Over the weekend, California State Senator Rodrick D. Wright (a Democrat) hosted a luncheon for high school honors students in his district. The invitation letter, sent out last month, was pretty straightforward and it sounded like a really nice gesture from a local politician:
Bob Smith (a pseudonym) was one of the attendees — his niece was being honored — but when the luncheon started, things got very quiet and very religious.
Beginning at the 0:48 mark in Smith’s video below, you can hear the person introducing Wright — Carson City Councilmember Mike Gipson — leading the crowd in a Christian prayer:
Senator Wright knew this was going to happen. He even mentioned it on his website:
LA Sheriff’s Lieutenant Scott Gage led the students, parents and teachers in the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by an invocation by Carson City Councilmember Mike Gipson.
Typically, government invocations are non-denominational, but I think it’s safe to say the line is crossed when you end the prayer with “Bless them now in Jesus Christ’s name. Amen.”
Smith notes:
There were noticeable Muslim students also at this event yet there was no mention of their faith.
There was obviously at least one atheist in the audience, too. Probably a lot more, though we don’t know for sure. But even if the entire audience comprised of Christians, it wouldn’t make this the appropriate venue for a religious prayer.
This wasn’t billed as a luncheon for Christian students only.
This was an event to honor the best and brightest students in Wright’s district, yet Wright and his colleagues used the time to make non-Christians feel excluded for the crime of not being in the majority faith.
Incidentally, Wright attended Pepperdine University, a private school affiliated with the Churches of Christ.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation has been alerted.
The organizers of the FreeOK Oklahoma Freethought Convention are doing a nifty fundraiser to help out Rebecca Vitsmun, the atheist who told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer “I’m actually an atheist” in response to his question about whether she thanked God in the wake of the recent tornado.
These shirts will be sold online and at the FreeOK Convention in June for a $25 donation to a relief fund designated to help our heroine and her son get through this very difficult time. All tees are black, 100% cotton with “I’m actually an atheist” screen printed in white with the scarlet letter A that has come to be associated with atheism. Ladies cuts are available. When ordering, you may choose to have your tee shipped or have it waiting for you at the convention on June 22nd. As always, your support is appreciated.
This is not to say that future desires do not matter. They matter to some people. In fact, they happen to matter to many of us.
When I say that future desires do not count, this is to be taken as reporting the real-world fact that a future desire is not a reason for action that exists. It is a reason for action that will exist - or not, depending on the choices we make. However, it is not a reason for action that exists at the time that an action is decided upon.
You, the reader, may want future desires to count. You may think that future people are people - or will be people - and their interests are as important as ours. You may want your fellow humans to act in ways that fulfill, rather than thwart, their future desires.
That "want" you have, if this is true, is a present desire. That "want" is a reason for action that exists. However, in the absence of such a want, future desires are impotent and irrelevant with respect to current action.
If you want people today to behave differently, in a way that fulfills rather than thwarts future desires, you must either find a current reason for action that exists, or create a current reason for action (desire) that will fulfill future desires.
To create a current reason for action that exists itself requires a current reason to act. It requires a current desire that give a person today reason to use social tools such as reward (which includes praise) and punishment (including condemnation) to mold the desires of others in ways that fulfill rather than thwart future desires. Whether the topic is climate change, overpopulation, or government deficits, one must find the reason to change in current reasons for action that exist.
As it turns out, people tend to have - and they have many and strong reasons to promote in others - a consideration of future desires.
We have the fulfillment of our own future desires to consider. However, even though we tend to have an interest in the fulfillment of our own future desires, it is one current desire among many. It often gets outweighed by other current desires. Thus, people eat what they should not, drink what they should not, enage in sexual behaviors that thwart future desires, choise entertainment over education, and generally sacrifice even their own future interests for the sake of current satisfaction.
Even here, our own future desires do not count in the absence of present desires that tend to fulfill future desires. The future desires alone will do no good.
In terms of an interest in fulfilling future desires, there are also those with children, who care about the fulfillment of their children's desires, who know that their children will be concerned with the interests of ther own children, and so on. Those who do not have children are friends with those who do. People generally have reason to promote an overall interest in the world those children will live in.
In all of these cases, we are talking about present desires that future desires be fulfilled. There is simply no sense to the claim that a future desire has any pull over present action by itself - in the absence of advocacy or mediation by a present desire that the future desire be fulfilled.
This post can mostly be taken as an instruction to those who do wish to see future desires fulfilled. Do you want people today to behave differently with respect to the fulfillment r thwarting of future desires? Then find or create (using reward and punshment) the reasons for action in the present. When somebody asks, "Why should I act differently?", if you do not give an answer in terms of a reason for action that exists (or create such a reason), it is a mistake to expect the answer given to have much of a real-world effect.
That's reality.
To tie this into the possible worlds questions we have been examining, one could say about a current action, "It will bring a person into the world whose desires will be largely fulfilled."
The respose is, "So? What current reason for action do I have for bringing a future person into existence whose desires will be largely fulfilled? You must relate that future state to a current reason for action that exists."
We were stood in front of a small bookcase filled with hundreds of little vials, each identical in shape but with myriad different labels, like “Arsenic” and “Belladonna”. Each vial contained perhaps a thimbleful of tiny, white sugar pills, identical to those you’d find in the homeopathy section of Boots.
“It looks a bit like my mum’s spice rack,” I ventured.
Homeopathy is a bogus system of medicine that relies on the assumption that “like cures like”. In the words ofBritain’s Society of Homeopaths, “drinking too much coffee can cause sleeplessness and agitation, so when made into a homeopathic medicine, it could be used to treat people with these symptoms”. It sounds a bit like the logic behind vaccines, if that logic had been concocted at a time when we knew nothing about germs or the immune system.
During yesterday’s Mass in Rome, Pope Francis made some noteworthy remarks that go against the Protestant notion that only those who believe in Christ’s divinity can be saved. (Sure, he’s Catholic, and this belief is nothing new, but we’re still not used to hearing it from someone in his position.)
“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class! We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all! And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”
Damn… this Pope’s making it really difficult to dislike him. Compared to the legacy the last one left behind, it’s like Francis is dragging Catholicism into the 19th century.
Of course, the underlying message — that were all “redeemed” because Christ died for us — is just fiction to atheists. You may also think it’s condescending to suggest that atheists need to be redeemed (from what, exactly?), but to have the Pope reiterate to Catholics that they’re not the only special ones is a big deal.
One commenter on Huffington Post put it perfectly: “I’m glad to know that an imaginary being has granted me imaginary forgiveness.”
Still, to have a religious leader of any sort tell his followers that people who aren’t part of the faith can be good and “saved” is a huge step forward. Usually, it’s the exact opposite.
That’s how many hours it’s taken me to get to Bucharest. But I’m here now! The sun is shining! I’m about ready to pass out! I’m hoping a shower will reawaken my will to consciousness.
Mama anteater with baby anteater on her back (Bob Luckey – Greenwich Time)
That sounds perfectly normal.
Until you realize that female anteaters have a six month gestation period, and a male anteater hadn’t been in the same pen with her for over eight months…
The staff at the conservation center immediately got to wondering. Either this was a case of immaculate anteater conception, or [father?] Alf had somehow gotten the keys to [mother] Armani’s pen one night in October.
Three points:
1) This could be Anteater Jesus.
2) As the Get Religion blog notes, the “Immaculate Conception” doesn’t refer to the birth of Jesus. It refers to the birth of Mary.
3) Never forget that, in the face of something that appears supernatural, there’s probably a very natural explanation:
Marcella Leone, founder and director of the conservation center, has another idea. She thinks it might have been a case of delayed implantation, when fertilized eggs remain dormant in the uterus for a period of time.
Crazy woman. We know the truth. EVERYONE BOW DOWN TO ANTEATER JESUS!
I RECENTLY watched an impassioned 18-minute film on the subject of religion and freedom, made as a kind of personal statement by Jacob Mchangama, a Danish human-rights lawyer. Copies of the film were given out to all participants in last week’s Oslo Freedom Forum, an annual human-rights festival, and it was also posted on the website of the “Free to Choose” network, a lobby group which advocates free markets and free speech. In part because of his unusual background, Mr Mchangama feels personally affected by some of the recent global furores over religion, blasphemy and free expression. He grew up in liberal Denmark but his forebears on one side came from the Comoros Islands; so he has close kin who practise Islam, albeit not of the harsh, intolerant variety which seems to be gaining ground in the Middle East.
Jamie Bartlett, Head of the Violence and Extremism Programme and the Centre for the Analysis of Social Media at Demos, writes:
All the evidence now strongly suggests that yesterday’s knife attack in Woolwich was a terrorist incident, and the two culprits were al-Qaeda inspired, or motivated by similar violent ideas. Beyond that, caution is required. There is still much we do not know (although Twitter, predictably, has already named one suspect, and I won’t repeat it here). It is being reported as a new departure, a new style, of terrorist activity. Assuming it is an al-Qaeda inspired attack, that is wrong on three counts.
Via Dangerous Minds, a rare clip from a 1994 television program warning of the dangers that lurk within local neighborhood parks throughout America: namely, homosexuals and Satanists. More background on the series here. One word, people: mullet.
Two vaguely related news items. First, from the grey lady:
Atheists should be seen as good people if they do good, Pope Francis said on Wednesday in his latest urging that people of all religions – or no religion – work together. [...]
He told the story of a Catholic who asked a priest if even atheists had been redeemed by Jesus.
“Even them, everyone,” the pope answered, according to Vatican Radio. “We all have the duty to do good,” he said.
I appreciate the gesture. Obviously the notion that atheists are “saved” is meaningless to me, and the emphasis on the sacrifice of the chief prophet seems misplaced, but the outreach is nice to see.
But just as I’m basking in the warm glow, I turn to the Chicago Tribune
Chicago Jesuits hid sex crimes
Internal church records released Tuesday show that Chicago Jesuits consciously concealed the crimes of convicted sex offender Donald McGuire for more than 40 years as the prominent Roman Catholic priest continued to sexually abuse dozens of children around the globe.
One letter written in 1970 by the Rev. John H. Reinke, then president of Loyola Academy in Wilmette, described McGuire’s presence at the school as “positively destructive and corrosive.” Instead of insisting he be removed from ministry or sent to treatment, Reinke suggested a transfer to Loyola University.
It’s really hard to sing “We Are the World” when this crap is still going on.
LAST January we carried news that a 16-year-old atheist, Jessica Ahlquist, was at the receiving end of a tsunami of insults and threats after she forced the removal of a 50-year-old prayer plaque in the auditorium of Cranston High School West in Cranston, Rhode Island.
Assisted by her dad, Ahlquist brought a lawsuit against the school, and a judge agreed that its presence was in clear violation of church-state separation. He ordered its immediate removal.
Jessica Ahlquist
Branded by one outraged Christian as “a horrible little monster”, Ahlquist has since been giving talks all over America about her lawsuit, and yesterday she was among several winners of the Hugh M Hefner First Amendment Awards. She won in the education category for her “courageous and successful lawsuit.” Her prize was $5,000 and – erm – a plaque.
Ahead of the ceremony at the Playboy Mansion in Holmby Hills, CA, Jessica told The Friendly Atheist:
I was so shocked when I heard that I was going to be honored with this award. At first, my activism doesn’t seem like it could possibly be connected to Hugh Hefner or Playboy, but when you think about it, we both advocate for the First Amendment. That’s what the award is really about. I’m so flattered and I’m definitely looking forward to the ceremony and meeting all of the other amazing awardees.
The awards were established in 1979 to honor individuals’ contributions to protecting First Amendment rights.
Somebody asked me why Abiogenesis happened only once.
My response was that it may very well have happened multiple times but that the Earth's atmosphere transitioned from 'reduced' to 'non-reduced' when fotosynthesis evolved and that this resulted in the extinction of all the other strains of life (the Great Oxygenation Event).
However, this can not account for it wholy because what about life forms that do chemosynthesis? How much have these life forms been examined? Are they known to be part of that same life strain (and simply well shielded from the non-reduced atmosphere and therefor unaffected? Or is the research pointing in another direction? A second abiogenssis? A remainder from the first? A return to the 'basics' comparable to the return of the whale to water?
Planet Atheism buttons
FAQ (includes joining info)
RSS feed
Email subscription
