The Bad Faith Award is given out by New Humanist magazine and it goes to “the person who has made the year’s most outstanding contribution to talking unadulterated (and often destructive) nonsense about matters of religion.”
It looks like your money will continue to have “In God We Trust” written on it.
The lawsuit filed by atheist Carlos Kidd against President Obama and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve to remove the motto from the currency was dismissed by a judge earlier this week.
The brief ruling by the judge said that there was no Establishment Clause conflict based on previous church/state separation cases.
I’m no lawyer… but how is that phrase not an endorsement of religion over non-religion? (Not only that, you know the phrase refers to the Christian god…)
It’s not the most pressing issue atheists have to worry about — we still have to fight against faith-based initiatives, for one — and I would think it virtually impossible to get the phrase off our currency anytime soon, but this is a lawsuit I don’t mind seeing.
Some could argue that it’s yet another case that will set a precedent for the future — a lawsuit that will hurt our future efforts in this area.
Still, I see an upside. Lawsuits like this can get blasted by the media and bloggers. But it raises the question of why that phrase is on the currency in the first place. People start to read up on why the phrase was adopted by our country as its motto — in response to those “Godless Communists” — and why it was originally put on our coins in the 1860s.
Why was it, you ask? Here’s a piece of the letter from Rev. M. R. Watkinson, Minister of the Gospel from Ridleyville, Pennsylvania to Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase which urged the Secretary to put holy words on the coins:
Dear Sir: You are about to submit your annual report to the Congress respecting the affairs of the national finances.
One fact touching our currency has hitherto been seriously overlooked. I mean the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins.
…
This would make a beautiful coin, to which no possible citizen could object. This would relieve us from the ignominy of heathenism. This would place us openly under the Divine protection we have personally claimed. From my hearth I have felt our national shame in disowning God as not the least of our present national disasters.
A couple years later, “In God We Trust” was adopted. It went away for a little while, but it’s been there since the 1950s.
How is that phrase not Christian? How is it not a violation of church/state separation? How is it not a violation of the Establishment Clause?
The judge was wrong, plain and simple.
And, yes, so were all those other judges before him.
The late senator Kennedy used to be quite good on separation of church and state issues, but he had a weakness for helping Christian Science. Call me cynical if you like, but it might have to do with the fact that the Church of Christ, Scientist is based in Boston and has political clout. Now that John Kerry is the senior senator in Massachusetts, he’s taking over where Kennedy left off. The LATimes reports:
Backed by some of the most powerful members of the Senate, a little-noticed provision in the healthcare overhaul bill would require insurers to consider covering Christian Science prayer treatments as medical expenses.
The provision was inserted by Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) with the support of Democratic Sens. John F. Kerry and the late Edward M. Kennedy, both of Massachusetts, home to the headquarters of the Church of Christ, Scientist.
The measure would put Christian Science prayer treatments — which substitute for or supplement medical treatments — on the same footing as clinical medicine. While not mentioning the church by name, it would prohibit discrimination against “religious and spiritual healthcare.”
Yes, this is obviously nonsense. While I expected this of Hatch, Kerry typically gets it right. But don’t be disheartened! When I worked for the Secular Coalition, we were lobbying on this issue - as it turns out, there was some positive news on the House side last week:
The Secular Coalition for America is thrilled that the House of Representatives has decided to remove language found in all three draft bills that would require private and public plans to cover the spiritual care of individuals with religious objections to medical care.
Today the House released their version of the health care reform bill that did not include language requiring private and public health plans to cover spiritual care for any person. This “spiritual care” includes reimbursements for payments that Christian Scientists make to members of the Church who pray for them when they are ill.
So! Here’s where we stand: the offending provision will probably be in the final Senate bill – it has the cover of being a bipartisan effort and that chamber is less favorable to our issues. But it isn’t in the House versions. Before a full vote, it will be up to the party leadership to reconcile the versions – that’s where the real decision will be made.
There’s hope yet, although it would be nice if we didn’t have to keep fighting for minor victories in what is already supposed to be a secular government.
We humans are so intent on finding meaning in things that we have a tendency to find it even where none was intended. It’s what we call a false positive and it happens all the time. We often hear about people seeing the Jesus or the virgin Mary in a particular piece of toast, water stain, or IKEA bathroom woodwork. But we usually associate it with images, not words, making this story about Governor Schwarzenegger particularly valuable.
It turns out that Schwarzenegger sent a veto letter to the state legislature. This is nothing out of the ordinary and wouldn’t be worth my mentioning, so you must know that there’s more of the story to come. No, it’s the “secret message” that got attention – see if you can find it (image from the San Francisco Bay Guardian):
But wait — there’s a real message, an actual missive from the Gov to Tom, embedded in this text. And it’s not hard to find — in fact, it’s hard to believe it could have been a coincidence.
Read down the letters on the left side of the message
If you read along the left-most column and take the first letter of each line, you get “I fuck you”. This was seen as a dastardly and immature prank. But I’m betting that the odds of a ‘coincidence’ like this are higher than intuition suggests.
To be honest, I’m not particularly interested in whether of not the message was intended, but the story does raise an interesting question: how likely are we to find a “hidden message” where none was intended?
It’s absolutely possible that the message was deliberate – I certainly used to do that sort of thing in my English papers (I hated the classes and needed some creative way to keep the projects interesting). There are also other important factors – there was a feud between the governor and the politician in question, the wording is stilted, etc. But as it stands, I’m not willing to rule out the null hypothesis (a hilarious coincidence) quite yet.
It looks like Brad Johnson at the Wonk Room tried the kind of analysis I was envisioning. He says the odds of that particular phrase are about 1 in a trillion, taking into account the likelihood of different letters being the start of each word.
Now, the likelihood that some phrase would be spelled out? Ignoring letter distribution, there’s about a 0.3% chance any four letter string is a common English word, and a 3% chance any three letter string is a common English word. The specific likelihood of the words “soap” and “poet” appearing, for example, given the Schwarzenegger speeches, is one in 100,000 — much greater than the one in 10 million shot of “fuck” appearing.
As letter distribution would make the appearance of common words more likely (e.g. “teas”), the probability of some two-word combination appearing is on the order of two percent. The likelihood of it making any sense, of course, is smaller. A more accurate estimation is left to the reader.
Good to see there are fellow nerds in the world interested in spending time on the question! But what’s missing from Brad’s analysis is the possibility of messages hidden other ways – we would be similarly remarking had the message been at the end of each line instead of the beginning. Or had the message been in the first letter of consecutive words. Or the last letter of consecutive words. Or in another language. Or backwards. This would surely increase the potential for “hidden” messages dramatically.
I should see how often “hidden messages” appear in the Bible.
This is a job for Python! Quick – to the bat-computer lab!
After decades in which Christian crosses were placed in public school classrooms in Italy, it looks like they’ll finally be taken down.
The decision was handed down by a panel of seven judges at the court in Strasbourg. They said that the display of crucifixes, which is common but not mandatory in Italian schools, violated the principle of secular education and might be intimidating for children from other faiths.
“The presence of the crucifix could be … disturbing for pupils who practiced other religions or were atheists, particularly if they belonged to religious minorities,” the court said. “The compulsory display of a symbol of a given confession in premises used by the public authorities… restricted the right of parents to educate their children in conformity with their convictions,” it added.
Crucifixes were an undeniable symbol of Catholicism, the court ruled, and as such were at odds with the principle of “educational pluralism.”
It’s a good move, of course — Get rid of the faith and focus on achieving a real education based in fact.
Not so surprisingly, not everyone is happy with this decision:
The newly-elected head of the main opposition Democratic Party, Pierluigi Bersani, commented that the ruling lacked common sense. “I think a longstanding tradition like the crucifix can’t be offensive to anyone,” he said.
Right… Unless the cross symbolizes how hundreds of millions of people around the world firmly believe you are going to spend eternity in hell because you prefer to think with your brain and not your heart.
Another upside to this decision is that it could start a trend, removing crosses (and other symbols of faith) all across Europe.
Which shouldn’t be a big deal at all. They’re unnecessary in public schools. Keep them at home or church. Good riddance.
I know there are more important elections happening out there right now (you did vote No on 1 if you live in Maine, right?), but there’s an update on the City Council race in Asheville, NC.
Challengers Esther Manheimer, Gordon Smith and Cecil Bothwell are virtually assured of election in the race for three open seats on City Council with all but one of the city’s 37 precincts reporting.
It’s not an official done deal yet, but it’s looking good.
Another openly-atheist politician has won on Election Day.
This wasn’t about his atheism pulling him over the top. This was about his atheism not bringing him down. It didn’t, and that’s good news for all of us.
It offers a bit of hope for other atheists who may soon run for local office.
The Los Angeles Police Department wants to stop working with the organization that runs its Explorer program for youths because the group is linked to Boy Scouts of America, which bans gays from becoming members.
The organization, Learning for Life, was spun off from Boy Scouts of America.
A department official told the Police Commission Tuesday that the Boy Scouts policy is “inconsistent” with the city’s policy of non-discrimination. He suggested that the department manages the Explorer program itself.
Learning for Life officials say the organization does not discriminate and does not take funds from the Boy Scouts.
They ban atheists, too, even though that’s not mentioned in the piece above. And that that last comment from Learning for Life officials skews the truth. There may be no funding from the Boy Scouts directly, but there is definitely a connection with them.
Unfortunately, there is one significant problem with the Explorer Program. In Los Angeles, the Explorer Programs are administered by a city contractor that in turn subcontracts with the Boy Scouts to administer the programs. The problem is that the Boy Scouts openly proclaim their right to discriminate based on sexual orientation and religion. I know first-hand the significant value of the Explorers Programs to the LAPD and for the young men and women who participate. But no matter how valuable the programs, that value is no justification for them to be administered by an agency that does not comply with the city’s non-discrimination laws.
This is an easy issue for the Boy Scouts to fix. Just revoke any policy that forbids gays and atheists from joining and leading the troops. That means changing their Oath and Law. It should’ve happened a long time ago, but it’s not to late to fix their misguided ways.
Until they do, however (and I’m not holding my breath), they should be constantly referred to as a discriminatory group and government organizations should refuse to work with them.
Individual parents would be well-served not to let their children join such a group, either.
He’s described as a “writer, environmentalist, builder, war protestor, gadfly”… and atheist.
As a journalist, Bothwell often focused on former Buncombe County Sheriff Bobby Medford, and takes much credit for Medford’s prosecution as part of an illegal gambling ring.
Writings on Medford led to death threats, Bothwell said, and the stuff of one book. In another book, “The Prince of War,” he targets Graham, saying the world-famous evangelist from Montreat was using access to U.S. presidents to push a theocratic agenda.
Bothwell’s political opponents fired back with a mailed-out flier pointing to statements Bothwell made about his own atheism. Bothwell said they’re not wrong. His spiritual beliefs focus on “the golden rule” as opposed to a deity, he said.
As for the mailer, he said it’s helped book sales. “My campaign is offering either of the two books…for a donation of 25 bucks. We’re throwing the books at them.”
What “mailed-out flier” are they talking about? Check it out — it’s fantastic:
“I suppose that I should also acknowledge that I will find myself labeled as Satan’s helper, instrument, vehicle and a whole lot more upon publication of this work. So, for the record, I don’t believe in supernatural beings of any stripe… It seems to me that belief in gods has caused a whole lot more problems than it has solved… I don’t believe in any of the religious stories of the origin of the universe and I don’t look to priests for my moral answers.”
That attack mailer was paid for out by “Common Sense in government, Cecil Cantrell, Treasurer.” I’m not sure who that is, but the mailer is backfiring.
Ironically, it ends with this lovely quotation:
We need levelheaded common sense leaders on city council, not a radical extremist.
Which is why we should be supporting atheist candidates who have a strong, progressive agenda.
I don’t know whether Bothwell is the best candidate or not in this race, but a look at his platform suggests he is a levelheaded, common sense sort of guy. I wouldn’t vote for him only because of his atheism, but you have to admire any atheist who is willing to run for public office without shying away from that label.
Bothwell’s response about following the “Golden Rule” is precisely what we ought to be hearing from future atheist candidates — not a denial of their atheism, but the idea that they can indeed be good without a god.
You remember the “atheist” mailer sent out by Albuquerque City Councilor Don Harris when he was trying to smear his opponent David Barbour by outing him as a capital-A atheist and criticizing his donation for a science scholarship?
In case you missed it, Harris issued an apology for his actions on this site. He had some issues with how I approached the issue, but he did acknowledge doing something he shouldn’t have and I sincerely believe he feels remorseful about it.
In e-mails to readers of a popular Atheist blog, City Councilor Don Harris recently apologized for attempting to use his opponent’s religion against him, saying he had “learned a great deal,” from the experience.
…
In an interview with the Independent, Harris said that once NMI’s stories about his mailer were picked up by FriendlyAtheist, he got “a fair bit of e-mail.”
“Although the safest course would be to leave it alone, I felt compelled to at least write the people back who took the time to write to me, and to post something on their site, which several of them asked me to do,” Harris told the Independent.
“I was reminded that the decisions that one makes when running for office and being in office are not simple ones, and they can have unexpected consequences. Being true to one’s own principles, while respecting the principles of others’, as a public official is a delicate balance. Political campaigns are by definition divisive; then after the election some healing and mending fences may be in order. That was the case here,” he wrote, adding, “I’m just doing the best I can.”
The article also says I “did not reply to an e-mail from the Independent requesting an interview.” Not sure what happened there, since I would’ve replied to that. I didn’t get their email, though. (I sent them a message letting them know that.)
…
I’ve learned a few lessons from this whole back-and-forth with Harris:
It’s not yet a taboo to use the word “atheist” as slander. We haven’t reached the level of respectability within public opinion that we deserve.
Politicians don’t always know why we get upset when they use “atheist” in a derogatory way. We need to let them know that’s bigotry.
Some politicians actually listen to what we atheists have to say — and respond in kind.
The way to fix this sort of problem is to write letters, contact the politicians, spread the message, and NOT let these stories slip under the radar.
Many thanks to all of you who didn’t let this story die and who carried on email conversations with Mr. Harris during this process.
There’s some good news for California teacher Jim Corbett, who was accused by his former student Chad Farnan of making anti-Christian comments during history class.
The clerk’s office in federal district court in Santa Anna, California has determined that nearly $20,000 in court costs should be borne by high school student Chad Farnan…
The fees are to be paid by Advocates for Faith & Freedom, a Christian legal group that represented Farnan pro-bono. The school district and teachers’ union, whose attorneys also represented Corbett, now plan to file a motion to recover over $378,000 in attorneys’ fees.
This case is complicated to figure out. Corbett was found to have violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
The school district and Corbett, at separate hearings, were found to be not liable for Corbett’s actions because of his “qualified immunity defense.”
And now, Farnan’s legal team has to pay the court costs.
Corbett’s team is still seeking to recover attorney’s fees ($378,519) and it’s possible that Advocates for Faith & Freedom will have to pay that again. Not surprisingly, they’re appealing.
Secular Student Alliance Member Todd Stiefel has agreed to match all donations to us by 12/21/2009 up to a total of $50,000. Double the value of your support and help us get the whole match by donating now.
