This is a guest post by Rich Wilson.

***

I recently started reading The Book of Mormon and have found it a very tough slog, even compared to the KJV Bible. So you can imagine my relief when I took a break from that book and starting reading David Fitzgerald’s The Complete Heretic’s Guide to Western Religion Book One: The Mormons.

It is, to say the least, a much easier read.

The book is aimed at two audiences — and devout Mormons aren’t one of them. David acknowledges that if one is already “in,” this book probably won’t pull you out, nor is it intended to. Rather, The Mormons is aimed at most of the readers of this sort of blog as well as ex-Mormons (or perhaps Mormons who are having serious doubts). David expresses respect for the Mormons he’s known — and that’s why he’s compelled to point out where their beliefs fall short of being true. I share that sentiment, too. One of the smartest people I’ve ever known is a devout Mormon, and while I like to pretend he doesn’t really believe all that stuff, I know he does.

Full disclosure: Even though I’ve known Mormons personally, my background on Mormonism comes mostly from one South Park episode (which was hilarious, but way too short) and the PBS two-part documentary The Mormons (which was more extensive, but shied away from pointing out the crazy).

David starts with a thorough history of Joseph Smith‘s discovery and “translation” of the Book of Mormon, and writes about how the story evolved over time. There are numerous conflicting versions of Joseph Smith’s “First Vision,” and the way the story changes is fascinating. It’s also interesting to watch the various power struggles of the early days, and coming to understand how many of the players had to be “in” on the hoax.

The story documents some fascinating financial shenanigans as the church moves to Ohio and begins a bank called the Kirtland Safety Society Bank Company, later changed to the “anti-Banking Company to avoid following state regulations (you know, because putting “anti-Banking” on all your bank notes makes you totally not a bank, subject to any state rules). Chased out of Ohio, they landed in Missouri, where Joseph revealed that God had promised all the land to the Mormons — to take by force if necessary. (And they wondered why they weren’t popular in Missouri.) Unfortunately, the result would not be the last bloody story in Mormon history. Not by a long shot. The chronological history takes us through to the death of Joseph Smith, including what Fitzgerald says may have been the “most decent thing” Joseph Smith ever did: return home at the request of his wife Emma, even though he was ready to flee west. In his own words, “I am going like a lamb to the slaughter.”

After Smith’s death, there were, of course, a number of people who claimed that Smith himself had appointed them leaders of the church. One in particular, James Strang, had his own book of ancient golden plates and received word (from angels!) that the new prophet would be able to translate the book of one King Rajah Manchou of Vorito. What more proof could one need?!

With the death of Joseph Smith and subsequent power struggles, Fitzgerald moves from generally chronological history to covering some of the major highlights — or lowlights — of the Mormons, including the many splinter churches. Polygamy receives the first crack, deservedly, since it has probably had the greatest impact on the church and the various directions and schisms it has taken. And while it’s amusing to read about characters such as Nancy Rigdon who rejected Smith loudly no matter how much he threatened her with God’s word, it’s also chilling to read about the reality of sexual abuse in groups living out Joseph Smith’s doctrine to this very day.

A close second to the embarrassment of polygamy is the no-less-sinister racial history of the church. Not much needs to be said, other than the fact that, to this day, there isn’t any good theological explanation for why 19th century bigotry still found a place in 20th century Mormonism, bigotry that (among other things) did not allow black people to become priests in the church. The apologetics are amusing, until you remember what they’re trying to explain away.

Oh, wait, did I forget to mention the different kinds of heaven, and the “sealing” and baptism of the dead, and the magic underwear, and the planet Kolob? (Or is it a star? Joseph Smith didn’t seem to know the difference.) Yeah, that’s all in there, too. As well as Joseph’s assured view that certain ancient documents were Reformed Egyptian dictionaries… only to be told that they were the Greek versions of Psalms.

And so it came to pass that David Fitzgerald did also write upon numerous problems with The Book of Mormon itself. Including its apparent reliance on other fictional sources, such as Shakespeare’s works, Pilgrim’s Progress, and the King James Bible. Interestingly, this “perfect book” dictated by God to an Angel contains the same errors that the 1769 edition of the KJV Bible (available to Smith at the time) had.

As if the obvious fan-fiction nature of the book wasn’t enough, we also take a quick tour of the problems of having no archaeological record of anything mentioned in the Book of Mormon anywhere in the Americas, including chariots, advanced metallurgy, horses, elephants, many crops, or cities with millions of people.

Of course, the Church has had to do some backpedaling over the years to cover things up and we get some great coverage of that as well. The Book of Mormon has undergone many edits, and a great many documents have disappeared for decades, only to show up and require new twisted apologetics to explain. Interestingly, many of the problems with the Book of Mormon, the church history, and general canon have been brought to light by the church’s own members… most of whom have since been either excommunicated or left on their own. And it’s in this chapter that we inevitably deal with what, perhaps even more than polygamy, the church wishes would just go away: the Mountain Meadows massacre. I’ve read (and Fitzgerald repeats it) that the massacre was the worst civilian atrocity in American history up until the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. (The Rosewood massacre might contend, but in any case, they’re all horrific.)

We end by looking to the future, including Humanist Mormons, gay Mormons, and the effect of the Internet and open dialogue on Mormonism. David Fitzgerald contends the Internet is having the same effect on Mormonism that it’s having on all other religions: marking their end.

Well, not quite the end. David has some sage advice for anyone wanting to dialogue with Mormons. Briefly, you need to understand the way their religion is part of every facet of their lives. It’s not just a set of beliefs and something they do on Sundays, and simply pointing out that their prophet was a huckster probably isn’t going to go very far.

The book is a fascinating read on the whole, and I have no doubt that anyone, even ex-Mormons, will learn something new. There were only two sections that dragged slightly for me — one about famous people I didn’t know had connections to Mormonism and one about the Mormon basis for Battlestar Galactica. These are minor quibbles to be sure, and I wholeheartedly recommend the book whether you plan to invite in the next missionaries to ring your doorbell or you just want a little more insight into what Mormons actually believe.

***

Rich Wilson concluded that he was wrong about Santa when he was four and has been trying to challenge his own beliefs ever since, with varying degrees of success. His biggest hope is that his son will be better than he is at figuring out what isn’t true.

Just over a year ago, I was celebrating a major court victory that put a stop to virtually non-stop Christian prayers at the city council meetings in Greece, New York. Now, that decision is back up in the air.

Here’s the story (pretty much as I wrote it then): The town of Greece, New York had opened board meetings with prayers since 1999 thanks to Town Supervisor John Auberger. While the invocations could be delivered by representatives of many different faiths, virtually all of the representatives were Christian. They still are (PDF):

In 2008, two residents of the town, Susan Galloway and Linda Stephens, spoke out against this practice. It worked! Non-Christians delivered the invocation at four out of the next twelve meetings. Then, assuming the women were satisfied, the City Council went back to almost-entirely Christian prayers.

Between 1999 and 2010, there were approximately 130 invocations and it appeared that all but four had been delivered by Christians.

Initially, a district court dismissed Galloway and Stephens’ case, saying that the fact that representatives from different denominations were invited to deliver the prayers meant that the town wasn’t pushing Christianity on its citizens.

But last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed that ruling (PDF). Victory!

In practice, Christian clergy members have delivered nearly all of the prayers relevant to this litigation, and have done so at the town’s invitation. From 1999 through 2007, every prayer-giver who gave the invocation met this description. In 2008, after Galloway and Stephens had begun complaining to the town about its prayer practice, nonChristians delivered the prayer at four of the twelve Town Board meetings. A Wiccan priestess and the chairman of the local Baha’i congregation each delivered one of these prayers, and a lay Jewish man delivered the remaining two. The town invited the Wiccan priestess and the lay Jewish man after they inquired about delivering prayers; it appears that the town invited the Baha’i chairman without receiving such an inquiry. However, between January 2009 and June 2010, when the record closed, all the prayer-givers were once again invited Christian clergy.

…

We conclude, on the record before us, that the town’s prayer practice must be viewed as an endorsement of a particular religious viewpoint. This conclusion is supported by several considerations, including the prayer-giver selection process, the content of the prayers, and the contextual actions (and inactions) of prayer-givers and town officials. We emphasize that, in reaching this conclusion, we do not rely on any single aspect of the town’s prayer practice, but rather on the totality of the circumstances present in this case.

The town’s process for selecting prayer-givers virtually ensured a Christian viewpoint. Christian clergy delivered each and every one of the prayers for the first nine years of the town’s prayer practice, and nearly all of the prayers thereafter. In the town’s view, the preponderance of Christian clergy was the result of a random selection process.

So that’s where we stood last May. It was obvious that the town of Greece was promoting Christianity at their meetings. It was illegal. It should have been the end of the story. Of course, the (Christian) Alliance Defense Fund was going to appeal the ruling, but that had a snowball’s chance in hell of happening, right?

As we found out yesterday, snowballs exist in hell.

The Supreme Court granted certiorari (PDF) to the case, meaning they will hear the arguments and decide whether to accept the Court of Appeals’ ruling or overturn it:

As the SCOTUS Blog notes, the issue at hand here is:

Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that a legislative prayer practice violates the Establishment Clause notwithstanding the absence of discrimination in the selection of prayer-givers or forbidden exploitation of the prayer opportunity.

Or, in other words, even though there wasn’t outright discrimination at work here — it’s not like they said only Christians could deliver the invocations — did the City Council still violate the Constitution?

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the City Council, Christian prayers are going to be heard at city councils around the country. One of the reasons they don’t happen everywhere now is precisely because the local governments don’t want to open the door to atheists and Muslims and Wiccans and other non-Christians.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State is, of course, urging the court to uphold the Court of Appeals’ ruling (they defended Galloway and Stephens):

“A town council meeting isn’t a church service, and it shouldn’t seem like one,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Government can’t serve everyone in the community when it endorses one faith over others. That sends the clear message that some are second-class citizens based on what they believe about religion.”

Not in question here is whether the invocations should be allowed in the first place. In general, the courts have ruled that non-sectarian invocations are permissible (see Marsh v. Chambers). But non-sectarian means not just Christian, and the town of Greece has clearly violated that ideal. I would hope Christian groups join our side, too. Not that it matters how many groups are on our side, but it would make very clear that this is not a case of Atheists versus Christians. This is a case between those of us who think the government ought to stay neutral with respect to religion versus those who think the Christian majority should be able to get special privileges because of their faith.

It seems likely that the conservative bloc (Justices Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia) will support the Christian prayers. But which way will swing justice Anthony Kennedy vote? Think Progress took a stab at that one:

Kennedy has held that “government may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise,” but it is not clear that he would forbid much else under the Constitution’s ban on government establishment of religion. By the end of the next Supreme Court term, however, it is very likely that his views will carry the day.

So… they don’t really know either. The Establishment Clause is up in the air and we have no idea where it’ll land. That should freak all of us out.

Here’s the upside to all of this: This is one of those cases that unites our community without exception — virtually all of the atheist and church/state separation groups will submit amicus briefs when the time comes; a few may sit out, but no one will oppose this. None of the groups want to see a government that promotes atheism. We want the government to leave decisions about faith to private citizens and we don’t want local city councils deciding that their official religion is Christianity, even in practice if not in policy.

Yesterday, I posted about what the Foundation Beyond Belief is doing to help the people in Oklahoma and I wanted to give you more of a detailed update.

Foundation Beyond Belief will be distributing 100% of the funds raised to Operation USA and the Regional Food Bank of Oklahoma with more beneficaries added as the nature of the immediate need evolves. The money will be sent to these groups every 1-2 days for the first week.

These organizations were chosen for their long records of outstanding work, their high ratings and transparency, and their current direct work in the disaster zone addressing the primary needs of food, shelter, and medical aid.

You can donate by going here.

In addition, We Are Atheism is also raising funds that will be directly distributed to the people affected:

How can we guarantee this will go directly to people that need assistance? Well, for the first time since we started this charity, we plan to hand deliver aid to people in that town once the rescue workers leave and people try to rebuild their lives. We have local contacts that will assist us in finding those in need. We will physically spend up to a week there (if need be) to help give money and help to those that need it but haven’t gotten it.

You have options. Now, it’s time to take action.

A group of priests led more than 20,000 people to attack participants in a gay rights march in Tbilisi, Georgia on Friday, but police refuse to take the incident seriously.

Gay rights rally under attack in Georgia

The New York Times reports that, in spite of the documented attack — which sent at least 14 people to the hospital after protesters punched them, threw rocks at them, and pulled people from cars — the Georgian police have made no arrests and are showing little signs of investigating further:

Instead, a bishop who helped to organize the mass turnout — ostensibly a counterprotest — said from the pulpit that while the violence was “regrettable” and those who committed it should be punished, the Georgian Orthodox Church was obligated to protest the gay rights rally and would “not allow anyone to humiliate us.”

“When there are so many people, it is difficult to speak only about Christianity and morals,” said the bishop, Iakob Iakobashvili, in his Sunday sermon in Tbilisi. “Many were not able to overcome their nature and saw enemies in the others, said bad words and punched them. I was told clergymen were among them. I am not able to either condemn or justify them. They are also humans.”

The orthodox church holds a great deal of sway in the Georgian nation, including openly supporting Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili, who may or may not pursue prosecutions after the attack. Georgian Orthodox patriarch Ilia II is another public figure who takes it upon himself to police the morality of the nation, even at the expense of LGBT citizens:

Ilia II is widely acknowledged to be the most popular figure in the country. He offered no sermon on Sunday, but on Friday, after the violence, he urged protesters to leave the streets and for both sides “to pray for one another.”

“We do not accept violence,” he said, according to Interfax. “But it’s also unacceptable to give propaganda” to homosexuality.

A day earlier, he had urged the Georgian government to ban the gay rights march, writing that the majority of Georgians saw gay activism as “an insult.”

Perhaps most disturbing is the Times‘ reporting on Georgian citizens who see little to no issue with the violence against the gay rights activists, clearly motivated by Orthodox teachings:

Outside of the Tbilisi church where Bishop Iakobashvili spoke Sunday, Elza Kurtanidze, 34, a former schoolteacher, said that she had spent the last days “hotly” debating if those who attacked the marchers should be punished.

“We have already gone too far by having gays and lesbians openly promoting their way of life,” she said. “This is unacceptable! By allowing things like this, we let Georgia turn from the road of its traditional destiny.”

“Arrests will be too much; it will help to further excite the situation in Georgia,” she added.

Also outside the church was Leila Dzneladze, 16, who said that while she opposed the violence, she believed that the “truth was on the side of the church.”

“No one should be punished for this,” she said. “This is for God to judge them, not us.”

It is completely unacceptable to simply let this brutality slide because it aligns with a group’s religious beliefs. Religious justifications for discrimination and intolerance are bad enough, but when religion unabashedly motivates physical attacks, the potential for it to devolve into something more severe is far too great. We should be more outraged about this.

Those of you who read this site regularly are familiar with Daniel Koster, the high school student from Florida who fought back against Bible distributions at his school by having his group set up shop and pass out atheist literature. I’m sure that went over well with Christian parents not used to being challenged

Now, Daniel and members of the Wekiva Atheist and Secular Alliance are fundraising to attend this summer’s Secular Student Alliance conference in Ohio:

Because the club is made up of High School Students, many of whom are college-bound, dropping several hundred dollars on a road trip is not a viable option. We need help for gas, registration, housing, and maybe a little bit of food. Any left over funds will go toward the club’s activities in the coming school year. With your help, we can lower the cost each student has to pay to take part in this spectacular opportunity. Your donation is an investment in the future of the secular movement!

There are many deserving high school students who could use the funds for this event, but I think it’s safe to say the Wekiva students have earned it. And this is one of those conferences that will really inspire them to do even more next year. As I write this, they’re only a couple hundreds dollars off their goal, so if you’re compelled, feel free to pitch in!

The death toll from the massive tornado in Oklahoma is already above 50 and climbing and the damage financially and otherwise is likely to be staggering, too.

Like other natural disasters, people of all faith backgrounds are affected by the devastation, and while you can always donate to the Red Cross, the Foundation Beyond Belief wants to offer atheists a way to donate as a group to relief organizations that directly help the people in Oklahoma who need it the most. As always, 100% of your donations will be passed along to relief organizations:

We will name a beneficiary tomorrow, but the window for donating is now open.

Whatever you do, please do something.

God won’t make things better in Oklahoma; it’s up to us.

Everybody Draw Muhammad Day was today, but if you weren’t aware of it, you’re not alone. I chose not to “celebrate” — despite having a few readers send me their drawings — because I just wasn’t motivated enough to do it. It’s not that blasphemy laws aren’t a problem in other countries or that moderate Muslims have changed their views on the issue, but the event is a reactionary one and there wasn’t much to react to this year.

When an American cartoon is censored from showing a Muhammad character (even in disguise) like South Park was in 2010, and when artists are killed or threatened for drawing cartoons featuring Muhammad, there’s plenty of reason for all of us to come together in solidarity and draw our own versions of the Islamic prophet. The fact that Islam forbids drawings of Muhammad is irrelevant — this is about free speech, pure and simple, not about disrespecting Muslims. Yet moderate Muslims have been quick to complain that this is just a way to “marginalize a community.” Not even close. It’s a way to fight back against oppressive religious dogmas that treat symbols as sacred cows. Drawing a stick figure with a smiley face and calling it Muhammad is not bigotry. If another group believes it is, then that belief deserves to be mocked. Remember: Respect people, not their bad ideas.

Maybe we’ll draw Muhammad again next year. But I hope there’s no reason to.

Jason Cohn and Camille Servan-Schreiber first heard about Jerry DeWitt when he was profiled in the New York Times. They knew they wanted to document his story in a different way so they began speaking to him, following him, and filming him.

The result is a film called The Outcast of Beauregard Parish:

The movie is still being made and the filmmakers could use your help:

Jerry’s book is coming out in June, which is likely to change a lot of things for him. In the same week he is planning a major secular service in Baton Rouge, which may be the beginning of the humanist congregation down the road from Bobby Jindal’s statehouse. This means we will need to do a ton of filming in June. And since we are based in California, this all gets expensive fast. Your contribution will allow us to continue filming with Jerry while editing the fundraising reels that we need to approach major funders such as ITVS, Sundance, the Ford Foundation and the National Endowment for the Humanities. It’s a lot of work but we hope you’ll agree that getting Jerry’s story to the widest audience is well worth it.

If that trailer is any indication, this is going to be great. They’ve raised about $8,000 of their $30,000 goal so far, so please consider chipping in if you think this project is worthwhile.

(Thanks to Chad for the link!)

Earlier today, the U.S. State Department released the 2012 International Religious Freedom Report. The annual report sheds light on abuses of religious freedom worldwide and reinforces America’s commitment to make those freedoms “an integral part of our global diplomatic engagement.”

The report itself makes references to atheism (albeit in a very loose way):

Fifteen years ago, the U.S. Congress took a momentous step in support of religious freedom when it passed the International Religious Freedom Act, establishing within the Executive Branch the position of Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom. With this measure, the U.S. government made a bold statement on behalf of those who were oppressed, those who were persecuted, and those who were unable to live their lives at the most basic level, for the simple exercise of their faith. Whether it be a single deity, or multiple deities, or no deities at all, freedom to believe — including the freedom not to believe — is a universal human right.

Secretary of State John Kerry spoke at an event marking the release of the report and his speech, too, celebrated the freedom to not believe in God:

But freedom of religion is not an American invention. It’s a universal value. And it’s enshrined in our Constitution and ingrained in every human heart. The freedom to profess and practice one’s faith, to believe or not to believe, or to change one’s beliefs, that is a birthright of every human being. And that’s what we believe. These rights are rightly recognized under international law. The promotion of international religious freedom is a priority for President Obama, and it is a priority for me as Secretary of State. I am making certain, and will continue to, that religious freedom remains an integral part of our global diplomatic engagement.

Kerry also spoke about the problem with blasphemy laws and countries where apostates live in fear for their lives:

Lastly, another troubling trend is the increasing use of laws governing blasphemy and apostasy. These laws are frequently used to repress dissent, to harass political opponents, and to settle personal vendettas. Laws such as these violate fundamental freedoms of expression and religion, and we believe they ought to be repealed. And because we defend others’ rights of expression, we are also ensuring that we can express our own views and practice our own faith without fearing for our own safety or our own lives.

You can be cynical and say this is just a report and it doesn’t change the practices that go on in other countries, but it’s important to note that our governments recognizes these problems exist and it’s working to fix the problem. Kerry is saying that we support universal religious freedom, which includes the right to be an atheist, something many countries in the world are afraid of doing.

In his “Ask a Pastor” column, Pastor R.A. MacDonald answered this question from a reader: “How can I witness to an atheist?”

I understand why someone would want to ask that question, but MacDonald didn’t give him a well-thought-out answer. Instead, he tossed out a series of straw men and stereotypes.

Like when he explained what atheists believe:

An atheist is someone who denies the existence of God. However, before one can be an atheist and positively assert “there is no God,” (which most of us don’t) he must presumptuously assume for himself the wisdom and omnipresence of God (We don’t. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to detect religious bullshit). He must essentially be everywhere and know everything to have any confidence in his theory (Again, no). You might say that, in order to prove there is no God, you would have to be God (Nope… Does MacDonald get paid by the word?). Therefore, even the atheist believes what he believes by faith. (It takes no faith to point out what’s right in front of you: Nothing) And so the bottom line is actually, whom are you going to believe: man’s reasoning or God’s Word? (Or: Common sense or a book written by men thousands of years ago?)

The fun didn’t end there:

The Word of God makes no effort to prove God’s existence; that fact is taken for granted. The very first verse of the Bible refutes atheism…

That’s circular reason used to perfection: The Bible is true because the Bible says its true.

Finally, MacDonald gets to the question at hand. How can Christians proselytize to us?

So in order to witness to an atheist, you must use the Bible. He may not want to read it, but you can slip it in from time to time in your conversation. As is said of the beautiful, “It may be shown but not proved,” so we say of the existence of God.

That’s just bad advice.

If you’re trying to convince someone who doesn’t think the Bible is the Word of God that the Bible is the Word of God, quoting the Bible isn’t going to do the trick. Damn near every atheist can laugh off your cherry-picked verses and respond right back with others that are far more despicable, disturbing, and damning.

My experience has been that most people who claim to be atheists do so for the shock value.

And my experience has been that most pastors who claim to “know” about atheists have never spoken to any who are open about it. Because if they did, they wouldn’t have to make up reasons for why we’re atheists.

Finally, MacDonald plays his trump card:

You might use some logic.

The logic he’s referring to includes everything he learned in Apologetics 101. Like the Cosmological argument, easily refutable and very unconvincing.

I guess we should be happy that MacDonald knows of no decent way to witness to atheists because the methods he has in his toolbox are worthless.

He would have saved himself a lot of time and embarrassment if he had just responded, “Don’t bother. It won’t work.”