Nonsense. The Speaker, the Catholic bishops and the rest are demanding that religious institutions be exempted from a Department of Health and Human Services regulation that in no way abridges freedom of religion. The trumpted up controversy concerns an important provision in the implementation of the Affordable Health Care Act that simply insures that employer health insurance plans include services that women overwhelmingly need and want - such as no-cost access to contraceptive health services.

The Republican campaign is in support of the Catholic Church, an institution that is seeking to impose its religious dogma on their employees and the patients they serve, including those who are not members of their religious faith.

The Secular Coalition of America issued the following statement summarizing the difference between freedom of choice and religious barriers to choice: Almost every sexually active American woman has used contraception at some point in her life. To allow religiously affiliated hospitals, schools, and nonprofits to deny millions of women access to contraception would be a gross and unconstitutional infringement on their religious liberty. This regulation does not force Catholic or other religiously affiliated hospitals or care providers to actually provide care that runs counter to their deeply held believes. It only requires that they, as employers, make available to their employees access to contraceptive care if their employees choose to use it.

Please consider contacting your Representatives, writing a letter to the editor of your local paper and/or telling your friends why you do not support this grotesque attempt by the Catholic Church and the Republican Party to dilute your freedom from religion. Do not allow Right Wing Christian fundamentalists to deny millions of women access to contraception.

Can you recall a time in your youth when you stood up to a bully,  objected to a convention that seemed unfair or took an unpopular position - and persisted in what you viewed as a quest for justice despite strong opposition from peers and adults? If so, good on you. Doing such a thing was never easy or comfortable growing up - and it remains challenging today, as an adult. It takes courage to defend what you believe is right, to stand on principle, when the majority is overwhelmingly against you.

In his book "Sincerely," the recently late Andy Rooney wrote, I'd be more willing to accept religion, even if I didn't believe it, if I thought it made people nicer to each other but I don't think it does.

Religious people are sometimes very unnice when they seek to promote their beliefs in the public square. Yet, the bad behavior of some Christians often reveals the presence of a few admirable cases of heroic behavior. All who support the Constitution's protection against compulsory religion can find inspiration in instances of courageous resistance to public piety.

One case where the Christian religion utterly failed the Andy Rooney acceptance test occurred recently in Rhode Island. A 16 year-old  high school sophomore named Jessica Ahlquist took exception to a prayer banner in a public school auditorium. Unfortunately, the no-so-nice Christian defenders of the prayer banner subjected Miss Ahlquist to a flood of hatred, harassment and violent threats. They were outraged by the young woman's support of the Constitutional principle of church/state separation.

You can read a full account of the case and the vitriol associated with Christian behavior at the website Friendly Atheist. You might also want to watch a video interview about the incident and/or read the judge's ruling on the case (a resounding victory for Miss Ahlquist and the Constitution) here.

While the behavior of Miss Ahlquist's peers raised to be good Christians was lamentable, bad behavior by teens is not so shocking. What percentage of young people can be expected to exbibit common decency or to resist established customs? Moral courage is not the norm with insecure, conformist adolescents. But adults? We expect more. Consider what Adam Lee of Daylight Activism wrote about the Rhode Island teachers, parents, school officials and the Christian community that lashed out, threatened and ostracized the banner-protesting student: Their obnoxious public displays of religious beliefs did not improve their moral sentiments, it only multiplied their viciousness toward those who don't wear expected marks of tribal conformity ... What the religious bullies want is to force conformity - to make everyone think and behave like they do.

Let's draw at least two lessons from this situation: 1) Celebrate moral courage at every opportunity. A few freethinking organizations are doing exactly that in support of Miss Ahlquist and a few other young people who have taken stands against Christian assaults on the establishment clause; and 2) consider that you are never too old to do the right thing. You may not get a college scholarship (or want or need one) but, win or lose in the near term, you will almost surely feel good about doing the right thing.

Stay well.

The U.S. Congress is one of the sorriest institutions in America, with an approval rating that rivals al-Qaeda. Yet, it does contain a few members who embody the best qualities we have any right or reason to wish for in politicians. One such senator stands above the rest - Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent from Vermont.

Sanders served four terms as Burlington’s mayor beginning in 1981 when he was first elected in a landslide - no less than ten votes more than his opponent. He has shown a particular interest in the widening wealth gap in America, now greater than at any time since the Great Depression. His other priorities include reversing global warming, universal health care, fair trade policies, supporting veterans and preserving family farms. He serves on five Senate committees: Budget; Veterans; Energy; Environment; and Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.

I almost got to have dinner with the Senator last August at the home of a wealthy donor while visiting Vermont, but the person invited who was planning to bring me along as his guest (I was staying at his home during the national championship triathlon) declined the invitation at the last minute. He was concerned that the event and after-dinner speeches might interfere with his sleep and other preparations for the big race, scheduled for early the next morning.  C’est dommage.

Sen. Bernie Sanders has proposed a constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court’s infamous Citizens United decision. His Saving American Democracy Amendment would undo the damage caused by that grotesque 5 to 4 ruling by the Right Wing element of the Court by setting forth the following self-evident but not presently recognized principles:

• Corporations are not persons with constitutional rights equal to real people.
• Corporations are subject to regulation by the people.
• Corporations may not make campaign contributions or any election expenditures.
• Congress and states have the power to regulate campaign finances.

The Supreme Court decision that necessitated this initiative by Senator Sanders is supported by other sensible politicians, as evidenced by the following statements:

• President Barack Obama:

 "... the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that, I believe, will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections."

• Justice John Paul Stevens: "The conceit that corporations must be treated identically to natural persons in the political sphere is not only inaccurate but also inadequate to justify the Court¹s disposition of this case. In the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The majority¹s approach to corporate electioneering marks a dramatic break from our past. Congress has placed special limitations on campaign spending by corporations ever since the passage of the Tillman Act in 1907. The Court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation. The path it has taken to reach its outcome will, I fear, do damage to this institution."

• Justice Elena Kagan (then Solicitor General): "When corporations use other people's money to electioneer, that is a harm not just to the shareholders themselves but a sort of a broader harm to the public that comes from distortion of the electioneering that is done by corporations."

• Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield:

 "I'm Ben, I'm a person. I'm Jerry, I'm a person. Ben & Jerry's ice cream? Not a person."

• Russ Feingold: 

"Citizens United was so extreme that unless we take action to stop it, America will return to the Gilded Age -- on steroids."

• Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.):

 "We are not going to let this decision to go unchallenged...At a time when Americans are worried about special interests having too much influence, this decision opens up the floodgates and allows special interest money to overflow elections and undermine our democracy."

"If there's one thing that Americans from the left, right and center can all agree on, it's that they don't want more special interests in our politics."

• Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) 

"This decision enables larger financial interests to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens, allows foreign corporations to spend money through their domestic subsidiaries, and permits major recipients of taxpayer dollars to funnel these funds into political activities."

Three cheers for Bernie Sanders, American hero. Let’s do what we can to support this needed Constitutional reform. Start by signing the petition in support of this amendment at the senator's website. Over 121,000 have done so at this writing.

Visitors to the Wellness Center and especially to Don’s Blog have a special interest in a candidate's positions on matters that affect their philosophy and lifestyle passions. They want to help elect a president, for instance, who will work for a society that makes it more likely that they and other citizens can pursue and sustain high quality lifestyles. REAL wellness enthusiasts all value freedom, reason, science and respect for and cultivation of clean, safe environments that promote sustainability of resources. Like most progressive Americans, wellness seekers favor fiscal responsibility, common decencies, separation of church and state, support for fairness and opportunities  for all.

REAL wellness supporters are not organized enough to sponsor presidential debates or to send interviewers to probe the views of presidential contenders. There is not a single REAL wellness PAC, unless you suspect that Stephen Colbert might be a secret agent or Trojan Horse for Wellness Nation. Thus, it is not so easy to see how candidates measure up relative to each other on vital matters of concern.

However, sometimes we get lucky. And guess what? We just got lucky.

Actually, it’s not so much luck as it is common cause that has given REAL wellness enthusiasts a golden opportunity to discover just how the 2012 presidential candidates rate on a good number of vital concerns shared by REAL wellness advocates.

The Secular Coalition for America has unveiled its 2012 Presidential Candidate Scorecard. The scorecard is also a valuable guide for REAL wellness-oriented citizens to understand where those who seek to lead the nation stand on key issues. 

The scorecard assesses the Republican Party candidates for president and Democratic president Barack Obama on nine issues. All were assigned grades of "A", "B", "C" or "F" based on their public statements and actions on these nine subjects, which are as follows:

• Attitude toward non-theists.
• Church and state separation.
• Taxpayer funding of religion.
• God, faith and governance.
• Endorsements and associations.
• Acceptance of evolution.
• Scientifically-based regulations and legislation.
• Religious discrimination and civil rights.
• Religious refusal laws.

Not surprisingly, U.S. Representative Michelle Bachmann and Texas Governor Rick Perry were rated “F” in every category; U.S. Senator Rick Santorum also received “F” grades in all categories save one. (On attitude toward non-theists, he got a “C.”) Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and U.S. Representative Ron Paul received mostly negative scores, while former U.S. Representative and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich received “F” grades in almost every category. Former Utah Governor and Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman and President Barack Obama received mixed positives.

To read a wide variety of comments that earned the candidates these ratings, visit the Center for Free Inquiry’s Presidential Scorecard.

God may or may not save the Queen but only reason and an informed electorate holds out much hope for the leadership of the not-so-united United States of America after the next presidential elections in 2012.

Christopher Hitchens is dead— long live our memory of the man and his works. A freethinker, he was a champion of reason and a debunker of frauds, among them the sainted but truly dreadful Mother Theresa. Rather than being a friend of the poor, as admirers of her charities believed, she was, wrote Hitchens, a friend of poverty who saw suffering as a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction.

Hitchens considered himself an antitheist. He viewed organized religion as the main source of hatred and tyranny in the world. Faith is a virus, he asserted. Faith is the surrender of the mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It's our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated.

In Hitchens honor, I think I will reread his masterwork God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything.

Hitchens was only 62. His death, as with any death, reminds us of our own mortality. We're here and gone in the blink of an eye in a cosmic sense, so welcome every breath. As we reflect on the death of this man, ponder for a moment the end of all men, women and earth itself - and tip your hat to a spacecraft called Voyager 1, which might outlast everything we've ever known.

About five billion years from now, when our life-giving sun begins to die, that great star will enlarge and engulf the Earth. Everything will be annihilated. Not a trace of anything of this planet, save for Voyager 1 and its companion Voyager 2, will exist.

Launched in 1977, Voyager 1 (and 2) have explored Jupiter and Saturn, Saturn's moon Titan, Uranus and Neptune. Now Voyager 1 is exiting the solar system, embarked on an interstellar mission, the first man-made object to reach interstellar space. Voyager is leaving the heliosphere, the region of our galaxy ruled by the sun, our ultimate energy source. We'll get signals from Voyager until 2025, when the craft will need a battery change - no chance of that.

In an essay in the Wall Street Journal entitled, Voyager Heads for the Stars (Opinion, December 10, 2011), Lawrence Krauss puts space - time in perspective: In 40,000 years, Voyager will travel within 1.6 light years of another star...In about 300,000 years, it will pass within four light years or so of Sirius, the brightest star that can be seen from Earth...it could continue to travel for billions of years, circling the galaxy much as our sun does on its 200-million-year orbit around the galactic center.

Hitchens is gone, we're all lined behind him lining up for the exits and, in distant but certain time, this good earth and the solar system it inhabits will be gone, too. Voyager, however, will still be out there, silent in the vast unknowable realm of wonder. It will last for many billions of additional years, easily.

Perhaps, before Voyager eventually decomposes at some time-era unimaginable to us, the visual images, music and data packed into it by humans on a planet from a solar system long evaporated will be discovered by intelligent life forms. Perhaps Voyager's contents will inform such beings about the Earth that was inhabited for a spell by Christopher Hitchens and you and I, and those we love who loved us. Perhaps, as Krauss muses, these artifacts will give a sense that we knew we were lucky to exist for a brief time on a cosmic speck, instead of suffering under the solipsistic notion that we somehow reigned supreme in a universe created for us.

Thank you Christopher Hitchens. Thank you engineers, poets and all who had the vision, wisdom, eloquence and determination to design, load and send the Voyagers on their way to eternity, of a sort.

There have always been assaults on the American tradition that holds separate church and state, but there may well be more today than ever before. We should all do what little we can to express our opposition to this trend. Separation serves church and state - it safeguards all religious freedoms while protecting the rights of those who choose no religion. America has managed to safeguard this separation, more or less, for over two centuries. Most Americans, except Right Wing Christians, support the establishment clause. Christians and others who prefer a secular Republic should recognize the dangers of creeping theocracy.

Five candidates for the Republican Party nomination for president are theocrats. All believe we are "under" their god and that this nation is "exceptional" because their god is a big fan and protector of America. These candidates are Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Congressman Ron Paul, Texas Governor Rick Perry and former Senator Rick Santorum. Consider the following from statements made at the “Thanksgiving Family Forum" in Iowa last week.

Michele Bachmann:

American exceptionalism is grounded on the Judeo-Christian ethic, which is really based upon the 10 Commandments. The 10 Commandments were the foundation for our law. That’s what Blackstone said—the English jurist—and our founders looked to Blackstone for the foundation of our law. That’s our law . . . I have a biblical worldview. And I think, going back to the Declaration of Independence, the fact that it’s God who created us—if He created us, He created government. And the government is on His shoulders, as the book of Isaiah says.

Herman Cain:

What we are seeing is a wider gap between people of faith and people of nonfaith. … Those of us that are people of faith and strong faith have allowed the nonfaith element to intimidate us into not fighting back. I believe we’ve been too passive. We have maybe pushed back, but as people of faith, we have not fought back.

Rick Perry:

Somebody’s values are going to decide what the Congress votes on or what the president of the United States is going to deal with. And the question is: Whose values? And let me tell you, it needs to be our values—values and virtues that this country was based upon in Judeo-Christian founding fathers . . . in every person’s heart, in every person’s soul, there is a hole that can only be filled by the Lord Jesus Christ.

Rick Santorum:

Unlike Islam, where the higher law and the civil law are the same, in our case, we have civil laws. But our civil laws have to comport with the higher law. … As long as abortion is legal—at least according to the Supreme Court—legal in this country, we will never have rest, because that law does not comport with God’s law. . . The idea that the only things that the states are prevented from doing are only things specifically established in the Constitution is wrong. Our country is based on a moral enterprise. Gay marriage is wrong. As Abraham Lincoln said, the states do not have the right to do wrong. … As a president, I will get involved, because the states do not have the right to undermine the basic, fundamental values that hold this country together.

Newt Gingrich:

And part of what I would like to explore is whether or not you could get the Congress to pass a law which simply says: Personhood begins at conception. And therefore—and you could, in the same law, block the court and just say, ‘This will not be subject to review,’ which we have precedent for. You would therefore not have to have a constitutional amendment, because the Congress would have exercised its authority under the 14th Amendment to define life, and to therefore undo all of Roe vs. Wade, for the entire country, in one legislative action.

All five of these Republicans want a government that applies their religious values to our laws.  All seek laws that apply their Christian version of Sharia law. These Republicans are committed to their notions of god-given truths and standards of morality. The source of these laws that they would seek to impose on all Americans? Not the Constitution but the Holy Bible.

The code word for much of this talk is "exceptionalism." It has been used by several recent presidents. It is another approach to the eventual elimination of the wall of separation much like the infamous "faith-based" funding of religious institutions initiated by Bush and expanded by Obama. 

It's a pity that all citizens who are not enamored of this direction do not laugh out loud when pols proclaim that we are divinely ordained. Do Republicans really think that a god gave a certain country a mission to manage, guide and lead the rest of the world? It sounds preposterous, yet, presidents and others have been getting away with it. Ronald Reagan once referred to "some divine plan" that placed America here. Reagan quoted Pope Pius XII on this theme, "Into the hands of America God has placed the destinies of an afflicted mankind."

Wow. How did the Pope know that? Did he offer evidence? Did everyone (or anyone) in other countries agree?

Who can forget the time George Bush got into the theocratic mood? In 2004, he said: "We have a calling from beyond the stars to stand for freedom."

No kidding? Where, exactly, beyond the stars did that call come from and who heard it, besides George? I didn't hear it. Did you?

I believe it was Voltaire (Philosophical Dictionary, 1764) who observed that "the truths of religion are never so well understood as by those who have lost the power of reasoning."

Take a stand against this trend. Write letters, tell your friends and let the candidates know they are full of bullbleep. Join campaigns to discourage theocratic meddling. Want a recent example?

Did you know that U.S. Catholic bishops have launched a campaign to defeat new rules adopted by Health and Human Services requiring employers to offer health care to cover contraception? This is simple prevention. While religious institutions were exempted, the Catholic bishops want more restrictions. They want a "conscience clause" to exempt larger population groups.

You can join the Freedom from Religion Foundation's campaign to "ensure American women's right to preventive contraceptive care" by petitioning the HSS to retain the rules first set out for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Ask that the government not exempt religion-related universities and hospitals from new guidelines requiring contraceptive insurance at no added cost to insured women. Keep the matter of whether or not to utilize family planning options is a private decision for individuals – not employers, pastors or priests.

You can E-mail the president at this address:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments

You can make a phone call the White House - 202-456-1111

Or, you can write a letter to The White House at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20500.

Consider sending a CC to Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Perry and Rick Santorum.

It won't turn them around but at least they'll realize that you are not likely to vote for a theocrat.