11.20.09
Posted in GLBT, Jesse Galef, Politics at 2:00 pm by Jesse Galef
by Jesse Galef
Do you remember how people insisted that the gays were trying to ruin marriage? Well, they succeeded in Texas. When the people of Texas passed a 2005 constitutional amendment to “protect” marriage, those clever, clever gays somehow forced them to word it poorly enough that it might prohibit ALL marriage in the state, same-sex or otherwise:
The amendment, approved by the Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by voters, declares that “marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.” But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares:
“This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”
Architects of the amendment included the clause to ban same-sex civil unions and domestic partnerships. But Radnofsky, who was a member of the powerhouse Vinson & Elkins law firm in Houston for 27 years until retiring in 2006, says the wording of Subsection B effectively “eliminates marriage in Texas,” including common-law marriages.
Why, yes, I do believe that legal recognition of marriage is a legal status “identical or similar to marriage.” By definition.
How in the world did that slip by people? It’s a pretty big deal. They might need a new constitutional amendment to fix the problem.
It’s absolutely legal to stop recognizing civil marriages. The people (through the governmental processes) can decide what relationships to grant special recognition and benefits. They decided to stop granting benefits to any relationships. Kudos for leveling the playing field for all sexual orientations, Texas!
I’m guessing it’s not what the people of Texas thought they were agreeing to. Their best options are an activist judge and revising their governing document. Which idea do you think offends Texans more?
Permalink ~
11.18.09
Posted in General, Politics at 12:00 pm by Hemant Mehta
We already know their athletes are bold. They are hosting a global atheist conference next year.
And now, we can add their politicians to the list of Reasons Australia is Better than Your Country.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says he has concerns about the Church of Scientology but wants to see what material independent senator Nick Xenophon has before committing to a parliamentary inquiry.
Senator Xenophon told Parliament today there was criminal activity within the church and has called for a Senate inquiry into Scientology’s tax exempt status.
The Prime Minister throwing his voice to the mix is interesting enough, but take a look at the speech Xenophon made in the Senate yesterday.
It’s blunt, powerful, and another major blow to the Cult of Scientology:
What we are seeing is a worldwide pattern of abuse and criminality.
On the body of evidence this is not happening by accident; it is happening by design. Scientology is not a religious organisation. It is a criminal organisation that hides behind its so-called religious beliefs.
What you believe does not mean you are not accountable for how you behave.
…
I also believe the activities of this organisation should be scrutinised by parliament because Australian taxpayers are, in effect, supporting Scientology through its tax-exempt status. I say to all Australians: as you fill in your tax return next July or August, ask yourself how you feel knowing that you are paying tax and yet this criminal organisation is not…
…
Ultimately, this is not about religious freedom. In Australia there are no limits on what you can believe. But there are limits on how you can behave. It is called the law, and no one is above it.
That’s a profile of courage for you.
Now when are some of these politicians also going to go after the Catholic Church for covering up their criminal past (and present)?
(Thanks to Julie for the link!)
Permalink ~
11.17.09
Posted in General, Politics at 5:00 pm by Hemant Mehta
The Boy Scouts of America will be honored by the U.S. Postal Service on a commemorative stamp to be released in the summer of 2010:
I won’t be buying any of those, of course, because I don’t support groups that discriminate against atheists or gays.
Unless…
Is there any way to use this stamp against them?
I would find it almost poetic if you could use a BSA stamp to send their headquarters your resignation form… if such a thing existed.
Maybe you can come up with better ideas?
Permalink ~
11.14.09
Posted in General, Politics at 6:00 am by Hemant Mehta
In the Philippines, the LGBT community is treated even worse than in America. Not coincidentally, church and state are closely intertwined.
Recent case in point:
The Commission on Elections (Comelec) on Wednesday rejected Ang Ladlad for party-list accreditation on the grounds that the party advocates “sexual immorality” and “immoral doctrines.”
Ang Ladlad is an organization of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders (LGBT).
In a ruling dated November 11, the Comelec said that although the party presented proper documents and evidence for their accreditation, their petition is “dismissable on moral grounds.”
In short, the political party for LGBT people has been dismissed and will not become official because they are being accused of “sexual immorality” and being a threat to Filipino youth.
Not surprisingly, COMELAC quoted the Bible and Koran in its ruling.
Atheist Ryan Tani is appalled by this. He and other non-theists are taking a stand:
In any case, the religious biases of three (or six) individuals should not be imposed on the millions who have their own beliefs, not to mention their own equal, unalienable human rights.
I don’t want to spend any more time talking about why COMELEC’s ruling is an atrocity. This is no longer the time for talk. It’s time to take action.
If you support Ang Ladlad, the LGBT movement, and the Human Rights movement, if you want to protect the freedom and equality granted by our secular Constitution, then join us tomorrow.
The details on that meeting can be found here.
They have an uphill climb but it makes me proud that the non-theists represent the side that supports civil rights for everyone. We’re on the right side of history, regardless of the country. Even the religious people will come along… eventually. But groups like the Filipino Freethinkers and Filipinos for Secular Government are leading the way.
(Thanks to everyone for the link!)
Permalink ~
11.13.09
Posted in GLBT, General, Politics at 6:00 am by Hemant Mehta
So let me get this straight.
Catholic Charities, a part of the Catholic Church, helps over 68,000 people in Washington D.C., including the homeless. It’s not just volunteer work — they get paid for this.
From 2006 through 2008, [council member David A.] Catania said, Catholic Charities received about $8.2 million in city contracts, as well as several hundred thousand dollars’ worth this year through his committee.
But if a new bill gets passed by the city council next month which would make it illegal for groups receiving city money to discriminate against gay people, they will be “unable to continue the social service programs“?
How bigoted do you have to be to refuse to help people because you’re more concerned about restricting rights from other people?
At least some of the city council members are speaking out:
The church’s influence seems limited. In separate interviews Wednesday, council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) referred to the church as “somewhat childish.” Another council member, David A. Catania (I-At Large), said he would rather end the city’s relationship with the church than give in to its demands.
“They don’t represent, in my mind, an indispensable component of our social services infrastructure,” said Catania, the sponsor of the same-sex marriage bill and the chairman of the Health Committee.
End the relationship. Good riddance. Hopefully, other groups will step in to fill in the hole.
Listen to how Susan Gibbs, the spokesperson for the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, defends the Church’s actions:
She said religious groups that receive city funds would be required to give same-sex couples medical benefits, open adoptions to same-sex couples and rent a church hall to a support group for lesbian couples.
Which makes sense. I think it was Jesus who said, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven… unless you treat the gays with any dignity.”
(Thanks to Steve for the link)
Permalink ~
11.11.09
Posted in General, Lawsuits, Politics at 5:13 pm by Hemant Mehta
South Carolina Lt. Governor Andre Bauer is quite pissed off that a judge ruled the “I Believe” license plates were unconstitutional.
He writes on his website:
For those who say proclaiming “I believe” violates the constitution by giving preference to Christianity, I think this lawsuit clearly discriminates against persons of faith. I will ask the state Attorney General to vigorously appeal this ruling because it is time that people stand up for their beliefs. Enough is enough.
This is absurd. As Sandhya Bathija of Americans United writes, “This lawsuit actually prevents discrimination against persons of faith, and that’s more than evident.”
Bauer goes on:
I could say that this is yet another example of judicial activism, of federal judges out of control. My instincts tell me that it’s even deeper than that. I think it’s another attack on Christianity and I’m not going to sit by and watch this one happen.
Someone should tell Bauer that two of the plaintiffs, Rev. Tom Summers and Rev. Monty Knight, are Christians…
In fact, here’s what Summers said about the case:
“I received some emails that asked how I, as a Christian minister, could be involved with this,” Summers said.
“But what I told them is that it is very Christian to be involved in a matter like this,” Summers continued. “One of the core values of Christianity is equality and fairness. This case is wrapped up on a human level on the issue of fairness. For a license plate to be displayed that is government sanctioned only for one faith group, it makes other faith groups in our state feel very isolated.”
What does Bauer say about this again?
… I think it’s another attack on Christianity and I’m not going to sit by and watch this one happen.
Right.
One more excerpt from Bauer:
I am proud and unrelenting in my support of the Legislature’s unanimous enactment of this plate.
Why? Because the “I believe” plate reflects core values that are meaningful to our society, promoting love, joy, and comfort in our spiritual lives, and accommodating to every citizen’s right of free exercise of any and all religions
All religions? Then why is there a Christian cross on the plate? And what about people of no faith?
Bauer doesn’t care. He doesn’t get the notion that there are people who don’t subscribe to Christianity and some of us who find Christian beliefs offensive.
Separation of church and state benefits everybody. There’s no need for the state to issue this license plate. The judge made the right decision and Bauer doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
The Lt. Gov. also mentions he doesn’t like how the judge awarded AU and another group their rightful attorneys’ fees. Bathija has a suggestion for him:
In the end, Bauer claims he is “offended” that Americans United was rewarded attorneys’ fees in this case. Well, here’s some advice to him and the South Carolina legislature on how to avoid that in the future: stop violating the Constitution.
Permalink ~
Posted in General, Politics at 3:03 pm by Hemant Mehta
This is a perfect example of how the Religious Right spins the news in a way that deceives people.
They know their followers are gullible and will believe what they are told. They know their followers won’t bother doing research to factcheck what is being reported. They know they can get away with it within their own community.
Thankfully, the rest of us can call them out on their bullshit.
Take a look at this lede from a OneNewsNow article on abstinence-only sex education:
An abstinence advocate says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control shows that abstinence education is delaying sex among teens.
They quote Valerie Huber, executive director of the National Abstinence Education Association. What does her group’s press release say?
CDC Data Shows Abstinence Education Works
Abstinence education is delaying sex among teens. Data from an analysis conducted by the CDC shows positive evidence that abstinence education is delivering an effective message. These positive findings should be incorporated in any policy designed to reduce teen sexual activity in our nation,” noted Valerie Huber, Executive Director of NAEA. “This is a time to assess what is working and capitalize on solutions that make a difference in the lives of youth.”
They say that abstinence education works because it delays sex among teens… as if having sex a little later in life is going to fix everything. Notice they don’t mention anything about diseases or pregnancy or the overall effect of abstinence education.
So let’s go to the source — the report that is being referenced, a meta-analysis of CDC data (PDF). Note that the emphasis is theirs, not mine:
What follows represents our minority opinion as members of this study’s External Partners consultant panel and does not represent the views of the CDC or the Adolescent Sex Behavior Coordination Team.
…
The Task Force has made public its Recommendation Statements without also making available to the public the full set of study findings upon which the recommendations are based — both supporting and otherwise. The reason given for this decision is that the data from the study has not yet been scientifically cleared by the CDC for release to the public.
I wonder if there’s a more reliable source that will tell me what the CDC actually had to say about abstinence-only sex education…
Let’s go to WebMD’s Daniel J. DeNoon, who says something quite different:
Experts Find “Insufficient Evidence” for Abstinence-Only Programs
Nov. 6, 2009 — There’s no evidence that abstinence-only sexual education programs cut teens’ risk of sexually transmitted disease, HIV, or pregnancy, a task force of public health experts finds.
…
The CDC will publish the findings in a scientific journal in about a year’s time. But the task force today released its bottom-line recommendations:
…
- On abstinence-only strategies: “The task force concludes that there is insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of group-based abstinence education delivered to adolescents to prevent pregnancy, HIV, and other sexually transmitted diseases.”
“The finding of insufficient evidence [for abstinence-based sex ed] really means that based on the evidence available, the task force could not come to any conclusions,” Randy Elder, PhD, the CDC’s scientific director of systematic reviews, tells WebMD. “It is really a big question mark, with the implication being we need more research in this area before we can make any determination whether this intervention does or doesn’t work.”
So while it may delay sex for a bit, it does little to help in every other area. Isn’t that a strike against abstinence-only sex education? Wouldn’t it make more sense to teach abstinence along with information about birth control and condoms?
I mean, what’s more important: having safer sex at a younger age or having unsafe sex at a slightly older age?
My money’s easily on the first option. I’m not advocating sex for minors, but if people are going to have it, better to do it safely.
The Washington Post quotes Elder once again:
Randy Elder of the CDC, who works with the task force, disputed [the minority] argument, saying the critics’ case was flawed.
“All of those points were considered by the task force. They reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of a systematic review process,” he said. “The whole point of what we are doing is to aggregate data from as many studies that are critical to answering the question. What they were doing was chopping up the evidence into very fine subsets to poke holes.”
So there are two people in a large panel who think abstinence-only education works because of results in one area. The panel itself says when all the data is considered — not just a select handful of studies looking at one factor — there’s insufficient evidence in favor of abstinence-only sex education.
Moral of the story: the conservative media says abstinence-only sex education works like a charm.
You see how this works?
It’s gotten to the point where I just assume whatever the religious right says is a lie. Then I do 10 seconds of research to find the truth.
Permalink ~
Posted in General, Lawsuits, Politics at 6:00 am by Hemant Mehta
Last time the South Carolina license plates which promote Christianity were in the courtroom, an injunction was handed down, preventing the plates from being issued.
Nearly a year later, the plates were back in the courtroom, and this time, the same judge says the plates are unconstitutional (PDF):
Whether motivated by sincerely held Christian beliefs or an effort to purchase political capital with religious coin, the result is the same,” Currie wrote. “The statute is clearly unconstitutional and defense of its implementation has embroiled the state in unnecessary (and expensive) litigation.
Besides the obvious reason this there is an entanglement of church and state, why is the plate a bad idea? Because not all faiths get the same opportunity. Some state legislators even said they “would not vote for similar plates for minority faiths.”
Meanwhile, there’s no problem with the “In Reason We Trust” plates sponsored by the Secular Humanists of the Low Country. If you want it, you pay for it. Taxpayer money isn’t involved.
For some reason, the Christians pushing this “I Believe” plate think everyone else ought to pay for promotion of their religion. It’s pathetic and it’s illegal.
Thankfully, the judge has now put a stop to it.
Permalink ~
11.10.09
Posted in General, Lawsuits, Politics at 4:00 pm by Hemant Mehta
Forsyth County in North Carolina could owe about $100,000 in legal fees if a federal judge finds them liable for promoting Christianity at their regular meetings. All of this could’ve been avoided if they simply used their common sense and kept religion out of the government.
A federal magistrate has recommended that prayers referencing Jesus and other sectarian deities made before meetings of the Forsyth County Commissioners are unconstitutional.
The decision, by Magistrate Judge P. Trevor Sharp, was in favor of the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit against Forsyth County on behalf of Janet Joyner and Constance Blackmon, residents of Forsyth County who have attended commissioners’ meetings.
“The defendant’s prayer alienates those whose beliefs differ from Christian beliefs and divides citizens along religious lines,” said Katy Parker, one of the attorneys with the ACLU.
“The government has to remain neutral on matters of religion, and that’s what the Establishment Clause is all about — that the government can’t pick sides,” she said.
Other cities are sometimes allowed to get away with this because they invite people from several religious faiths and no faith at all — and all of them may only give a non-sectarian prayer, that is, no mention of one particular deity or another.
That wasn’t the case here, though. The magistrate’s decision is precise and blunt (PDF) in explaining how Jesus-centric Forsyth County prayers were:
The undisputed record shows that the prayers delivered at the outset of Board meetings from May 29, 2007 through December 15, 2008 referred to Jesus, Jesus Christ, Christ, or Savior with overwhelming frequency… No non- Christian deities are invoked… These prayers as a whole cannot be considered non- sectarian or civil prayer. They display a preference for Christianity over other religions by the government.
“Overwhelming frequency” means 26 out of 33 invocations contained a reference to Jesus or the like.
Again, this is an easy problem to fix.
Remove prayers before meetings.
You want to pray? Do it on your own time. You don’t need to force the rest of the city (or at least those who attend meetings) to do it with you. Why is that so damn difficult to comprehend?
But apparently, the requirement that religion be kept private is too much for these Christians to deal with. The Alliance Defense Fund (defending the county) has not yet released a statement on the matter as far as I can tell…
(Thanks to Michael for the link)
Permalink ~
11.08.09
Posted in General, Military Atheists, Politics at 6:00 am by Hemant Mehta
During his Inaugural Address, President Obama gave a shout-out to us:
“For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non-believers.”
It could be considered lip-service (and nothing more, some could argue) but it was a meaningful gesture for a lot of us.
Yesterday, he did it again.
While addressing the massacre at Fort Hood during his radio address, President Obama made this comment:
“Thursday’s shooting was one of the most devastating ever committed on an American military base,” Mr. Obama said in prepared remarks. “And yet, even as we saw the worst of human nature on full display, we also saw the best of America.”
Mr. Obama was also quick to note the diversity of U.S. military personnel. “They are Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and nonbelievers,” he said. Mr. Hasan, a Muslim, was scheduled to be deployed to Afghanistan.
Again, it may not seem like much, but it goes a long way to combatting the stereotype that there are no atheists serving the military. I’m glad he did it and I hope he continues to include in when talking about the diversity of viewpoints in America.
American Atheists president Ed Buckner was also thrilled to hear it (via email alert):
We thank the president for including us in the diverse population that is the people of the United States. We appreciate the fact that President Obama has acknowledged what we have always known: Of course there are Atheists in foxholes, and there are and always have been men and women who have worn the uniform of this nation and have served with courage in the military and in many other ways.”
We should still go after the President for encouraging faith-based initiatives and the like, but he deserves our appreciation when he does something right. This is one of those gestures that can make a big difference.
Permalink ~
« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »
