[via]

• Everything since the Big Bang can be explained naturally
• We can only speculate about what “caused” the Big Bang
• Ethics do not require a God
• Religion is man-made
• The God of the Bible is especially implausible
• The idea of prophecy is even less plausible than a God
• Only humans can solve human challenges

Dave goes into more detail in his Psychology Today article.

Are there any items on that list you would disagree with?

A new computer simulation is showing Earth’s magnetosphere in amazing detail – and it looks a lot like a huge pile of tangled spaghetti (with the Earth as a meatball). Or perhaps a cosmic version of modern art.

Read much more about what it means for our planet to be tangled in “magnetic spaghetti” at Discovery News.

Your Thoughts?

Unfortunately, you can also hear the devolution of mainstream pop as the quality steeply drops in the songs chosen from the last couple decades.

Your Thoughts?

Check out Humor Blogs.

Fact: Requiring insurance companies to pay for birth control is a matter of good public heath policy.

Fact: Requiring Catholic institutions that provide health insurance for their employees to pay for birth control is a matter of good public health policy.

Just because they are required to pay for birth control doesn’t mean a Catholic woman has to use the benefit. Surely, the Pope, and his underlings, have Catholic women under control. Surely, no good Catholic woman would go against the Pope and a Church teaching that is contrary to sane public health policy. Surely, it is a great idea for every Catholic woman to have 6,8 or 10 children. Surely, surely surely………

From Reuters:

Some 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women in the United States have used contraceptive methods banned by the church, research published on Wednesday showed.

A new report from the Guttmacher Institute, the nonprofit sexual health research organization, shows that only 2 percent of Catholic women, even those who regularly attend church, rely on natural family planning.

The latest data shows practices of Catholic women are in line with women of other religious affiliations and adult American women in general.

“In real-life America, contraceptive use and strong religious beliefs are highly compatible,” said the report’s lead author Rachel Jones.

She said most sexually active women who do not want to become pregnant practice contraception, and most use highly effective methods like sterilization, the pill, or the intrauterine device (IUD).

“This is true for Evangelicals and Mainline Protestants, and it is true for Catholics, despite the Catholic hierarchy’s strenuous opposition to contraception,” Jones said.

Nearly 70 percent of Catholic women use sterilization, the birth control pill or an IUD, according to the Guttmacher Institute research.

The numbers are slightly higher among women who identify as Evangelicals or Mainline Protestants, research showed.

The latest data is from the 2006-2008 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG).

The findings nearly match previous NSFG data from 2002, which showed that 97 percent of Catholic women were using birth control, and are consistent with a trend tracked over the last decade by Catholics for Choice.

From CNN:

“It is time for the extreme right wing to stop playing football with women’s health,” said Rep. Nita Lowey, D-New York. “My colleagues and I stand in solidarity with American women who have waited decades for equity in contraceptive coverage. We have fought for too long.”

“I woke up this morning in the 21st century, not in the Middle Ages,” said. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colorado. “Family planning and birth control (are) an essential part of women’s health.

Memo to the Pope:

You have already lost this battle. The women of your church are using birth control, papal decrees and church teachings be damned.

Enter the 20th century and be a voice for progressive human rights instead of trying to hang on to antiquated beliefs that have no place in a modern society.

Memo to President Obama:

Now is not the time to compromise. Stand face to face, toe to toe, with religious extremists and tell them you refuse to budge. Let them sue. Let them picket. Let them scream all they want.

If Catholic hospitals and  social institutions want to be governed by papal decrees and church dogma then remove their federal funding. If they truly want to be Catholic…….then let them do it on their own dime. If they want the money then they MUST play by the same rules everyone else does.

White House blog article on this issue

Walla Walla’s state representative, the widowed Maureen Walsh, articulates the most fundamental truth that opponents of gay marriage refuse to let themselves see. It’s not about the sex. It’s about the love.

Though to be clear, the sex deserves full equal protection of the laws too.

Make a public display of your support for gay marriage too.

(via X-Blog)

Your Thoughts?

Moonbattery wrote:
Hollyweird excretes an unending flow of degenerate filth not because there is a market for it, but because the entertainment establishment consists of moonbats. According to a new report from Movieguide, if they were more interested in the bottom line than in liberal politics, they would give the public what it wants — countermoonbattery:

The Movieguide report rates movies using more than two dozen criteria, such as whether a title promotes capitalism or socialism or if it promotes or denigrates biblical principles. Violence, sex, political correctness, revisionist history, environmentalism, feminism, homosexuality and more hot-button political issues all are taken into consideration.

This year’s report concludes that seven of the top 10 films of 2011 scored high on Movieguide’s index and therefore qualify as films with “strong or very strong Christian, biblical, moral and redemptive content.”

Movieguide identified 91 movies in 2011 that scored high in “conservative/moral categories”; these earned an average of $59 million apiece. On the other hand, it identified 105 movies that scored high in “liberal/leftist categories”; each of those titles earned an average of just $11 million.

The average movie scoring four stars from Movieguide earned $53.5 million while the ones that scored just one star earned $10.6 million.

More ...

Statistics: Posted by A Person — February 9th, 2012, 4:42 pm — Replies 0 — Views 9

My wife and I bought our home in 2007. We have, gasp, a subprime mortgage. We had a 20% down payment, bought only as much house as we could afford, with a payment 200.00 a month less than we were paying for rent.

Do I owe more on my house than what it is worth? I don’t know and it doesn’t matter. I have to live somewhere. Either I will buy a house or rent one. Better to stay in the house I own if I can afford the payments. It’s mine and I can do with it want I want.

A lot of the people underwater are drowning because they bought a house as an investment. They bought far more house than they could afford, thinking that housing prices would continue to rise. They didn’t. They took on adjustable rate or interest only loans. The housing bubble collapse turned their investment into a huge liability. The solution? Uncle Sam and his checking account with unlimited overdraft privileges. This is not much different than what happened with the banks and Wall Street.

I know some people got sucked into loans they really didn’t understand. However, I am not so quick to let them off the hook. Did they read the loan documents? If they couldn’t understand the documents they should have had someone who could read and explain the documents to them BEFORE they signed. Ignorance does not excuse us from our responsibilities. (and I am acutely aware that banks, loan agents, mortgage brokers, and house sellers often prey on the poor and ignorant)

I am not excusing the banks. The recent  US Department of Justice settlement with the banks over mortgage fraud is scandalous. Wall Street and the banks win again and the Obama administration proves once again that it is a whore for the rich and powerful. Any bank that committed fraud should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Asking banks to pay money is not punishment. It is a reward for criminal behavior. When bank and Wall Street CEO’s and CFO’s, COO’s and corporate board members are sitting in jail then I will believe the US Government is serious about these matters. Fines and financial restitution are just costs of doing business…..jail time is the only penalty that will put a stop to the fraud. (along with asset forfeiture)

The people who are really punished are those who pay their mortgages every month. While they dutifully pay their mortgage every month, billions of dollars will be paid out to those who acted irresponsibly. The interest rate on my mortgage is high yet I am not eligible for an interest rate reduction because I am not in default. This is crazy, ass-backwards thinking.

I am a liberal but I am quite tired of the victim mentality that is so prominent in America.  What happened to personal accountability? I have made some bad financial decisions in my life. I could blame my Dad, I suppose, since he wasn’t good with money and didn’t pay his debts. I won’t do that. I own the decisions I make, even the foolish ones.

I realize that a person’s individual story may not be accurately reflected in what I have written here. My intent is not to attack anyone personally……just a few observations in general about the issue.

The motto is “Opus Dei Cum Pecunia Alienum Efficemus,” Latin for “Doing God’s Work with Other People’s Money.”

Except they’re not doing “God’s work.” I’ll be honest; I read the description of what the RCO does and it still doesn’t make much sense to me, but it’s pretty evident God is nowhere to be found in that office. So there’s no reason for the patch to say that.

The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers pointed that out to Air Force officials and — surprisingly — they changed the logo!

Here’s the new patch:

In Latin, it reads “Miraculi Cum Pecunia Alienum Efficemus.” In English: “Doing Miracles with Other People’s Money.”

It’s not really any better. The RCO isn’t performing miracles any more than it’s doing God’s work — but if you see the word as a metaphor, I suppose it’s a small step up.

In any case, it’s probably a net positive since Republican Congressperson Randy Forbes is irate:

‘It is most egregious,’ Virginia Rep. Randy Forbes told Fox News. ‘The Air Force is taking the tone that you can’t even use the word “God”.’

‘(It is a) bridge too far in terms of the rights of men and women who serve in our services and their ability to express their faith.’

Right. Because we all know how hard Christians have it in this country when they want to express their faith…

Forbes sent a letter (PDF) to Air Force officials, co-signed by 35 other members of Congress, asking them to reverse their decision. If the officials are interested in doing the right thing, they’ll toss that letter right in the trash where it belongs.

No one is taking away any rights from religious military personnel. They’re simply removing an unnecessary reference to God in a logo that’s meant to be a symbol for everyone in the Air Force, not just the religious people.

Retired cardinal Edward Egan

According to this report, Egan – in the interview with Connecticut Magazine –  said:

I don’t think we did anything wrong.

He said he had not been obligated to report abuse claims and maintained he inherited the cases from his predecessor, and did not have any cases on his watch.

Egan, who reached the mandatory retirement age of 75 in 2007, was Bridgeport bishop from 1988 to 2000. The Bridgeport diocese has paid out nearly $38 million to settle abuse claims over the years involving allegations by more than 60 people who said they had been molested by Catholic priests.

In court documents unsealed in 2009, Egan expressed scepticism over sexual abuse allegations and said he found it “marvelous” that so few priests had been accused over the years.

The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests called Egan:

Obviously unrepentant, self-absorbed and painfully dismissive of the abject suffering of tens of thousands of deeply wounded men, women and children who have been sexually violated by priests, nuns, bishops, brothers, seminarians and other Catholic officials. We can’t help but believe that many other prelates feel exactly as he does but are shrewd enough to avoid saying so outside of clerical circles.

Meanwhile, Walsh, of Church Lane, Abbots Bromley, was warned by Stoke-on-Trent Crown Court to expect a long sentence for the attacks carried out while he worked at children’s homes and churches between the 1970s and 1990s.

Disgraced priest Alexander Bede Walsh

During the 10-day trial, the jury heard Walsh already had a previous conviction for possessing indecent images of children.

Det Con Tim Bailey, from Staffordshire Police, said after the hearing:

He is supposed to be a man of the cloth but he has shown no compassion, no integrity and no humanity. He has forced grown men to come to court and relive childhood experiences of sexual abuse.

Mr Bailey said he believed there could be further victims who had yet to come forward.

Speaking after the trial, the Archbishop of Birmingham Bernard Longley apologised to the victims for the “horrendous crimes” and the “deep betrayal of trust” they had experienced.

Hat tip (Walsh report): Angie RS and BarrieJohn

Here’s how to participate:

1. Make a sign that says “Gay marriage doesn’t threaten our marriage” feel free to add “facebook.com/TheHSSE”

2. Take a picture of you and your husband/wife (and kids?) holding the sign.

3. Go to facebook.com/TheHSSE and upload the photo to their wall. Alternately, you can e-mail the picture to me (my first and last name[George Waye],ampersat,consultant, period, com) If you put “George sent me” and I get twenty photos……

4. I will raffle off the free “Straight Not Narrow” T-shirts to the people who participate-your name will be entered so long as your picture is posted by Noon on February 14th.

So get to it. Be a part of something meaningful.

And, if you live in Toronto, you can get professional photos done for free!

As part of the campaign, for the month of February, the wonderfully talented staff at “Who Do You Love? Photography” in Toronto are very generously offering FREE professional couples portraits like the one above. If you’d like to book your session (or if you have any questions) email: contactus@WhoDoYouLovePhotography.com

For more information in general on this project, visit George’s blog Misplaced Grace.

And to help me quickly get a wife so I can participate in this project in time for Valentine’s Day, send your leads to camelswithhammers @ gmail . com. I like long walks on the beach, Doritos, and gay people (but not that way).

Your Thoughts?

To hear [the 'political whorehouse' that is Faux] News, AM radio and the [Reactionaries] speak of it, you would not think there is a problem with domestic terrorism in this country. Rather, you would be convinced that all terrorism is Islamic in nature and targeted only at our FREEDOM. This is a far cry from reality, however, as there have been numerous counts of domestic terrorism both successful and thwarted in just the last 20 years. Almost all of it based on [White-]Wing rhetoric and politics.

But “numerous” really doesn’t capture the essence of just how much violence emanates from the Right. The Southern Poverty Law Center has compiled a handy list of incidents.

Read more . . .

In the instance displayed on this manuscript folio, Newton calculates a tentative date using the 1260 days (taken to be years) from Daniel in part to counter the claims of some of his contemporaries, who claimed that the end would come in the seventeenth or eighteenth century. Newton stood apart from contemporary interpreters who were predicting the imminent restoration of the Jews, the fall of the Catholic Church and the Second Coming of Christ. Nevertheless, Newton’s own fervent belief in these prophetic events is not in doubt. The abbreviation “A.C.” stands for Anno Christi (“the year of Christ”).

So then the time times and half a time are 42 months or 1260 days or three years and an half, reckoning twelve months to a year and 30 days to a month as was done in the Calendar of the primitive year. And the days of short lived Beasts being put for the years of lived [sic] kingdoms, the period of 1260 days, if dated from the complete conquest of the three kings A.C. 800, will end A.C. 2060. It may end later, but I see no reason for its ending sooner. This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fanciful men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, and by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail. Christ comes as a thief in the night, and it is not for us to know the times and seasons which God hath put into his own breast.

However, any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman’s vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child.

Sen. Constance Johnson, D-Oklahoma City, said that while it takes two people to create life, Crain’s measure focuses only on half of that equation.

My amendment seeks to draw attention to the absurdity, duplicity and lack of balance inherent in the policies of this state in regard to women. Oklahoma already incarcerates more women than any other place in the world. Under the latest provisions, a woman in Oklahoma may now face additional criminal charges and potential incarceration for biological functions that produce or, in some cases, destroy eggs or embryos, such as a miscarriage. In vitro fertilization, involving the fertilization outside the womb for implantation into the womb, would also potentially represent a violation of the proposed Personhood statute.

Finally, this amendment seeks to draw humorous attention to the hypocrisy and inconsistency of this proposal – from the Republican perspective of down-sized government and less government intrusion into people’s private affairs.

(See: Atheist Ethicist: Scripture as a Source of Moral Knowledge)

(Also Relevant: Atheist Ethicist: Faith Hospital.)

Imagine having our entire health network claim that there are no medical facts that have not appeared in the writings of Hippocrates, and nothing written in Hippocrates that is not a medical fact.

In fact, it is even more foolish to hold that the bible is the last word in morality.

Hippocrates at least was at least the model for medical knowledge in his age, and a wise and compassionate individual. Whereas scripture was not so much about morality as it was about securing the social and political power of priests and kings by securing the faithful, unreasoned, and unquestioning obedience of their subjects. They claim that the command is to obey God.

However, there is no God. There is only the person who claims to be able to tell you what God says. Consequently, what is presented as, "Obey God without question or justification or suffer the consequences in this world or the next," is, in practice, "Obey me or suffer the consequences."

When I assert that making scripture the last word in morality is worse than making Hippocrates the last word in medicine, I assume that readers will see that making Hippocrates the last word in medicine is a bad thing.

That may be optimistic.

What we get from scripture - in particular concerning matters of reproductive health - very much fits the description of taking the word of people far less intelligent than Hippocrates as the final word in medicine. We are, in fact, prescriptive primitive pre-historic remedies for our social ills.

Even the social and political elite, who shaped religion for their benefit, had some reason to prefer to be the elite in a healthy and well-ordered society unmarred by petty jealousies, than one that was riddled with disease and violence. Some of their "Obey me . . . ahem . . . I mean . . . obey God or suffer the consequences" commandments were actually geared to help them rule over a healthy and prosperous society. To do this, their commandments contained within it the medical facts and fictions of their age.

When we use these same prescriptions we are, in effect, declaring them to be the last and best words in matters of medicine, biology, and psychology - which is actually worse than declaring Hippocrates the last word in medicine.

Again, I am not claiming that these people were engaged in a conscious campaign to deceive people. It is more likely that they believed that their god or gods existed and wondered what qualities those beings had.

Naturally, they would start by assigning to those deities the qualities they wanted those deities to have. Their assignments faced no reality check in terms of truth so they could not be disproved. The only reality check they did face was whether their assertions would survive - which was a measure of their usefulness to the elite.

In this case, we not only get the virtue of blind obedience already mentioned, but other elements that help to secure power. There is good reason to view the demand that women be baby-making machines in such a society as a way to secure power.

The elite needs soldiers and servants, and societies were organized to fulfill that need. The more children, the more effectively they can be raised to be capable soldiers and servants for the elite, the better off the elite become. Therefore, god commands women to stay home and have children and to raise them according to scripture to become soldiers and servants of the elite, donating their time and labor as the elite dictate.

Limiting sexual partners limits the spread of disease and limits the petty jealousies that reduce the quality of the society over which the elites rule. It makes medical sense to command people to have few sexual partners - particularly in a primitive society that knows so little about medicine, biology, and psychology. It was not a stupid move.

Similarly, many of the remedies that Hippocrates prescribed were not foolish. They were wrong, but not foolishly wrong. They may have been the best remedies for that time, but it does not imply that we should not use our current knowledge to replace it with something better.

When we accept the absurdity that these prescriptions came from a perfectly wise and benevolent god, rather than from a social elite using the knowledge of their age to secure their position at the head of their own societies, we are actually claiming that the tribesmen of that age had both perfect virtue and perfect knowledge of medicine, biology, and psychology. We are accepting an absurdity, and we are basing social policy on that absurdity.

Where we know have a great deal of knowledge about the relationships between sexual behavior, brain structure, biology, and evolution, the primitive inventors of scripture did not even know that those relationships existed. I have been spending my time going over Sean Faircloth’s new atheist strategy. It includes ten policy objectives for the secular and atheist community. The second of those ten policy objectives is for reproductive information to be based on science – not on myth.

This means that when we go to discover what is known about the medical, biological, and psychological facts relevant to reproduction and reproductive health, we are not going to go to the ignorant tribesman who knew almost nothing about the world in which he lived. Instead, we are going to go to those who have libraries full of peer-reviewed literature that tells them what the facts are.

We are going to do this for the same reason that if we go to build a bridge or a communications satellite, we are not going to ask the primitive tribesmen who does not even have the capacity to read and write to determine the best way to go about it. We are going to ask the people who have stacks of material at their disposal telling them the facts of materials science, chemistry, and physics relevant to doing the job competently.

It is utterly foolish to consider an ancient Greek, no matter how gifted he was in his time, to be the last word ever on all matters of medicine. It is more foolish to go to an illiterate tribesman to have him design a complex bridge or communications satellite. And it is an extreme form of foolishness to go to ancient tribesmen who have been dead for a few thousand years as the last word in matters of reproductive health.

As Faircloth says, the new atheist political strategy should have, as one of its objectives, reproductive information based on science, not based on the superstitions of illiterate tribesmen who have been dead for a few thousand years.

Here’s something you don’t hear a lot, courtesy of Luke Gyure at WWJTD:

Here’s the answer is to what theists and atheists can do together: secular work. If you’re really as committed to working together and finding common ground as you claim to be, then you have to concede that the common ground is found in nonreligious conversation… The “middle ground” for an atheist and a believer is not actually somewhere in between: it’s where the atheist already is.

Never thought of it that way, but it’s accurate. Whenever I’ve participated in interfaith projects, they’ve been things like hosting debates/discussions (something atheist groups do all the time), volunteering at a soup kitchen or homeless shelter (ditto), donating blood (yep), etc. It’s never anything unique to one faith or another, because there’s no common ground there.

When you want to do good — with other people from different backgrounds — god stays out of the picture.

One person commented on my article asking why we can’t have an atheist exemption from the gay marriage bans in some states. I think this is a great idea. I think we should definitely push for such a thing.

Since we don’t believe in any deities or the Bible, we don’t believe that homosexuality is a sin and therefore, the government’s prohibition on gay marriage is a restriction on our secular values. We should be exempt from the government prohibition on same-sex marriage and the government should respect and legally recognize our right to marry gay and lesbian atheists.

While we are at it, we don’t believe in Hell for those who kill themselves, so we should demand an exemption from the laws against euthanasia too. While I’m not fond of the pot, I don’t see why atheists should be prohibited from using marijuana for medical purposes either. I want an exemption!

If the religious can get away with demanding exemptions from laws they don’t like, why shouldn’t we do the same? Not only will we raise the awareness of atheists in our society, but we will also gain a great deal of support from others who don’t normally think about religion, but will support what we are trying to do here. It’s great PR and supports great causes. It will cause people to think about religious identifications why use, but don’t really believe.

Related articles

• On Faith: Churches seek exemption from the law (examiner.com)
• Pushing Beliefs: Atheists vs. Theists (dangeroustalk.net)
• Gay-marriage amendment would exclude religious-school chapels (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

I would love to send you a copy of GOD, NO! Signs You May Already Be an Atheist and Other Magical Tales to review, feature, or giveaway on One Minion’s Opinion. I look forward to hearing from you.

I’ve always enjoyed watching Penn and Teller on television and it was a book I figured I’d want to read anyway so I dashed off an email with my address and waited eagerly for the arrival of my free copy. And waited. And waited. And by then I knew the library had ordered a few copies so I waited some more. I saw a copy of the audio version and thought that’d be a good pick, since I could listen to it while doing other things. I gave up after disc 4. There were more loony anecdotes than there were signs of being an atheist and after that many hours of listening to the man read his own book, I couldn’t take it anymore. His voice was starting to remind of me Dr. Marvin Monroe, someone else I didn’t want to picture naked. Maybe I’ll borrow the bound version at some point and finish it but it’s not looking likely right now.

This morning I checked my email and found a new announcement, this one from Jessica Abell. The book’s called UNORTHODOX: The Scandalous Rejection of My Hasidic Roots by Deborah Feldman

Next Tuesday Simon & Schuster is publishing UNORTHODOX: The Scandalous Rejection of My Hasidic Roots, Deborah Feldman’s memoir of growing up in the Satmar sect of Brooklyn’s Hasidic community. In UNORTHODOX—the first story to peek behind the curtain hiding this oppressive group—she tells the heartrending story of her cloistered childhood, her arranged marriage at seventeen, the painful year she and her husband were unable to consummate their marriage, and her ultimate decision to leave the Satmar sect with her son after giving birth to him at age nineteen.

Yesterday the New York Post ran an explosive three-page feature interview with Feldman, which has been since been picked up by the Daily Mail, Jewish Chronicle, and Yahoo! Shine, among others.

Feldman—who is now 25, lives in New York City with her son, and attends Sarah Lawrence College—is ready to share her story with the world and is available for interviews. She can also offer insights about the Hasidic community, particularly its view on appropriate behavior for women.

Feldman’s website address was included and again I was invited to write in and ask for a copy. The Post interview is a fascinating read, I have to admit. I’m not a memoir reader by nature, but I think I’ll go ahead and email back and see if a book arrives. Failing that, maybe my library will wind up with one at some point. I’ll watch for it.

There are many troubling portions of the Bible, but the one that occurs to me first is the first story of Phineas (AKA Phinehas and some other variant spellings) found in Numbers 25:1-13. Philip Jenkins uses this as a his prime example in Laying Down the Sword: Why We Can’t Ignore the Bible’s Violent Verses.

While Israel dwelt in Shittim the people began to play the harlot with the daughters of Moab. These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate, and bowed down to their gods. So Israel yoked himself to Ba’al of Pe’or. And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel; and the LORD said to Moses, “Take all the chiefs of the people, and hang them in the sun before the LORD, that the fierce anger of the LORD may turn away from Israel.” And Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Every one of you slay his men who have yoked themselves to Ba’al of Pe’or.”

And behold, one of the people of Israel came and brought a Mid’ianite woman to his family, in the sight of Moses and in the sight of the whole congregation of the people of Israel, while they were weeping at the door of the tent of meeting.

When Phin’ehas the son of Elea’zar, son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose and left the congregation, and took a spear in his hand and went after the man of Israel into the inner room, and pierced both of them, the man of Israel and the woman, through her body. Thus the plague was stayed from the people of Israel.

Nevertheless those that died by the plague were twenty-four thousand.

And the LORD said to Moses, “Phin’ehas the son of Elea’zar, son of Aaron the priest, has turned back my wrath from the people of Israel, in that he was jealous with my jealousy among them, so that I did not consume the people of Israel in my jealousy. Therefore say, `Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace; and it shall be to him, and to his descendants after him, the covenant of a perpetual priesthood, because he was jealous for his God, and made atonement for the people of Israel.’”

So Phineas kills a man and his wife for the sin of miscegenation. This was obviously written during one of the xenophobic periods of Jewish history.

There are some ridiculous elements to it. The supposed “crime” was marrying a Midianite, and the text makes a big deal out of the fact that this was brazenly done in front of Moses. But Moses himself likely had a Midianite wife, from the period after he fled Egypt. Moses’ Midianite father-in-law, Jethro, seems to be a fairly important character in Exodus.

Also notice that God stays his hand and grants a covenant of peace, “only” killing 24,000 people. This is what people mean when they complain about the God of the Old Testament. Also note that Phineas’ zealotry earns him and his descendants the plum position in the priesthood.

To me, this passage represents the troubling undercurrent of ethnic purity that runs through some of the Hebrew Testament. All of these sections, found particularly in books like Ezra and Nehemiah, are ignored by most mainstream Christians. Thankfully. But there are a few groups, like the Christian Identity group the Phineas Priesthood, who use this passage as a justification for their racism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/08/church-of-england-compromise-women-bishops

The synod voted against measures proposed by the Manchester diocesan synod that would have allowed parishes opposed to women bishops to be administered by male ones (Manchester was supported by the Archbishop of York), however, they synod also voted against a proposal by the Southwark diocesan synod calling for the CofE to press ahead with legislation to introduce women bishops.

The synod agreed that the legislation introducing women bishops can now be revised by the bishops, and will be put before the synod in July. If passed then, the first women bishops could be ordained in 2014.

The Times reports the defeat of the diocese of Manchester’s proposals as a defeat for the Archbishops http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/faith/article3313973.ece Christina Rees says 42 out of the 44 dioceses wish to see women bishops have equal status within the church.

Hamza Kashgari could be executed for his 'sacrilegious' Tweets

Abdul Aziz Khowja said:

When I read his articles, I wept and got very angry …

And the infantile apparatchik announced:

I have instructed all newspapers and magazines in the kingdom not to allow him to write anything and we will take legal measures against him.

Worse, Kashgari, 23, offended the king of that basketcase of a country, Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, who ordered the journalist’s arrest.

A statement carried by the official Saudi Press Agency earlier this week revealed:

The Monarch today issued orders to arrest and try Kashgari for his offences against the deity and the Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) … The order came after many scholars, dignitaries and citizens in the kingdom sent messages to the Monarch expressing indignation at Kashgari offences.

Kashgari had the good sense to flee the country as devout Muslims began baying for his blood, but today we learned that he has been arrested in Malaysia.

According to this report, he was seized as he arrived in Kuala Lumpur yesterday. The Saudi Arabic language daily Al Youm reported:

The Malaysian authorities are coordinating with Saudi Arabia to hand Kashgari over.

In a separate report, newspapers quoted a statement by the kingdom’s Islamic Fatwa Committee calling for Kashgari to be punished:

In line with Islamic law, which means he could be executed.

King Abdullah’s order to arrest the writer, a columnist in the Saudi Arabic language daily Al Bilad, followed public furore in the kingdom over some of his articles, considered as abusive of Islam and the Prophet.

Ajel Arabic language daily said yesterday:

The order came after many scholars, dignitaries and citizens in the kingdom sent messages to the Monarch expressing indignation at Kashgari offences.

Other papers reported that thousands of readers and schools sent letters to the local media and posted online  messages demanding Kashgari’s prosecution.

After the arrest order, many Saudi newspapers carried a letter written by Kashgari on his Twitter page apologising for any offence, which he said was inadvertent.

My tweets were posted during a [difficult] psychological state. I erred and I pray to God that He will forgive me for what I did. I declare my repentance and I distance myself fully from all the misleading ideas that had affected me and made me write expressions that I do not support. I bear witness that Mohammad is the messenger of God. I shall live and die firmly believing in it. I declare my repentance and I strongly adhere to the testimonies that there is no deity but Allah and that Mohammad is the messenger of Allah.

Ahead of Big Mo’s birthday, Kashgari used Twitter to reflect of the occasion, saying:

On your birthday, I will say that I have loved the rebel in you, that you’ve always been a source of inspiration to me, and that I do not like the halos of divinity around you. I shall not pray for you.

Nasser al-Omar, an influential cleric, called for him to be tried in a sharia court for apostasy, and, in a YouTube video, called on the faithful to express their indignation to the media and the authorities.

Your duty is to defend our religion against those atheists and not let it pass by with no punishment — you must write in the papers, in the Internet, and write the government, and not be silenced.

Hat tip: BarrieJohn

I’m getting pretty damn peeved with the attitude that seems to be mainstream within the atheist groups etc as of late. They think themselves far superior to the poor, feeble minded little theists who’re blind and must depend on an imaginary friend to get them through life. Remind me, how exactly are they supposed to be any better? I never used to have any issues with atheists but they are now proving themselves to be just as bitter, closed minded, arrogant and downright condescending as those heavy, closed minded christians they despise!

(Episode CCXCVIII: Karate, train your body.)

Every summer, the church would organise a retreat at a large house somewhere in the country for a week of prayer and bible study, and my older sisters and I were always taken along. The worst of these was when I was 12; that was the memorable year when the ‘Holy Spirit’ was sweeping through the land (or at least through the evangelical churches). For a week I was stuck in a remote house in the highlands of Scotland while everyone around me was filled with the holy spirit and started swaying, shaking, falling down and speaking in tongues. I spent most of the week hiding.

Around this time, I started to read a lot of old myths – Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Celtic and so on. It occurred to me that those people who had worshiped Isis thought they were right just as sincerely as I did about Jesus. And once I’d acknowledged that question, what about Muslims or Hindus? I asked my stepfather – how did we know that we were right? He told me that it was just a matter of faith (which was honest of him), and I accepted that answer. And I believed in god – but not unquestioningly. I had doubts. I saw so many contradictions in the world, so many things that didn’t make sense thought the lens of faith. But I ignored the contradictions and assumed I just didn’t understand. Perhaps we needed god to set off the big bang, I wondered. And perhaps he nudged evolution along.

Ultimately, what saved me was science. It never occurred to me to doubt that evolution is true and I never really believed that creationists existed until the horrifying day when I discovered that my mother and eldest sister (both highly educated, otherwise intelligent women) are creationists.

And one day, I finally caved to my doubts and actually considered a question that had been hanging around at the edge of my consciousness for years. It’s accepted among most Christians that humans are the only human beings to have souls. Dogs, cats, horses, goldfish – nothing. Chimps, nothing. We assume the Australopithecines had no soul. So what about Homo habilis? Or Homo erectus? No. So when had the soul appeared? Which individual was the first Homo sapiens and had the first soul? Of course, I knew that was a ridiculous question. But it had to be asked, because if there was no soul, there could be no afterlife. No heaven, or hell. And if there was no afterlife, there was no god, and it was all an invention of people who were afraid of death, and so convinced themselves that they would live forever.

Of course, that wasn’t all, and it look me a while to completely let go of my faith, but it’s gone now. I miss it sometimes. The idea that there is an omnipotent being out there who loves you and will do anything for you is incredibly comforting. But I’ll take what I have now – the ability to see and appreciate the world as it actually is and nothing more – over a lie any day.

Annabel
United Kingdom

The military, however, doesn’t recognize the difference. They allow soldiers to wear dog tags that say “Atheist” but not “Humanist.” Why not? Who knows. But Bradley is trying to fix that.

Maj. Ray Bradley is applying to be the first humanist recognized as a “distinctive faith group leader” by the Army. In the meantime, he can’t be designated as a humanist on his official records or dog tags, although he can be classified as an atheist.

…

Bradley said he applied for the change to his record after learning that “atheist” was now an officially recognized choice for soldiers. His request was ultimately rejected by the Army Chaplain Corps, he said, which didn’t respond to a request for comment. Bradley believes some of the resistance comes from a lack of familiarity with humanism.

“I don’t think the chaplaincy really understands the difference between atheism and humanism,” he said.

…

The Army currently has no humanist chaplains or laypersons authorized to perform limited chaplain duties, a position roughly equivalent to a deacon or elder in a Christian church. A soldier at Fort Meade, Md., has also filed the paperwork seeking the designation, which is a more formal process in the Army and Navy than in the Air Force, where a humanist lay leader is stationed at MacDill Air Force Base, Fla., according to Torpy.

Incidentally, that Fort Meade soldier is Cpt. Ryan Jean, whom I mentioned here.

I’d love to hear a good reason from military officials as to why they won’t allow the label, but there really isn’t one. It’s just ignorance on their part. It ought to be a quick fix. And yet, when it comes to non-religious people in the military, there’s always some sort of resistance when they try to assert themselves.

The Secular Student Alliance showed up in force brandishing signs reading ‘This guy is full of shit,” “Sex: a lot of fun,” and “Keep your church out of my sex life and I won’t have sex in your church.”

Matt Runnebaum, president of the Secular Student Alliance, said the group was there to protest the “message of hate” Morrell and Smock were preaching.

“We are trying to make a mockery of it,” he said. “The best way to combat messages of hate is with humor.”

College atheist groups have been *amazing* at responding to Christian hatemongers like Jed.

The pro-intelligent design (ID) internet echo chamber has been making a big thing of late about “peer-reviewed papers supporting intelligent design.” Their “Center for Science and Culture” has even published an updated list. (PZ Myers has provided a more accessible version of the list at More bad science in the literature).

This of course does raise some questions about what they mean by “peer review” and the real nature of some of the journals these papers are in (have a look at their in-house journal Bio-Complexity). But leaving those issues aside for now I just don’t think any of these papers are reporting “ID research.”

The nature of “ID research”

To me research supporting intelligent design should postulate some structured hypotheses for ID and seek to test them or validate them against reality. But none of the articles do that. Most, especially ones that are published in credible journals, deal with aspects of evolutionary science.

Sure they may postulate a problem, an example or issue where they feel current science does not have an answer. That’s what I expect in a scientific paper. Identification of problems and reporting work on them.

Like all areas of science, evolutionary science has its so far unanswered questions, its problems and anomalies. perfectly natural and perfectly acceptable to identify and investigate them. But calling such work “supporting intelligent design” is just dishonest. No specific ID hypotheses have been advanced, let alone tested.

This always seems to be the case for any list of “peer-reviewed scientific papers supporting ID.”

“Theistic science” – or argument by default

Nor, by the way, do these papers display any example of the alternative to “materialist” science. Their declared aim of replacing modern science with a “theistic science.” (See Wedge Strategy and Theistic science? No such thing). If they were doing any work like this why isn’t that demonstrated by the publications? I would love to see examples of such research and identify the different methods characteristic of such science.

To list these papers as supporting ID  is simply assuming that any criticism, any problem, any gap in evolutionary science is, by default, evidence for ID.

It’s not.

Relying on cranks

David L Abel

Another issue with this publication list which does supply some mirth is the frequent occurrence of publications by David L. Abel (17% of total list). He has raised some attention because he published a paper in the journal Life which had recently received attention for its publication of the whaky paper “Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life,” by Erik D. Andrulis. (See The comparison to jabberwocky is inevitable for PZ Myers’ in depth discussion of that paper). Abel’s article is titled “Is Life Unique?” – Myers describes this as “Intelligent Design creationism crap,” and “drivel” (see More bad science in the literature). But Myers was impressed with Abel’s address and affiliation:

Department of ProtoBioCybernetics and ProtoBioSemiotics, Origin of Life Science Foundation, Inc., 113-120 Hedgewood Drive, Greenbelt, MD 20770

Turns out this is a residential house, probably Abel is the only “employee,” but it does have na official name plate besides his front door! As PZ says:

“That’s every intelligent design creationism institute of scientific thinking: a cheap sign tacked up on a garage, with some guy with delusions of competence twiddling his thumbs inside.” (see Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation)

Abel himself describes his institute as a “science and education foundation with corporate headquarters near NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center just off the Washington, D. C. Beltway in Greenbelt, MD.”  If you are not careful in your reading you might assume he was actually based at a NASA site!

And here is the information on Abel held in his profile at the ID journal
Bio-Complexity.

David L. Abel

These lists of “peer reviewed papers supporting ID’ are getting rather desperate.

Similar articles

This article, ”The Obama administration’s abortion rule,” suffers from only one minor problem: it is woefully fraught with error. Its writers claim, and without presenting a stitch of evidence, that emergency contraceptive drugs Ella and Plan B cause abortions. Only on Christian or religiously-slanted websites will you find such a myth. Here is another article that, again, without citing any references whatsoever, makes the same claim in a rather ironic “myth” versus “fact” article:

3) Myth: Ella does not cause an abortion because it does not interrupt an established, implanted pregnancy.

Fact: Ella can cause the demise of an embryo that is already implanted in its mother’s womb, in addition to preventing implantation after fertilization. Ella also appears to have a powerful ovulatory blocking capability.

But according to the FDA,

The safety and efficacy of ella were demonstrated in two Phase III clinical trials. One study was a prospective, multi-center, open-label, single-arm trial conducted in the United States; the other was a randomized, multi-center, single-blind comparator-controlled trial conducted in the United States, United Kingdom and Ireland.

The FDA states clearly that women who are already known to or may be pregnant should not take the drug.

And according to Princeton University’s Office of Population Research:

No, using emergency contraceptive pills (also called “morning after pills” or “day after pills”) prevents pregnancy after sex. It does not cause an abortion. (In fact, because emergency contraception helps women avoid getting pregnant when they are not ready or able to have children, it can reduce the need for abortion.)

Yet, the writers of the Baptist Press article claim, ridiculously, that these pills cause abortion. It may be possible that the fetus would be harmed if a woman takes the drug while pregnant, but as just mentioned, the FDA explicitly warns against such behavior. The pills are meant to be take before the pregnancy occurs. Nowhere except in apologist literature will you find credible sources that maintain that these drugs can cause major damage to the woman at all, much less abortions.

The Baptist Press also reads as if the health care plan requires women to take these drugs. No. It simply provides the contraceptives free of charge, and federal funds can not be used for abortions, except in cases of incest or rape.

This smacks of the time-tested, hypocritical Republican way: push for big government on certain issues (religious protections, immigration and gun protection laws) and argue for limited government on others (abortion, gay rights and women’s rights). Silly and contemptible but mostly contemptible.

                          

The interesting development since then is that it had led to some actual discussions about SGK , what it does, whether it’s effective or not. If you’re not aware, SGK is the main organisation responsible for the pink ribbons, “awareness-raising” and so on. This has come under a lot of criticism over the years as well but is beyond the scope of this post. What I’m interested in is how SGK splits its money. According to this Slate post, the breakdown of SGK’s gargantuan $400M/year budget is:

• 12% administration
• 8% fundraising
• 7% treatment
• 15% screening
• 24% research
• 34% education (largely the pink ribbon/awareness campaigns)

Let’s leave the other goals aside and just focus on administration and fundraising. Lumped together, that’s about 20% of what people might consider “overheads” as opposed to “programs”. Discussions of this have been a bit limited. Some see 20% as a low figure that suggets SGK is efficient (eg. Pharyngula). Others consider this as too much, especially if they lump in education. For instance this comment on the Slate story I linked to: “Wow – 54% of $400M goes to admin, fundraising & education (which for them seems to be an adjunct to fundraising)!? They’re crossed off my annual list of good causes.”

The problem with both of these views is that they assume the following:

• Overhead/admin is generally bad/wasteful for a charity
• The lower the overhead/admin the better
• Overhead/admin is a meaningful metric of how good a charity is
• Overhead/admin should be below a certain threshold for a charity to be worth donating to
• Good and effective charities have lower overhead/admin than bad charities

All of these assumptions are false. They’re myths in the crudest sense of the word — outright falsehoods (as opposed to simplifications) which are very commonly believed. Overhead/admin is often a meaningless metric, and trying to chase charities with low overheads is not a good idea. The best source of explanations for this is Good Intentions Are Not Enough, which has a whole ebook on the topic as well: Lies, White Lies and Accounting Practices — Why nonprofit overheads don’t mean what you think they mean.

Saundra Schimmelpfennig has blogged about this for years so rather than try explain it myself, I’ll let her historical posts do the topic. On the view that overheads are bad/wasteful:

Imagine walking into Wendy’s or Burger King (or whatever fast food restaurant you frequent) and insisting that you will only pay for whatever is actually on your hamburger. You’ll give them money for the cost of the bun, ketchup, hamburger patty, and pickles. But you refuse to pay for staff wages, building rental, electricity, the iconic golden arches, and certainly not a cent of your money should go to Superbowl commercials. [Source]

The only way to have no overhead is to hand cash to a random person (see this post). Anything beyond that requires finding people based on certain criteria, assessing needs, formulating plans, assessing your impact and work and so on. All of these are overheads. Asking for low overheads is asking for the charity to be blind to what it’s doing — it’s asking it to simply do (ie. work on the “program”) as opposed to assessing, optimising, evaluating and trying to find the best way to help people.

Also overheads are often a function of a particular charity’s accounting practices. One charity might consider paying for a staff member in the field as overhead, another as part of the “program”. A lot is subjective too. Sandra considers the WorldVision tshirts debacle where WorldVision shipped 100,000 unwanted tshirts from the US to developing countries. Shipping cost $1.82 per tshirt. So the overhead is completely dependent on what you value the tshirt at. WorldVision reckoned they could be sold for $20 in the US which gives the program 8.3% overhead. However if value them at $1 the overhead jumps to a very large 64.5%. A $10 valuation gives an overhead of 15.4%. Why might you value a tshirt at $1? If these are shipped to a country where local tshirts are available for $1, by giving it to someone you’re only saving them $1. In which case you’re paying $1.82 to save $1.

Finally, the chasing of low overheads incentivises (1) accounting arrangements that show a low overhead (2) actually skimping on much-needed costs like paid experts over volunteers, proper research on effectiveness as opposed to guessing and so on. While 1 might feel annoying and misleading (as the $20/$1 tshirt example shows), 2 is absolutely disasterous. It is therefore the quality and effectiveness of SGK’s programs that should be the main point of discussion.

The Avalanche

God’s love—a vast oceanic expanse? An aggressive love, “lavished” on mankind? Coming at us like an avalanche?

These ideas came to Dr. James Gills and me as we were working on our book The Mysterious Epigenome: What Lies Beyond DNA. As we tweaked the final manuscript, we were haunted over and over by a powerful, pivotal thought. As scientists continue pulling back curtain after curtain that had previously shrouded the chemical master-codes that control our DNA system (that is, the multiple integrated layers of our epigenetic “computer codes”), they were also revealing something in the realm of spirit. They had opened up a new kind of vista on the greatness of the Creator’s overwhelming intelligence—his boundless genius--which is placed on display in this bizarre biochemical landscape. The more we thought about and discussed the latest discoveries of the genome and epigenome, the more we were confronted with this sense of the cosmic architect’s “unlimited, off-the-chart wisdom” in creating and sustaining the micro-cosmos of life. At the same time, seeing the Creator’s engineering intelligence in this new light also made us ponder the striking parallel with other “overwhelming/incalculable/infinite” qualities that the Bible attributes to the Creator, such as his power, knowledge and love.

‘You wanna get hard?’:

And Charlie dancing while under the influence of glue:

Is it possible for people to get any stupider? Watch the show.

Enjoy.

We all know that the “official” position of the Catholic Church is against any form of birth control, other than the rhythm method. And surely we’re aware of the current controversy (and when I say “controversy” I mean bullshit created by the Republican party to stir up trouble for Obama) involving the health insurance requirement being imposed on Catholic employers mandating coverage of Birth Control, even for the Catholic Church. Yes, the Catholic Church will be required to provide medical insurance for its employees, except in certain circumstances, primarily involving employees of the religious edifice itself, as opposed to incidental employes not providing religious functions, such as hospitals, clerks, secretarial etc. Oh, the horror. It’s been the law, however, since 2000, all during the Bush years, with nary a peep from conservatives – until now.

If you listen to the people talking about this on the morning news shows, you have to ask yourself “Why are the only people complaining about this wearing black robes and funny hats with rosaries around their neck? THEY surely don’t use birth control, do they?” (If you hear of any pedophile priests using condoms when they rape little boys, be sure to let me know.)

Polls show that Catholics as a whole are in favor of the Catholic Church being required to include contraception in its health insurance plans provided to employees. More so than even the general population at large.

Some of them even recognize that more contraception access and affordability means a potential drop in abortions. You’d think the Pope would be happy with that. Yet Republicans are claiming that this is not acceptable, and that they will reverse this requirement. John Boehner calls it an “attack on religious freedom” that “will not stand”. Sean Vanity of Faux News says it’s part of a “war on religion”. However, many religious groups are in favor of the rule.

So what does this Health and Human Services rule actually do? It allows all employees to be treated equally when it comes to health insurance, instead of allowing employers that happen to be affiliated with the Catholic Church from treating their employees as second class citizens. It allows employees of Catholic institutions to be covered for what most of them use, have used in the past, would like their children to use when they become sexually active, and what responsible human beings actually use.

Face it. The hierarchy of the Catholic Church, (members of which, to a man, do not need or use contraception – at least officially) are afraid they are losing control of their flock. Dictating to the congregation what they can and cannot do in the privacy of their bedrooms has been the Church’s stock-in-trade, the sine qua non of Catholic dogma, and a sure means to control the general population of Catholics, not to mention ensure a continuous source of new Catholics. When the government takes that away from them, of course the boy-rapist papists will squeal. But has it really been taken away? Can one take something away from someone that which someone doesn’t have?

Click to view the mother's vagina

Catholics are individuals, not necessarily a monolithic entity. In matters of contraception, historically, Catholics have violated the ban on birth control with impunity. 98 percent of Catholics use birth control, according to surveys. With some exceptions, Catholic families, while stereotypically large, have shrunk. That mantle has been taken up by the evangelicals and fundamentalist Protestants. So exactly who are the Catholic leaders and Republican politicians fighting for? Catholics, one would expect, would welcome mandatory insurance coverage, if they use contraception. Who wouldn’t? And if any individual Catholic who in good conscience refused to use contraception, he/she is not using the mandatory aspect of the health insurance anyway. So, no harm, no foul.

As you can see from this link, as usual, the Republicans are being hypocritical (though I’m beginning to think they really don’t understand the concept of hypocrisy). It’s just another convenient political football to kick around in the hopes that it lands close to a Republican goal line – the goal being a single term Obama Presidency. In an age where the population explosion is one of the most pressing public concerns, now or in the future, this planet faces, it’s irresponsible to make an issue of this simply because it’s an election year and the Republicans want to use it to regain the Oval Office.

Filed under: 2012 Elections, Abortion, AIDS, Beliefs, Catholicism, Children, Christianity, Church and State, Current events, First Amendment, Fox News, Health, Health Care, Law, Legal, Medicine, Political/Topical, Politics, Pregnancy, Religion, Republicans, Science, sex, STDs Tagged: Barack Obama, Beliefs, Birth Control, Catholic, Catholic Church, Christian, Christianity, contraception, First Amendment, Fox News, Health, hypocrisy, John Boehner, morality, Obama, Politics, Pope, Religion, Republican, Republicans, sex

Statistics: Posted by Liv — February 8th, 2012, 9:37 pm — Replies 2 — Views 184

I realize watching this is going to make a lot of your heads hurt (via P.Z. Myers). Sorry for that. But I have little patience for drivel and less patience for abject stupidity served up on a daily basis from Pat Robertson and his black cohost who daily betrays both her race and her gender. That said, here is our good friend, Pat, enlightening us on atheists:

I find it interesting that Robertson would make this statement:

Isn’t this a strange thing that we would allow somebody who doesn’t believe in anything to restrict the freedom of those who do. I mean it makes no sense.

Isn’t it also strange that a believer can have non-believers penned down so well. Non-believers, in fact, believe in quite a few things, it’s just that none of them include the supernatural, things like literature and the arts as transcendent topics of inquiry. Science and free inquiry. Freedom of speech, and yes, freedom of and, if people wish, from religion. Actually, the word “believe” in the sense that Robertson means would probably make a lot of non-believers uncomfortable because the absence of a belief is not a belief. This is like saying that zero equals one. In computer programming jargon, 0 often refers to the “off” position, while 1 refers to the “on” position. For non-believers, belief in God is just off. Nothing more.

As for the issue at hand, I believe Robertson was referring to this issue, in which a statue of Jesus is perched atop Big Mountain at Whitefish Mountain Resort in Montana. The statue sits on public land and has been in that location since the 1950s. The Freedom From Religion Foundation challenged the constitutionality of the display, but the Forest Service made the decision to keep the statue in place, citing its historic significance.

Regarding Robertson’s statement early in the video, no one, not the FFRF or any other non-believers are attempting to “restrict” the freedoms of believers. In case he fails to understand the English language, “protesting” and challenging the constitutionality of a statue on public land does not mean the same thing as restricting the rights of believers. Just as believers have the right to worship however they see fit in this country, non-believers have the right to speak their mind and red flag issues that may subvert our constitution, which, as it happens, protects both.

I won’t bother to address the cohost’s asinine comment about Wicca.

                          

And yes, I seriously guilted Jen into owing me a beer for missing my talk. It’s only a 5 hour drive from Seattle to Pullman! She could just hop in a car right after lunch and blow off Friday, no problem.

Just one word. And yet, someone in Scranton, Pennsylvania is bound to get all huffy about it.

“Various ads placed by atheists on billboards, buses, and elsewhere — no matter how innocuous they may be — throughout the United States have been called ‘offensive’ by theists. This led me and others to question if some theists are offended merely because atheists exist and are promoting a message (regardless of its content),” Vacula says. “Instead of theists reacting to messages from atheists with vitriol,” Vacula explains, “they should take some time to learn what atheists have to offer and what individual atheists believe. In the case of the NEPA Freethought Society, all persons have the opportunity to visit our website, read our content, listen to our podcast episodes, and even listen to a recent respectful debate I had with a Methodist minister. There’s no reason to be angry with us.”

The ad will be sponsored by individual donors, the Northeastern Pennsylvania Freethought Society (NEPA), and American Atheists.

All Justin’s waiting for is the green light from the bus company’s board of directors.

If they reject this ad, how newsworthy would that be…?

In 2010, Crystal Cathedral Ministries filed for bankruptcy. Now, the building is in the possession of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange — they paid $57,500,000 for the place.

The Diocese doesn’t know what to name their new acquisition, though… and they’re asking for help.

This can only end well:

Before the building may be used as a Catholic cathedral several design and other changes must be made. In addition, the Bishop will re-name the site. You can be a part of that process by submitting your suggestion for the cathedral’s new name. The deadline for suggestions is February 20, 2012.

Following a review of all suggestions, Bishop Brown will determine the cathedral’s name and announce it at the appropriate time.

Bishop Brown has asked that any suggested name have a “Christological” relevance, that is, the name must refer to the nature and person of Christ or to his activities as illustrated by the gospels.

Reader Michael suggested a couple:

1. Our Lady of Perpetual Phallic Symbols
2. Holy Mother of God We Paid What? Cathedral

The problem is that those aren’t very “Christological”… if you have better suggestions, let them know!

And let us know in the comments, too

I spent most of my teenage years attending Trinity Baptist Church in Findlay, Ohio. Gene Milioni was the pastor, Ron Johnson was the assistant pastor, and Bruce Turner was the youth pastor.

Trinity was a fast growing church. Easter services were so well attended that services had to be held at nearby Findlay High School. During my time at Trinity the church outgrew its facility on Trenton Ave and made plans to build a new, round church facility on the east side of Findlay. The church, a shadow of what it once was, still holds services at their east side facility today.

Getting people to ride the bus required promotions. Promotions were enticements or incentives used to keep riders coming back week after week. They were also used to attract new riders. Sometimes promotions were used to attract non-bus riding people to the church.

Pastor Milioni (Milioni and his wife Dorothy in picture to the left) was not afraid of using promotions. Bus riders were given candy every Saturday when their bus worker came to call on them. As a teenager, being left alone in the bus office provided an opportunity to steal as much candy as I could put in my pockets. I was not alone in my thieving ways….many a Trinity youth found the candy closet too much of a temptation to resist.

While many Trinity promotions are lost to the failed memory of an aging man, I do remember several of them.

One Sunday, a woman came down the Church isle riding a tricycle. Her name was Phyllis Penton, the world’s smallest woman. At another church service, the world’s tallest man made an appearance.

Mike Crain was a church favorite. Mike was noted for doing karate tricks. One of his favorite tricks was slicing a watermelon with a long sword, off the belly of a church member. (Mike Crain now, as a suspected criminal)

I attended Midwestern Baptist College from 1976-1979. Tom Malone, the founder of the college, was also pastor of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Pontiac, Michigan. In the 1960′s and 1970′s Emmanuel was one of the largest churches in America.

Every dorm student was required to attend Emmanuel. We were also required to work in the bus ministry. A significant part of Emmanuel’s attendance came from people bussed in from as far away as Detroit. Some children were bussed to a service held in the afternoon. The service was called B Sunday School. It was quite evident to anyone who bothered to pay attention that the B really stood for black. Most of the children attending B Sunday  School came from black neighborhoods in Detroit.

While at Midwestern and Emmanuel I learned the fine art of operating a bus ministry. I also learned that promotion was the key to bus ministry success.

For many years, I was quite good at increasing church attendance through the bus ministry. I also was quite good at promotions. Most every week we had a promotion of some sort or the other. These promotions attracted new bus riders and encouraged old riders to keep riding the bus.

The first church I served was Montpelier Baptist Church in Montpelier, Ohio The church had two buses and I was the bus pastor given the responsibility to build-up the bus routes. Hundreds of children were brought to church through the bus ministry. Every so often I will run into to someone who rode the bus while I was at Montpelier Baptist Church.

I pastored Somerset Baptist Church in Somerset, Ohio for 11 years. For six of those years the bus ministry was central to our mission and purpose as a church. Whatever it took……get them in……..so they could hear the gospel and be saved.

We started with one bus and over time bought three more. Buses from Somerset Baptist Church fanned out over Perry, Muskingum, Fairfield, and Licking County picking up riders and bringing them to church. We also ran several buses on Sunday night.

While at Somerset Baptist Church I used a lot of promotions to get people to ride the bus and attend church. I firmly believed that it was vitally important to stand out in the crowd and I used promotions and advertising to do just that.  Again, by any means, save some….

I want to end this post with a list of some of the promotions I used to attract people to church. I hope you will find this list interesting and amusing.

• Tar and feather the bus pastor. Bus riders poured Karo syrup over me and pasted me with feathers.
• We gave away two live turkeys. I visited the bus route for several weeks with a live turkey in my car so the kids could see it.
• 100 foot banana split. We built a 100 ft long trough that looked like an animal feeder.
• Hatfield’s and McCoy’s. I divided the church into two groups, the Hatfield’s and the McCoy’s. One Sunday I had two people rush into church dressed as hillbillies and they shot blank guns at each other. Several first time visitors were visibly shaken by the scene.
• Hamburger Sunday. Everyone who rode the bus got to go to McDonald’s. Keep in mind I was pastoring a church in one of the poorest counties in Ohio.
• We gave away new bicycles and money.
• We gave away a 5 pound solid chocolate rabbit one Easter.
• Squirt gun Sunday.
• Greased pig contest.

All of these things, any many more, while fun in and of themselves, were done for the sake of winning people to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. While it may sound like a carnival show, I believed Jesus was my example. When I read the Bible I saw that Jesus was quite a user of promotions.  Like the Feeding of the  5,000. Healing the sick. Raising the Dead. Turning Water into Wine. Jesus knew how to get a crowds attention. Who better to follow after the master promoter Jesus himself.

Consider the steady stream of recent books by authors striving to define a new field called evolutionary developmental biology (e.g., Arthur 1997; Gerhart and Kirschner 1997; Davidson 2001, 2006; Carrol et al. 2001; West-Eberhard 2003; Carrol 2005a; Kirschner and Gerhart 2005). The plots of all these books are similar: first, it is claimed that observations from developmental biology demonstrate major inadequacies in current evolutionary theory, and then a new view of evolution that eliminates many of the central shortcomings of the field is promised. Developmental biologists are correct in pointing out that evolutionary theory has not yet specifically connected genotype to phenotype's in a molecular/cell biological sense. However, extraordinary claims call for extraordinary evidence, and none of these treatises provide any formal example of the fundamental inability of evolutionary theory to explain patterns of morphological diversity. Those who argue that microevolutionary theory has made no contributions to our understanding of the evolution of form may wish to consult the substantial body of quantitative genetics literature on multivariant evolution. Such work is by no means fully satisfactory, as it is couched in terms of statistics (variances and covariances) rather than the molecular features of individual genes, but a more precise evolutionary framework for linking genes and morphology not be possible until a critical mass of generalities on the matter has emerged at the molecular, cellular and developmental levels.

For the vast majority of biologists, evolution is nothing more than natural selection. This view reduces the study of evolution to the simple documentation of differences between species, proclamation of a belief in Darwin, and concoction of a superficially reasonable tale of adopting the divergence (...). A common stance in cellular and developmental biology is that the elucidation of differences in molecular genetic pathways between two species (usually very distant species) completes the evolutionary story. No need to dig any deeper—because natural selection surely produce the end products, the population genetic details do not matter. In individual cases, this type of informal thinking may do little harm, but in the long-run it undermines the very scientific basis of with the evolutionary biology.

There are two fundamental issues here. First, the notion that interspecific differences at the molecular level reveal the mechanism of evolution ignores the fundamental distinction between the outcome of evolution and the events that lead to such changes. For example, although most animal developmental biologists argue that it was shocking to discover that the development of all animals is based on modifications of the same sets of ancient genes, many evolutionary biologists regard this view with some surprise. It is, of course, easy to criticize based on 20/20 hindsight, but we have known for decades that all eukaryotes share most of the same genes for transcription, translation, replication, nutrient uptake, core metabolism, cytoskeletal structure, and so forth. Why would we expect anything different for development? Although knowing that HOX genes play a central role in the development of all animals provides insights into the genetic scaffold from which body plans are built, it does not advance our knowledge of the evolutionary process much beyond noting that all vertebrates share a heritage of calcified skeletons. It need not even tell us that such genes were involved in the initial stages of differentiation (Alonso and Wilkins 2005). A vast chasm of stepwise (and partially overlapping) changes may separate today's products of evolution, and understanding those steps is what distinguishes evolutionary biology from comparative biology.