The setup: Juliane Koepcke is getting aboard a flight with her mother on Christmas Eve in 1971:

The flight was supposed to last for less than an hour and for the first 25 minutes everything was fine, Koepcke recalled.

“Then we flew into heavy clouds and the plane started shaking. My mother was very nervous. Then to the right we saw a bright flash and the plane went into a nose dive. My mother said, ‘This is it!’”

An accident investigation later found that one of the fuel tanks of the Lockheed Electra had been hit by a bolt of lightning which had torn the right wing off.

“We were headed straight down. Christmas presents were flying around the cabin and I could hear people screaming.”

Koepcke fell two miles into the jungle and managed to survive.

In any other article, that’d be called a miracle and someone would be invoking the name of God…

What did Koepcke say?

Koepcke says she is not a spiritual person and has tried to find logical explanations for why she survived.

“Maybe it was the fact that I was still attached to a whole row of seats,” she says. “It was rotating much like the helicopter and that might have slowed the fall. Also, the place I landed had very thick foliage and that might have lessened the impact.”

Wow. Lucky and rational. I love it.

(Thanks to Shawn and Jeff for the link!)

(Thanks to Reed for the link!)

Specifically, I’d like to discuss whether an atheist and theist couple can make things work. Should they consider dating at all? Or should we try to avoid that at all costs?

If you’ve made a theist/atheist relationship work, how did you do it? What advice do you have for others?

If you only date other atheists, why?

You’re welcome to post your thoughts in the comments or send them to me personally.

Personal stories would be ideal

I’ll respect any requests for anonymity.

Thanks in advance!

The situation in that posting was that young teenage girls were duped into having sex with an older man. He worked his way into their lives and used tarot cards to influence them into letting him do what he wanted with them.

The thread among the comments is that all the blame should be on the old man. The young girls were taken advantage of, and even through they willingly did stuff with the man (as opposed to being forced to do it), they shouldn’t be blamed for not having the experience or judgment to know any better. Fair enough.

Let me suggest a slightly different scenario.

Same story. Man dupes women into having sex with him using Tarot cards. But this time, the victims are all 24-years-old.

The old man is still a monster, no doubt. Again, I’m not letting him off the hook by any means. He deserves to be locked away for a long time.

But in this case, how much culpability can be placed on the women?

Fell asleep through Lord of the Rings (friends made me watch the Extended Editions).

Never understood the appeal of Star Wars (the first one I saw was Episode 2… I went with friends to the theater against my will).

I have yet to see an episode of Doctor Who (sorry, Richard Dawkins).

And I’ve only seen one episode of Star Trek. It was on a first date. Her idea. It was also our last date. My idea.

But maybe I should’ve given that show another shot.

In the latest issue of The Humanist, Nick Farrantello writes about how “Star Trek Made Me an Atheist“:

And so as a boy I found it increasingly hard to understand why Christians weren’t acting the way Kirk and Spock were. If there was a God, some being causing earthquakes and hurling hurricanes, why wouldn’t Christians (or Jews or Muslims for that matter) fight against such a being? What I was learning on Star Trek seemed more moral to me than what I was learning in church. As I got older and learned more about suffering around the world, the more I wondered why religious people didn’t oppose such a cruel God. These holy men should be up in arms, I thought. If they were faithful Star Trek watchers, they would be trying to build some sort of giant phaser to take him out.

…

When you first watch Star Trek it’s this campy sci-fi show that occasionally takes some not-so-subtle potshots at religion. At a very young age it made me question the nature of God even to the point of questioning his (her or its) very existence. And it showed me that those questions were okay to pose, that there were other people out there like me, asking the same questions. But then Roddenberry’s campy little show goes so much farther. It explores what it means to be human. It is a message of hope for the future of our species and an expression of pride in all of humanity. Through it, I learned that although people aren’t perfect, it is that striving to be better (the voyage) that makes us special…

(via The Humanist)

We need a syndicated atheist advice columnist. I nominate Richard Wade. Any reader who checks out his comments on this site knows what I’m talking about.

At first I just laughed. Hemant’s kidding, right? An advice columnist? An agony aunt? But then my imagination started running. I love reading this blog and interacting with people here every day. I really can’t stay away. I comment about the posts or other’s comments far more often than I post my own articles. I much more prefer to respond to the issues that others bring up, and I especially like the “people” issues, such as atheist-Christian marriages, the problems of coming out as an atheist to loved ones, or the feelings of grief sometimes felt early in an atheist’s emancipation from god belief.

So I thought, okay, why not? I’m a retired marriage and family counselor, I’ve counseled tens of thousands of people, I’ve heard and seen things that would shock most people into tears and retching at the same time, and I’ve survived many more days of life than most of the readers who frequent this site. So maybe I can help someone, and with the input of others, we can help each other and have fun doing it.

So we’re launching a special section, “Ask Richard: Advice from an atheist”.

Anyone, atheist or not, can anonymously send in a detailed description of some life problem that is vexing and perplexing you (No, I can’t help you get your browser to work right), and I’ll respond with as much respect, compassion and clarity as I humanly can. Including pertinent details such as your age, sex, financial situation, etc. will help me be more precise and less “iffy.” The problems need not always be atheist-oriented, and my responses might not always be strictly an “atheist” response per se, whatever that is. My viewpoint grows from a lifetime of skepticism, rationalism and a pragmatic attitude that life should be faced with equal measures of courage and humor.

Although I’ve been known to joke around often, I’ll be taking your questions seriously, so I ask you to not submit frivolous or contrived questions that don’t represent a real situation that you’re facing. I’ll respond to those privately via your email address, but I won’t publish them if I think they’re B.S.

Unless you clearly state otherwise, your identity will be kept strictly confidential. Give yourself a pseudonym that is related to the problem you’ve presented, like those you see on newspaper advice columns.

There will be a comments section after each posting for readers to agree or disagree with my advice, but much more importantly, to offer their own ideas and experience on the topic.

You can send your questions to

I think many of us can enjoy and benefit from this.

Richard

Those atheists are not named Rob Sherman. He decked out his entire Sherman-mobile:

He’s promoting his blog.

And himself

And he’ll be driving in the fourth of July parades in various Chicago suburbs.

If he accidentally runs over a Christian child, our entire movement will be set back four centuries.

…

According to Michael Miner of the Chicago Reader, Chicago Now pays its bloggers $5 per 1,000 hits.

I wonder: What do the Science Bloggers get? Is it comparable?

And how do I get me a piece of that action?

Recently, FLASH put up this billboard:

I realize many of you dislike the color scheme… but the billboard is already provoking discussion. Many in the community don’t like it.

WSVN, a local FOX affiliate, reported on the controversy and found the most ridiculous people to interview in opposition to the billboard:

Here’s a partial transcript of another piece by the same station, featuring some of the same clips (Pops out):

Essie “Big Mama” Reed: Is that sign telling the truth?

Kids: NO!

Reed: And how do we feel about that sign?

Kids: BAD!

Reed: And it need to come where?

Kids: DOWN!

Reed: We need this sign taken what?

Kids: DOWN!

Reed: In the name of Jesus.

…

Reed: I don’t know what their reason why putting this sign up. And then it says ‘Do Not Believe in God.’ How we gonna make it? Look at our schools every day. Every day, is something going on. Kids out here are killing each other. Kids out here are using drugs. Who else they gonna believe in?

Actually, Reed might want to learn some grammar. There’s a question mark after “Don’t believe in God”… it’s a call out to people who already don’t believe in one, not a command for others to stop believing in one.

Instead of believing in a higher power, it would be more effective to take some action and try fixing the problem from within. Get the troubled kids a proper education, get them working, get them some positive role models. It’s easier said than done, but those things would be far more effective than sitting around and blaming atheists for getting you to think about what you believe.

And is anyone else disturbed by the kids parroting whatever she wants them to say?

That’s why we need the billboard and people like Ken promoting freethought.

The not-so-major-but-kinda-interesting revelations:

• He is considering choosing a group of churches in Washington, rather than a single congregation, to reduce the impact of his presence on any one community.
• Joshua DuBois, the president’s faith adviser, sends Obama’s BlackBerry a devotional prayer each morning for the president to reflect on.
• Quote: “I think it’s clear that [members of the gay and lesbian community] feel victimized in fairly powerful ways and they’re often hurt by not just certain teachings of the Catholic Church, but the Christian faith generally.”

There’s plenty more information here.

It turns out his past is still coming back to haunt him.

After the whole Haggard debacle died down, Mike tried to get his life back on track. He went back to school and became certified as a Nursing Assistant.

Two weeks ago, he got a job with Christian Living Communities. That came to an end quickly…

Mike writes in an email to me:

… The residents loved me and several staff members commented on what a wonderful job I was doing.

Well today I got fired. The pulled me into the office with tons of stuff they pulled off the internet about me and a copy of my book. They said they could not have a person like me working for them. I asked them: Is it not Christian that people can turn their life around and given a second chance? They would not respond to that and told me they had no use for my type.

His “type”? Do they mean gay?

I’m not sure how Jones’ past has any bearing on his ability to do the work for which he’s getting paid. Neither does his sexuality.

Updates to follow; hopefully, good ones.