Hemant Mehta's Blog, page 1927

Toll Collector Quits Job After Being Told She Can’t Say “God Bless You” to Drivers

Cynthia Fernandez, a toll collector in New Jersey, quit her job last week not long after she was told by her boss not to say “God bless you” to drivers:

Fernandez told CBS New York this week that she used to say “Have a good day” and “God bless you” to drivers as they left, but her employer, Henry Lee, asked her to stop mentioning God .

“[My boss] told me he wanted to talk to me, that I couldn’t say ‘God bless you’ anymore to customers because somebody might get offended,” she explained.

This is one of those grey areas for me when it comes to church/state separation. It’s obviously a harmless gesture and I doubt Fernandez has any intention of proselytizing to the drivers.

On the other hand, where should we draw the line? Unfortunately, if you give conservative Christians an inch, they (have and) will take a mile. Many of the legal battles we see today over religious invocations and “In God We Trust” displays are relatively benign on the surface — but, together, they create a trend of Christians pushing God in government and it’s much harder to push back after that progression gets out of control.

The best thing we can do is put a stop to it immediately.

Does that mean people will claim we’re being petty? Absolutely. I really wish Fernandez didn’t feel pressured to quit over this, but I can tell you exactly how this will play out if it doesn’t stop: She will continue to say “God bless you.” Other government workers will follow. Other toll workers in other locations, hearing about what she’s doing, will say the same thing. Next thing you know, “God bless you” signs are being put up in toll booths everywhere.

And the moment a church/state separation group attempts to put a stop to it, the reaction will be, “Well, you never complained about it before!”

It’s not the slippery slope fallacy. It happens all the time.

Jeff Diminiski, a local New Jersey radio host, offered another perspective on the matter:

“These same people would have a meltdown if a different toll collector exercised their different belief by saying ‘Allah is great’ to passing drivers, or an atheist toll collector expressing their view by telling a parkway patron to ‘have a Godless day.’ They’d call for immediate firings.” he said. “Believe what you want, but there’s a time and a place and not everyone thinks like you think. Not every random thought and belief has to be expressed on the job to total strangers.”

Fair point.

Again, this particular example isn’t a big deal. It’s not even a small deal. My concern isn’t with what Fernandez said. It with where these micro-violations lead.

Advice Columnist in Christian Magazine Tells Reader Not to Sign a Prenup Because It Would Diminish Her Marriage

Minister Eddie Kaufholz, writing for the Christian publication Relevant, just offered some of the silliest relationship advice you’ll ever hear this past week, advising reader “Christina” to ignore her parents’ suggestion to get a prenup with her fiancé.

I am all for making your own decisions and parting ways with your parents when their advice reflects a significant disparity with your personal values. But this article frames marriage in a particularly romantic Christian way: It assumes that marriage is an idyllic state of being that can be achieved by magical thinking and cultivated codependency:

… your friends also have a really valid point. That is, that signing a prenup is essentially preparing for a divorce. Which, it is. Let me explain…

Your marriage has nothing to do with stuff. Contracts have to do with stuff. No, marriages have to do with something that is much more sacred, much more binding, and much less able to be broken via divorce lawyers who are bickering over alimony…

…

A prenup is nothing compared to a covenant commitment before God. And so to… sign a legal document that says that “Christina keeps XYZ and Mr. Christina keeps ABC” has nothing to do with what’s actually possessed, and it puts value in the wrong worth.

Additionally, a prenup is a bad indicator that not everything is being relinquished for the sake of this marriage. And while some may say that signing it is just a legal formality and it doesn’t take away from the significance of the union. I would object and say that it’s an indicator that the couple, even if they’re a great couple who should totally get married, is keeping a little divorce insurance on the side — and you can’t do that.

I heard the “dating is practicing for divorce” line all throughout my childhood. And even though I married my first boyfriend and waited for sex until my wedding night, I still ended up divorced. There is no way to know how a marriage will work out until you’re in it, and it’s a huge risk to cultivate the sort of enmeshed relationship that the author advises.

It may be wonderful if it works out well, but it leaves little room for emotional autonomy and an independent identity in practice. Much of Christian marriage advice pushes for further emotional tangling as a substitute for true intimacy (which respects and knows the other partner as a fully autonomous and separate individual). This column is more of the same.

I suppose this idea of codependency being a sign of a good relationship is heavily supported by popular cultural assumptions about the nature of romance, but it’s also a particularly Christian fault, since the marriage is so often compared to the relationship between Christ and the church: The church is supposed to be utterly dependent on and centered around Christ and his identity. Therefore, the idea of this woman centering her whole identity around her fiancé is passable as biblical — it isn’t; the metaphor was never meant to stretch that far — and any sort of attempt to preserve a separate identity, even separate bank accounts or lines of credit, is seen as a lack of trust in the relationship and thus a lack of faith in Christ’s plan for your marriage.

This misuse of scriptural metaphor is pretty common in Christian circles. And unfortunately, “Christina” will probably hear the same advice from several other people. I just hope that having all her eggs in one basket works out better for her than it did for me.

(Image via Shutterstock)

Finally, a Chemistry Demonstration About Religion That I Can Support

After yesterday’s post about a science experiment used to teach kids about Jesus and “sin,” I’m glad someone was able to repeat the experiment in a much more useful way:

Post by Gregory Storer.

(Thanks to Predrag for the link)

For Those Praying for Protection Against the Islamic State…

Cartoonist Michael Leunig points out the irony:

(Thanks to David for the link)

How Well Do You Know the Pledge of Allegiance’s History?

Atheist Alliance of America created a fun little quiz on the Pledge’s history and you can take it here.

I’m ashamed to admit I didn’t get a perfect score. But c’mon, who knew there were *that* many changes to the Pledge?!

Should You Wear Your Atheism on Your Sleeve?

The video below, part of The Atheist Voice series, answers the question: Should you wear your atheism on your sleeve?:

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.

Tennessee Dept. of Children’s Services Commissioner Says Religion is the Only Foolproof Form of Rehabilitation

You may have heard about how 32 teenagers escaped from the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services’ Woodland Hills Youth Development Center last week. Most of them are back in custody, but the community wants answers. Why did it take so long for officials to contact the police about the escape? What are they going to do to prevent this in the future?

This week, DCS leaders held a community meeting to try and answer some of those questions.

But I want to draw special attention to comments made by DCS interim commissioner Jim Henry:

… Henry also pleaded with the community for their help.

In a number of ways, Henry told the crowd that “education is the way out” of the situations that many of the youth in the juvenile system come from. He also urged Tennessee’s numerous churches to produce more foster families. Henry added that “we need more church services” and said that in his experience a conversion to a religion was the only thing that truly rehabilitated people behind bars.

The hell…?

Religion never kept people from going to prison and it’s not a magical potion that’ll keep them from ever going back in. There’s a difference between faith as an automatic solution and dedicating your life to a worthwhile cause (which may include religion).

Henry’s right about education — I imagine even moreso when we’re talking about teenagers — but teaching those kids useful skills that’ll enable them to get jobs when they leave prison also helps.

But if religious conversion is the only foolproof elixir he’s ever seen, I have serious concerns about his ability to manage the DCS.

(Image via Shutterstock. Thanks to Brian for the link)

Oklahoma Officials May Revise Religious Headwear Rules for Driver’s License Photos After Pastafarian Dons a Colander

Enid, Oklahoma resident Shawna Hammond is an atheist and a Pastafarian. When it came time to renew her driver’s license earlier this month, she made the decision to wear a colander — her religious headwear — in her photo. The choice was met with giggles but not disputed at the time: a colander might be unorthodox, but it is the religious headwear of followers of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Hammond explained her decision to wear a colander as being an important expression of religious freedom:

“For me the colander represents freedom, our freedom of religion, and to whatever religion we prefer or lack of religion. It was important to me to exercise that, even if it’s just a driver’s license photo.”

However, since the photo was taken,

[o]fficials with the Oklahoma Highway Patrol are… doing a review of the photo to make sure it follows state guidelines.

Since the “rules for religious headwear in driver’s license photos state that the face area must be clear and not covered by shadows,” and the photo pretty clearly complies, it doesn’t seem that there’s any cause to rule against her.

It is worth noting, however, that it seems authorities might might not be big fans of Pastafarian headwear since they’re now thinking about revising the headwear rules:

If it does follow the rules, authorities say they may look at changing the rule of religious headwear because it is more than 10-years-old.

Maybe this is just a matter of confusing phraseology… but, if not, it seems odd to make revision of the rules (if it’s actually related to age) contingent on whether or not Hammond’s photo complies with those rules.

We reached out to Hammond earlier this week to get a more detailed explanation of her motivations but haven’t heard back as of this writing.

Florida School Board Member Tells Pagan He Can’t Deliver an Invocation Because It Might Offend the Audience

Last month, David Suhor (who calls himself an Agnostic Pagan Pantheist) spoke to the Escambia County School Board in Florida, saying that they were not very welcoming of non-religious viewpoints when it came to their opening invocations. He acknowledged that one board member invited him to deliver one (though he had a conflict on that date), but that was a rarity:

In response, one of the board members, Jeff Bergosh, took to his personal website to write about how he had no intention of letting non-religious people deliver invocations:

I mean, should the majority of persons in attendance at one of our meetings really have to listen to a satanic verse? What if a “Witch Doctor” comes to the podium with a full-on costume, chicken-feet, a voodoo doll and other associated over-the-top regalia? It could easily get out of hand, so far as I can tell….(I wonder what our local media would say about this?)

And I won’t stay and listen if someone tries to be disrespectful like that. I’ll leave the room and come back after, or wear BOSE noise cancelling headphones. Or I’ll turn around and raise my fist in the air like the ’68 Olympians did(uh, I’m being sarcastic-I wouldn’t really do that…)…… I won’t be part of someone’s prank.

So we have to be careful about how this issue is managed.

Locally, I’ve been bombarded by people offering their willingness to give invocations lately…. However, as a current practice each board member has the latitude to select whomever he/she wants to deliver the invocation before the meeting. In my eight years on the board, I’ve utilized a priest, two pastors, a youth pastor, the leader of my bible study group, several members of the district staff, a school community volunteer, and I’ve delivered the invocation on a number of occasions myself. I like having the flexibility of the board’s rotation system, and I’m not in favor of changing it…

Did you catch all that? He’s so into diversity, he invited a whole bunch of people… to pray to Jesus! Those other weird traditions have no place in a community like Escambia. (I’m sure they say the same about Christianity.)

Then, at the end of his post, Bergosh wrote that he *might* consider opening up his circle of invitees…

I’d even be willing to select someone other than a Christian to deliver the invocation. I’ve recently been contacted by someone of the Jewish faith, and I’m considering having that individual bring the invocation when it is next my turn, in January 2015.

Mr. Generous was expanding his base from Christians… to Christians and one Jew.

It got even worse. After Suhor emailed the board and requested a chance to give an invocation, Bergosh replied and told him what he would do if Suhor ever spoke at a future meeting:

[I] have an idea that I’ll be posting on my blog in the next few days that will allow everyone to win, a true win-win situation. When you come to bring your Wiccan, Atheist, or Klingon invocation — I’ll politely excuse myself from the room and simultaneously invite anyone in the audience who wants to join me in a Christian invocation out back. You can give your invocation to those that want to hear it and stay in the room. Nobody will prevent you from your free exercise of your religion, just as I would expect for you not to attempt to block me from exercising my constitutional right to my Christian belief via a Christian invocation outside the back door. A win-win, right Dave?

Since then, things have gotten no better.

The invocation policy still hasn’t changed. So Suhor doubled-down on his offer by saying on this site:

… the longer I am delayed, the more obscure I’ll make my prayer when they finally allow it. Right now they are Pagan-level cooperation. More rejection and delays and I’ll go to FSM. If they keep obstructing, I go Satanic.

Bergosh didn’t like that one bit.

Meanwhile, I’m cracking up. It’s such a legally-safe thing to say, even though it sounds like a veiled threat. If the school board wants to have invocation prayers, they can’t limit them to only religions they prefer. They can’t discriminate. Satanists can speak right alongside Christians.

Suhor spoke at a school board meeting on Thursday and made his case as to why the district was in the wrong here. He even suggested they move to a moment of silence instead, because at least that would be inclusive of everyone:

Yesterday, the school board met again to discuss the invocation protocol (among other things) and you can hear the discussion around the 1:30 mark in the video below. The district’s attorney, Donna Waters, looked into the matter and made her suggestions to the board:

In short, she states that the effects of Greece v. Galloway are still in flux and therefore the board can go ahead and continue with invocations if it wants… however, she warns there’s “some degree of risk of litigation.” They could avoid it by having a moment of silence or eliminating the invocation altogether (though she ignorantly says eliminating the invocation may be a church/state violation, too. It absolutely would not be).

Bergosh responds by mentioning his Token Jew giving an invocation, and therefore, he’s in the clear, right?! Even Waters had to push back on that.

Long story short, what you have here are a bunch of school board members doing anything they can to keep religious prayers in their meetings.

It won’t work. They can’t exclude beliefs they don’t like. And they have every intention of excluding beliefs they don’t like.

Near the end of the video, around the 9:45 mark, the board member who initially invited Suhor to speak (on a date on which he had a conflict) points out that Suhor is in the room, before adding, “he is no longer on my list.” She then turns to Suhor and says, “I’ll talk with you afterwards why.”

What did she say to him?

Suhor explained on his site:

After the meeting she said it was personal, not religious. Because I called her out for waffling and because of a social media post she heard about, she was afraid I would deliver Pastafarian or Satanic prayer instead of a Pagan one. That sounds like a religious issue, not a personal one. That was not my plan, but there is nothing wrong with those religions and it’s not their right to judge them. She said she couldn’t have the audience being “offended” by my prayer. That’s sad. She ALMOST understands how consistent majority-only prayer offends non-Christians there for a government meeting.

She’s asking for a lawsuit. She can’t just exclude Satanists and Pastafarians because she thinks they might offend the audience. This school board is more interested in playing martyr and wasting taxpayer money than it is getting down to work.

That’s why Suhor is still considering a lawsuit:

Suhor — who has led pagan invocations at other meetings and will deliver one at the Escambia County Commission’s next meeting — said he will talk with his attorney about pursuing litigation against the school board.

“I’m willing to go as far as I need to go,” Suhor said. “My big thing is you’re going to have to include everybody, or you’re going to have to end it.”

He’s not asking for much. He just wants non-Christian views to be treated the same as Christian views.

One way the board seems to be getting around him — and I haven’t been able to confirm this yet — is by quickly lining up their future invocation schedule with as many Christians (and that one Token Jew) as they can find. That way, when Suhor or anyone else asks for an invitation, they can tell them they’re all booked up in the foreseeable future.

It won’t stand. And the lawsuit will come. I have no clue why they’re being so stubborn against letting him (or other non-Judeo-Christians) speak, but it’s the students in the district who will end up suffering because of their irresponsibility.

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

This is How You Ruin an Amazing Chemistry Demonstration

You use the power of science… to talk about Jesus and “sin”:

Post by Jennifer Shelby-Barnhill.

*Sigh*…

That could have been a great lesson on what happens when you mix combinations of water, iodine, and bleach — and why that happens — but it was used instead to teach kids nonsense.

And I’m guessing chemistry wasn’t even mentioned in the discussion.

(Thanks to Terry for the link)