Hemant Mehta's Blog, page 1842

Churches Are Great at Outreach (Seriously)

The video below, part of The Atheist Voice series, discusses how churches are great at outreach (seriously):

This is an excerpt from a longer video, which can be seen here.

A rough transcript of the video can be found on the YouTube page in the “About” section.

We’d love to hear your thoughts on the project — more videos will be posted soon — and we’d also appreciate your suggestions as to which questions we ought to tackle next!

And if you like what you’re seeing, please consider supporting this site on Patreon.

Dish TV Removes Fox News From Channel Lineup … But It’s Likely Only Temporary

If this situation were permanent, the average Dish subscriber’s IQ could well jump by 50 points.

Dish Network subscribers were unable to watch Fox News Channel and the Fox Business Network on Sunday when the channels were taken down as part of contract negotiations.

The Fox blackout is just the latest skirmish as cable and satellite TV providers fight with networks over subscription fees. Dish Network just settled disputes that led to the temporary blackout of some local CBS stations and a separate blackout related to Turner Broadcasting channels — including Cartoon Network, CNN, Boomerang and Turner Classic Movies.

Fox is urging viewers with emails and tweets to switch to another TV provider. Dish has more than 14 million satellite TV customers.

That’s 14 million Americans who, at this critical time, will be bereft of Bill O’Reilly‘s angry salvos against the “War On Christmas.” Oh, the humanity!

I Don’t Think These Atheists Understand the Whole “War on Christmas” Thing

The St. Paul Pioneer Press has a story about atheists during Christmas and it’s… surprisingly upbeat and positive!

Atheist soldiers in the War on Christmas pack food for the less fortunate (via Facebook)

In the trenches of the War on Christmas, the troops are ready for their assault.

Their weapons are green beans, apple pies and frozen turkeys.

“People have to do God’s work, because there is no God to do God’s work,” said Eric Jayne, president of the Minnesota Atheists, as his crew of nonbelievers packaged food in a food-shelf supply warehouse earlier this month.

…

Back in the yuletide combat zone, 10 atheists were hard at work at the Food Group warehouse in New Hope.

The crew assembled boxes and put them on conveyor belts. Down the production line, others filled them with turkey, chicken, green beans and apple pie.

How dare those atheists celebrate the birth of Christ by helping the less fortunate? Don’t they know the holiday is all about getting people to praise the right God?

One day they’ll learn.

Hamza Yusuf, Islamic Scholar in U.S., Claims That Western Pornography Drives Young Muslims to Jihad

I’ve seen my share of porn, and it’s never made me want to blow someone up. Not everyone is so lucky, says Hamza Yusuf, née Mark Hanson, an Islamic scholar who is the co-founder of an Islamic liberal-arts college in Berkeley, California, an institution whose curriculum includes “rigorous training in traditional Islamic disciplines.”

During a recent panel discussion at Georgetown University, Yusuf declared that young Muslims become drawn to jihad because they feel morally contaminated after watching too much Western porn. Obviously, then, acts of terror are their path to purification.

Yusuf offered a theory in which young men “become deeply defiled” by [their] pornography habits and blame the West for providing the corrupting influences. They turn to jihad for religious purification and redemption.

“I really think that we underestimate the amount of people that have this experience of wanting to restore some kind of purity to themselves,” Yusuf said, “and the only restoration for them is blowing themselves up and get rid of the part that is the source of my defilement which is [the] body.“

A fellow panelist cited a poll that ostensibly reveals that Muslism join the jihad more for political than for religious or moral reasons. Yusuf would have none of it.

“They’re always going to tell pollsters that crap. They’re not going to say, ‘The real reason I decided to get into terrorism was that I was watching pornography 24 hours a day.’“

I feel a lot filthier for having read Yusuf’s words than I did after I last visited mormongirlz.com. Go figure.

(Photo via Wikipedia)

An Atheist Delivers an Invocation in Pennsylvania, Eliciting Gasps from the Crowd

This past July, atheist Tracy Jones delivered the invocation address at a meeting of the Chester City Council (in Pennsylvania).

In a video of that speech, which was just brought to my attention, Jones spoke about how “the fact that we have a prayer before we have these meetings, I find it uncalled for,” to audible gasps from the audience:

His request was simple and sensible: Unless you can invite people of all faiths to deliver these speeches, you should do away with this ritual altogether.

Given the reaction, you’d think he suggested all babies within a 5-mile radius be burned at the stake.

I’ve asked Jones what the reaction was from the audience after he finished his speech and whether anything changed for the better. I’m not optimistic.

(Thanks to Nikki for the link)

Poll: Most Non-Believers Decry CIA Torture, While the Religious Are O.K. With It

Earlier this week, Rachel posted about Bryan Fischer‘s views on torture. Fischer says that when the CIA tortured terrorism suspects, that was OK, because they did so righteously, just like the murderers in the Bible did their work to please God.

For my money, Fischer is the Ann Coulter of the evangelical set: someone with a big mouth, a tiny heart, and a propensity to spout outrageousness. I’ve always considered his views to be on the outer edge of what most Christians find acceptable. But it turns out that at least when it comes to torture, Christians are, overall, broadly in agreement with the man.

Over at MSNBC, Steve Benen scrutinized the results of a recent Washington Post/ABC poll, and concludes:

While many might assume that the faithful would be morally repulsed by torture, the reality is the opposite. When poll respondents were asked, “Do you personally think the CIA treatment of suspected terrorists amounted to torture, or not?” most Americans said the abuses did not constitute torture. But it was non-religious Americans who were easily the most convinced that the “enhanced interrogation techniques” were, in fact, torture.

The results in response to this question were even more striking: “All in all, do you think the CIA treatment of suspected terrorists was justified or unjustified?” For most Americans, the answer, even after recent revelations, was yes. For most Christians, it’s also yes. But for the non-religious, as the above chart makes clear, the torture was not justified.

Atheists and agnostics are much more likely to condemn the gross, inhumane actions of the worst CIA interrogators.

[N]on-religious Americans were one of the few subsets that opposed the torture techniques — and that includes breakdowns across racial, gender, age, economic, educational, and regional lines. The non-religious are effectively alone in their opposition to torture. …

[The poll results are] a pretty interesting starting point for a discussion about faith, morality, the law, and the limits of human decency.

In 2009, there was a Pew poll about torture that revealed more or less the same divide between religious people and non-believers.

(Image via Shutterstock)

Despite Silent Protests, Bill Maher Encourages Berkeley Graduates to Be Freethinkers and “Fight Oppression”

A couple of months ago, we learned that comedian Bill Maher was invited to deliver the commencement address at University of California, Berkeley’s winter graduation ceremony.

The problem was that students were petitioning to stop him from speaking there:

Bill Maher is a blatant bigot and racist who has no respect for the values UC Berkeley students and administration stand for. In a time where climate is a priority for all on campus, we cannot invite an individual who himself perpetuates a dangerous learning environment. Bill Maher’s public statements on various religions and cultures are offensive and his dangerous rhetoric has found its way into our campus communities. Too many students are marginalized by his remarks and if the University were to bring this individual as a commencement speaker they would not be supporting these historically marginalized communities.

It was a pointless effort from the start. Maher’s job is to share his opinions and make jokes about touchy subjects. As far as opinion-leaders go, his biggest liability is that he talks about topics (like religion) most people want to avoid at all costs. While the bigotry charge was over-the-top, the racism charge was just baseless.

More importantly, I didn’t think Maher ever created a “dangerous learning environment” by pointing out the problems with religion and those who follow it a little too devoutly. If anything, he should be commended for inviting people who disagree with him on his show.

The “Californians” were the campus group that invited Maher to speak — and they rescinded that invitation following the public outcry. Thankfully, UC Berkeley’s administration wasn’t having it. In a public statement, they announced that Maher would be welcome on their campus:

The UC Berkeley administration cannot and will not accept this decision, which appears to have been based solely on Mr. Maher’s opinions and beliefs, which he conveyed through constitutionally protected speech. For that reason Chancellor Dirks has decided that the invitation will stand, and he looks forward to welcoming Mr. Maher to the Berkeley campus. It should be noted that this decision does not constitute an endorsement of any of Mr. Maher’s prior statements: indeed, the administration’s position on Mr. Maher’s opinions and perspectives is irrelevant in this context, since we fully respect and support his right to express them. More broadly, this university has not in the past and will not in the future shy away from hosting speakers who some deem provocative.

That is how you do it. There are genuine hateful people out there; Maher isn’t in that group. He may go after sacred cows, which some people never want to criticize, but that doesn’t mean he should be disinvited from campus.

…

Earlier today, Maher gave that speech. It was hardly controversial, though Maher encouraged students (especially at Berkeley) to defend free speech, even if they disagreed with it:

“C’mon, it’s Berkeley. I think I can speak freely here,” he said. “I mean, I hope I can.”

The audience responded with cheers.

…

Maher indirectly referenced the controversy in his remarks, saying: “Liberals should own the First Amendment the way conservatives own the Second Amendment.”

“If you call yourself a liberal, you have to fight oppression from wherever it comes … that’s what makes you a liberal.”

He also urged UC Berkeley graduates to avoid the perils of group think. “That’s the last thing I’ll suggest to you — be a free thinker,” he said. “One reason our politics is so screwed up is that it’s gotten so tribal.”

That’s not to say there weren’t protests, but they were silent (and, it seems, pretty ineffective):

Some students protest Bill Maher's appearance at Berkeley commencement. @dailycal pic.twitter.com/8lxfAJn3Lz

— Graph/Haley Massara (@BylineGraph) December 20, 2014

Some protestors are inside waiting for commencement to begin. Meanwhile on the street #NoMaher pic.twitter.com/11ULoen77m

— Berkeley SJP (@KumarsSalehi) December 20, 2014

Better view of #NoMaher signs after @billmaher speech @dailycal pic.twitter.com/3sBzfGR6GG

— Graph/Haley Massara (@BylineGraph) December 20, 2014

#nomaher protesters allowed to stay in Haas Pavillion during @billmaher speech. pic.twitter.com/iBQAIu76v4

— Graph/Haley Massara (@BylineGraph) December 20, 2014

A handmade sign outside the arena read: “I’m oppressed by Islamophobia, not Islam.”

At one point during Maher’s speech, a group of protesters silently rose in the audience, holding up a series of placards that read,” Dear (administrators), don’t Maher our commencement.”

Not sure how Maher’s comments on religious extremism “oppress” moderate Muslims (or non-Muslims) at Berkeley, but at least that’s a better response than trying to boot him off campus. The Yale Atheists, Humanists, and Agnostics could learn something from all this.

(Top image via s_bukley / Shutterstock.com. Large portions of this article were published earlier)

More New York Fire Departments Are Now Wishing Jesus a Happy Birthday

People always argue that groups like the Freedom From Religion Foundation go after “petty” church/state separation cases, and they should just let some things slide.

Like New York’s Utica Fire Department Station 4 with a “Happy Birthday Jesus” sign outside its building. What’s the harm, right?

Well, not only are they selling shirts promoting Christianity, other fire departments are now following their lead, like the Whitesboro Fire Department (also in NY):

And the Yorkville Fire & Hose Co. Inc.:

And the Barneveld Fire Department:

There are many others (including volunteer fire departments) where these came from.

You can argue that wishing Jesus a happy birthday isn’t that big a deal, but I wonder how many taxpayer-funded organizations need to start doing the same thing before people realize this is just another way of promoting Christianity through the government. If we give them an inch, they’ll take a mile. They always have.

That’s why I support groups like FFRF, which go after all the church/state separation violations they can, big or small. They get a lot of shit for tackling these smaller cases, but what’s happening with these fire departments is just indicative of what Christians will do when they believe they’re above the law.

It won’t be long before these departments become more explicit with their faith-pushing. Maybe it’ll be a Nativity scene. Maybe they’ll put up a cross symbol. Maybe they’ll all put Bible verses on their equipment. Eventually, these things become “tradition,” making it that much harder to stop.

It’s a giant game of Christian Whac-A-Mole. And it never ends.

(Thanks to Joe for the link)

Rev. Franklin Graham: Christians Whose Lives Are in ISIS’ Hands Should Choose Martyrdom Over Lip-Service to Islam

Evangelical Christian Reverend Franklin Graham was on Fox News’ The Kelly File recently and the discussion revolved around a topic cherished at Fox: Christian persecution. But not the usual December horrors, like “my grocer said ‘Happy Holidays!”

Instead, while Graham and Megan Kelly were sparse on specifics, they referenced some real examples of Christians in danger in the Middle East. Graham was insistent that President Obama should be “doing more” to protect Christians around the world. It was, in short, his typical saber-rattling stuff.

But after implying that Obama just doesn’t care about the lives of Christians, Graham demonstrated exactly how much he cares about them.

Watch the latest video at video.foxnews.com

Kelly told a story about children killed by ISIS for refusing to convert to Islam, and asked her guest,

But, in those circumstances, should Christians consider saying what the enemy wants them to say to preserve life?

Graham’s answer?

No. No. I think we take a stand for our faith. Christians have been martyred going all the way back to the Romans when they fed ‘em to the lions. We would be betraying every person who stood for their faith, who stood for Jesus Christ, if we turned our back on Christ.

I’m not sure what “we” Graham is talking about here. It is beyond absurd to suggest that a privileged American evangelical, who has an empire of wealth and (undue) influence, who has prayed at a presidential inauguration, who is consulted on matters for which he has zero expertise simply because of his last name and religious affiliation, is in any way a victim of religious persecution. On the contrary, Graham is a beneficiary of extraordinary religious privilege.

So what is this “we take a stand for our faith” nonsense?

It’s terrible that Graham would insist that children must accept being beheaded, rather than paying lip service to the ideals of the religious fanatics threatening them. It’s disgusting that he, living in comfort, ease, and safety, would try to lay guilt on people who would lie about their faith to save themselves and loved ones from terrible peril and death. And it’s despicable that these instructions come with the implicit suggestion that he, flapping his gums in safety and security, is somehow participating in the suffering he’s self-righteously demanding.

Graham’s comments display the worst of the American right-wing Christian persecution complex. He is happy to insist that other men (and children) die for his God, while he, enjoying freedom and security, fantasizes that their struggles are his own.

Headstone Makers in New Jersey Score Victory Against Church-Based Competitors Who Are Tax-Exempt

New Jersey headstone-making companies have won a battle against the Newark Archdiocese over the latter’s hawking of gravesite monuments.

John Burns, a born-and-raised-Catholic owner of a monuments company in North Arlington, NJ, was appalled that the diocese began offering mausoleums and tombstones last year. He argued that the tax-exempt status of the padres gives them an unfair advantage, so he and his colleagues have been trying to get the state to stop the Catholic expansion.

Quoted in the New York Times,

Mr. Burns, 54, said the fight was “hard because it’s the church.” “Where in my life did I ever think I’d go to my state legislator and ask for legislation against the church to keep my livelihood?” he said in an interview. “It’s a shame.” …

Wilson Beebe, the executive director of the New Jersey State Funeral Directors Association, said the archdiocese had captured 25 percent of the Catholic monument market in less than 18 months, and predicted that its share would increase to as much as 50 percent in a couple of years. “They’re carrying on essentially a for-profit enterprise,” he said. “Given their income- and property-tax exempt status, there’s no way that the monument builders can compete with them.”

On Thursday, to Burns’ and Beebe’s delight, the New Jersey Senate voted yea on the bill, which

… prohibits religious entities that own or operate cemeteries from manufacturing or selling memorials, funeral vaults, mausoleums or funeral homes.

In addition, religious cemeteries are now also required to refrain from

… renting or leasing space to funeral homes and from arranging management contracts with any company that owns funeral homes.

It’s surprising that the bill was necessary in the first place. Several years ago, the New Jersey diocese said it would never sell gravesite monuments, and it doesn’t even deny making that promise. The diocese’s word wasn’t worth much, however; when asked about the episode by the Times, a spokesman said that the promise “was not binding,”

… and that officials had rethought the idea because of vandalism and damage from Hurricane Sandy in 2012.

The archbishop of Newark, John J. Myers, is not pleased with the Senate’s vote. Earlier this month, he had urged Catholics to oppose the legislation,

… saying [it] would violate the separation of church and state.

Right. ‘Cause the Catholic Church is a staunch defender of church-state separation. But seriously: Have you ever heard a member of the clergy say that the Church, on principle, wants no tax breaks from the state, ’cause that would violate the sacred wall between the two?

Me neither.

Continued Myers:

“We cannot stand by and watch the Legislature ignore the religious freedom we enjoy in this country as they attempt to insert themselves into the religious practice of Christian burial.”

I’m heartened that New Jersey’s lawmakers were not swayed by that Olympic-level bluster.

(Image via Shutterstock. Thanks to Tania for the tip)