Hemant Mehta's Blog, page 1901

Air Force Medical Commander’s Pro-Christianity Article Removed From National Guard Newsletter, So Cue the Outrage

The Stinger is an Air Force-funded publication for members of the 180th Fighter Wing in the Ohio Air National Guard.

Which is why this essay by Colonel Florencio Marquinez of the Fighter Wing’s Medical Group about how important Jesus is to him seemed extremely out of place in the September issue (since revised):

There have been many challenges and adversities along the way that really impacted my life… It is my strong spiritual foundation that has kept the light shining on my path. I would not be the man I am today if isn’t wasn’t for my mother leading our whole family to Jesus Christ. Her creed to us five children growing up is God first in your life, then comes family and third work.

…

… no matter how stressful your life can be with juggling family issues, relationships, career advancement, work, school, or any burden that life throws your way, cast it upon the Lord and He will sustain you.

On the surface, it doesn’t sound like he’s proselytizing or saying everyone else needs to agree with him. The problem is that he’s definitely promoting his faith, not as a private citizen, but as a military leader using his title, uniform, and publication space. (There’s also the issue of how the Medical Group Commander thinks Christianity, or “spirituality,” is a requirement for wellness, which makes you wonder what he thinks about atheists.)

That goes directly against Section 2.11 of the Air Force Standards:

2.11. Government Neutrality Regarding Religion. Leaders at all levels must balance constitutional protections for an individual’s free exercise of religion or other personal beliefs and the constitutional prohibition against governmental establishment of religion. For example, they must avoid the actual or apparent use of their position to promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion. Commanders or supervisors who engage in such behavior may cause members to doubt their impartiality and objectivity. The potential result is a degradation of the unit’s morale, good order, and discipline. Airmen, especially commanders and supervisors, must ensure that in exercising their right of religious free expression, they do not degrade morale, good order, and discipline in the Air Force or degrade the trust and confidence that the public has in the United States Air Force.

When the Military Religious Freedom Foundation‘s Mikey Weinstein contacted Commander Col. Craig R. Baker at the request of “several” members — including Christians — Baker agreed to reissue the publication without the column, adding, “I intend to give further academics to all my CC’s to insure [sic] this mistake does not happen again.”

As you might imagine, the Christian Right is flipping out.

[Alliance Defending Freedom] Legal Counsel Joseph La Rue wrote in a report on the matter on Friday that he believes Baker’s actions run counter to the Constitution because they amount to censorship.

…

“Common sense tells us that it would be wrong, of course, for Col. Marquinez to order those under his command to attend church, or to follow Jesus. But that’s not what he did,” La Rue continued. “No: he merely said, Jesus has helped me, and if you have problems, you should consider letting Him help you, too. There’s nothing wrong or improper about that.”

Note the contradiction there. La Rue makes clear it would be wrong if Marquinez ordered people to follow his faith… then points out that Marquinez did exactly that by openly making his religious preference known. Even though it’s hard for La Rue to put himself in non-Christian shoes, who knows how many people under Marquinez’s command will now hide their personal beliefs or lie about them so that they don’t rub him the wrong way, lest it hurt their chance at a promotion. You always want to make your bosses happy, and if one of them says Christianity is golden, there’s certainly pressure to conform.

Baker understood this, and that’s why he reissued the publication without the column. This essay belongs in a church newsletter, not a government-funded publication.

I asked Weinstein what he thought about Baker and his quick action and he only had effusive praise for the man:

“This is one of the finest military leaders I’ve seen. I wish we had more like him. He did absolutely the right thing. He deserves to be commended for doing his job.”

Weinstein also told me this decision would never have been questioned if Marquinez was promoting Islam or atheism instead of Christianity. He said, “It’s not a small thing. It strikes to the very core of who you are as a human being.”

Mark Driscoll Resigns from Mars Hill Church

According to Sarah Pulliam Bailey of Religion News Service, Pastor Mark Driscoll has (finally) resigned from Mars Hill Church:

His resignation letter was delivered to church elders earlier today:

… I do not want to be the source of anything that might detract from our church’s mission to lead people to a personal and growing relationship with Jesus Christ.

That is why, after seeking the face and will of God, and seeking godly counsel from men and women across the country, we have concluded it would be best for the health of our family, and for the Mars Hill family, that we step aside from further ministry at the church we helped launch in 1996. I will gladly work with you in the coming days on any details related to our separation.

This comes after Driscoll and Mars Hill were already dropped from the Acts 29 church network, he was found to have trolled his own church website’s forums, it was discovered that he used church funds to game the system and turn his book about marriage into a bestseller, his plagiarism came to light, and well after church members called for his resignation. And we haven’t even gotten into all the awful sexist, provocative things he’s said over the years…

His church was bleeding members and money, and resigning may have been the only way to stop the pain. It may have been inevitable, but still, what a relief.

I doubt it’ll be the last we hear from Driscoll. The man loves attention too much to go away from the public eye completely. Still, maybe the church, under new leadership, can change its ways and stop hurting so many people.

By the way, my Patheos colleague Warren Throckmorton deserves a hell of a lot of credit for shining a spotlight on what was going on in the church for the past several months. He brought to light a lot of information that church leaders never wanted to be made public.

After Approving Religious Veterans’ Monument, Alabama Officials Reject One Honoring Atheists in Foxholes

Atheist Amanda Scott (below) recently fought a battle to get the Mobile County Commission (in Alabama) to put up displays reading things like “In Reason We Trust.” It was in response to a vote to put “In God We Trust” on a plaque in the city’s Administration Building. Despite her efforts, the Commission denied those requests, saying only the Christian phrase would go up.

Her willingness to speak up also made her the target of several online threats, including one from a correctional officer.

It didn’t stop her activism, though. She recently attempted to push back against a religious veterans’ memorial at the Baldwin County Courthouse:

On the memorial are the words “Dedicated to the glory of God and in honor of the veterans of all wars.”

The monument was sponsored by the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars and Disabled American Veterans, and is located on county-owned property.

It was going to be an uphill battle to get the monument removed, so Amanda made a different request: If this religious monument was allowed on government property, then why not an atheist one, too? She would find all the funding necessary.

At the time, the Baldwin County Commission Chairman Charles “Skip” Gruber said he would be “more than glad” to hear what Amanda had to say.

Turns out that was all just lip service.

Amanda spoke to the Commission yesterday, but the members took no action at all on her request:

“At this time, we’re not erecting any other monuments,” Charles “Skip” Gruber, commission chairman, said after the meeting.

…

“The Commission today has the opportunity to show they are not anti-atheist by accepting a monument to atheists alongside a monument honoring theists,” Scott told the group Tuesday. “Only by adding an atheist monument or removing the religious monument can we honor the Constitution that all military personnel pledge to defend.”

Just to be clear, this was only a work session, not a regular meeting, so nothing official took place. It’s still possible Amanda could propose the monument at their next regular meeting and they could vote to approve it… but it seems pretty clear that’s not happening.

What’s amazing is how this Commission has now promoted religion over non-religion — and, really, Christianity over everything else — twice in the past few months, even though they were made aware of the legal problems in doing so. But they still don’t care. Forget Amanda, forget the Jews and Muslims and Pagans in the county. None of them matter.

I hope Amanda files a lawsuit. (She’s currently considering her options.) If the Commission members don’t care about what she has to say, maybe they’ll care when they piss off voters by wasting taxpayer money on a completely-avoidable legal battle.

The Commission has two perfectly acceptable options available to them: Say no to the religious monument or approve the atheist one. Saying yes to one but no to the other, even if it’s found to be legal, sends the wrong message to the citizens of the county.

(Large portions of this article were published earlier. Thanks to Brian for the link)

The Satanic Temple Wants a Holiday Display in Florida’s Capitol After Getting Rejected Last Year

Last year the Florida State Capitol Building became home to a Nativity scene, a Festivus Pole, three signs from atheist groups, and an homage to the Flying Spaghetti Monster:

(Ben Wolf – Department of Management Services)

Despite the cultural smorgasbord, Capitol officials drew the line when it came to the Satanic Temple’s proposed display, calling it “grossly offensive”:

The proposed Satanic Temple display (via the Department of Management Services)

Mind you, the display was simply a depiction of a Bible passage, just like every Nativity scene, but the state’s guidelines were so hazy that it caused a lot of confusion.

That led to questions about what state officials would do this year. Would they allow all groups to have displays? Would they cut them all off entirely? Would they just (illegally) allow Christian displays?

Something had to change. But, since this is Florida, nothing did:

No reason was given by the Department of Management Services for holding pat on the display policy.

The application process was under review earlier this year, spurred by the diverse exhibits that dotted the Capitol rotunda during the holiday season.

Earlier today, Americans United for Separation of Church and State sent a letter to the Florida Department of Management Services on behalf of the Satanic Temple. Simply put, it says state officials can’t deny the Satanists’ monument this year:

Given the manner in which the Department of Management Services rejected the Satanic Temple’s application last year, we remind the Department of its obligations under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The Department may not, as it did last year, reject the Satanic Temple’s display — even if the Department finds the display to be “offensive.” A rejection of the proposed display would violate the Free Speech Clause, Establishment Clause, and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Executive Director Rev. Barry W. Lynn added:

“Government officials have no right to determine what is ‘offensive’ when it comes to religion,” Lynn said. “If public space is open to all, that must include groups that some people may not like.”

A Satanic Temple representative announced last week that the group wanted to put up the same display in the Capitol that was proposed last year. If he submits the paperwork now, there’s plenty of time for officials to get this right. There’s just no excuse to say no to one group when they already say yes to everyone else.

(Portions of this article were posted earlier. Thanks to Brian for the link)

Religious References on Georgia High School’s New Monument Will Be Covered Up or Removed, Says School Board

Last month, I posted about a Christian monument in front of the newly-renovated Madison County High School in Danielsville, Georgia:

In particular, the sculpture, placed at the Madison High School football stadium, contains the words, “Romans 8:31,” and then directly quotes that biblical passage in large text: “IF GOD BE FOR US, WHO CAN BE AGAINST US?” The Madison High School logo is prominently featured throughout the monument, as well as the words: “HOME OF THE MADISON COUNTY RED RAIDERS.” At the base of the sculpture is a reference to the biblical passage from Philippians 4:13 (“I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me”), bearing the following words: “I CAN DO ALL THINGS” “STRENGTHEN ME.” The sculpture itself is inscribed with the words: “PHILIPPIANS 4:13.” Since it has been erected, the Madison High School football team has started a tradition of touching the sculpture before home games.

Both the American Humanist Association’s Appignani Humanist Legal Center and the Freedom From Religion Foundation had sent the district letters explaining the constitutional problems and why the monument had to go.

Finally, last night, the school board held a meeting to decide the fate of the monument. The citizens knew exactly what needed to happen:

“We are not here as haters, we are here to love all,” [Theresa Gordon] said. “It seems as if these (atheist) groups are here as haters, willing to spend millions to remove God from (our society), which means they are antichrists by definition — they must have hatred in their hearts to fight so hard to remove Him from this small object that was placed for others to enjoy.”

…

Anna Martin said she supported the monument and that she disagreed that the scripture on it violates the First Amendment. She said people have been brainwashed to believe that the amendment provides a “wall of separation” between church and state.

“We do not have to bend or bow to the demands of these groups,” she said.

Her husband, Jess Martin, spoke last, saying that in this instance, turning the other cheek was the wrong thing to do.

“We cannot let them take advantage of our rights as a Christian nation,” he said. “This is the South, the Bible belt of the world.”

Lots of local ignorance on display. (And who knew atheists had millions of dollars to spend on cases like this?! News to me.) None of these people care about the students, since they’re perfectly fine throwing money away defending this monument, and they sure as hell don’t give a damn about the law. All they care about is advancing their faith in any way possible.

Yet, somehow, the school board wisely and unanimously decided to remove or cover up the religious references. Maybe they saw the writing on the wall, knowing the monument was illegal, and knew they would never be able to get away with it.

And the reaction was pretty much what you’d expect:

As soon as the announcement was made, there was a mass exodus of the 150 — 200 people who had showed up for the meeting, most in favor of the monument. Many mumbled and shook their heads as they left the high school cafeteria where the meeting had been relocated to accommodate the expected large crowd.

Anyone want to bet these people never show up to a school board meeting when budget cuts are being made, teachers are let go, and extracurricular activities are being jettisoned?

Good for the school board for doing the right thing, even if it took them this long to figure out the obvious.

(Portions of this article were published earlier)

New Zealand “Charity” Church Buys Its Leaders a Six-Figure Luxury Car

A New Zealand church that critics have called a cash cult is shelling out big money to transport its leaders, Brian and Hannah Tamaki, in the style they believe they deserve. The Tamakis, who run Destiny Church, dipped into church funds to finance the ride and will henceforth be zipping around town in an Audi Q7, valued at NZ$100,000 (about 78,000 U.S. dollars).

Meanwhile, the charity — we’ll have to agree to use the word loosely — is a year behind on filing its latest tax return.

The Tamakis posed for pictures in front of the Audi, which has a personalised number plate PROT0N, and posted them to social media.

Just like Jesus would do.

Independent charity researcher Michael Gousmett was gobsmacked a charity had bought a six-figure vehicle.

“That’s not what charity is about. These organisations are here to provide public benefit, and if you’ve got members of this organisation running around in super-expensive vehicles, you’ve got to ask the question to what extent are they providing public benefit rather than looking after their own self interests.”

(Thanks to Dave for the link)

Vatican Officials: If We Said Anything Nice About Gay and Lesbian Couples, We Take It Back

Just yesterday, Camille posted about a draft report released this week by Catholic clergy members that was being hailed as “revolutionary” for how it treated topics like homosexuality and cohabitation. Did it deserve that label? Not so much, but that was the general perception.

Among other things, the report said “Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community”… which is at least better than saying they’re sinners who should burn in hell.

But as we’ve seen the Vatican do so many times in the Pope Francis era, they were quick to walk back from even that tiny bit of progress. After conservative Catholics complained that the statement deviated from Church teachings, the Vatican issued a statement saying we shouldn’t take the document all that seriously:

… [the Vatican] said the report on gays and lesbians was a “working document,” not the final word from Rome.

The Vatican also said that it wanted to welcome gays and lesbians in the church, but not create “the impression of a positive evaluation” of same-sex relationships, or, for that matter, of unmarried couples who live together.

Because suggesting same-sex and cohabitating couples have the same value as straight couples would be perfectly appropriate ruin society.

My favorite response to that backtracking has to be this one:

“I actually don’t think this is as much of a backtrack as we usually see!” said Marianne Duddy-Burke, head of the gay rights group Dignity USA.

This is how bad it is for Catholic Church leaders these days. Even when they make incremental steps in the right direction, they are criticized by the loudest voices within their bubble. Keep in mind none of these “radical” moves comes even close to accepting or affirming people who don’t fit the traditional Church-sanctioned mold, and yet the “Who am I to judge?” mentality that Francis took when he was elected has yet to permeate the rest of the Vatican.

It’s a common pattern at this point: The Catholic Church had a chance to become a teeny-tiny bit more accepting and relevant… and they blew it.

(Image via Shutterstock)

16 Reasons the Harry Potter Series is Better Than the Bible

The video below, part of The Atheist Voice series, discusses 16 reasons the Harry Potter series is better than the Bible:

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.

Christian Debater Gets Outwitted by an Eighth Grade Atheist

Regular readers of this site are undoubtedly familiar with Chad Dehler by now. He’s the young atheist who has flummoxed a number of Christian debaters.

Chad’s in eighth grade now and is still at the top of his game. In a recent debate between his father, Bernie Dehler, and Christian Ben Clifton, Chad challenged Ben on why God bothers interfering in our lives if He already knows what will happen in the future. He goes on to ask about the fates of those who’ve never heard of Jesus (like people in North Korea).

The part beginning at the 2:22 mark is fantastic Just wait for Chad’s response at 3:00.

(from L to R) Chad Dehler, Ben Clifton, Bernie Dehler

Go, Chad, go!

Atheist Parolee Receives Nearly $2,000,000 After Being Punished for Refusing a Religious Drug Treatment Program

In February of 2007, after spending time in prison for drug possession, Barry A. Hazle Jr. was finally released on parole.

Barry A. Hazle Jr.

Parole came with a few strings attached, though. Hazle had to attend a 90-day drug treatment program which, in his case, involved the Twelve-Step program most commonly associated with Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous. As we’ve discussed on this site before, several of those steps include references to God and submitting to a “higher power.”

Hazle — an atheist — wanted no part of that, so he asked to be reassigned to a secular treatment program. Even as he began attending the Twelve-Step classes, he objected to them. Three days after his parole officer received the appeal, Hazle “was called out of a program class and arrested for violating parole… He was sent back to prison for four months.”

It made absolutely no sense. That same year, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals specifically ruled “that a parolee [couldn't] be ordered to attend [Alcoholics Anonymous] meetings as a condition of staying out of prison.”

A little over a year ago, there was some resolution to this issue from that same Court of Appeals:

A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said a jury should award Barry A. Hazle Jr., a drug offender, compensatory damages for his loss of freedom and could consider possible punitive and emotional distress damages as well.

…

“Given the indisputable fact of actual injury resulting from Hazle’s unconstitutional imprisonment, and the district judge’s finding that the state defendants were liable for that injury, an award of compensatory damages was mandatory,” Judge Stephen Reinhardt, a Jimmy Carter appointee, wrote for the panel.

The court also demanded that a district judge in Sacramento reconsider whether state officials could “[require] parolees to attend treatment programs that emphasize God or a ‘higher power.’”

At the time, the amount of compensation Hazle would receive was in the hands of a different jury. And today, we learned what that amount was… and it’s staggering:

The California government and a nonprofit will pay a Shasta County atheist nearly $2 million for violating his civil rights when he was sent back to prison for taking issue with a religious drug-treatment program while on parole.

Barry Hazle Jr. and his attorney, John G. Heller, announced the settlement this morning at a press conference in San Francisco.

…

The money is meant to compensate for the violation of Hazle’s First Amendment religious rights, as well as to pay for the legal costs of the lengthy court battle. Heller noted that the prison where Hazle was sent also was “overcrowded and dangerous for both inmates and guards,” according to a statement by former Gov. Arnrold Schwarzenegger, so the suit included compensation for “physical and emotional symptoms and injuries,” as well.

The settlement of the six-year court case is made up of $1 million from the state and $925,000 from Westcare California Inc., the contractor that offered only a religious rehabilitation program for parolees such as Hazle.

It’s hard to overstate how important this victory is. It should’ve been obvious to state officials (and Hazle’s parole officer) that they couldn’t mandate anyone to go to a religious drug treatment program. It should’ve been obvious that they couldn’t punish someone for not wanting to attend that particular kind of program. Yet, they tried to coerce Hazle into going there, anyway.

He fought back, he was right, and he (finally) got fair compensation after everything the state put him through. More importantly, it means that no other prisoner or parolee will have to fight the same battle in the future.

(Large portions of this article were published earlier)