Hemant Mehta's Blog, page 1942

Secular Group Showcase: Northern Ohio Freethought Society

We asked you to tell us about your local secular group in an attempt to encourage the start-up and growth of “good without god” communities. We’ve received a lot of responses already (Thanks!) and here’s a glimpse at our next group: The Northern Ohio Freethought Society in Cleveland:

They offered advice to other groups just starting out:

For anyone serious about starting up a group I would advise having at least five core people who are willing to donate a lot of time to the group. And get out there and be active. Your group will not grow if you are not making something happen. Take a day to pass out non-theist literature, protest in front of the statehouse, or hug an Atheist. Just keep advertising for your community. Also hold monthly meetings to organize.

You can read more of our interview here.

…

Want to be featured in this series? If you can fill out most of the questions below, your group is probably a good candidate to be showcased on our page. We hope to hear from you! E-mail submissions to SecularGroups@gmail.com!

Group name:

Location:

Mission Statement:

Links to group’s Facebook. website, Twitter, etc.:

When was your group established?

What does your group do for fun to connect with each other?

What community/volunteer activities does your group participate in, if any?

What political/social activism does your group do, if any?

Does your group have a favorite charity to fundraise for or promote?

Do you have any stories to share about your city having a positive reaction to your group?

What are some challenges your group has faced?

What advice would you like to share with other groups struggling to grow or are just starting up?

**Please attach some photos of your group as a whole, in action, and having fun**

Pastor’s “Spiritual Relationship” With Hermann Göring and Other Nazi Butchers Possibly Paved Their Path to Paradise

When the Allies jailed and tried many of the members of the Nazi high command after the end of World War II, Henry Gerecke (pictured) tended to the defendants’ “spiritual needs.”

Gerecke was a Lutheran Church Missouri Synod pastor who worked to bring Hermann Göring, Albert Speer, and others not so much to justice, but to Jesus. A non-fiction book about his efforts, written by Tim Townsend, recently hit store shelves.

In a Huffington Post article about the book, Townsend says that Gerecke

… looked beyond the terrible men imprisoned in front of him to the children they had once been. One of the most lovely — and chilling — pieces in the book comes when Gerecke accompanies [de facto Nazi Secretary of War Wilhelm] Keitel up the 13 steps of the gallows and prays aloud with him a German prayer both were taught by their mothers.

“He knew that he needed to save the souls of as many of these men as he could before they were executed,” Townsend said. “I think for him he thought it was a great gift he had been given.”

And not one he took lightly. Gerecke did not give communion to any of the Nazis unless he believed they were truly penitent and [they] made a profession of faith in Jesus. Only four of the 11 sentenced to hang met Gerecke’s standard.

Two things jump out at me.

Number one: Gerecke acting as the gatekeeper of paradise, rather than letting his omniscient God sort out which Nazis deserve to sit at His feet for all eternity. What a divine head rush that must have been for a mere mortal!

Number two: As we’ve seen before, not even serial killers and genocidal maniacs are, apparently, beyond the reach of Christian redemption. Non-Christian people, however, no matter how kind the lives they’ve lived, are denied God’s eternal grace — and they may well burn in hell if, for example, they’ve been playing doctor with someone who possesses the same naughty bits.

Gerecke may have been a nice man. Let’s say that he was. Knowing of his works, are you any closer to wishing to join his favorite club?

Me neither.

(Image via U.S. National Archives)

Colorado GOP Candidate: Gay Rep. Jared Polis Will “Join ISIS In Beheading Christians”

A GOP candidate for state office in Colorado way, way, way crossed the line this week when he likened a gay politician to the terrorist group ISIS.

Gordon Klingenschmitt (below), a minister and nominee for a seat in the Colorado state House, who has already said some awful things during his campaign, sent an email to his subscribers accusing openly gay Democrat Jared Polis of wanting to execute Christians.

Here’s what he wrote:

“The openly homosexual Congressman Jared Polis (D-CO) introduced a revised bill to force Christian employers and business owners to hire and promote homosexuals with ZERO RELIGIOUS EXEMPTIONS for Christians who want to opt out.

“Polis ‘wants sexual orientation and gender identity treated the same way as race, religion, sex, and national origin, when it comes to employment protections,’ claims the Advocate, under the headline “Polis trims ENDA’s religious exemption.

“Dr. Chaps’ comment: The open persecution of Christians is underway. Democrats like Polis want to bankrupt Christians who refuse to worship and endorse his sodomy. Next he’ll join ISIS in beheading Christians, but not just in Syria, right here in America.”

Comparisons to extreme terrorists are always out of line, but especially now, a week after ISIS publicized the execution of noted American journalist James Foley, this is particularly vile.

Mark Ferrandino, Speaker of the Colorado House, immediately denounced Klingenschmitt and his comments and called on Colorado Republicans to do the same. They did so swiftly, but then again, they’re used to it; Klingenschmitt has previously called President Barack Obama a demon and suggested the Affordable Care Act causes cancer.

“As Chairman Call has said in the past, Gordon does not speak on behalf of the Republican Party, and his comments in no way reflect the views of the Party. Gordon needs to give a sincere apology,” said Owen Loftus, a Colorado GOP spokesman, in a statement.

Now, Klingenschmitt has “apologized” in a video. In a tone that’s entirely too jokey and nonchalant, he says that he was using hyperbole and that “some Democrats do not have a sense of humor.” Addressing the video to Polis, he says:

Even though you’re an openly gay Democrat and you are passing policies that would persecute some Christian business owners here in America, I would never compare you to the ISIS rebels who behead Christians, right? Of course you would never go in for something like that.

So in the spirit of bipartisanship, I want to extend a hand to you. As a right-wing Christian minister, there are some things that you and I are just never going to agree on. But we can agree on charity. Can’t we agree on caring for sick people?

Then he dumps a bucket of water on his head and challenges Polis, Ferrandino, and Colorado Republican Ryan Call to the ALS #IceBucketChallenge.

No, this is not The Onion. I am not making this up:

James Foley got his master’s degree in journalism from Northwestern the year before I started my undergraduate career there. Some of my classmates have met him and spoken to him about his work, and some professors knew him well. All those who were close to him are devastated and shocked beyond belief, as are countless journalists and others who admired him.

Comparisons of this caliber are never okay, but especially not now. And that apology was laughable. (No, literally. He was practically laughing.)

Out of respect for Foley and his family, I hope you didn’t watch the video ISIS released. Now, for the same reasons, I hope Coloradans do all they can to keep this filthy excuse for a man as far away as possible from any legislative power. It’s the absolute least we can do.

Australia Pushes Ahead with $244,000,000 Federally-Funded School Chaplaincy Program That Excludes Secular Workers

Ron Williams (below) wanted his children to attend a secular school in Australia, so you can imagine his surprise when his children told him they were attending “assemblies where the chaplain presided and a rap song was played extolling the virtues of chaplains over teachers as adults kids could trust.”

His lawsuit eventually went all the way up to Australia’s High Court, where, in 2012, they ruled that that it was illegal for secular schools to offer chaplaincy services for students through a government program that gave participating schools up to $24,000 each. The judges said no legislation allowed for this.

So the government, under then-Prime Minister Julia Gillard, quickly wrote up and passed legislation to rescue the program.

Earlier this summer, the High Court unanimously struck down that legislation as well. But there was still an opening:

Sydney University constitutional law professor Anne Twomey said on Wednesday that the federal government would be able to continue the chaplaincy program by providing grants to state governments rather than directly to schools.

“This is the only real option. They can do that and they probably will,” she said.

The fate of nearly $244,000,000 allocated for the next five years of the chaplaincy program hung in the balance based on what the government would do next.

Now we know their next steps.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott‘s government announced that the religious-only chaplaincy program would likely continue via those state grants:

In a bid to prevent another High Court challenge, the federal government will provide funding to state and territory governments to administer the scheme. This new arrangement strengthens the hand of the states and could see some demand an option for secular welfare workers or tougher qualification standards.

In a cabinet meeting on Monday, Abbott government ministers explored options to extend the scheme to include funding for secular welfare workers. This would have reversed the government’s existing policy that funding should be restricted to religious chaplains. During the cabinet discussion, Mr Abbott argued that the government should stand by its existing policy. Mr Abbott argued the scheme’s original intent was supporting pastoral care in schools and that should remain its focus. The chaplaincy scheme was also raised in the Coalition party room on Tuesday, where at least two government members argued the scheme should be broadened to include funding for secular workers.

…

Under the new scheme, chaplains can be of any faith, cannot proselytise and must meet minimum qualification standards.

In effect, though, that means nearly $244,000,000 will be allocated for religious chaplains in secular schools. As it stands, trained Humanist chaplains are excluded from the program and “secular welfare workers” are only being considered for inclusion.

It’s irrelevant that the program is voluntary. The message sent to students is very clear: Look to religious leaders for guidance, not anyone else. Even if proselytization is forbidden, religious groups are being handed a gift at the taxpayers’ expense.

There’s opposition from reasonable voices, but none that the government appears to be listening to:

Australian Education Union president Angelo Gavrielatos said the school chaplaincy scheme would “undermine the secular traditions of public education”. The $244 million funding over four years should be spent on more urgent needs, such as support for children with disabilities, he said.

When did Australia turn into the American South?

(Portions of this article were posted before.)

After Long Ignoring Their Requests, Chico City Council Invites Atheists to Deliver Multiple Invocations Next Year

The Atheists of Butte County (in California) have been urging the Chico City Council for a while now to let them deliver invocations at meetings.

For a while, the city council just ignored their requests, despite receiving a letter from the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

But group leader George Gold (below) kept trying:

Earlier this month, we found out that the Deputy City Clerk, in charge of selecting the invocation speakers, had a system that was effectively illegal — she just searched for groups that met in the Chico area and had a physical meeting space… a qualification that would exclude most atheist and minority religious groups. (FFRF made that point in a second letter to the council.)

After all that, there’s finally some good news to report.

The 2015 list of invocation speakers has just been released and the Atheists of Butte County are listed on it three separate times. Excellent! And a smart move, too, given that the city would’ve lost a lawsuit over the exclusion.

The atheist invocations will be delivered on January 6, April 7, and November 3.

In an email, Gold offered his thanks to the Mayor and council clerk for their “positive roles” in this process. Which I would say is extremely gracious of him.

Kudos to Gold, though, for his persistence. Can’t wait to hear what he has to say at the meetings.

…

This is probably a good time to remind everyone that FFRF is running a contest for best secular invocation address:

The individual or individuals judged to give the “best” secular invocation will be invited to open FFRF’s annual convention with the “invocation,” receiving an all-expenses-paid trip to FFRF’s annual convention (this year at the Los Angeles Biltmore Oct. 24-25), a plaque and an honorarium of $500.

The winner better be a reader of this site!

Appeals Court Rules that a North Dakota Ten Commandments Monument on City Property is Legal

In 1958, the Fraternal Order of Eagles donated a Ten Commandments monument to the city of Fargo, North Dakota. Like many similar monuments across the country, no one complained for decades, whether out of ignorance that it was illegal or fear of repercussions.

(Image via Secular News Daily)

In 2002, a group of five individuals — all members of the Red River Freethinkers — filed a lawsuit to have it moved to private property because it was violating the Establishment Clause. In 2005, a judge ruled that the monument could stay put:

If the former observer views the monument he would quickly realize that the display originated from a private organization and was erected for a secular purpose, to celebrate the first urban renewal project in North Dakota history. However, if the observer is imbued with the full knowledge of the history of the display and of the land on which its sits, this Court concludes that he or she would be even more conscious of the secular nature of the monument.

The plaintiffs were disappointed but didn’t want to fight any more:

Our request was based on the First Amendment, on the principle that public space should be neutral toward religion. The principle is clear, simple, and fair. We regard the present decision as a step away from that principle and a weakening of First Amendment protections.

After that setback, the Red River Freethinkers offered to pay for their own secular monument to be erected nearby the Ten Commandments one. If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em, right?

Their monument would’ve had this description:

The city’s own attorney suggested saying no to the atheists, but moving the Ten Commandments display to private property to avoid further litigation. And that’s precisely what city officials decided to do, on a 3-2 vote.

Unfortunately, religious conservatives petitioned for the city council to reconsider its decision (which they are allowed to do). In 2007, council members reversed their previous decision, again on a 3-2 vote.

At the time, that meant keeping the Ten Commandments monument in place and creating a new policy regarding monuments on city property. Later that summer, they came up with a new policy:

No one else gets a monument.

So the Red River Freethinkers sued again, this time over the new exclusionary policy. But a lower court judge dismissed their challenge, saying there was no evidence the city was engaging in illegal religious expression (because the Ten Commandments are totally secular. Especially the parts about taking the Lord’s name in vain, resting on the Sabbath, worshiping false idols, and having no other God before God.)

The judge also added they didn’t have standing to bring this case since they had already done so before and lost. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals said they did, in fact, have standing and told the district court to reconsider its decision in light of that. The district court ruled in favor of the city.

I’m skipping over a lot of the legalese, but that all brings us to what happened this week. The case went back to the Appeals Court, and the judges there ruled 2-1 in favor of the city:

The petitioners combined “many small donations” of political will to sway the City. They expressed both religious and secular reasons to retain the monument. The Board of City Commissioners did not adopt a religious point of view, instead citing legal challenges, the City’s interest in ending anguished debate, and the importance of embracing and tolerating “all people.” By adopting the petition, the City did not “necessarily endorse the specific meaning that any particular [petitioner] sees in the monument.”

Judge Kermit Bye dissented from the ruling and offered a far more comprehensive explanation of why the decision made no sense:

… the actions of the City Commission served only to ensure the religious message of the monument continued to be displayed on government rather than private property. The policy adopted by the City Commission then had the further effect of conferring on the Ten Commandments monument a special status as the only permanent message allowed in the Civic Plaza.

…

… an objective observer could infer the City Commission intended to maintain the display of the religious message of the Ten Commandments monument on government grounds and confer on the religious message of the monument special status as the only permanent message in an area used for public assemblies.

…

For these reasons, I conclude the Freethinkers have introduced sufficient evidence to raise questions of fact for a trial, and I respectfully dissent. I would reverse the grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.

The Red River Freethinkers can either drop the case or ask the full Appeals Court to reconsider the decision (in an en banc review).

When the Supreme Court ruled in 2005 (in Van_Orden v Perry) that a Ten Commandments monument in Texas was legal, Justice Stephen Breyer was the swing vote. That same day he ruled a different Ten Commandments monument on city property illegal. He noted that the difference between the two cases was that, in Texas, the monument had a secular purpose. It was donated by the Fraternal Order of Eagles (like the Fargo monument), had been around for decades (like the Fargo monument), and sat “in a large park containing 17 monuments and 21 historical markers.”

That’s the key difference. In Fargo, the Christian monument stands alone, and the city council refuses to let anything else get in the way.

That’s why the Fargo monument should be declared illegal. The Red River Freethinkers are right. There’s no word yet on whether they’ll pursue another challenge, though. After more than a decade fighting this battle, it’d be hard to blame them if they just decided to give up.

I reached out to the Red River Freethinkers yesterday afternoon for comment, and President Charles Sawicki sent me a brief statement from the group’s lawyer:

“At this point the only option is to request cert in the US Supreme Court — which could be granted due to the unique issues here. We would need financial help for that though due to the costs involved.”

We are discussing the situation.

Not sure why the Supreme Court is the next step rather than a rehearing from the full Court of Appeals. Either way, I’ll post updates as they come.

(via Religion Clause)

If Someone Filmed a Parody About the War on Christmas, It Would Look Just Like Kirk Cameron’s Latest Movie

If I told you Kirk Cameron was making a movie about putting Christ back in Christmas, and you really wanted to mock it, you might create a poster for the film that looks something like this:

But that’s the actual poster for Cameron’s very real movie Saving Christmas:

“I assume [atheists are] going to get frustrated to see some of their best arguments deflated by this movie, because we take on some of the most commonly parroted myths about the origins of Christmas,” Cameron exclusively told TheBlaze Tuesday.

Riiiight. The whole movie seems to involve Cameron saving Christmas from… all those people who celebrate other things around the same time of year and who believe it’s not the government’s job to promote religious holidays.

The best part may be the main character’s name, because Cameron knows subtlety:

“It’s a scripted story about a guy named Christian White who represents the typical white Christian male and he’s got a bad case of religious bah humbugs,” Cameron said. “He is just deflating his wife’s entire Christmas party because he has come to believe that everything we’re doing at Christmas to celebrate is wrong.”

The problem is his premise. No one is ruining Christmas — not Jews, not Festivus-proponents, and not atheists. You know a film is doomed when the villain is a retail employee who smiles while saying, “Happy Holidays!”

Christmas has been, and will continue to be, celebrated by the majority of people every year. What’s happening now is that people are finally realizing that Christians don’t own that time of year. Other traditions can be celebrated and created. But in Cameron’s mind, diversity is evil, and the world not putting his beliefs on a pedestal is a dilemma that only he can solve… with his trusty candy cane and Santa Claus bowling ball, apparently.

Despite a Legal Complaint, This Georgia School District is Still Pushing Christianity on Students

It’s been weeks since we learned that Christianity was the glue binding together the Chestatee High School football team in Gainesville, Georgia. The American Humanist Association’s Appignani Humanist Legal Center even had pictures of coaches involved in a team prayer, a Bible verse quoted on the team’s workout log sheet, and cheerleaders hoisting banners with Bible verses on them.

Last week, district Superintendent Will Schofield told a local newspaper that he didn’t care for the AHA since they lived “a thousand miles away,” ignoring completely that the AHA was prompted to act by someone in the district. However, he reminded all faculty members that they could not lead “students in prayer during school or school-sponsored activities, nor may they require or pressure students to participate in religious activities.”

That didn’t address all the concerns, though. (For one, coaches also can’t participate in team prayers, but the superintendent didn’t mention that at all.) Earlier this week, the AHA received an official response back from the district referencing an email sent to faculty members reminding them of the law (which, as stated, didn’t address all the concerns) and mentioning that the coach involved in these shenanigans was no longer employed by the district and these issues were all water under the bridge.

Today, however, the AHA hit the district with another bombshell:

They know the prayers are still happening. They even have a picture of it going on — with coaches participating — from a scrimmage game two weeks ago:

That was after the AHA sent its initial letter, by the way.

More importantly, several current and former students at the school have contacted the AHA since its initial letter to complain about the overt Christianity exhibited by the faculty members:

Since we sent the letter, we have received numerous emails from current and former students in the School District confirming that these practices have been ongoing, pervasive, and longstanding. One student informed us that a high school wrestling coach often led group prayers with students and would tell the students “religious stories” disguised as motivational speeches. Another student reported that a Christian-themed prayer was almost always included before the Chestatee High School marching band performances, usually prompted by the band director. At least one of the drummers in the band reportedly was a Muslim. The marching band student informed us of the following:

[T]he entire school was very religious, heavily biased towards Christianity… My sister who does not associate with the Christian religion either actually pretended to be Christian for a good year for fear of being ostracized by her friends… As part of the marching band, I often felt very out of place. The Christian religion was heavily seeded into the program and bothered me from the start. There would always be a prayer before each performance, usually led by a student, but often prompted by our band director. Chaplain actually became a leadership role one could be elected to in the band’s student leadership.

The student, like many others, thanked the AHA for trying to make “Chestatee High School a place where people who are non-religious like myself and those who associate with other religions can feel more comfortable and open about their beliefs.”

The AHA is suggesting the district take three actionable steps:

1. Adopt a written policy prohibiting teachers, coaches and other school officials from leading, endorsing, facilitating, and participating in prayer with students;

2. Eliminate all religious references from official team documents and promotional
materials and adopt a written policy prohibiting the same;

3. Enforce said written policies by monitoring games and practices and by sanctioning school officials for non-compliance with the penalties assessed for similar school code violations.

They also suggest sensitivity training for faculty members. Any decent school district would already have these policies in place, but when Christianity is entrenched within the culture, it’s not surprising to see these violations happening.

The ball is in the district’s court. It’s up to them to fix the problem they created.

(Portions of this article were posted earlier)

Help Me Track Legislation in Every State That Threatens Church/State Separation

I’ve written lots of posts over the years about state legislation that threatens to erode the wall between church and state, whether it’s making the Bible the official State Book or altering science curriculums so that public schools teach Creationism alongside evolution.

Normally, I hear about these bills second-hand, like when a local newspaper reports on it or someone writes a blog post about it — and a reader directs my attention there. There are two downsides to that: Some bills may go under the radar and I may discover these things too late to urge people to take action. I want to be more pro-active, but I need your help. Despite my best efforts, I can’t keep track of all the bills introduced in every state.

That’s why I’d like to create a taskforce in each state to help keep tabs on what politicians are doing to promote God through the government. Each group will keep an eye on their state’s legislation and alert me if there’s something our community needs to be aware of. (If you don’t know how to keep track of it in your state, I’ll show you how.)

It’ll take a little trial and error to get this right, but I’m committed to making this work.

Here’s what I need from you:

If you’re interested in participating in this project, fill out this form ASAP. I’ll put together the teams in each state (with no more than a handful of people in each) and we’ll go from there.

Thanks for your help.

(Image via Shutterstock)

Leaving the Christian Right: Harder Than You Think

I didn’t know who Joyce Elaine White was until I read this piece in the American Prospect. I’m still not entirely sure why this piece ran, but I’m glad it did. The article covers her life from about 1973 to 2011 and unravels each layer of her departure — from being a fundamentalist homeschool preacher’s wife and mom in a cultish group, to divorcee and right-wing Christian political leader, to interior designer and conservative political bystander. I think her story is important to read for those on the outside of this world, just to understand how complex it is to untangle yourself from the religious, political, and social ideologies as they interplay in conservative Christian culture.

From the story, about her time as a Maranatha pastor’s wife:

He told her he had prayed to God, promising, “If you will bring her back to me, I’ll call her Joy.” She agreed to follow her husband to his mission post, relinquishing her given name.

“I figured my life was over anyway,” said White, “so why not call me Joy?”

In fundamentalist Christianity, White explains, “they tell you that love is not a feeling. Love is a decision. You decide to love this person. You honor your commitment and your vow that you made before God. I’ve even had ministers say this: It doesn’t matter what you want, think, or feel. It only matters what God wants.” (Robert Hucklebridge did not respond to several requests for an interview.)

The pair became disciples of Bob and Rose Weiner, the founders of Maranatha Christian Church, a charismatic group that had university campus chapters across the country. Former members and critics of the group would later charge the Weiners with “us[ing] a form of mind control that isolated students from their parents and then guid[ing] decisions on such personal matters as career choices, politics and marriage,” according to a 1985 Wall Street Journal article.

She later left the cult, began to realize her individual power, and got involved in conservative politics:

Under the weight of scrutiny, Marantha began to unravel, suffering financial decline and disbandment. In 1992, in the Hucklebridges returned to Odessa. It was no small adjustment — her two children had known only homeschooling in Mexico — but Elaine found a new calling when she became involved in the local Christian Coalition, during the presidential campaign. When she and her husband moved to Austin a year later, her networking with fellow conservative Christians soon landed her a position as director of the Capital City Christian Coalition and later as a lobbyist for the state organization in the state capital.

Upon returning to the United States, though, White decided to pursue the idea of taking dominion in a role distinct from that of pastor’s wife. She abandoned the name given her by her husband and started going by Elaine, her middle name. Joy, her son used to say, “died at the Rio Grande.”

Eventually, after debating the abortion issue in public with a Democrat, Elaine was finally able to leave fundamentalism entirely:

The Rev. Jim Rigby of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Austin, long active in Texas pro-choice politics, debated White for a local television station in the 1990s. After the debate, he offered to discuss common ground they might find together in the abortion debate. He didn’t hear from her — until she showed up at his church, several years later, wanting to talk.

…

Although White didn’t appear to be frightened on the surface, he said, she was “terrified of disappointing people, not doing the right thing, disappointing God.”

But, he said, “she didn’t quit. She kept facing her monsters.”

“You have to grieve your way out of fundamentalism,” Rigby added.

The profile is well worth a read for those puzzled why those in Christian fundamentalism don’t just up and “get out.” It’s a process that requires time and much work.

(Image via Shutterstock)