INQUIRER Volume 3, Issue 6, June, 2000  A Thumbs Up Publication Editor: Gerald Dantone Art Design: John R. Wilmarth Copyright LISH 2000 (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.)
Visit LISH on the web: http://www.homestead.com/lishweb and also at http://wwwhumanist.com

Discount for LISH members!
      Who's Who in Hell, a new book by Warren Allen Smith, 1260 pages, give or take of few dozen, of everything you'd ever want to know about non-theism!  Regularly sold for $125, LISH members or members of UU, Ethical culture, or  other freethought or humanist groups can purchase it for $99. Send $99 to  Rationalists NY, Box 10-D, 31 Jane Street, NYC, NY, 10014 and indicate of which group you are a member plus your address. Mr. Smith is a scheduled guest speaker for a fall LISH meeting!

1)  Blasphemy Wars in NYC Due to Ten Commandments!
2)  Movie Review - Kadosh
3)  Hey Tom, I Found a $100 Million
4)  Letters to the Editor
5)  To Bigotry No Sanction
6)  Miami Mayor's Bigoted Comments Go Unnoticed
7)  Gore Makes Moses Joke, Republicans Offended
8)  Rudy Breaks Commandments

Discount for LISH members!

Who's Who in Hell, a new book by Warren Allen Smith, 1260 pages, give or take of few dozen, of everything you'd ever want to know about non-theism! Regularly sold for $125, LISH members or members of UU, Ethical culture, or other freethought or humanist groups can purchase it for $99. Send $99 to Rationalists NY, Box 10-D, 31 Jane Street, NYC, NY, 10014 and indicate of which group you are a member plus your address.

Mr. Smith is a scheduled guest speaker for a fall LISH meeting!

Blashpemy Wars In NYC Due to Ten Commandments!    Gerry D
        A little noticed war has broken out in New York City - all because of the Ten Commandments! Check out the following items and see if a pattern can be detected!

News item #1: As has been reported previously, State Sen. Maltese has proposed a statute outlawing denigration of any class of person's religious beliefs.

If taken literally, this law would ban in public many portions of the bible that call for destroying the sacred idols or artifacts of rival religious groups or insult non-believers. Of course, Sen. Maltese has no intention to be fair. What this law is intended to do via biased enforcement is to allow the religious to slander the non-religious while protecting the religious from unwanted criticism.

News Item #2: Angry Catholic smears white paint on "infamous" Virgin Mary painting.

No, it was not quite inevitable but it was also not completely surprising that someone chose to deface African artist Chris Ofili's painting of the Virgin Mary made in part with elephant dung. Apparently a 72 year-old retired teacher, calling the work "blasphemy" did the deed and was arrested on December 16 in the Brooklyn Museum of Art. The painting probably was not permanently damaged.

New York City Mayor Giuliani and the Catholic League have criticized the painting and the mayor has gone as far as to threaten the Museum with de-funding over the brouhaha. The mayor has not been successful.

The suspect was caught on video and told police that the painting offended his religious beliefs. (Of course, the fact that the Virgin Mary was painted as an African looking woman couldn't have had anything to do with the offense taken. It must have been strictly the dabs of manure and incorporated clippings of photos of buttocks that were the problems.) A bystander contended that the guards did little to stop him. The vandal stopped when he ran out of paint according to the witness.

The wife of the suspect said to the NY Post, "We are Catholics. He was angry and he had to say this is not right and put an end to it... Because it's near Christmas, he thought it would be good to do it today. I encouraged him to do it." The perpetrator, in an interview with the NY POST did not express any regret. He explained "... the one that I put the paint on, well, that's a rejection of God." Hey, well that settles that!

The couple is well educated according to the report, both speak several languages and are very religious. It was reported that the suspect visited his church just prior to the crime.

This story has many interesting layers. The idea of defacing a painting made with manure is worth a thought as well as the realization that the defacing material was paint. But what is really surreal about the whole matter is that the painter is Catholic as is the alleged vandal! And further that the suspected vandal is a very religious Catholic and that his target was a painting of the Virgin Mary!

True, the painting is partly made with manure, but in African custom, some claim that it is not an insult to the subject of the painting. As far as anyone can tell, the artist meant no insult.

To the religiously intolerant, this is apparently not enough! Not only must all paintings of the Virgin Mary be painted in a manner pleasing to Mayor Giuliani, the Catholic League and its supporters, all funding for art must pass their sniff test as well.

Now, to be sure, the mayor and the Catholic League did not call for anyone to deface the painting. They just called it "blasphemous." As we all know, calling something blasphemous and branding someone a blasphemer, who would then be considered deserving of eternal punishment, couldn't possibly influence anyone to commit a violent or illegal act.

So here we have it: A Catholic attacking another Catholics' religious painting because it isn't Catholic enough! And the crime is blessed by the Second Commandment!

Although the perpetrator could have gotten a one-year sentence for his vandalism, he will be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge and face ten days of community service. He'll probably be considered a hero for opposing someone else's First Amendment rights. Whatever.

News Item #3: Catholic Church vandal is apprehended. Solid police work lead to the arrest of a suspect who has reportedly confessed to vandalizing statues at a number of Catholic Churches in Brooklyn and NYC.

The suspect, according to police, "felt he was a messenger of God. He would wake up and God was telling him to go out and do it." The suspect quoted to police Chapter 5 of Deuteronomy, saying, "Smash their sacred stones... cut down the idols of their gods..." (End of news items.)

As in the case of the Catholic man who defaced the "blasphemous" painting of the Virgin Mary at the Brooklyn Museum of Art, the alleged perpetrator considers the statues, as a Rastafarian-influenced Christian, "blasphemous." As NY Daily News religion reporter Charles Bell wrote in the May 18, 2000 issue, "To many evangelical and fundamentalist Christians, (the 2nd Commandment) prohibits any icons, statues or paintings in sanctuaries. This is what leads some to brand Catholics idolaters - worshippers of idols."

Mr. Bell's assessment is accurate. It is irrelevant even if Catholic apologists explain that they do not "worship" the statues or images. The mere creation of such images is forbidden by the 2nd Commandment. The Commandment reads (Ex 20:4) "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."

Just to make sure that the Hebrews understood, God lectured them thusly, saying (De 4:15 to 19) "Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven." In other words, images should not be made in case (lest) the images themselves then tempt the people to worship the images. This is precisely how they interpreted this commandment leading to the dearth of objects of art from that culture.

What is interesting, of course, is the identical rationalization for this person's alleged activities and for the person who defaced the Virgin Mary painting at the Brooklyn Museum. In the 3 items cited here, the 2nd Commandment (for Catholics it bans blasphemy and for others it bans graven images) is the inspiration.

Of course this leads the wisdom of the Ten Commandments themselves: there is none! Here we have Christians attempting to attack other Christians, sometimes of their own denomination, over one or another version of the 2nd Commandment!

Lawmakers who support the posting of these Commandments in schools will have to answer for these kinds of acts and the rationalizations that they will inspire.

If children and adults, take these Commandments seriously, their will be no tolerance for differing Gods, Sabbaths, or practices involving graven images, divorce and blasphemy. Why on earth would legislators deliberately choose to promote such a divisive set of arbitrary superstition-based taboos?      [TOC]

Movei Review "Kadosh"      Susan T Kadosh
        (Sacred) is an Israeli film set in the orthodox quarter of Jerusalem, Mea Shearim.

In this film we are exposed to a fundamentalist culture in which women are victimized in a male-dominated society whose life-rules are governed by the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament, rampant with misogyny. Every aspect of life is controlled by religious law and accentuated with rituals, including clothing, hairstyles, and food, to name a few. No radio or television is permitted and their world is kept as isolated from the "others" as possible.

Only males may touch the Torah, as men fear that women may be "unclean," and an individual's needs and desires are subordinate to its religious laws and tenets. Men spend their days in prayer and Torah study while their wives are expected to earn a living for the family and to bear their husband's children (the more, the better.) Women's needs and desires are subject to the dictates of their men. This way of life is dying out, we are told, and it is more important than ever for families to have as many babies as possible.

The story is about two sisters, Rivka and Malka, members of an ultra orthodox Jewish sect who are faced with circumstances which compel them to flee from their grim existence.

Rivka, married for ten years to Meir, a man who feels love and tenderness for her, has no child yet, and is considered no woman at all. She is a non-person, worthless because her main purpose is to bear her husband children. Meir is torn between his love and respect for Rivka and his need to obey his father-in-law, an important Rabbi, and the group's dictates that he must divorce Rivka and find another wife who will bear him children. It matters not that Rivka is fertile, and that the problem lies with Meir. Rivka must bear the blame and the shame, while her husband, we are told, is an object of derision and scorn because he is childless. Meir must follow tribal dictates, and Rivka is cast out.

Malka, the younger sister, is in love with Yaakov, who left the group to join the military and is now a club singer. Now, he is one of "them," the "others," and is considered unacceptable to be Malka's husband.

Malka's father, the rabbi, is pressuring her to marry, as women must do, and he has chosen the blustery and fiercely fanatical Yossef for her. She fears what marriage will mean for her, a life in which her preordained "role fulfillment" will be at odds with her true desires as an individual. In a moving scene in which she discusses her fears with her sister Rivka, Malka points out that the Torah is filled with contradictions, and a man can use any part of it, arbitrarily, to back up any decision he makes. She knows her needs and desires will be subordinated to her husband's wishes. Nevertheless, she has refused many matches, and reluctantly, against her better judgement, she agrees to marry Yossef.

At the wedding the men are deliriously happy, but for Malka it is like a funeral, the death of her chance to live in an independent and free manner.

Naturally, as Malka knew would happen, her fears come true, and she winds up living in squalor with Yossef, a socially and emotionally bankrupt man. She tries to adjust to life with this callous man who has no regard for her, but the pressure builds up and she must escape.

The story of each sister's escape for her torturous existence is told with stark realism, and although it was filmed in color, I had the impression that the movie was in black and white, because of the black and white world of Mea Shearim. It is beautifully directed by Amos Gitai, an Israeli filmmaker, and has a wonderfully supportive musical score. The actors are all perfect in their roles.

I became very involved with the story and the characters, and for me, that is what makes for an excellent film. I really cared about these two women and their struggles, and I cried for their helplessness. I definitely recommend this film for everyone who is concerned about religious oppression.      [TOC]

Hey Tom, I Found $100,000,000    Will R
        Nassau County (NY) is one of the richest counties in the country in the midst of an economic boom time. Unemployment is the lowest it's been in years, yet Nassau County is in financial trouble. The budget deficit this year is estimated to be $200 million and could surpass $300 million in years to come. We do know how to spend, right Tom? How we got to this sad financial state is a story for another day. However, I have an idea on how to increase the tax revenue, without increasing individual taxes. Real estate taxes should be collected from religious organizations owning or leasing real property in the county.

Public schools, hospitals, governmental buildings, public services and public parks should be the only real properties with tax exempt status. Not only can we address the deficit; we can also improve the services provided by the county in these facilities tremendously if we increase our tax revenue. Now Tom, we can't spend this newfound money foolishly.

This idea is not that crazy, Tom. Currently all real property owners in Nassau County are subsidizing all faiths with a real estate tax-exempt status. Should a person of one faith subsidize the faith of another, even if they believe that other faith to be wrong? It is only fair that all religious organization pay their fair share of the burden in support of their followers.

Tom, I do admit this will put a financial strain on smaller religious organizations and start-ups, but if the faith of the individual constituents is strong, they can show it by their support through dues or donations. There is no reason for any person who is not a member of this faith to support it through real estate tax subsidies. If a religious organization fails, the property can then be used for another useful purpose (school, housing, medical, etc.).

Here are some facts collected from Nassau County through First American Real Estate Solutions. My street (in an average middle class neighborhood) has 25 houses with a total land area of 155,926 square feet, a total value $150,500 (a value set by the county; not the market) and total Real Estate taxes of $152,737.41. This is a tax rate of 1.015 of the total value. By the way, I'm amazed at how a neighbor with a large extension and larger property then mine pays less tax and another neighbor with a similar house and property pays more. That's another story for another day as well, right Tom? Currently there are 1,059 religious properties with a total land area of 74,202,201 square feet (1,703 acres), a total value of $99,245,640 and $0 paid in real estate taxes. If these religious properties were taxed at the same rate as my street (1.015) that would add $100,734,325 to the tax role of Nassau County. Wow Tom, could this help the county?

Now Tom, I admit taxing religious organizations for their fair share is not likely to be taken on by any candidate for public office, but you are already in office and you could introduce this sweeping tax reform and seek voter support. I would urge all voters to write their local politicians in support of this real estate tax reform, should you introduce it. Just think Tom, one day this could become nationwide policy, thus propelling your career into the national spotlight. After all, raising revenues through a new tax source and keeping individual taxes down could make you very popular. If one chooses to become members of a religious organization, one can show support by their own contributions, financial of otherwise.

We could debate which religion is right, true, just, fair or wrong, but again, another story for another day. This is about what is fair to all property owners in the county. Real property owners paying there fair share of real estate taxes, regardless of faith. Right Tom?

If you have any thoughts on the subject drop us a note, or write a letter to Mr. Thomas Gullotta, Nassau County Executive. Happy Taxing!      [TOC]

Letters to the Editor

4/17/00 In Keith Taylor's piece, "A Memorial in Alabama," (April 2000), he talks about people who defy the "truism" that there are no atheists in foxholes. He failed to mention one very eminent personage who may or may not have been atheistically inclined, but who certainly questioned the given gospel of his day.

I refer to American's founding President, George Washington. In J.A. Haught's "Two Thousand Years of Disbelief" the author quotes historian Barry Schwartz thus: "Even on his deathbed, Washington asked for no ritual, uttered no prayer to Christ, and expressed no wish to be attended by His representative." Gerald Albert, Professor Emeritus, LIU

Response: It is also true that Washington was a Mason, and many Christians do not believe that Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity, while others do believe it is compatible. Certainly, at the least, Washington was no fundamentalist "Pat Robertson" type of Christian. G.D.

4/16/00 Thank you for the free copy of the LISH Inquirer. I was happy to hear from a chapter of Long Island Secular Humanists. I'm sure I will enjoy each issue and look forward to receiving regular information regarding secular humanism, freethinking, atheism and agnosticism. Many thanks, Betty V., East Hampton.

Response: I'm glad we exist for people like you. You're very welcome. G.D.

5/1/00 I inadvertently acquired a copy of your April 2000 Inquirer. After reading it in its entirety, I am disappointed. There are isolated spots of wit and intellectual depth, but superficiality and blatant bias override these. It would seem that the closeness of your newsletter's name to that of the well-known yellow journal may not be intentional.
        To cite a few specifics, a recent Time Magazine article outlined the Catholic Church's - or at least the current Pontiff's - concept of hell. It bears no resemblance to the outdated version to which you refer in the "Papal Apology."
        While I am unfamiliar with your policy regarding Letters to the Editor, I do not think printing "Lynn via Internet" saying she'll get "satisfaction... seeing creationists humiliated" will attract the caliber of secular humanist more lofty aspects of your publication would indicate. My concept of an intellectual is one who at the least knows respect for others and their differing beliefs.
        Meanwhile, Lee D. of Glen Cove defines rational humanism in part "as seeing neither evidence of...the existence of an ultimate creator." Could you explain what is meant by the term "ultimate." And could you comment on secular humanism's rationale for the order in the universe? Also have any who ascribe to secular humanism experienced "out of body" episodes? Thank you. SMason.

Response: To quickly answer: According to the latest official Catechism of the Catholic Church, "Jesus often speaks of... 'The unquenchable fire' reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost. Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather... "all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire," and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal flames." The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire." (Paragraphs 1034-35).
        If the above is not convincing, the following is how my personal Baltimore Catechism, from my childhood, described hell: "Those in hell... are deprived of the vision of God and suffer dreadful torments, especially that of fire, for all eternity." (Pg. 74.)
        It is true that the chief punishment is separation from God, but hell hardly sounds appetizing otherwise.
        Your next critique, that of Lynn's hope for the "humiliation" of creationists is well taken. No one should hope for someone else's humiliation, but instead his or her enlightenment. However, we are all human, and it is understandable that one would secretly hope that Pat Robertson's trousers fall down on national TV.
        Also, as far as what Lee meant by "ultimate" creator, I suspect that he meant a creator who needed no creator of its own. As for the order of the universe, a secular humanist may not have the ultimate answers - it's just that we would not stop inquiring in favor of a "magical" answer. Finally, yes, secular humanists have recounted episodes of "out of body experiences." Typically, they view them as amazing but natural experiences involving poorly understood processes of the brain. Thanks for writing. G.D.

Re: LISH Question of the month: Should bookstores sell the anti-Semitic "Protocols of the Elders of Zion?"

5/13/00 I personally believe that selling such material is wrong. We should not encourage hatred of any people, Jews, Christians, Gays, or other Atheist/Agnostics. If the book is historical in nature, I could possibly allow myself to say yes to it. But, I do not know enough to comment firmly on either side. I do know that anti-Semitism is wrong. L.V.C. via Internet

Response: I actually have little problem with Amazon.com or anyone else selling any and all kinds of books, with the possible exception of books that detail how to commit crimes or build dangerous weapons. When it comes to having Amazon.com ban books based on public sentiment, NO ONE would be a bigger loser, potentially, than the non-religious.
        Just imagine if, in response to Amazon.com banning the Protocols, the radical religious right starting demanding that sacrilegious books such as Bertrand Russell's "Why I Am Not a Christian" should be banned. They outnumber us and they could effectively hurt us.
        It is not as if the Protocols is a "how to commit murder and get away with it" or "how to wage germ warfare" kind of textbook, intended for use to commit a crime. THAT kind of book is the only kind I see as worthy of being banned, and it would be for safety reasons. In fact, there is probably a need by many scholars to have the Protocols book, not to promote hate, but to understand it. Though hate is regrettable, censorship is censorship whether the government or societal pressure causes it. The result is the same - we are prevented from reading and knowing all there is to be read and known. Shoot, if you think about it, the bible has enough hateful things in it to consider banning it for the same reason as one would ban the Protocols.
        Banning books is a tough issue - the right wingers are now starting to say that it is the left that wants censorship. If it is argued that it is justified to ban a hateful book, the secular humanist will be a target by the radically religious who see us as hateful for rejecting God. G.D.

5/13/00 Yes. Banning books has never solved any problem. If one is to "know thy enemy," one should have access to books presenting their viewpoint, as offensive as it may be. The alternative of trying to suppress a viewpoint will merely result in it "going underground", where hate mongers will keep reading and distributing such literature within their "camp," but opponents will have less of an inkling of what they're up to than if they were out in the open. Dan via Internet

Response: There are ample practical reasons to allow the free exchange of ideas, even odious ones. One person's hate, sadly, is another person's love. If we ban the "Protocols" how does the bible or Koran escape banning on the same grounds? G.D.

5/13/00 I say they have the right to sell them and at the same time people have the right to boycott them for it. Wiz, Wichita, KS, via Internet

Response: Makes sense! G.D.        [TOC]

To Bigotry No Sanction      Barry L
      One of the most intriguing elements of the "New Right" that brought Ronald Reagan into the White House was its marriage of erstwhile "mortal enemies": traditionalist Catholics and fundamentalist Protestants. The Catholics appreciated the biblical support that the Protestants provided for the positions taken by the Holy Church (abortion, homosexuality, and the status of women), while the fundamentalists, frankly, did not appear too concerned about earning the imprimatur of the Vatican.

Now, however, it seems that the marriage is falling apart, with the Catholics being the ones seeking divorce (or should we say "annulment"?). Since the views of the Dubya-visited Bob Jones University hit the media, an army of voices -- including US News' John Leo, William Donahue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights and Newsday's own Bill Reel -- has arisen to decry and battle... "bigotry"! How dare BJU and their fellow travelers attack the pope as "antichrist," or claim that the One True Church is really the "Great Whore" of Revelations 17! Why does such narrow-minded prejudice and ignorance even continue to exist in an enlightened age that should know better?

Talk about beams and motes! Apparently, traditionalist Catholics think that fundamentalist Protestantism is a perfectly fine weapon -- just as long as it's not pointing (much less firing) in their direction. Forget about the hypocrisy; can you believe the naivete of the Catholics? Did they honestly think that Catholicism alone would escape the scrutiny -and thus the wrath -- of the fundamentalists?

Admittedly one is tempted to trot out the familiar Neimoller quote, but one soon learns to resist temptation. In this world, "prejudice and ignorance" are their own punishment.       [TOC]

Miami Mayor's Bigoted Comments Go Unnoticed      Gerry D
      Imagine if Rudy Giuliani said something like "Those Baptists; there was no need to for them to march on City Hall protesting police brutality." Or if Al Gore said something like "Those Jews; there's no need for them to call for an independent prosecutor." What would happen?

If those elected officials indeed said things like the above, they would severely castigated, perhaps have their political aspirations ended, and deserve it! Yet the mayor of Miami said something even more inflammatory and has not, as far as I can see, received the slightest criticism for it! Instead he's a hometown hero!

Here is a snippet from a UPI story regarding the return of Juan Miguel Gonzalez's child via a raid by Federal Agents on the non-custodial relatives holding him: "Miami Mayor Joe Carollo said he was outraged by the raid over the Easter weekend. "These are atheists. They don't believe in God," he said. "There was no need to do this like this. These are hard working men and women. I had no information at all that this was going to happen.""

Just in case one is wondering if this story is accurate, it also appears on USA TODAY'S Website in the following form: "Early Saturday, an angry Miami Mayor Joe Carollo made the rounds of TV networks to denounce the government. On NBC, he called the agents ''thugs.'' On CNN, he said it was one of the most shameful acts he had ever seen.

''What they did here was a crime,'' Carollo said on CBS. ''Tell the country that these are atheists. They don't believe in God ... I felt that I could not trust our government any longer.''" The website is http://www.usatoday.com/news/ndssat07.htm.

There is not a shred of evidence that Janet Reno, Bill Clinton, the INS, or anyone else involved in this raid were atheists. Castro is presumably an atheist, but once again, there is not a shred of evidence he had a clue about the raid, which was not given a go-ahead until the last moment.

Was the raid ill conceived? Perhaps. Unfortunately, we will never know if this raid was ultimately necessary, and keep in mind it does not change the basic thought that the father should have custody of his son, subject to all future court rulings.

None of the above has anything to do with atheism, however. None of the above observations necessarily represents the thoughts of all or even most atheists as well. What is obvious is that if you want to reduce an "enemy" to the lowest form of human life on earth, there is but one respectable way to do it - call the enemy an "atheist."

Once again, atheists were maligned without having done a thing to deserve it. Non-believers are certainly the only class of persons that can be insulted, falsely accused and vilified without fear of correction. In fact atheists are held is such little esteem, their feelings are not thought to be worth any consideration.

LISH has written the Mayor's office, but has received no response. If you want to contact the Mayor, here is the info: Mayor Joe Carollo, telephone: (305) 250-5300, email: jcarollo@ci.miami.fl.us. Or mail to: Mayor Carollo, City Hall, 3500 Pan American Drive, Miami, Florida, 33133.       [TOC]

Gore Makes Moses Joke, Offends Republicans!     Gerry D
      Al Gore has said he is glad to be called Public Enemy #1 by the NRA's Charlton Heston. In front of 13,500 people at a Democratic fundraiser he continued, "If I remember my Bible correctly, the last time that Moses listened to a bush, his people wandered in a desert for 40 years."

Of course, Gore was humorously referring to Heston's movie portrayal of Moses and the anti-gun control presidential opponent, George W. Bush, whom Heston supports. The joke was a pretty clever creation, it would seem.

Some people have no sense of humor when it comes to the supernatural, apparently. The spokesman for the Republican National Committee, Mike Collins, claimed, "I think that is an incredibly tacky, tasteless comparison that offends the values of millions of Americans - Jews an Christians alike. His comparisons are ruthlessly brutal."

Apparently it isn't tasteless for a Christian, such as Mr. Heston, who believes it is necessary to believe in the divinity of Jesus to be saved from eternal hell, to portray Moses, a Jew. Are Jews going to hell, Mr. Heston? Mr. Bush? Is that a ruthlessly brutal question to ask? Mr. Collins, is God/Jesus justified in sending those who do not profess faith in Jesus' divinity to everlasting torment?

Whenever someone who believes that others are damned, evil or immoral for failing to believe what they themselves believe, all claims about their being offended by some perceived slight rings hollow. The ultimate insult is to consider others worthy of eternal punishment on the basis of their beliefs. Mr. Heston, Mr. Bush and Mr. Collins ought to be ashamed to hold such opinions if this accurately describes their point of view.

It is refreshing to see someone, such as Mr. Gore, lacking pious self-righteousness, and able to joke about his own religion. Where was Mr. Collins when Gov. Bush claimed Jesus was necessary for salvation? What could be more "ruthlessly brutal?"        [TOC]

Rudy Breaks Comandments      Gerry D
      Mayor Rudy Giuliani is suspected of having a romantic and sexual relationship with a woman who is not his wife, according to numerous recent press reports. Polls have indicated that about 12% of the electorate thought that this information was relevant, an important factor in a close race for elected office. It was therefore not surprising that, when combined with his health concerns because of recently diagnosed prostate cancer, he withdrew from the US Senate race from NY.

An ironic twist to this story has to do with Mayor Giuliani's stated support for the posting of the biblical Ten Commandments in public schools. According to the 6th Commandment of the Catholic Ten Commandments (7th in most others) it states "Thou shalt not commit adultery." Oops!

Even worse is the biblical penalty for such a sin. According to Lev. 20:10: "And the man that committeth adultery with an-other man's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death."

Well perhaps there's a loophole here. The mayor's friend is divorced, so that she is no one's wife at present. Unfortunately, Mr. Giuliani's denomination, Catholicism, does not recognize divorce and it is likely that the Mayor is still damned and technically, still due to be "put to death."

Adultery, apparently is also in violation of the penal code, as a misdemeanor. Perhaps someone such as Ken Starr can look into this matter. We wonder if disbarrment is in the future.

We wish the Mayor the best of luck in dealing with his health concerns. We also wish him luck with the remainder of the Commandments, but we suppose if you're already supposed to be disbarred, jailed, killed and then go to hell, what's the difference?