainly welcome on my computer. Thank you very much. C.R.B., CA.
Although we may be strong in our opinions regarding the value of religion itself, we should be careful not to label the religious right as "nuts." First of all, they are not suffering from mental disease any more than any other group, as far as I know. Secondly, it would be dangerous to underestimate their abilities to pursue and obtain cultural and governmental dominance. Our moral high ground consists of being able to seek justice in society on the basis of a person's behavior, not their beliefs. The religious must be free to believe what they prefer to believe. They just should be accorded no special rights on account of those beliefs, nor lose rights accorded others. I appreciate your support very much. G.D.
Excellent newsletter as usual. D.S., NJ Thanks, excellent letter to the editor as usual. G.D.
In several articles recently, you have said that the recent school killings have occurred in areas "overwhelmingly religious." While I cannot speak regarding the other areas, I live in Oregon, the least religious state in the US according to the 1990 census. Springfield is adjacent to Eugene, one of, if not the, least religious cities in the state. Perhaps all the Christians in the Eugene area moved to Springfield, but I have no way of knowing that. Bottom line is that I know of no reason to think of Springfield, Oregon as "overwhelmingly religious." Another interesting point is that we never hear that the perpetrators of school violence come from "good, Christian homes." Why? It's not news. The media would be sure to let us know if the boys were raised in atheist, or humanist or even agnostic homes. So, the fact that they were raised in Christian homes isn't mentioned, allowing religious fanatics to lay the blame on "Godless atheists," who had nothing to do with it. If religious upbringing is mentioned, then obviously it's Madelyn Murray-O'Hairs fault for kicking God out of the schools. We can't win. I., OR In a subsequent Email, the above writer estimated that the percentage of religious to non-religious in the area might have been 83% to 17%, which compares to 95% or so to 5% for the country as a whole. Though this might still be considered "overwhelming" it would not be relative to the rest of the country. Other sites of school tragedies, such as Jonesboro and Paducah have constantly been portrayed as being in the "bible belt" and predictably lack of school prayer has constantly been offered as a cause. Still, it would be best not to generalize unarmed with the facts. Thanks for the information. G.D.
I, too, do not believe in the existence of God for all the simple reasons you repeat ad nauseum. But no, I will not join you because your prattle is as bigoted as those you accuse of bigotry and as intolerant and (I add) as humorless. Except for you, all humans are ignorant, deceived, self-righteous and in dire need of conversion. I say, if my neighbor believes in a deity, let him. So long as he permits me not to. So long as he (and there are many, many hes) is kind and good to me, our children and our neighbors; so long as he creates fine music and art; so long as he practices charity and forbearance. And, of course so long as he doesn't interfere with my doing all the above; in which case I loudly let him know my displeasure. In my view the dire need to convert is probably more destructive, physically and morally, than evil itself. Righteousness kills; witness Kosovo. When Secular Humanists practice humility, admit fallibility, I will join them. L.D., Glen Cove, NY
First of all, we ARE funny, just not all the time.
Secondly it is difficult to respond to assertions that we are bigoted, intolerant, self-righteous, arrogant, think we're infallible and/or consider all others ignorant in the absence of a single example of our overstepping the bounds of good reasoning. To disagree strongly with Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, New Age, Nazism, Communism and whatever else comes along is not what I consider bigotry, though some others think it may. To pre-judge a person's character on the basis of their professed beliefs or deny them any rights would be bigotry and it is precisely that aspect of religion that galls humanists the most. I would suspect no religious or non-religious group supports the First Amendment more strongly than secular humanists.
Every humanist group I know of opposes the movement for a Religious Freedom (for religions that Rep. Bob Barr likes) Amendment to gut the First Amendment. It is also strange to accuse humanists of considering themselves infallible when we more than anyone have no "absolute truths" to cling to. All that we know to be true is what we think to be "probably" true, and our confidence is relative to our evidence. It is humbling to not be in possession of absolute truths, yet at the same time, that lack of certainty ensures that humanists are always open to new and more reliable conclusions based on new information. In your letter you propose to let your neighbor be so long as he lets you be, basically. Well who could disagree with that? Well actually, many do disagree with that, but not humanists! The last time I checked the majority of Congress supports gutting the First Amendment; the majority supports State sanctioned school prayer; supports religious institutions receiving real estate tax exemptions; supports tax monies to be used for religious education; and supports religious charities which proselytize receiving tax monies for their work. Our neighbors elected those officials. Further, most religions teach that my children and yours are worthy of eternal punishment for their lack of belief alone. It is absolutely no problem for any media outlet or political figure, even a president, to malign and stigmatize humanists and non-believers with impunity. There is no moral crime they can accuse us of fostering that will engender public scorn to the accuser at this time. For his network's accusations of secular humanism being the cause of school violence, Pat Robertson has suffered little and has probably raised more money for it. Everyone, it seemed, but atheists ignored President Bush's questioning of the citizenship of atheists. If someone in the LISH newsletter is unfair or inaccurate, we welcome correction.
Tolerating the peaceful and harmless (to others) practice of religion or irreligion is a basic tenet of humanism. Any failure to affirm these values would be our mistake. G.D. [TOC]
END NOTE Teletubbie Hit List By Gerry D
A new web site has been created giving the names and addresses of suspected gay puppets. Called Americans for Straight Puppets, it accuses Tinky Winky, a Teletubbie, of being a gay role model for toddlers, and quotes the command in Leviticus for the elimination of those who engage in gay sex acts. Other past suspected gay puppets, now deceased, have had lines crossed over their names, such as Howdy Doody, Hush Puppy and Casper the friendly ghost. Casper was noted as being too friendly and having a sissy name. Besides Tinky Winky, other puppets still active that are on the list include Big Bird and of course, Barney, the PURPLE Dinosaur, who suspiciously has a Magic Bag like Tinky Winky. Operators of the list have denied all responsibility for any acts of violence that may be perpetrated against the puppets, and cite their First Amendment Rights. Tinky Winky, when asked about the list, just cried. By the way, the above report is not true - yet. [TOC]LISH MEETING INFORMATION got to [Calendar June 25, 1999]
Meetings of LISH are now scheduled for the lower level of The Plainview-Old Bethpage Public Library, located at 999 Old Country Road, Plainview, 7:30 PM. Friday, June 25, 1999: "Overpopulation in the World." Guest speaker Amy Sauer of Planned Parenthood will talk on the subject of world population. Please note that no meetings are scheduled for July and August. However, LISH members only and their families and friends will be invited to a beach picnic during the summer break. Look for the details in the mail!