A billboard saying “There Is No Afterlife: Enjoy Life Now” placed in Watertown, Wis., by the Freedom From Religion Foundation on behalf of a local member, was vandalized. Paint was poured on the billboard posted at the entrance to Watertown at N8690 High Rd., apparently sometime overnight on Thursday, Aug. 26.

The vandalized vinyl message was promptly removed by Adams Outdoor Co., on Friday. Adams Outdoor is replacing the message gratis and expects to have it back up around Labor Day to honor FFRF’s 6-week lease. The billboard went up on the first week of August.

An octogenarian Lifetime Foundation member who prefers not to be publicly named suggested the wording of the slogan as a legacy for his grandchildren.

The donor of the billboard is putting up $500 and the Foundation is matching that pledge for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the vandal(s). The donor expressed shock and revulsion that a vandal or vandals would deface his message to “enjoy life now.”

“At least 45 million honest Americans reject the supernatural idea of life-after-death,” said Dan Barker, Foundation co-president, who has written two books about “losing faith in faith” and leaving the evangelical ministry. Barker quoted a poem by Emily Dickinson: “That it will never come again is what makes life so sweet.”

“There is no evidence of a soul or an afterlife,” added Annie Laurie Gaylor, Foundation co-president. “We freethinkers believe the only afterlife we should be concerned about is leaving a secure and pleasant future for our descendants.”

In order to claim a reward, information leading to the conviction of the vandal or vandals should be directed to the Foundation, which will pass on information to the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department. Contact the Foundation by phone (608/256-8900) or e-mail.

Related articles:

1. FFRF’s latest billboard: Enjoy life now, there is no afterlife
2. FFRF places 5 “God-free” billboards in New Orleans
3. Freethought “Billboard Blitz” in Tampa

Courtesy AtheistCartoons.com.

Related articles:

1. SFB: 8/26/2010 Atheist Cartoon
2. The Four R’s – 8/30/2010 Atheist Cartoon
3. Godwin: 9/3/2010 Atheist Cartoon

Unable to attend Beck’s pro-theocracy events tonight and tomorrow? You have options. FREE options.

First, make sure you have all required supplies. Beer, check. Snacks, check. Pepto-Bismol, check. Restraints so as to avoid damaging own computer in blind rage, check.

Second, turn on computer. (You’re reading this, so you have probably already completed the second step. How proactive!)

Third, go to the Washington Post’s liveblog of tonight’s “America’s Divine Destiny” speech, which begins at 8:00 Eastern Standard Time. Feel like watching it? You can only see it if you pay, joining Beck’s “Insider Extreme” program.

Beck’s site describes tonight’s speech:

Join Glenn Beck for an inspiring look at the role faith played in the founding of America and the role it will play again in its destiny. The audience for the event will be overwhelmingly made up of pastors, ministers and clergy: a modern day Black Robe Regimen. Tickets will be made available to the general public at no cost.

Fourth, set alarm so you will be up by 9:45 am Eastern Standard Time.

Fifth, drink beer and worry about the coming Mormon theocracy while watching Red Dawn.

Sixth, settle in with proper morning supplies. Pitcher of Bloody Maries, and all the other supplies from last night.

Seventh, visit Beck’s Restoring Honor Rally page on Facebook to watch the rally desecrating the Lincoln Memorial and the memory of Martin Luther King, Jr. It runs from 10 am to 1 pm Eastern Standard Time on Saturday morning. As described,

Join the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and many more for this non-political event that pays tribute to America’s service personnel and other upstanding citizens who embody our nation’s founding principles of integrity, truth and honor.

Our freedom is possible only if we remain virtuous. Help us restore the values that founded this great nation. On August, 28th, come join us in our pledge to restore honor at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC.

Related articles:

1. Beck Rallies In Washington Undercut Church-State Separation, Watchdog Group Charges
2. Glenn Beck in Bed with Big Business
3. In Brief: First Glenn Beck, now George Will – Liberalism, Liberals, Liberal Politics – Salon.com

Historian Diana Agorio has released Sex Rites: The Origins of Christianity.

Sex Rites describes the evolution of religious rituals involving sex, drugs, and human sacrifice as the foundation of Christian myth and ritual. Diana’s description of the religious rituals and myths which led up to Christianity is far more damning than the typical atheist critique of religion. In particular, it describes the outrageous suffering of children at the hands of ancient religious leaders. She describes rituals in which children were mutilated, raped, drugged, and killed, as acts of faith. She also highlights positive aspects of ancient cultures, which were the origins of humanism and secular government.

Diana Agorio began her studies of West Asia as a conservative Christian kid in Alaska. After living in Israel; then, traveling and studying ancient history for the last 25+ years, she ended up a liberal atheist. But, unlike many other atheist critics of religion, Diana knows and loves the ancient cultures which invented the Abrahamic faiths. No theist can accuse her of reading the Bible like a fundamentalist. She has an in depth knowledge of the political and economic environment which shaped the minds of the Biblical authors.

Diana graduated magna cum laude with a BS in History. Her primary fascination is with the cultures of the Bronze Age and Iron Age Levant. But, she is a generalist with historical interests ranging from Sumer, to Anatolia, to Egypt, to Greece, and Rome. Her methodology is based on meme theory, following changes in cultures as fashions, avoiding racial descriptions. This method provides a powerful new understanding of ancient peoples, describing their evolution in dynamic terms, rather than as static ethnicities. Diana makes extensive use of primary source material and cites experts in the fields of archaeology, theological studies, and art history, in scholarly journals and peer reviewed books.

A virtual book party launch is ongoing on Diana’s Facebook page. Stop by and pay a visit! Additional information about the book is also available at: http://ancientmeme.blogspot.com/.

Related articles:

1. In Brief: Religious accommodationism at Evolution 2010
2. Disproving Christianity: A new addition to your freethought library
3. In Brief: S.C. Gov. Race Heats Up over Haley's Religion | Politics | Christianity Today

In 2008, the Arkansas Freethinkers requested space at the State Capitol for a solstice display, alongside religious displays. They were refused. They sued; now a settlement is proposed.

Wall 1 of the solstice display. Click for larger version.

The group has dedicated a website to the proposed display and the ongoing legal saga. They’ve included all four wall designs, scans of their exchanges with the Secretary of State, and news reports.

The first wall is shown at left; visit their site to see the others.

In 2009, the ACLU took on the Freethinkers’ case. They reviewed the state’s policy on displays at the Capitol, and asked to see the records of permit applications for all displays installed during the 16 years of the current policy. Even though religious displays had been installed annually, the only permit applications on file were the 2008 and 2009 Freethinker applications. The ACLU sued, as it was clear that the Freethinkers’ display was being denied on grounds of its message.

The display was placed on the Capitol grounds in 2009 following a Federal judge’s injunction, and a proposed settlement over the 2008 and 2009 refusal was announced Monday. Under the proposal, the state will pay the Freethinkers’ $28,500 in legal fees, and allow the group to set up its display annually.

The court has yet to review and approve the proposed settlement.

Related articles:

1. Federal judge dismisses suit against FFRF solstice sign
2. FFRF challenges religious Tennessee courthouse display
3. Northern Ireland's culture minister calls for creationism display at museum

Responses to a recent Pew Forum poll indicate that a rising number of Americans believe President Obama is a Muslim. The same poll also demonstrates that a majority of Americans believe churches should stay out of politics.

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life conducted a telephone survey of 3,003 respondents, using landlines and cell phones, in English and in Spanish, from July 21 – August 5, 2010.

The results?

Americans perceive Obama as less influenced by religion that his predecessor, George W. Bush . . . but not substantially less. When asked whether the presidents relied on their religious views too much, too little, just the right amount, or unsure, 53% gave Bush kudos for being “just right”; 48% felt the same about Obama. A majority – 52% and 53%, respectively — believe that Bush and Obama mention their religious faith and prayer enough.

Respondents also expressed an increased willingness to believe that Obama is a Muslim. Back in October 2008, a slight majority of Americans, 51%, believed Obama to be Christian, and 12% believed him Muslim. Presently, a mere 34% of Americans believe him to be Christian, and 18% think he’s deceived the country and is really a closet Muslim.

Please note that this survey was completed before President Obama’s remarks regarding Park 51, the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque”.

A recent Time Magazine poll found that 24% of respondents believed Obama to be a closet Muslim, and that nearly one-third of Americans think Muslims should be barred from sitting on the Supreme Court or running for President. (Poll conducted on behalf of Time Magazine by Abt SRBI. 1,002 adults — 89% of whom identified themselves as likely voters — surveyed on Aug. 16-17, after Obama’s remarks supporting Park 51.)

Graphic: Pew Forum

The long-term shift in attitudes about church involvement in politics suggests that, in spite of the current rise of the Tea Party and other Christian Right-dominated organizations, America is still slowly moving toward respecting the need for church-state separation. What do you think? Will this trend continue? And what about Obama . . . what do you think he believes? Or do you care?

Look, TWO polls!

Related articles:

1. Majority of Americans favor allowing openly-gay military service
2. Republican National Committee Survey – Take it Now
3. Poll: 43% of Americans neutral or anti-Nat'l Day of Prayer

Dr. Wynne LeGrow

LeGrow appears to be the first major party nominee to seek federal office as a declared unbeliever, and the first to seek elected office on that basis since CFI board member Eddie Tabash’s unsuccessful bid for a seat in the California legislature in 2000. (In 2007 Congressman Pete Stark (D.-Cal.) identified himself an unbeliever, having held his seat since 1972.)

LeGrow’s lack of belief isn’t the only thing setting him apart from other candidates. On his Issues page, LeGrow explains his positions. He stresses the need to focus on deficit reduction once the economy stabilizes, recognizing that living on debt isn’t healthy for individuals or nations. LeGrow promotes green energy, echoing T. Boone Pickens’ ongoing commentary about the wisdom and negative economic impact of exporting billions of American dollars to oil-producing nations who, as LeGrow diplomatically puts it, “do not have our best interests in mind”.

In other areas, LeGrow is much like other first-time candidates. H asserts that education needs to be a priority in this country, and that alternate funding sources — beyond property taxes — should be found. Unfortunately, he does not at this time propose any such alternatives.

On the matter of jobs, LeGrow returns to the need for a well-educated work force, and also suggests tax incentives for small businesses. Again, he does not yet list specific measures he would propose.

LeGrow has presently taken no stance on social issues.

On August 18, LeGrow posted a statement, simply titled “An Atheist Running for Congress,” on the political blog site Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/8/18/894365/-An-Atheist-Running-for-Congress). LeGrow outlined his reasons for running for office, in part:

My opponent is Congressman Randy Forbes. During his nine-year tenure in the House of Representatives, he has founded the Congressional Prayer Caucus, led a group of House and Senate members in a public prayer for the demise of the Health Care Reform, and introduced a Congressional Resolution to have “In God We Trust” engraved at the new Capitol Visitor Center. He regularly attempts to introduce religion into government. He not only believes that the United States is a Christian nation, but he believes that we should be a Christian republic.

I am running for Congress to encourage the growth of the job market and support quality public education in Southside Virginia. I am running for Congress because I am absolutely convinced that the burning of fossil fuels is contributing to global climate change and putting the planet at risk for our children and grandchildren. I am running for Congress because we can no longer allow Wall Street and Big Oil gamble away our money and ruin our ecosystem. I am running for Congress because I believe in effective government that protects individuals but does not over-regulate and stifle initiative. I am running for Congress because I believe freedom of religion is a principle which should unite all of us in tolerance.

Forbes ran unopposed in 2002 and 2006, and beat Democratic challengers in 2004 and 2008 with 65% and 60% of the vote, respectively. He has recently introduced legislation to declare the United States a “Judeo-Christian nation”, declare the Bible to be God’s Word, and to declare (his) religion “the inseparable foundation for America’s representative processes, legal systems, and societal structures”.

LeGrow’s website may be found at http://www.legrowforuscongress.com/

What do you think? A desperately-needed change? A long shot?

Related articles:

1. Religious Liberty: Freedom to Control Government?
2. Federal judge declares Pennsylvania blasphemy law unconstitutional
3. European Union to hold atheist summit . . . plus freemasons

Sam Harris

Sam Harris is well known, and generally respected, for his strong opinions. The content of his column, “What Obama Got Wrong about the Mosque“, is no exception. Harris, one would assume, takes objection to President Obama’s recent remarks about freedom of religion.

Oddly, despite the title, Harris doesn’t describe or quote anything Obama said on the subject. So, what did our President say? Obama’s remarks (in full):

Recently, attention has been focused on the construction of mosques in certain communities -– particularly New York. Now, we must all recognize and respect the sensitivities surrounding the development of Lower Manhattan. The 9/11 attacks were a deeply traumatic event for our country. And the pain and the experience of suffering by those who lost loved ones is just unimaginable. So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. And Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground.

But let me be clear. As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. (Applause.) And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are. The writ of the Founders must endure.

We must never forget those who we lost so tragically on 9/11, and we must always honor those who led the response to that attack -– from the firefighters who charged up smoke-filled staircases, to our troops who are serving in Afghanistan today. And let us also remember who we’re fighting against, and what we’re fighting for. Our enemies respect no religious freedom. Al Qaeda’s cause is not Islam -– it’s a gross distortion of Islam. These are not religious leaders -– they’re terrorists who murder innocent men and women and children. In fact, al Qaeda has killed more Muslims than people of any other religion -– and that list of victims includes innocent Muslims who were killed on 9/11.

So that’s who we’re fighting against. And the reason that we will win this fight is not simply the strength of our arms -– it is the strength of our values. The democracy that we uphold. The freedoms that we cherish. The laws that we apply without regard to race, or religion, or wealth, or status. Our capacity to show not merely tolerance, but respect towards those who are different from us –- and that way of life, that quintessentially American creed, stands in stark contrast to the nihilism of those who attacked us on that September morning, and who continue to plot against us today.

In my inaugural address I said that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus —- and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and every culture, drawn from every end of this Earth. And that diversity can bring difficult debates. This is not unique to our time. Past eras have seen controversies about the construction of synagogues or Catholic churches. But time and again, the American people have demonstrated that we can work through these issues, and stay true to our core values, and emerge stronger for it. So it must be -– and will be -– today.

Where is Obama wrong? Can someone please enlighten me where his comments are off base?

Harris levels his charges not against Obama’s support of religious freedom, but against the assertion that al Quaida is not the only, or even primary, face of Islam. He declares Islam “different from other faiths”, noting that even if multiple generations of moderate Muslims ignore the violent passages of the Koran and focus on more peaceful messages, “the holy books remain forever to be consulted, and no one will dare to edit them. Consequently, the most barbarous and divisive passages in these texts will remain forever open to being given their most plausible interpretations.”

Anticipating a common response, he correctly notes that “the Old Testament contains even greater barbarism,” but insists that “there are obvious historical and theological reasons why it inspires far less Jewish and Christian violence today,” asserting that anyone comparing the mass-murders of the Crusades or Israel’s bombing of civilian areas of Palestine to Islamic jihadists “is simply not thinking honestly about the problem of Islam.”

That’s right. According to Harris, you’re intellectually dishonest if you recognize that the fundamental texts of the Old Testament, which Harris declares to contain “even greater barbarism” and which “no one will dare to edit,” leave Christians with the same potential for barbarism as modern fundamentalist Islam.

Harris never describes the “obvious historical and theological reasons” he mentions, and conveniently forgets the domestic Christian terrorists of recent years — the Oklahoma City bombers of 1995; this year’s Hutaree, who hoped to spark a civil war by murdering policemen; the rise of the “sovereign citizen” movement; and the upswing in Christian Dominionist groups, like American Vision, classed as “hate groups” by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Harris, in his fear and anger, plays directly into the hands of the Christian right, even repeating their arguments.

“There is no such thing as Islamophobia,” he declares. “. . . it is not a form of bigotry or racism to observe that the specific tenets of the faith pose a special threat to civil society.” While Harris stops short of demanding that the government prevent the community center/mosque from being built, he echoes all the sentiments of those who do . . . while keeping his own hands clean.

Harris fails to realize — or, at least, to acknowledge — that the Christian right has two goals in this case, and neither has anything to do with Islam per se: To inflame Nativism, that “Us/Real Christian-Nation Americans” vs. “Them/Invaders” dichotomy; and to weaken respect for the First and Fourteenth Amendments so they may be either disregarded or amended in the Right’s favor.

If the community center/mosque were forced off the legally-acquired land and such action supported by the courts, it would set a legal precedent stating that land use law, and the rights of the minority, may be determined by the sensibilities of the majority. Equal protection and freedom of religion would be irrevocably damaged. The First Amendment’s Free Exercise clause, and the Fourteenth’s Equal Protection Clause, would be rendered judicially impotent.

This is exactly what the Christian Right wants. Both Liam Fox and Luis Granados have recently addressed the Right’s complete disinterest in — nay, hostility toward — democracy except when “the will of the people” serves their needs, and have commented on their hostility toward the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Sam Harris is playing directly into the Right’s hands, bringing thousands of liberal-minded folk along for the ride . . . willingly herding themselves onto the train toward Christian theocracy, a ride gathering strength and speed daily.

Harris openly condemns the construction of an Islamic center, mosque, what-have-you in this vicinity, warning that “the erection of a mosque upon the ashes of this atrocity will also be viewed by many millions of Muslims as a victory—and as a sign that the liberal values of the West are synonymous with decadence and cowardice.”

Andy McCarthy, author of a paranoid screed about how American liberals are consciously handing America over to the Muslims, recently professed that there are 2,300 mosques in the US, but no churches in Saudi Arabia. Is he suggesting that the United States should behave like Saudi Arabia? Is Harris?

If there were evidence that this project were a “conquest mosque”, Harris might have something. Not a legal basis, but a reason to be offended. A reason to question the motives of the sponsors. So, why are these Muslims so intent on moving into lower Manhattan?

Because they’ve been there nearly three decades, that’s why.

Like Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Fischer, et al, Harris ignores the fact that the congregation has been located a few blocks away in TriBeCa for twenty-seven years, and has outgrown its space.

Twenty-seven years.

This is not a “conquest mosque”. What is it?

It is not a mosque, although it will include a space for Muslim prayer services. It will have a swimming pool, basketball court, meeting rooms, a 500-seat auditorium, banquet facilities and many other things a community needs to be healthy. The center will offer theatrical programming, art exhibitions and cooking classes. These are amenities missing now from this part of the city.

And, yes, the center will have a public memorial to the victims of 9/11 as well as a meditation room where all will be welcome for quiet reflection. The center will support soul and body.

The center will be open to all regardless of religion. Like a YMCA, the 92nd St. Y or the Jewish Community Center uptown, it will admit everyone. It will be a center for all New Yorkers.

Some say that the Imam, moderate Feisal Abdul Rauf, should have the sensitivity not to locate there. Maybe he should move his congregation to a different borough at taxpayer expense, as New York Governor Paterson suggested, instead of just a few blocks from their existing, undersized space. However, it is not for the government, or anyone else, to direct — or pay — him to do so. We either have religious freedom and equal protection under the law in this country, or we do not.

Religious freedom does not mean allowing Sharia courts, like the UK and some other European nations have in some cases done. It means expecting everyone to follow the same laws, and according them the same rights and responsibilities as everyone else.

That includes the right to be insensitive and putting your own rights and desires above the sensibilities of others. Regardless of how we feel about the sponsors’ choice of location for this facility, we should not be attacking our own people for supporting the basic freedoms that set the United States apart from other nations; we should not allow the Right to lead us into condemning and invalidating our own Constitution.

That is the last thing we can afford to do.

Related articles:

1. Use of Government Property to Relocate NYC Mosque Raises Serious Legal Questions, Says Americans United
2. FFRF: Islamic Center not a state/church violation, we’re not suing over it
3. In Brief: About New York – A Marine, a Mosque and a Question on Staten Island

How do you spell “atheist”?

Courtesy AtheistCartoons.com.

Related articles:

1. June 13 2010 Atheist Cartoon: Oh! Calcutta!
2. May 19, 2010: Atheist Cartoons draws Muhammad
3. August 9 Atheist Cartoon: Together again, for the first time