Center for Inquiry-:Long Island INQUIRER
Volume 7, Issue 4, April, 2004TABLE OF CONTENTS
Same-Sex Marriage
Letters to the Editor
QUICKIES
Decoding the Message of DNA
Viva La France! Just Say No To Religious Displays in Public Schools-Everywhere!
What's Wrong with the Palestinians?
Making The Rounds with Norm
The Point of “The Passion”
An Open Letter: Integrative Medicine Service?Original LISH Board Member Bill Mohrman Moving to N. Carolina!
Dear Friends: It has been a great pleasure for me to know each of you and I know I will miss you. The last years have given me stimulation, excitement and happiness as I participated in meetings, the book club, picnics and discussions. Both Maureen and I look forward to having you visit us at: 314 Kingfisher Lane, Mills River Village, Mills River, NC 28742, email, wmohrman@yahoo.com.SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Gerry Dantone
In August 2003, President Bush and the Pope fired a one-two punch at gays by announcing officially their already assumed opposition to the possibility of allowing gays to marry. The Pope called on Catholic politicians and others to do their religious duty while Bush announced his disturbance at the prospect.
With the campaign season now in full swing, Bush this year announced that he was now willing to support a Constitutional Amendment that would define marriage as that between a man and a woman only even though he legally would have no role to play in this process. This contradicts a campaign statement where the President had said this matter should be left to the states.
Polls indicated that only a small portion of the electorate who favor gay marriage would decide their vote on this issue; a larger group who opposes gay marriage WOULD decide their vote on this basis!
The motivations are clear: Gays want marriage for the same reasons anyone else would want marriage.
On the other hand, the President, probably on the advice of his “brain,” Karl Rove, has determined that hurting gays is something that may help Bush in the election - so be it.
The voters who oppose gay marriage are bigots inspired primarily by their religious indoctrination. The Pope's words have consequences.
Pretty simple actually…
This analysis is hard to refute. Pointless arguments involving “states rights” and “sacred covenants” aside, the common good is served by allowing more couples access to the perceived advantages of marriage. Since it is voluntary, the decision to seek marriage should be open to all who seek it based on an equally applied formula - any two persons should be allowed this status regardless of their sexual relationship, or even whether there is such a sexual relationship.
Churches and religions are unaffected by allowing same sex marriage. Those churches that are against same sex marriage do not have to perform them, and those that are for them can continue, period.
Who is harmed by same-sex marriage? Every explanation offered is incoherent or dishonest. Pat Buchanan at least is honest about it: “Same sex marriage is an abomination before the Lord.” A complete response to him would be, “Who cares what you claim disgusts your God concept.” Who should care if 70% of Americans agreed about God's delicate sensibilities? In this country we are not to legislate religious belief, only the common good.
Does the Religious Right prefer that same-sex couples NOT commit? Does the Religious Right prefer that they be promiscuous? Answer: Yes, so that the Religious Right can stereotype them, ostracize them, and compound their “sinfulness”!
Yet, how can gays be blamed for the current state of affairs where 50% of marriages end in divorce and where a Britney Spears can get married just because she wanted to do something “wild,” “see how it felt” and get an annulment the next day. What amendment is being proposed to prevent this nonsense?
This is certainly a sad state of affairs where a President can actually suggest amending the Constitution to deny a specific class of non-criminal citizens the rights accorded to others.
What next?
Do not laugh when it is suggested that outlawing marriage for gays cannot be the end goal of this line of persecution. If gay sex within marriage is enough to amend the constitution over, why isn't gay sex outside of marriage equally worthy of an amendment? Isn't that even more immoral to religious extremists?
Why not move on to any form of sex that does not have the Papal or Presidential seal of approval, even between married heterosexuals? Do not such sinful sex acts exist supposedly? Aren't all such sinners going to hell as certainly as those who have homosexual sex?
Where will this all end? By now, and knowing the situations in places such as Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and throughout history whenever religion made law, we know to where it leads - human misery. The cure is pure separation of church and state and legislating laws for the purpose of the common good only.
[TOC]
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Re: Question of the Month: Do you agree with France's ban on religious garb or
symbols in their Public Schools?
3/6/04 The question has several facets. First, does France have legal restrictions
on religious symbols in official areas, such as schools, similar to our First Amendment?
If so, then the law ought to be followed until and unless changed in accordance
with French law.
Second, does French law allow open personal expression, such as religious symbols, in
public, in schools, and in public forums? If so, what are the conditions for such
expressions?
Third, does France have legal exceptions to either of the above, such as expressions which
may be hidden below clothing? Again, without knowing the context, it is difficult to
judge at this point.
The major societal question is whether such individuality should be allowed to supercede
expressions of solidarity. I am unfamiliar with the history and culture of France in
this regard, and thus cannot make a judgment for that nation. Hank Kocol
via Internet.
3/7/04 No I do not. I am an atheist, but as long as those symbols are not imposed by the
schools themselves, or by a government authority, people have the right to wear whatever
symbols or culturally derived clothing they want. It will also just increase the
enmity between religious and secular (atheist, agnostic, etc.) people. William J
Gonzalez, via Internet
3/7/04 It is my understanding that France does not have the same concept of freedom of
religion that we do, and that this is not much of a problem there. Nevertheless, it
rubs me the wrong way, mainly because "small" crosses are allowed. It
seems to me that, once again, Christians are being given special privileges that are not
accorded other groups. Isaac, via Internet.
3/7/04 As much as I love the idea, I think it is at the same time a terrible idea.
First, I strongly believe in keeping government out of religion, and having the government
restrict a person's religious freedom is wrong and dangerous. And the other reason I
am against it, is that policies like this have a tendency to backfire. For example
an unintended consequence may be increased attendance at religious schools. David
Zilkha, via Internet.
3/7/04 I've been fairly torn about this issue. I could see why it deserves support.
Schools should be able to establish a reasonable dress code, and attire outside of
those limits shouldn't be allowed, even if it is religiously mandated. Surely the
extreme burkas mandated by some strict Islamic sects would be disruptive. If wearing
of headdresses is so important for the girls and women this ban effect, then let them
attend private schools that support their religious display. If they cannot afford
such private schools, but it's important to the Islamic community, let them provide
scholarships for the girls. If the question is how important this principle is to
the Muslim community, they can solve it for themselves.
On the other hand, the ban does not seem to be equitably distributed. The wearing of
crucifixes or other symbols of Christian religious identity is not prohibited. If
the people who decide what's excessive or not share in the cultural heritage of only one
group, then bias and discrimination is inevitable, and that's not right.
So I'd support a complete ban on the wearing of religious symbols, but as I understand the
implementation of this prohibition, I'd have to disagree. Bob, via
Internet.
3/7/04 YES! Katy Fischer via Internet.
3/7/04 Oo la la, Oui! France is setting the right example of separation. Too
bad they are getting such heat for it. Cheers, Pete via Internet.
3/7/04 Yes, I agree with Frances' ban on religious garb and symbols in their public
schools, noting however, that small symbols of religious were not banned. Students
can still wear small crosses, stars, and etc. The ban is against symbols and
clothing that causes a distraction or could jeopardize security. We do the same
thing in America. J.E. Hill, Washington, via Internet.
3/7/04 Certainly France sees things more clearly than we do under our misguided leader who
is so anxious to push vouchers. Separation of Church and State has separated us from
many of the so called civilized nations who have embraced Governments supporting
Religions. This is only a short step from the Religions being subservient to the
States. Wes via Internet.
Response: Typically we
should raise our antenna when the government either encourages or discourages religious
expression. Unless religious garb could be demonstrated to causing harm, such as in
leading to intimidation, it should then be unregulated. However, this would only
apply to students; teachers and employees of the state should appear to be neutral.
France may be overreacting, but then again, they've experienced religious wars on their
own soil. Read Don Ardell's article for another point of view. G.D.
Re: CFI Metro NY Director Susan Jacoby in the NY Times, “One Nation, Under
Secularism”
1/8/04 Kudos to Susan Jacoby, director of Metro N.Y. Center for Inquiry, on her
well-written Op Ed piece in the Times decrying the tendency of presidential candidates to
get on the religious bandwagon. Entitled "One Nation, Under Secularism,"
Jacoby points out that "it would take genuine courage to stand up and tell voters
that elected officials cannot and should not depend on divine instructions to reconcile
the competing interests and passions of human beings." This, of course, is
preaching to the freethinking choir -- but hopefully, some of the uncommitted might sit up
and take notice. David Shobin, M.D. via Internet.
Response: I'm sure Susan
will appreciate your comments. G.D.
1/15/04 In my lecture (on alternative medicine) I used the quotation from Confucius:
"When words change their meaning, men lose their liberty". Reading the
papers lately has provided too many examples: "No Child Left behind" translates
into less funding for education; "Clear Skies program" = increased legal
pollution; "Patriot Act" defines patriotism as willingness to eliminate basic
civil liberties for anyone the authorities don't like; "Prescription Drug Benefit =
giveaway to the drug companies and increased drug prices; Concern for the environment =
willingness to tear up Alaska for a tiny bit of oil. Words are losing their meaning,
and I'm more and more afraid that we are losing our liberty. Regards, Chic
Schissel. Long Island, via Internet.
Response: Regardless of
the effectiveness or benefits of the above programs mentioned, there is no doubt that
there is a deliberate effort to “market” these and other programs in a manner
designed to mislead the general public from the real intent, because, in the opinion of
the ideological program makers, it's for “our own good.” That is no way to
run a “free” country. G.D.
2/25/04 Using the term "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, is in a sense,
imposing the majorities will on others by offending non-believers, and those that believe
but desire a secular society, and insist that religion should be confined to the private
sector. Our founding fathers consisted of men who were believers, deists, agnostic,
and atheists-so their patriotism was not predicated on the need to believe in a God.
Separation of Church and State has been a fundamental tenet of American society. To
reinforce that tenet, the 9th Circuit Court showed great courage in declaring the Pledge
of Allegiance unconstitutional because of the phrase "under God," despite the
fact that most Americans believe in God. Fundamentalist Muslims when in the majority
want only a Muslim state - likewise many fundamentalist Christians would prefer America to
be a Christian state.
The true mettle of a society is not what it does for those in power, but what it does for
those with little or no power. Joe Brooks, via Internet,
Whitestone, NY.
Response: Thanks for a
simple but focused explanation of the Pledge fight. G.D.
[TOC]
QUICKIES! Gerry Dantone
Item: It was reported in Elle Magazine that Paris Hilton explains what studying kaballah
has done for her: “It helps you confront your fears. Like, if a girl borrowed
my clothes and never gave them back, and I saw her wearing them months later, I would
confront her.”
Comment: Instead of
kaballah, perhaps she was thinking of karate. In any event, this is too deep for me.
Item: More than one-third of Iran's lawmakers resigned in protest in February 2004 over
disputed elections, and the parliamentary speaker charged ruling clerics with trampling on
the rights of his countrymen. Speaker Mahdi Karroubi appealed to Iran's supreme
leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to help resolve the crisis caused by disqualification of
thousands of liberal candidates from the Feb. 20 vote. But Khamenei had left the
capital, Tehran, making it difficult to reach him, parliamentary officials said.
About 124 lawmakers in the 290-seat Majlis, or parliament, resigned in a dramatic gesture
intended to force the clerical hierarchy to reinstate the disqualified candidates.
"Are you loyal to Islam if you pray daily, but then trample on the rights of the
people?" asked Karroubi, himself a cleric. He accused the Guardian Council,
whose 12 members are appointed by Khamenei, of "disrespecting democratic values and
having no faith in a popular vote."
Comment: Well here is the
question: Is the Ayatollah's version of what is Islamic correct or is it Mr. Karroubi's?
If the leader of the Islamic community, the Ayatollah, is not authoritative on what
is Islamic, who or what is? This is similar to the situation that Martin Luther
faced many centuries ago, and though Luther did not answer it 100% correctly, (or even
remotely correctly!) his Reformation was vital in the humanization of the Christian
religion. Individual conscience in interpreting one's religion is a step on the way
of criticizing and ultimately rejecting religious belief. Mr. Karroubi is probably
unaware or in denial of the implications of his position, but his and other Iranians'
alternative is to accept authority without question. What will they do?
Hopefully they will choose an Islamic “Reformation” and then an Islamic
“Enlightenment.”
Item: (By Ann Coulter in Human Events) “… If I were a man rather than part of
the frivolous, nonproductive chattering class, Roy Moore is the man I'd like to be.
He lost his judgeship because he did what was right. He took an oath to uphold the
Constitution, not to uphold whatever blather a liberal judge manages to put on
paper. He followed the real law, not liberals' make-believe law. He put
principle above his personal interest or comfort. He was actually brave-and this is
the only newspaper in the country that will say so. The Ten Commandments monument
was removed, but this time, not without a fight.”
Comment: Ms. Coulter has
also written, “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them
to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and
his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's
war. And this is war…” Out of the Ten Commandments that Ms. Coulter
holds so dear, we can probably suspect that the unmarried Coulter has managed to keep only
a few of the Commandments, such as not coveting someone's ox, although that is only
because Democrats don't seem to be big on oxen. This is her version of Christianity,
and we should not be surprised her “man of the year” is Judge Moore.
Item: (Sen. Cornyn, TX, in the Austin-American Statesman) We have drifted a long way from
the original vision of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution says that there shall
not be any law "respecting an establishment of religion." It also says
that there shall not be any law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Both principles deserve protection.
Under our Constitution, everyone is allowed to practice whatever religion they choose --
including no religion at all. Likewise, people should be free under our Constitution
to encourage religious expression through their public, democratic institutions.
For example, we open every daily session of Congress with a prayer. Every day,
courts throughout our land admit testimony on the basis of a commitment to tell the truth
"so help me God." Even our calendar system resonates with religious
significance -- our Constitution explicitly acknowledges that its drafting was completed
"in the Year of our Lord" 1787, and expressly recognizes Sunday as a day of
rest.
Comment: Sen. Cornyn is
clueless: How would he feel if the government decided that atheistic expression should be
encouraged, such as a Pledge that said “under NO God…”? In other
words, Sen. Cornyn is relying on the Constitution being applied unfairly to support his
majority views over the views of what should be the constitutionally protected minority.
What a shock!
Item: Queen of Pop Madonna sees herself as a teacher - because she now consciously imparts
knowledge on those around her. The singer, writer and icon has become a devoted
follower of the Kabbalah faith, a branch of Jewish mysticism - and is glad it has helped
her to help others. She explains, "If I taught people earlier in my career, it
was by default. I wasn't consciously thinking of sharing in any way. I was
just showing off. I felt full of myself. Now I'm a teacher." And
the Hollywood hit-maker rejects claims her on-stage smooches with Britney Spears and
Christina Aguilera at this year's (03) MTV VMA Awards were merely a publicity stunt.
She explains to website PAGESIX, "We were playing with lots of post-modern
iconography."
Comment: Translation:
“We were hoping that it would boost my sagging career!”
Item: (Ed Lowe, Newsday) On a weekly Telecare television panel show we now have been doing
for 13 years (although, this column may mark the end of my tenure), he said, "Ed,
what do you think about all this?"
On the show, I answered Hartman's question, probably a bit too passionately. The
show never made the air…
Incredibly, after Suffolk District Attorney Tom Spota's blistering grand jury report came
out, Hartman asked me, again, on camera, "What do you think about all this, Ed?"
I thought, "Are you nuts? You're going to ask me this question again on the
air?"
Anticipating moans from the control room, I answered, again, this time even more
passionately.
That show never aired, either.
Now that the scandal has reached into New Jersey, and now that the priests of Diocese of
Rockville Centre-including some good friends of mine-are going to meet next Monday with
their bishop, here, pretty accurately paraphrased, is how I answered, both times.
"Have you heard of the RICO Act? "Here's what you need for a successful
RICO prosecution: a recognizable, identifiable organization-There's a short putt: the
church-with a clearly identifiable hierarchy-another short putt-whose members, you can
show, conspired to commit felony crimes, either in their own interest or in the interest
of the corrupt organization.
"What do I think? I think that by now, your boss, Murphy, should be playing bridge in
a federal penitentiary with the other two disgraced princes of the Church, Cardinal
Bernard Law and Bishop Thomas Daily, and at least, at least, a dozen co-conspirator
priests, lawyers and priest/lawyers.
"And, if you don't want me to say what I think, don't ask."
Comment: No comment
needed.
Item: (AP) Waves of pilgrims were jostled or shoved their way through the crowds for
devil-stoning rituals in February 2004, a day after 244 people were crushed to death
during the same rites at the annual Muslim pilgrimage, the hajj.
"We are deeply saddened when we hear such news,'' said a Saudi pilgrim, Mohammed
el-Shahrani, "but all we can do is to pray to God to keep us safe. ''The
victims, he said, "are now martyrs, may God bless them.'' Muslims believe that
if a person dies while performing the hajj, he or she goes directly to heaven.
Sunday's tragedy was the worst disaster at the hajj since 1997, when 340 pilgrims died.
Comment: Christianity
glorifies suffering; Jews deny themselves all manner of things in deference to their
beliefs; and of course, Muslims believe it a blessing to die at a religious ceremony.
Is there any question that dogma inevitably places itself above the well being of
its practitioners?
Item: According to their newsletter, the Southern Poverty Law Center has been receiving
religious hate mail ever since their victory in the Judge Moore case in Alabama. For
example they've received notes saying: “Dees is a s.o.b. jew and deserves to burn in
hell”; “I hope all of you who had anything to do with removing the Ten
Commandments die in a car accident with a fuel tanker along with the rest of your filthy,
stinking, traitorous families,”; “We Christians are watching you now”; and
“May the wrath of God be delivered upon you.”
Comment: It is
understandable how persons who believe in “You shall have no other gods before
me” and not “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
religion,” would be upset.
Item: (NY Daily News, Hannity & Colmes) An American Airlines pilot terrified
passengers aboard a Los Angeles-to-New York flight when he asked Christians to identify
themselves and then called those who weren't Christian "crazy," witnesses and an
airline spokesman said yesterday.
Shortly after takeoff on Friday, the pilot asked people aboard Flight 34 to "raise
their hand if they were Christian," according to one passenger, Amanda Nelligan, of
Los Angeles, who spoke to CBS. He then told the passengers that "everyone who
doesn't have their hand raised is crazy," Nelligan said. Others were not as
sure who the pilot referred to as “crazy.” Another passenger who happened
to be a journalist, claimed on a TV show that he interviewed the pilot after the flight
and the pilot told him that after a pre-flight problem cleared up by itself the pilot
decided that it was a sign from God and that he should go ahead and proselytize to the
passengers.
Comment: Who knew Tom
DeLay had a second job?
Item: (American Legion Magazine) Joseph E. Caouette, chairman of The American Legion
Americanism Commission, believes attacks against the Boy Scouts are battles in a larger
war - a war against American values.
Caouette says, “(The Scouts) are a force for good, morality, a belief in God or a
supreme being. But because of this, opponents call them a “discriminatory”
organization… There are those that are trying to impose their sexual lifestyles
on the majority. Well, excuse me, but the Boy Scouts don't want don't want
gays.”
As a response, the Legion passed Resolution No. 28 which in part reads:
WHEREAS, Those same traditional family values with regard to membership and leadership
standards have been under attack by homosexuals, agnostics, atheists and others for more
than 25 years, resulting in at least 38 legal cases being brought against the Boy Scouts
in which it was claimed that BSA practices illegal discrimination on religious and sexual
preference grounds; and
RESOLVED, By the National Executive Committee in regular meeting assembled in
Indianapolis, Indiana, on October 8-9, 2003, that The American Legion does gladly accept
the privilege and responsibility of defending traditional American values and freedoms by
reaffirming its support for the Boy Scouts of America, and by pledging to assist the Boy
Scouts of America in filing an amicus brief or briefs, as may be necessary, appropriate,
legal, and approved by the National Commander so that the concerted assault on traditional
American values and morality, beliefs and standards will ultimately fail… (Go to http://www.legion.org/?content=boyscouts)
Comment: These
pathetic moralists deliberately miss the point: The Boy Scouts and the American Legion can
be as discriminating as they wish - just not on the tax dollars of everyone else.
The Scouts and Legion should NOT be entitled to any benefit that an atheist group or other
group is not entitled to receive. Yet the Scouts have Public School teachers hand
out their literature for meetings on Public School grounds claiming it is open to
all. The President of the US is the honorary leader for goodness sakes! Is he
just the leader of the religious? Answer: He seems to think so.
Then there is the moral and ethical issue: The Scouts are bigoted regardless of their
legal rights. There is no defense for their animus against gays and non-believers.
Scouting, as is now practiced, is not an ethical choice for young boys.
[TOC]
DECODING
THE MESSAGE OF DNA BY BROTHER I.M. RIGHTEOUS, EXEC. DRTR., INSTITUTE FOR CREATIVE
CREATIONISM REPORTED
Reported by Richard Morrock
Skeptics and other non-born-again types have churlishly dismissed recent claims that the
Creator embedded coded messages in the Holy Bible. But what can they say about
evidence, discovered by our hard-working scientific researchers at the Institute for
Creative Creationism (ICC), that He also put coded messages in the DNA - messages that
refer specifically to current developments, even though they were written at the beginning
of the Universe, thousands of years ago?
AS everyone knows, DNA, which is the basis of all Created life, consists of four
chemicals: creosote, anodyne, guano and tylenol, known by their initials as C, A, G, and
T. What our researchers have found is that these initials can be combined to form
words, which when arranged in the proper order and correctly interpreted, spell out a
message to documentary film director Michael Moore, telling him to make the movie
“Bowling for Columbine,” and even predicting that it will win an Oscar.
Among the words discovered by our researchers are: tact; act; cat; gat; gaga; caca; ta-ta;
tag.
Placed in the correct order, these words spell out the sentence: “TAG the ACT(or) CAT
with the GAT as CACA. TA-TA, TACT! Make 'em GAGA.” As befitting
Divine revelation, it even has a catchy rhyme and meter. We believe God is saying
that a male movie star fond of guns (the actor cat wit the gat) should be exposed (tagged)
as being full of crap (caca). This should be done with no regard for his feelings
(Ta-ta, tact) and the public will be highly impressed (gaga). Indeed, Moore's
interview for his film with then NRA head Charlton Heston were damaging to Heston's public
image, and were handled with so little discretion by Moore that Heston walked out in the
middle of the interview, held in his own home. Criticisms of Moore's treatment were
widespread, but it turns out that the filmmaker was only following the Lord's explicit
instructions. And, as the hidden message in the DNA predicted, “Bowling for
Columbine” did indeed win an Oscar for best documentary.
It may strike creation scientists as odd that the Creator would share Michael Moore's
leftist views, at least on the question of gun control, since it has long been assumed by
all fundamentalists that He is a conservative Republican. But the Lord moves in
mysterious ways, and after all, He did change his mind on racial segregation just a few
decades ago.
Unfortunately, a pair of misguided researchers at the ICC came up with an incorrect
reading of the Lord's SNA message to Mr. Moore. Their interpretation was
“TACTfully TAG the ACTor CAT with the GAT as CACA. Make 'em GAGA.
TA-TA!” This clearly implies that Moore was violating the Lord's instructions
when he pressed Heston so hard on the gun control matter, as if the Lord Didn't know how
Moore would handle the task back when He created DNA! It also implies, with the
carefree “TA-TA” at the end, that the Creator is not going to be speaking to us
in the near future, which would have serious consequences for the scientific work of the
ICC. As a result, after due consideration, and with great sorrow, these two researchers
were expelled from the ICC for heresy.
Of course, we at the ICC anticipate further communications from the Lord, and our
remaining researchers are currently both hard at work seeking them in the periodic table.
Those with a close-minded bias against the supernatural may scoff, but can they
provide a convincing natural explanation as to how clear references to a film made in the
twenty-first century could appear in the DNA code which was written as far back as 4004
BC?
[TOC]
VIVA
LA FRANCE! JUST SAY NO TO RELIGIOUS DISPLAYS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS-EVERYWHERE! Don Ardell
France is leading the way for secular
democracies in taking steps to ban religious emblems in state schools. While doing
so has created holy howls from Muslim and Christian fundamentalists, it seems that French
President Jacques Chirac, a French government advisory commission and the French National
Assembly are doing the rest of us (e.g., Canadians, Australians, Americans, British, etc.)
a huge service. A pity our president did not listen to these sensible folks when
they made it clear a year ago that going to war in Iraq was a really bad idea.
To bring you up to date on the fact situation, France's National Assembly, on the advice
of their president, has voted to ban Muslim headscarves, Jewish skullcaps and large
Christian crosses from state schools. Students who violate the ban can be expelled.
The Muslim dress and attendant militant Islam is the key target of the ban, as Islamic
enthusiasts have become a divisive, separatist movement in France. The speaker of
the National Assembly, Jean-Louis Debre, remarked, “What is at issue here is the
clear affirmation that public school is a place for learning and not for militant activity
or proselytism” (New York Times, February 10, 2004). Like America and most
other Western democracies, France is a secular state that historically, for the most part,
has managed to keep religion out of state schools and services to ensure no religion
dominates or suffers discrimination. Like George Bush, those who prefer a
"faith-based" society find this an affront to their religious agenda to spread
one gospel or another.
The education minister in France (Luc Ferry) endorses the ban as a way to combat a
“spectacular rise in racism and anti-Semitism in the last three years, including the
division of classes into militant religious communities.'” Other problems that
prompted the effort to curtail religious activism in French schools include demands by
male and female Muslim students for prayer breaks, bans on pork in school cafeterias and a
host of other controversies surrounding accommodations for religious rituals and
preferences affecting public education. Accommodations for faith-based piety might
be the stuff of wet dreams for people like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, but they give
most Americans enamored of keeping separate church and state--and public schools, the
creeps. In the spirit of tolerance for dissent for which they are infamous, Muslims
have objected to the French initiative in some countries with chants at French embassies
of “Crush the infidels.” This, of course, has many of us infidels a bit
nervous.
Fortunately, the French move has broad public support amongst the French people. Of
particular interest in this brouhaha is the fact that the French may go beyond controlling
religious symbols in schools--some supporters of the effort to safeguard secularism want
total equality that would entail requiring all students to attend physical education
classes, to be exposed to the history of the Holocaust and to learn about human
reproduction. As in this country, the religious extremists currently resist or block
such basic educational features due to varied religious prejudices, all part of revealed
dogma. “Abstinence only” sex education, anyone?
The French supporters of secularism believe the schools are the best tool for planting the
roots of the republican idea. For children with religious fundamentalist parents,
schools might be the only exposure to such an idea, and other compatible ideas, such as
tolerance, respect for diversity, freedom of choice and the common decencies found only in
secular, not theocratic states.
To summarize to this point, I support the proposed ban on religious garb in public
schools, along with the even more significant policies that would halt the spread of
religious influences at odds with France's Republican ideals. It seems religious
militants insist upon divided classes, anti-Semitism and assorted school changes based
upon religious dogma (e.g., prayer breaks, elimination of pork in school cafeterias,
exclusion of Muslims from physical fitness and sex education classes). All seem instances
of anti-democratic pressures likely to arise in other Western societies if unchallenged.
We should be grateful to and supportive of this French initiative. After all,
public schools might be the only source for many students from religious families to learn
about democratic values, such as tolerance for minority viewpoints, the values of free
expression, individual choices and the common decencies we associate with secular states,
not militant religious fundamentalism.
The bottom line, as I see it, is that France is seeking to protect and advance nothing
less than what in an earlier essay I described as rational social wellness. (See
http://www.seekwellness.com/wellness/reports/2004-01-07.htm.) This entails promoting
freedoms, discouraging totalitarian mindsets and advancing basic rights. Viva La
France, indeed! That country's president is defending such American ideals as
freedom of thought, freedom of (and freedom from) religion, freedom to change one's
religion, freedom of speech and freedom of action. In doing so, they are resisting
religious attempts to diminish the role and power of qualities that inhibit human
potentials, particularly a cultural-based hostility to modernity. This struggle in
France, which will surely come to America and the other democracies, is not really about
religious garb-it's really about the following rights:
* Right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
* Right to speak out and otherwise resist forces, institutions and individuals that seek
to deny human rights.
* Right to have one's conscience as the guide to ethics and morality.
* Right to expect tolerance for dissent and differences.
* Right to challenge information that seems nonsensical or misinformed.
* Right to a sense of cosmic modesty--a view that guards against taking oneself or
humanity's place in the universe too seriously.
* Right and a willingness to question those in charge.
(For more by Don Ardell go to http://www.seekwellness.com/wellness. )
[TOC]
WHAT'S WRONG
WITH THE PALESTINIANS? Massimo
Pigliucci
In the past I have written columns critical of
the Israeli government and its actions against the Palestinians. As it was perhaps
predictable, I have therefore been accused of anti-Semitism by some readers. This
month is the turn of the Palestinians to be considered rationally speaking, and I can't
wait for the mail I will find in my box after this column. Oh well, at least I am an
equal opportunity offender.
Historically, of course, the Arabs' behavior against Israel is easy to condemn: They
engaged in wars with the stated purpose of annihilating the state of Israel, a goal which
was part of the charter of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (the pertinent articles
have been abrogated in 1996, as part of the peace process facilitated by US President
Clinton). While it is certainly true that Israel as a modern state came about in a
way that, shall we say, wasn't exactly Kosher by the standard of the United Nations, it
seems to me that any group of people who elects as their main goal the destruction of
another group of people cannot be considered with too much sympathy.
Furthermore, PLO leader Yasser Arafat has perhaps been the worst thing that ever happened
to the Palestinians, and clearly been much more interested in cultivating his ego and
consolidating his meager power, than truly worried about the fate of his people.
Indeed, the recent power struggles at the top of the Palestinian administration between
Arafat and whoever happens at the moment to be so foolish or naive as to think of being
able to open a new chapter in Palestinian history, have become symbolic of the permanent
stall of the “peace process.” That new chapter will be opened, one is
forced to conclude, only after Arafat will be gone because of the natural biological decay
that eventually overtakes every human being (the same, it appears, will have to be the
case for Cuba and Castro -- though the latter has done significantly more for its people
than Arafat has done for the Palestinians).
It is also true that, for all the (perfectly justified) call for independence from Israel,
the Palestinians are the only Arabs living in a democracy, and they are enjoying its
fruits while at the same time invoking the help of sinister characters like the now
deposed Saddam Hussein, Libya's Muammar Gheddafi, and the Saudi's royal family -- none of
whom is particularly well known in the world for encouraging free speech. Indeed,
when Palestine will be an independent state (and I am confident that this is a matter of
when, not if), its people will have some hard choices to make in terms of form of
government -- choices that may truly influence (hopefully for the better) the rest of the
Arab world.
But the Palestinians have another, much more urgent, choice to make right now: they need
to make up their mind whether to pursue nationhood within the respect of the United
Nations charter, or to continue to use terrorism as their alternative diplomatic tool.
Let me be clear on two things here. On the one hand, I in fact think that
there really is no choice: the Palestinians have to outlaw their violent Islamic group and
incarcerate their leaders, the sooner the better. On the other hand, I am not here
condemning terrorism in all forms and for all purposes (boy, is this going to cause some
angry e-mails!). The United States of America was established out of what were
initially terrorist actions against the British crown. Italy, my native country,
started its own independence movement around the middle of the 19th century with an
underground group of patriots called the “carbonari” (coal men, because of their
habit of going around always dressed in black). The carbonari are patriot heroes for
the Italians, but they were (justly) considered terrorists by the Austro-Hungarian
government then occupying Italy.
What I am suggesting is that terrorism is simply the way poor people wage their wars: If
you don't have tanks to roll into town, you can always throw a bomb at a vehicle full of
your oppressors. However, terrorism -- like war -- is justified only under extreme
circumstances, and only for as little as possible. While the Palestinian
circumstances may at one point have called for violent action against Israel, they
certainly have ceased to do so for many years. Ever since the international
community (and in particular the United States), as well as a majority of Israeli
themselves, have started to see a Palestinian state as eventually inevitable, suicide
bombers have only delayed that long-waited moment to hasten which they have irrationally
agreed to tear themselves into pieces.
The Palestinian people, then, are on the brink of an historic moment (in fact, they have
been there for several years already). They are currently torn between two opposite
forces that are attempting to bring them towards completely different directions. On
the one hand, the terror of Islamic fundamentalism; on the other, the hope for the first
Arab democracy to emerge by choice (the Iraqi one, if there ever will be such thing, is
being imposed from outside -- something that is much more unlikely to work in the long
run). Palestinians simply cannot go both ways, and they better make the choice now,
before yet another external power is going to make it for them, leaving them to live with
whatever the consequences would be for generations to come.
(For anything you'd like to know about Dr. Pigliucci go to http://www.rationallyspeaking.org
)
[TOC]
MAKING THE ROUNDS WITH NORM
Norm Roscoe
Saturday Feb 7, 10:30 AM, Jewish Cultural School, Centereach: This
intergenerational group engaged in an event called"Tu B'sha\evat Hagadah."
This is basically an Arbor Day observation. The early spring rite is based on
conditions in Israel where people show the value of trees and the fruits that they bear.
This was in the usual intergenerational mode in a ceremony not only honoring the
value of trees but was generalized to include vegetation and its positive impact on our
lives. It also emphasized the need to care for the earth which supports these.
There was also fine music and song. This is such a delightful environment as
we see the young folks take a major role in these proceedings.
Center for Inquiry Metro NY, Wednesday Feb 11, 6:30 PM, New York Academy of Science East
62 Street Manhattan: This evening provided us the opportunity to hear Ann Druyan
(pronounced Dree an) Carl Sagan's widow.
An almost full room heard the speaker give a tribute to this honored person of evolution.
This was a Darwin lovefest. Rather than be given a science primer we got a
loving biography of the man behind evolution.
Charles Darwin was shown as a man of compassion. He was shown to be a person who
might be for many of our causes. These would range from animal rights, to anti
slavery, and of course ecological issues. Ms. Druyan described a person who was not
especially gifted but well motivated. One would wonder with all his accomplishments
that at worst we was "a late bloomer".
With this portrait of the Evolutionist it seems strange that one could see
"evil" in evolution. However, we realize that the discoverer is not the
discovered. After all, evolution does not rescue the weak and the disadvantaged.
Only caring intelligent sentient beings can undertake this venture.
Ann Druyan introduces her talk with the Garden of Eden as a prison with Big Daddy God as
the warden. She shows the need for total compliance to this warden's rules with
"No questions asked." The strange thing is the forbidding of taking from
the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil." We are not to become capable of
determining good and evil for ourselves. "Heaven forbid!"
Ms. Druyan discusses not only the effective process of the scientific enterprise but also
the arousal of wonder and awe as we undergo this process. This self correcting
procedure gives us a method of increasing insight as we also gain more opportunities to
engage this universe of amazing wonder. It also frees us from the need to find the
absolute truth.
The latter part of her presentation was on the need for today to improve education to not
only be more effective in science and critical thinking but to also appreciate the results
of this activity. We see here the effort to connect the scientific method and
critical reasoning with ethics and the effort to be more effective as ethical people.
We need more "Carl Sagans."
Actually this was a short talk with an extensive question and Answer session. A key
question was about Darwin's interaction with Wallace. She showed Darwin to be very
cooperative and not competitive. The ultimate result was paramount. She also
noted that Wallace also reciprocated such cooperation. I asked Ms. Druyan about
Darwin's faith as his life progressed with setbacks and tragedies. She indicated the
fading belief as he matured. He may have maintained a level of agnosticism but the
original belief was gone. We also discussed creationism and the fallacies of the
method used to support this position. Finally we asked the speaker about her own
development in this area. She referred to her family with her father as an atheist
and also her early interest in the pre Socratic philosophers and materialism. Ann
Druyan is not, as she indicates, a scientist but a lover of science.
Saturday Feb 14 CFI-LI/LISH @ the EHSLI, 2:00 PM: This was our third Darwin Day.
The afternoon began with Gerry Dantone alerting us to how to "carry on the
Great Evolution Conspiracy." This satirical delivery showed how we
evolutionists are continuing our nefarious crusade to indoctrinate the country to the
evolution message. Pointing out what we would maybe expect in the continuing
progress in evolutionary research Gerry Dantone makes a "case" for the
conspiracy theory behind this whole evolution scheme. As I have pointed in previous
Rounds, sometimes conspiracy theories can be found where there is not much evidence for
such a conclusion. It is not easy to assign motive behind the actions done by
others. How we can make a critical discernment in this area is more effectively
pointed to as we progressed throughout the afternoon. Gerry's talk was a fine
introduction to the whole afternoon.
After Gerry's talk and fine songs from Sonny Meadows, we heard from Fred Edwords, Editor
of the "Humanist Magazine" and major leader Of the American Humanist
Association. This major talk focused on the "Evolution of Creationism."
Mr. Edwords took us through the history of the continuing efforts of Creationist to
bring the biblical sources into the science curriculum. These efforts involved a
range of tactics. Arguments were shown that Creationism was another
"theory" which deserved equal time. When efforts are made to show the
arguments for the creationist models are presented they consistently fail the test of the
scientific method. Some examples would involve fallacies about the age of the earth
and the universe. There were also problems with the range of species and how they
could have come about with the creationist model. Some of these shortcomings were
shown with detection of the misapplication of math, geology, fossil records, and astronomy
to support these "arguments."
Mr. Edwords program was not only important in the area of evolution but in the entire
realm of critical thinking. This was a great presentation.
Our final speaker of the day was an example of how science should be done. Dr. John
Wiens from Stony Brook University showed how a science team studies evolution at work and
how they not only how they get specific data, but also how they interpret the meanings
behind these findings. This team studied the evolution of tree frogs and the range
of there successful survival. This showed the richness of the tropical area as
contrasted with the limitations of temperate areas.
By having this lecture by Dr. Wiens after Edwords' talk we could see how the effective
evaluation of data could be applied.
The whole afternoon was a very effective and important event. Sonny Meadows provided
us with entertaining and thoughtful songs to round out the full day.
Sunday Feb 15, 11:00 AM, Bay Shore Unitarian Universalist Society: Fred
Edwords on this morning put on his Humanist philosophy hat and presented to us
"Humanism and Greek Forerunners". This talk was based on a talk given a
number of years ago.
We look at our philosophical ancestors and we frequently think of Epicureanism. Mr.
Edwords acknowledged this and made references to this and occasionally would point this
out throughout the talk. However, our speaker indicates rather effectively that the
Stoics were better models and lessons for our humanist living today.
The Stoics would ask us to "Not sweat the small stuff." So would Dr.
Albert Ellis. I would also add Epicurus to this list of advisors. We ask
“what really counts?” Suggestions from religious sources seem to often
make things worse in these challenges. Jesus and other scapegoats do not relieve
guilt; knowing ourselves helps us to live for today and to not have to impress others.
The hedonistic life stance may at first seem self centered but when we experience
community and the added pleasure in the shared experience in compatible community this
philosophy seems to be quite satisfying.
Philosophical Discussion Group, Saturday Feb. 21, 7:30PM, The Lodge in
Patchogue: Dr Massimo Pigliucci came to town to speak in a cozy home setting. This
turned out to be a nice follow-up on our Darwin Day with an evaluation of the more
advanced Creationists, "Intelligent Design" people.
Dr Pigliucci made a point to show his effort to respect his opponent. He showed that
this latter incarnation of Creationism is a more sophisticated variety. The
"worthy" opponent is Dr. William Dembski, a leading figure in Intelligent
Design. The main issue is whether ID is a science or is there something wrong with
science?
The design inference is used as the example in "legitimate" sciences.
Dembski uses Forensics and SETI as his legitimate examples. He then would transfer
this to Biology to defend the intelligent designer position.
Dembski employs an explanatory filter to set up his approach. He uses regularity and
randomness to carry out this filter device. The absence of these would lead to
design support.
In what I found to be a rather difficult exercise we then proceeded to evaluate Demski's
methodology. With the assistance of Massimo Pigliucci and along with others, the
fine response of Rosemary and Gerry Dantone we found a good number of problems with the
filter.
Complex and random phenomena do occur naturally (no designer necessary).
The model could lead to an infinite regression. Where did the designer come from?
All known designers have physical attributes. If the designer is not physical, we
have the problem of the non material impinging on the material.
Some things in nature could be made useful for example (some objects in nature could be
weapons).
Also, there could be more than one designer.
Other questions would be if universe is designed, the designer is quite frivolous or
incompetent seeing the way the universe is put together.
The issue of natural selection was also addressed with the mutations determining winners
and losers. It seems that a designer would have had a much smaller number of
"bad" mutations.
Does our designer have to have so many terrible natural events in this project of his?
The challenge here is the continuing application of critical thinking as a tool. I
found in this, for me, a challenging exercise but with questioning and searching I can
make some inroads to counter the approaches made by folks from the ID and creationist
camp.
It was a great evening of learning and socializing. We are grateful to Massimo, and
also to Warren and Emmy for the wonderful venue for this great evening.
[TOC]
THE POINT
OF “THE PASSION” Gerry
Dantone
What is the “point” of the recent Mel Gibson movie, “The Passion of the
Christ”? Is it to convert viewers to accepting Jesus as a savior due to his
horrific suffering which is explicitly depicted (in un-biblical detail.)
Why should an appeal to a person's emotion be valid? Shouldn't there be an appeal to
the facts? What is the evidence that Jesus indeed died for “our”
“sins”? No evidence is given other than a gory retelling intended to
“move” audiences via shock treatment. Bulletin to the religious: Emotions
might tell us what it is we want, value or desire, but emotions tend to deceive us in
understanding the truth. For the truth we need science and logic. Out of
necessity, of course, in this movie, science and logic are apparently wholly absent.
The director has admitted as much with his stated desire to “move” his audiences
as opposed to any desire to present evidence that the bible is accurate.
Indeed, some persons who have viewed “The Passion of the Christ” movie are
making it sound as if Jesus holds the record for the most brutal death of all time, and as
if this somehow were evidence that Jesus was God.
Why aren't others who died similarly at the hands of the Romans given a similar treatment
- wasn't their suffering at least equally as great? After all, if you grant for the
sake of argument that Jesus was divine, the others didn't know, not being Gods themselves,
that their suffering would ultimately serve a purpose - it was empty and pointless
suffering to all the other victims of the Romans. Jesus, as God supposedly, knew his
suffering would not be in vain, and that, in fact, omnipotent days were ahead. His
sacrifice emotionally would therefore not be as great as that of ordinary persons.
Question: If average persons were given a choice to suffer as Jesus did in the knowledge
that all humanity would be saved, and that afterwards, they, the sufferer, would be God,
how many would accept that fate? I'll bet more than a few. Maybe most persons
would!
So did Jesus suffer the most of anyone ever, or even unusually more than others? Of
course, there is simply no evidence for this. Why then is Jesus' suffering more
important than Giordano Bruno's? Or the thousands of others killed in the
Inquisitions? Or of witches burned or drowned at the hands of - Christians?
Did Jesus suffer more than Matthew Shepard, killed because of Christian inspired
homophobia....?
Did he suffer more than Jews in the gas chambers of their Christian tormentors in WWII?
Do we elevate everyone who suffered extreme torture to a God-like status?
Why is this movie supposed to inspire anyone - is it because it means we can now be saved
from a fate that the savior himself formulated (as God) by creating humans in the form of
Adam and Eve without the knowledge of good and evil and knowing that they would disobey
his orders, stigmatizing all their heirs with original sin? Uh, thanks for nothing,
basically.
The emotion-laden arguments of his incredible suffering are not evidence of Jesus' status.
These kinds of arguments should not, but will, influence the emotionally
susceptible and ignorant towards stronger belief. This basic lack of integrity on
the part of many evangelists is a reflection of the irrational religious motive itself.
Mrs. Gibson Hell-bound?
Mel Gibson was interviewed by the Herald Sun in Australia, and the reporter asked the star
if Protestants are denied eternal salvation. "There is no salvation for those
outside the Church," Gibson replied. "I believe it."
He elaborated: "Put it this way. My wife is a saint. She's a much better person
than I am. Honestly. She's, like, Episcopalian, Church of England. She
prays, she believes in God, she knows Jesus, she believes in that stuff. And it's
just not fair if she doesn't make it, she's better than I am. But that is a
pronouncement from the chair. I go with it."
Yes, we understand. To put it concisely, Mel Gibson worships a Being that will
banish into everlasting torment the woman he loves.
Not to mention such “Passion” boosters as Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell!
Hey, they might as well be atheists for all the good their zealotry will give them,
according to the man who they are helping to make rich!
What's Wrong with the Palestinians?
[TOC]
AN OPEN
LETTER: INTEGRATIVE MEDICINE SERVICE?
Dr. Marvin Schissel
Dear Dr. Harold Varmus, President, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center: The mail today
contained a shock: An announcement from Memorial Sloan-Kettering of their
“Integrative Medicine Service” with a request for contributions. The
letter also told of the availability of “fee-based services” including
“touch therapies”, acupuncture, herbal counseling, “mind-body”
therapies, etc.
I question the need for another agency to investigate these over-investigated and
under-validated “therapies”. The Office of Alternative Medicine at the NIH
and the Rosenthal Center at Columbia, along with many other medical centers, have been
studying these methods for a decade. If any of them have come up with any of these
“alternative” methods that actually work it's been kept a close secret.
MSKCC has always been in the top rung of authentic medicine. My wife has been your
patient, and you have received many contributions in her name. I understand that, as
the dumbing down of our culture proceeds apace and the acceptance of superstition and
pseudo-science accelerates, medical quackery is becoming hugely lucrative. Surely,
plenty of money can be raised this way. But money should be put to better purpose
than to waste it on investigating quack medicine over and over again. Worse yet, I
feel outrage that MSKCC is actually offering these services to the public. I hate to
think that you need money that badly, that MSKCC is adopting the methods of an even older
profession. For shame! Sadly, Marvin J. Schissel
CFI-LI/LISH MEETING INFO SUSAN
JACOBY, AUTHOR
CFI-Metro New York Exec. Director Susan Jacoby, author of the forthcoming
“Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism” (Metropolitan Books) will speak
at our public forum at the Plainview-Old Bethpage Public Library, 999 Old Country Road,
Plainview, 7PM, Friday, April 16, 2004.
Susan Jacoby is the author of five books, including Wild Justice, a Pulitzer Prize
finalist. A contributor to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Newsday, and Vogue,
she lives in New York City. It's free!
PAUL KURTZ AT CFI-LI BANQUET!
Join us at our fundraising banquet featuring CFI founder Paul Kurtz, CSH Exec. Director
David Koepsell, DJ Grothe, Austin Dacey, Susan Jacoby and Gerry Dantone at Antun's, 244 W
Old Country Rd., Hicksville, just off Rt. 106, on Saturday, May 8, 6PM! We will be
discussing “The Future of CFI-LI” and enjoying a buffet dinner as well!
Tickets are $40/person and checks can be sent to CFI-LI, PO Box 119, Greenlawn, NY
11740. Don't miss it!
Become a Friend of CFI-LI
Join CFI in challenging unreason and promoting the scientific outlook. Become a
Friend of the Center today. Levels are available to suit every family and budget:
$20 Student/low-income
$45 Individual
$65 Household
$100 Contributing
$250 Supporting
$500 Sustaining
$1,500 Lifetime
Friends of CFI-LI gain use of the CFI-LI Freethought library; voting rights for the CFI-LI
advisory board; mailed newsletters; invitations and discounts to local non-public
functions, dinners, and perhaps movies and plays as well!
All Friends of the Center receive:
A colorful CFI vinyl decal
A handsome enamel CFI lapel pin (at contributing level or higher)
10% off CSICOP and Council for Secular Humanism events
15% off Prometheus book titles
Send a check with your name, address and phone number, to CFI-Long Island, Box 119,
Greenlawn, NY 11740, or call 516 742 1662 with your Visa, Mastercard or Amex card ready.
All articles in this newsletter may be reprinted by organizations affiliated with
CFI, CSICOP, Council for Secular Humanism, American Atheists or the American Humanist
Association, with a reciprocating reprinting agreement with CFI-LI, so long as the article
is used in full and with complete crediting. Edited versions can be used with
written permission.
The Center for Inquiry is a transnational nonprofit 501 (c) (3) organization that
encourages evidence-based inquiry into science, pseudoscience, medicine and health,
religion, ethics, secularism and society.
Center for Inquiry-Amherst
Summer Session 2004
July 11-25, SUNY-Buffalo, Amherst, NY: The Center for Inquiry Announces its summer
offerings, available to audit for State University of NY undergraduate credit through
Empire State College. Applications are welcome from students, academics and the
general public.
Registration deadline: June 15, 2004. Scholarship application deadline: May 15,
2004.
Courses:
Revelation & Interpretation: A Critical Analysis. Instructors - Gert Ludemann
& Ibn Warraq.
Punishment, Forgiveness & Reconcialtion: Religious & Secular Perspectives.
Instructor - Trudy Govier.
Trudy Govier is a former Assoc. Prof. of Philosophy @ Trent Univ. in Ontario, and author
of “A Delicate Balance: What Philosophy Can Tell Us About Terrorism.”
Gerd Ludemann is Prof. of History & Literature @ Georg-August Univ., Germany. He
is author of “Jesus After 2000 Years: What He Really Said and Did.”
Ibn Warraq is a research fellow @ the Center for Inquiry and author of “Why I Am Not
A Muslim.”
To audit: $850, SUNY credit additional. $475 per course, NY State, $1005 out of
state. Includes 14 days room & board, add $75 for single room. Includes
excursion to Shaw Festival, Ontario. Apply online @ www.centerforinquiry.net/summer04
, or mail to CFI Institute, PO Box 741, Amherst, NY, 14226 or fax to 716 636 1733.
The Amateur Observers Society of NY (The Astronomy Club)
It meets @ Nassau Community College, Earle Ovington Blvd., Garden City - Building
"F", Room 129, generally on the first Sunday of the month @ 1PM:
April 4- Frank Melilo- Mars and detecting an extra solar planet through astrophotography
May 2- Prof. Jake Noel-Storr, Columbia University, annual election
June 6- Harvey Miller, Sky Tools Pro 2.0
July, Aug- No member meetings scheduled. Thurs nights, July 1-Aug 26, outdoor public
lecture and observing at Waterfront Park in Freeport, weather permitting.
Sept 5- Murray Cohen "The Trail that led to the Big Bang" part 2
Oct 3- Larry Dwyer, Comparing Edwin Hubble to Galileo
Nov 7- John Pazmino, "Back in time, out in space" astronomical progress in the
19th century
For information on outdoor Stargazing sessions and other info go to http://www.benjaminsweb.com/aos/index.htm
March for Freedom of Choice April
25, 2004
To demonstrate overwhelming majority support for a woman's right to choose safe, legal
abortion and birth control, the largest pro-choice majority in history will march on
Washington on Sunday April 25, 2004.
For the first time ever this pro-choice march is a collaborative effort - four leading
national women's rights groups have come together to organize this momentous event. The
Feminist Majority, Naral Pro-Choice America, National Organization For Women and Planned
Parenthood Federation Of America are the principal organizers of the March for Freedom of
Choice and have pooled efforts and resources to lay the groundwork. Other
progressive organizations have signed on as Co-Sponsors - offering everything from member
participation to help spreading the word and help defraying costs.
The march will begin at noon from the Lincoln Memorial, although participants may begin
assembling as early as 10 a.m. After marching on Washington, a rally will be held from 1-4
p.m. on the National Mall. Special seating will be available for people with
disabilities. The rally program will be signed for the hearing impaired. The
route is wheelchair accessible and transportation will be provided for those who cannot
negotiate the route.
To sign-up on line go to: https://www.marchforchoice.org/index.php.
Locally, you may call Sarah Miller @ 516 750 2666 or email sarah.miller@ppnc.org for more
information on the march.
THE 30th ANNNUAL NATIONAL CONVENTION OF AMERICAN ATHEISTS
April 9-11, 2004, San Diego, California
Join AA in beautiful San Diego for the gala 30th Annual National Convention of American
Atheists. We have an exciting three-day program including talks by distinguished
speakers, panels and workshops, our annual Member's Dinner, the Oral History Project, the
Life Member & Legacy Dinner, and a magnificent Harbor Excursion Cruise!
The venue is the luxurious, world-class Shelter Pointe Hotel and Marina located on Shelter
Island at the tip of beautiful San Diego Bay.
Visit us at http://www.atheists.org/convention
to learn more, and register on line using our secure transaction server.
Confirmed speakers include: ELLEN JOHNSON, President, American Atheists; EDDIE TABASH,
Constitutional and civil rights attorney; AROUP CHATTERJEE, author of the critically
acclaimed book "The Final Verdict" which probes the life and sordid legacy of
Mother Teresa; FRANK ZINDLER, editor, linguist and Bible scholar; TIM SLAGLE, comedian and
entertainer (M-TVG, C-SPAN, Showtime); CONRAD GOERINGER, Editor and more!
Book Discussion Club!
If you are interested email wiwade@suffolk.lib.ny.us.
All meetings are at 7 PM at the Plainview-Old Bethpage Public Library, 999 Old
Country Road, Plainview, unless otherwise noted. FREE!
Date: At the home of Warren and Mary Jane in Patchogue, Suffolk County. Call
631-363-8216 for reservations and directions. Friday 7 May 2004, Book: Patricia
Daniels Cornwell, "Portrait of a killer: Jack the Ripper case closed".
Date: Friday 4 June 2004, Book: Jared Diamond, "Guns, germs, and steel: the fates of
human societies".
American Humanist Association
Conference: Oasis in the Desert
The AHA will be holding their 63rd Annual Conference from May 7 to 9, 2004 in Las Vegas,
Nevada! Guest speakers will include Nadine Strossen of the ACLU, Barry Lynn of
Americans United and many more! Go to www.AmericanHumanist.org
for all information and details.
For more information, please don't hesitate to contact Allison Muller at the AHA's
Washington, DC office: (800) 837-3792 or amuller@americanhumanist.org.
CFI-International Conference
Science & Ethics
May 13 to 16th, Toronto, Canada
For many centuries scientists and philosophers believed that with the advance of
scientific knowledge, literacy, and education, humankind could become liberated from
ancient fears and superstitions so that a wiser and more humane ethical outlook could
develop. It was believed that scientific inquiry could be applied to moral values and
modify them in the light of their causes, rational consistency, and a regard for empirical
consequences. This viewpoint is sympathetic to the classical attempt to apply reason to
conduct, and it is consonant with the Enlightenment goal of achieving human progress. Many
people were thus committed to using science to reconstruct the traditional sources of
morality and to form entrenched socio-political-economic institutions.
First, many religionists hold that without belief in God and in absolute religious
commandments, no moral standards are possible (a premodern view). Second, postmodernists,
while skeptical of religious metaphysics, are likewise skeptical of science, believing
that it offers its own mythology and that consequently no progressive emancipation agenda
is possible for humanity. Third, many scientists and philosophers have in the past held
that science deals with facts and that moral values are based on passions and feelings.
Hence, it was held that science cannot help frame rational moral judgment.
This conference will challenge these assumptions and bring to the fore a renewed challenge
to integrate the sciences and ethics as disciplines.
Among the scheduled speakers and lecturers are Prof. Paul Kurtz, Prof. Mario Bunge, Prof.
Austin Dacey, Vern Bullough, Prof. Richard Hull, Prof. Jim Alcock, Jim Underdown, Susan
Jacoby, Prof. David Koepsell, Jan Eisler, Tom Flynn and many others.
Accommodations: Courtyard Marriott, 475 Yonge Street, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA, M4Y 1X7,
Tel: (416) 924-0611
For More Information: David Koepsell, Executive Director, Council for Secular Humanism,
Center for Inquiry, P.O. Box 741, Amherst, NY 14226, Tel: (716) 636-7571 ext: 215, E-Mail:
dkoepsell@centerforinquiry.net
REGISTRATION
Adult Registration: $159.00 USD
Student Registration: $99.00 USD (please show valid ID)
Friday Luncheon: $30.00 USD
Saturday Luncheon: $30.00 USD
Saturday Banquet: $45.00 USD
(Go to http://www.centerforinquiry.net/conference-2004.html)
CFI-LI/LISH
Philosophical Discussion Group
First and third Tuesdays of the month 7:30PM; meets in Patchogue, limited seating,
email Waremmy@optonline.net to reserve a place and for directions.
WBAI 99.5 FM Radio EQUAL
TIME FOR FREETHOUGHT!
Listen to the show for and by humanist, freethinkers, atheists, agnostics, etc. on Sundays
@ 6:30 PM, WBAI FM, 99.5 on the dial and in streaming audio on the web! (Website: http://www.wbai.org
Be Sure to Watch:
"Humanist Perspective" hosted by Joe Beck, on Cablevision Public Access can be
seen, starting April 2004, 6:30PM Tuesdays, channel 20 on the Woodbury system; and 7PM
Wednesdays channel 20 on the Hauppauge & Brookhaven systems.
LISH ON CABLE!
“What is Secular Humanism?” This is a LISH one-hour self-produced show and
will be shown, starting April 2004, 9PM Mondays, channel 20 on the Woodbury Cablevision
system; Thursdays @ 7:00 PM on Channel 20 on the Hauppauge & Brookhaven
Cablevision systems.
From American Atheists!
“Atheist Viewpoint” featuring Ellen Johnson, it will be seen starting April
2004, 6:30PM Wednesdays, channel 20 on the Woodbury system; 7PM Mondays on the Hauppauge
& Brookhaven Cablevision systems.
TIME TO GROW SOS!
The Council for Secular Humanism is requesting donations specifically for SOS programs
administration.
Send your donations to:
CSH, PO Box 664, Amherst, NY 114226, and note that the gift is for SOS - NY.
SOS (Secular Organizations for Sobriety/Save Our Selves), a support organization for
people recovering from alcohol and drug abuse, have added a new local group.
Meetings are held Thursdays at 7:30 P.M. at, 280 Suburban Avenue, #F, Deer Park, Suffolk
County, NY. Open to all persons who need sobriety in their life. For info
about this planning meeting or directions, contact Drew @ 631 242 2498.
The home page of SOS is http://www.secularsobriety.org
. This web site has much information for downloading on running SOS groups.
(Marriage on page #)
Secular humanism is the philosophy of
life guided by reason and science, freed from religious and secular dogmas, motivated by
an appreciation of life and the lives of others, seeking to reach goals of human
happiness, freedom and understanding on this earth, in this life.
Visit our website: www.CFIMetroNY.org
Editor: Gerald Dantone
Design: John Wilmarth
A Thumbs Up Publication
Copyright LISH 2004
[TOC]