Can Anything Good Come Out of Mississippi?

What's Wrong with Mississippi

Mississippi has had a lot of problems since its inception, not the least of which was its sordid support of slavery. We've come quite a long way since the Civil Rights era but, due to conservative religious saturation and natural human bigotry (we like to call that "tradition"), we still have a whole lot of work to do. Since it is now a public death wish to be known to be a racist, people have taken refuge in the next brand of socially-accepted bigotry...anti-gay intolerance.

SB2681 and Its Real Meaning

This bill was hailed as a "religious freedom" bill but its real intent was to give Mississippi business owners the power to discriminate in their dealings. The bill was pretty much DOA but a quick slap by the Mississippi Southern Baptist Convention reminded our legislators that religion runs Mississippi - not the law.

The law takes place on July 1 and allows people to discriminate against anyone or anything for any "sincerely held" religious reason. When I say "any religious reason," I mean any:

"Exercise of religion" includes, but is not limited to, the ability to act or the refusal to act in a manner that is substantially motivated by one's sincerely held religious belief, whether or not the exercise is compulsory or central to a larger system of religious belief.

So the reason doesn't have to pertain to a particular religious doctrine or belief. It can be any peripheral idea you've pulled out of your ass or any other non-religious belief you hold and slap a "religion" label on it.

Who is the arbiter of what belief is "sincerely held?" The court, by default, will become the decider of what is legitimate religious belief and what is not. So much for religious freedom. The law forces the state to define religion - not stay out of it.

What Is Mississippi's Response?

Many of us Mississippians did not support this bill and we are actively standing against it now, sometimes at great personal risk to our family, friendships, and business interests. 
The beginning of our campaign to fight back was to make this sticker available to those who were against the bill and let people see the very real opposition.

We want people to see that it's ok to fight against the radical, conservative religious agenda. It's ok to publicly say, "I'm not going to discriminate against anybody." We wanted to challenge people to stand up to the bigots in our state whether they are at home or at church. We are trying to be powerful agents for change in this state and this is our FIRST step, not our last. We are strongly encouraged by the fact that the AFA has called this sticker a "bullying campaign" because a) it's obviously untrue, and b) it shows we've got them scared.

Is It Good Enough?

I'd hope that people around the country would rally to our cause and encourage us in the fight but, sadly, that's not always the case. When the AFA's comment was covered on Pharyngula, a couple of commenters made the following statements:

1. @5: It’s worse than that. These stickers aren’t calling for a repeal of the “bigotry is allowed” law — they’re just saying that this store chooses not to avail themselves of their God-given right to be bigots. That the bigots take this as bullying of *them*…….defies all attempts at explanation, however desperate.


2. These non-discrimination signs aren’t even very welcoming. They’re basically saying, “Even though we’re not legally required to recognize your humanity, we’ll take your money.” Fuck that whole state off.

Because Mississippi has allowed the AFA and their ilk to define our state image and speak on our behalf for so long, I can understand why these people feel this way. I sympathize strongly with their weariness at our intolerance and willful ignorance. But I feel I must speak up on behalf of the many Mississippians who don't share those views and have been working tirelessly to try to change this state. Our work here is difficult and it's not always very rewarding. Often we see no personal benefit except to know that we are doing what is right.

We do want this law repealed but we can't start the big legal work on that until it takes effect. As for being welcoming, I suppose we could have made signs that said, "Get Your Cute Gay Ass in Here and Spend Some Money!" but that wouldn't have helped our cause much.

Friends, we need your support badly. Instead of looking for fault in what we do, encourage us and help us do it better. This whole state isn't just conservative, religious nutjobs. There are a lot of decent, caring folks here of all stripes and we're working to find our voice.

What Good Is Coming Out of Mississippi?

We are rising up slowly but surely. We are working to pull our state kicking and screaming into the 21st century. We are struggling to liberate our family and friends from the toxicity of the SBC's rule. We are working to change minds and open hearts (figuratively, mind you).

We successfully fought against the 2012 Personhood bill and we'll likely fight that again this year. The struggle is over once you're done reading the article but it continues daily for those of us who live in these trenches.

We're not going to stop until we accomplish our goals. Support us.

Hagee Fails on Church/State Separation

The concept of the "separation of church and state" ensures that our government will remain neutral regarding religion. It's the backbone of a secular state; therefore, religious zealots often distort it. John Hagee's son, Matthew, explains...

...and gets it totally wrong.

1. He says it is supposed to protect the church from the state only. This is ridiculously false. A quick read of Jefferson and Madison's writings suffice to debunk this notion.

2. He says it is used nowadays to silence believers at the ballot box. This is obviously false. People will always vote their values whether those values are religious or secular. We don't vote as robots. We vote as thinking, feeling people.

3. He takes the opportunity to equate abortion with murder despite the fact that there are serious legal and moral differences between the two.

4. He ends with a fallacious semi-threat. We have no evidence of any gods, an afterlife, or a final judgment. And even if the latter two are true, how do we know which god(s) we will answer to? Does supporting a secular state bring about eternal punishment? There's no good reason to worry about any of this.

I can't help but laugh any time someone talks about how the American government oppresses the religious - particularly Christians. These guys couldn't be much more in bed with each other if they tried.

Christian Privilege in Mississippi - by "Brownie"

This is what I hope will be the first in a series of other Mississippians describing the pressure and discrimination they've witnessed in this state. A couple of people outside the state have accused me of "bullshitting" or making up my story for attention so I thought it might be useful to hear this from the mouths of other Mississippians. Pseudonyms have been used upon request. - Tweenky D

I work for the feds in MS. I've worked for the State at MSU. Lived ten years in MS, in a college town. Some of my experiences, below, at these places that are actually more tolerant than most of MS.

* A director at my fed lab led prayers, at completely non-religious events, while acting as director. Refused to acknowledge objections from peers that this was not right. No idea if subordinates dared complain. I have been told that in the past, group work meetings were opened with prayers.

* Each year, I receive an official email, from the fed lab that employs me, about the National Day of Prayer. Nothing about the Day of Reason.

[redacted by author due to the unresolved nature of the incident]

* The cafeteria at my fed lab used to play Fox on TV, exclusively, for the first year I was there. Recently, they've also started showing CNN, and there's a channel changer now. So, some progress.

* At MSU, a professor printed his private receipts for donations to an anti-gay group, on a public lab printer, where any student could see it.

* At MSU, another professor attached conversion pamphlets and Bible quotes to the end of professional publications, without coauthors knowledge nor consent. This went on for years. When I brought this up, all this person would admit to concern about was speaking for coauthors without their consent.

* Same professor at MSU, initiated a discussion about Christianity with a Muslim student, whose committee this professor was on. Coercion, abuse of power, even if not explicitly stated.
* Same person at MSU received anti-Muslim propaganda in their mailbox at work, where any student could see it. This person was on my committee too. I brought it up with another committee member. Wasn't going to risk antagonizing this person alone, when they had such power over me.

* Same person at MSU, sent invites to non-Christian students specifically to come see The Passion of the Christ. Totally inappropriate.

* At MSU, professors advertised their Creationism talks.

* Took a yoga exercise class at MSU's Sanderson center, for students and faculty. The instructor played Christian praise music. When I discussed this with him, and explained not all participants are Christian, and we're just here for exercise, not conversion, he just laughed. Didn't get it at all. Not one bit.

* The city council, in my college town, only a few years ago, used to open council meetings with a prayer. A new mayor put a stop to it. For now. We'll see how long that lasts. He's no longer in office.

* My orthodontist's office, in a my college town, plays exclusively Christian praise music. [edit: mistakenly wrote dentist, the dentist has Christian children's books in the lobby]

* A doctor's office, in my college town, had Fox playing in their waiting room. The doctor there told me he doesn't give women who *might* get pregnant most meds because the "baby" might have "allergies". Embryos, early fetuses, are susceptible to genetic damage from certain meds, but we know which ones are what class, B, C, D, X. And they don't have allergies at that age. I'm fortunate I can afford to see a different doctor.

* Another doctor I went to see was going to vote for initiative 26, fertilized eggs are people. This despite opposition from ob/gyn colleagues.

* I wrote to my college town hospital, to ask if they have rape evidence collection kits in stock, and personnel trained to use them. They did not bother to write back. (I was not attacked, wanted to know if women who were would have proper legal recourse.)

While I personally have not experienced death threats, bricks through windows, firing, or the like, I live and work in the most tolerant parts of MS, and still see plenty of preferential treatment for religion, and breaking of the law. Also, I'm well aware I'm white, middle class, and can afford to fight back, and have resources to fall back on if I lose. Not everyone has that.

What if Bryan Fischer Is Right?

I'm sure by now you've seen the video of Bryant Fischer and his disgusting assessment that school shootings happen because "God doesn't go where He's not wanted." Here's the video if you missed it and would like to torture yourself with it.

But what if Bryan Fischer is right? What if we're seeing more violence because we've taken prayer and Bible reading out of schools? Let's consider that from a Christian perspective.

Yahweh, according to the Bible, is all-powerful. He sees all and knows all - even before it happens. He can be everywhere at once and almost nothing can stand in His way.

Therefore, if Yahweh does not go into a school, it's because He chooses not to. We can't reasonably assert that He is rendered powerless to enter the building unless, of course, the entrances were guarded by iron chariots (Judges 1:19).

Why would Yahweh choose not to enter a school and protect the students? According to Fischer's explanation, He does not protect those who don't love Him and don't want Him around. Considering that Newtown, CT, is 85% Christian, that answer doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

The only thing left to consider is that these teachers and students were only nominally Christian - in other words, they weren't "True Christians." Not only is this fallacious thinking, but it leads us to a very damning conclusion.

If these victims weren't "real Christians," then who is to blame? It's not the government's job to teach kids religion. It's not the city council's job to teach kids the "real" meaning of Christmas. As any honest conservative who takes personal responsibility will tell you, it's the PARENTS' job to teach their kids how to be good Christians.

In other words, if you buy Fischer's claims, you must blame the victims' parents for not indoctrinating their kids well enough to buy them some mafia protection from their god.

That's not a position I'd want to advance, much less stand by. How Bryan Fischer, Mike Huckabee, and all the other shills can utter these notions without choking is beyond me.

Taking Back Mississippi

Credit: Thomas Thornycroft

It's no secret that Mississippi has long been under the boot heel of preachers and politicians who put their own interests above those of the people. I think it's even safe to say that corruption is so ingrained in our way of life down here that we've come to expect it and take a rather lackadaisical attitude towards it. Many are the times I've heard people say, "That's just the way things are down here," or "It's never gonna change. It'll always be that way."

Mississippians proved that wrong in 2011 when we said NO to amendment 26's "personhood" initiative. Against the dollars funneled in by Colorado's forced-birth group, against the organization and bullying of the local churches...against all hope...we defeated them by 58%. And now we've done it again.

Last night - Tuesday, December 11, 2012 - in Corinth, MS, the voters passed a liquor referendum by 70%. The churches posted their signs. The pastors thundered their sermons of doom. But 70% of the voters paid them no mind. Now the pastors are weeping and caterwauling at this stinging defeat and well they should - it's a sign of the times and conservative religion is losing!

The most damning belief we can hold is that we can't change anything. It's a message you'll hear all the time from those who don't want things to change or those who have already given up. The future is not for those people - it's for us. Mississippi doesn't have to always be the third-world state of the union. It doesn't always have to be the brunt of every joke. We can make it a better, freer place to live but it's going to take work.

Be sure, that work is going to continue to be arduous, maybe even risky, at times. It's always hard to take a stand against something that is so deeply ingrained. Nevertheless, we owe it to ourselves, our country, and our future generations to turn this ship around. Someone has to fight these battles and last night's victory is proof that votes - and voices - matter.

Every soldier in this fight is valuable. It doesn't matter whether your job is to stand on the front lines, fire the cannons, lead the calvary, run the ammunition, or cook for the troops. Everybody has a place in this fight. So do what you can. Plant the seeds of freedom by challenging myths and assumptions. Spread those seeds on Facebook and Twitter. Use humor. Be creative. Find your place in the ranks and help us pull this state out of its corrupted and prohibitive rut.

We pay a lot of lip service to the concept of freedom. Now it's time to claim that freedom - to claim our natural rights as free people. We don't need Mississippi's version of the nanny state, always telling us what religion says we can't drink or view or buy. We need to make those decisions for ourselves.

Use your voice. Use your vote.

Take Mississippi back!

Kumbaya in the Classroom

Pope Phil is at it again - fondly remembering a time when kids were forced to listen to state-sponsored prayers and hoping that people will see the "wisdom" of forcing future students to do the same. Who needs freedom of religion when the State of Mississippi can write and say our prayers for us?

"I know it's difficult when you start talking about denominations and different beliefs, but I think there is a way for us to have a nondenominational opening prayer when the opportunity is available to let people know there is a God," said Bryant, who is Methodist. "Those children should know that he does care about them, particularly within their classroom."

Hopefully, most of us already understand the Establishment Clause and how even a non-denominational prayer at school would violate the First Amendment. But I'm going to show you why Pope Phil's "Kumbaya" approach is not compatible with religious freedom and I'm going to use his exact words above to do so.

1. "...there is a God." Zap! There went the atheists' religious freedom. When the State says that a god exists, it endorses theistic belief over atheistic belief.

2. "...there is a God." Zap! There went the polytheists' religious freedom as well. When the State says there is "a" god, it means only one god. 

3. "Those children should know that he..." Zap! There went the religious freedom of everyone who believes in a female deity. The State endorses one male god only.

4. "...that he does care about them..." Zap! There went the deists' religious freedom. The State endorses the idea of a personal god that intervenes in daily life.

Who does that leave religious freedom open for? Obviously, for the Christians, Jews, and Muslims, right? No, not really.

Many (if not all - I'm not sure) Muslims segregate the sexes at prayer time. A state-sponsored prayer in the classroom won't accommodate those needs. Jews also have particular ways that they pray that differ from mainstream Christianity and those needs likely won't be accommodated either.

So we're left with only Christians really having religious freedom, right? Still, no. Jehovah's Witnesses won't participate in a state-sponsored prayer so they don't get religious freedom. Many Catholics have specific prayers or invoke the aid of saints and the Virgin Mary so this state-sponsored prayer probably won't meet their needs either.

So who gets the religious freedom? Pretty much just Protestants and isn't that what Pope Phil really means? I wonder what the teacher is supposed to do after the prayer when the Pentecostal students get filled with the holy ghost and start jumping on desks and shouting. Perhaps some of them will bring rattlesnakes to wave in the air after the prayer to show their faith.

It may sound ridiculous but a lot of people do this stuff because it's an important - sometimes vital - part of their religious faith. No mealy-mouthed "non-denominational" prayer is going to satisfy the needs of all students. It's only going to satisfy the ego of the AFA and like-minded folks. 

If Pope Phil wants prayer in school, he needs to do his job as a pastor on Sunday and encourage his flock to prayer more. But when it comes to job as a governor, he needs to drink a big cup of Shut-the-Fuck-Up and let free people remain free.

Fox's Larry Allen Taunton Needs a Reality Check

Either Larry Allen Taunton is the worst prophet of all times or else he's a dishonest shill for those who hate the fact that atheists exist. His article, "The Rally For Nothing In Particular" is so full of falsehoods and stupidity that he ought to be feeling really ashamed of himself and issuing apologies right now. But he won't, I'm almost sure, because his job is to blow smoke up people's asses for Fox News - not talk about truth.

So as people prepare to gather on the National Mall to celebrate their belief in nothingness, we might reasonably wonder what they want.

If he had waited to attend  the rally rather than writing the article ahead of time, he would have known what we wanted. We had flags flying high promoting our values - reason, diversity, compassion, etc. Our speakers articulated clearly what we want - a better world for everybody that is guided by reason instead of superstition. We want religion to be held accountable for the harm it does and to be treated like every other institute instead of given special accommodation.

Finding abuses of religion is low hanging fruit—the sexual abuse scandal within the Catholic Church, self-detonating Muslim extremists, snake-handlers, etc.—and Dawkins and his ilk have made a fortune peddling it. 

If religious abuse is low-hanging fruit, then let me ask an important and very telling question: why is it still hanging there for us to pick it? Why hasn't religion, that wannabe bastion of morality, cleaned up its own act already? The answer is obvious - they don't care about the abuses until someone exposes them and puts their feet to the fire. Sometimes the faithful (who I believe are more moral than their leaders and their gods) do this but often it is us atheists who must dare to shine that light in the darkness. 

Also, we aren't the ones profiting from religious abuse. The religious institutions, the megapastors, and the televangelists are the ones who profit while the followers suffer. So don't you dare accuse us of profiting off the misery of others, Taunton, you horrible little man.

Paradoxically, it has become a kind of religion, a Church of Unbelief complete with a saint (Christopher Hitchens), a high priest (Richard Dawkins), and holy writ (anything Dawkins writes). And now, with the political nature of this rally, Dawkins is set to become the Pat Robertson of atheism.

Atheism is not a religion and it's a shame I even have to repeat that. Hitchens is not our saint. He was anti-choice (according to some - I have not read it for myself) and pro-war in Iraq. I do not agree with either of those positions. Hitchens was an important voice but he is not a saint, a preacher, or a martyr for any cause. Likewise, Dawkins is not a high priest. Many of us were appalled by his out-of-place response to Rebecca Watson during Elevatorgate. I've read some of Dawkins' books but not all of them. They are interesting but they are not "holy writ." I'm pretty sure if Dawkins thought he was going to be the next Pat Robertson, he'd slit his own throat and bleed out all over the floor. 

But there is something not quite right about all of this. Christianity, whatever the faults of its adherents, has a rich intellectual tradition that has a comprehensive view of life.

It has given rise to the West as we know it. Our laws, arts, governments, and the very framework of our thought find their meaning in Christianity. Take for example the central premise of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal.”

Christianity, like Islam, has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Enlightenment era. And to suggest that the Declaration of Independence means nothing without the light of Christianity is to be so obtuse and so stupid as to not warrant serious thought. The idea that we are equal is the antithesis of the Bible until you get to that one passage allegedly written by Paul and then promptly dismissed as nonsense by later church fathers. Jews were better than Gentiles. Men were better than women. Straights were better than gays. Masters were better than slaves. To deny this is to deny the very words of the Bible.

That not withstanding, atheism does have a history—a bad history. By conservative estimates, the twentieth century, an experiment in secular governance, witnessed the deaths of more than 100 million people. That is more than all the religious wars in all previous centuries combined.

And here we go with more of this nonsense: Stalin, Mao, Hitler, etc. For the love of all that's true, has Taunton not yet figured out that Hitler used Christianity (in particular Catholicism) to perpetuate his garbage? Stalin and other dictators held up their philosophies of communism as the state-enforced religion to perpetuate their garbage. Those of us at the Reason Rally (with few or no exceptions) do not want a state-enforced religion. THAT'S THE WHOLE GODDAMNED POINT. We don't want to force people to believe like us;  we just want the freedom and the equal opportunity that religious people have in this world. Communist values are not the same as humanist values and Taunton would do well to figure that out before he shows his stupidity even more.

If, for instance, you do not believe in God, you are likely to conclude that man is a temporal being meant to serve the state, an eternal institution. This is the view of the communist world. Sacrificing a few million people for the sake of building socialist paradise was always deemed an acceptable price to pay.

If, on the other hand, you believe in a just, benevolent God who made man in his own image, you will likely draw a very different conclusion: man is an eternal being that the state, a temporal institution, is meant to serve.

Bullshit. Humanists and many atheists believe that since there is probably no god and just this one life, we need to spend it making the world a better place. We champion freedom and justice in this life, not some imaginary paradise after death. Life is important to us and, unlike too many religions, no holy book can justify the taking of it.

On the other hand, if you believe in the Bible god, you might get the idea that you have some special place in creation that gives you superiority or dominance. You might think it's ok to destroy unbelievers, suppress believers who don't believe exactly as you do, or else purge from your ranks those who don't measure up to your standards. That's the fruit of "my way or the highway" religion.

Proponents of a society free from religious influence can point to no nation or civilization that was founded upon atheism that we might call even remotely good. The story of those regimes is well documented and may be summarized in a word—murderous.

What they can point to are secular societies that are still running off of their accumulated Christian capital. But beware. When the fumes in that tank are spent, tyranny cannot be far away.

Nice try, Taunton, but the truth is that religion has ruled this world for millenia and its fruits have been tyranny and evil. Good religious people have chosen to be good in spite of the evil doctrines spread across the pages of their holy books. They are better than their evil "do as I say, not as I do" gods. America once had this brilliant notion that people could be more free and more prosperous if the government minded its own business about religion. That foolish men like Taunton try to turn this doctrine on its head and demand that we bow to Christianity shows their true goal - to tell whatever lies it takes to force us to submit once more to their rule. If there is one thing he should have learned from the Reason Rally, it's that we will not submit!

So as the rally for nothingness meets to celebrate, well, nothing in particular, reflect for a moment on the world they would give us. One need not imagine it. It has been done.

You wouldn't need to imagine it if you had just shown up at the Reason Rally and listened to what we had to say instead of making up shit and flinging it at us to see what would stick. You're a disgrace and a liar in my opinion, Mr. Taunton, and you owe every atheist who was at that rally an apology. We won't hold our breath though because we know all too well how people like you act. 

The Shamed Slut Diaries

If you are interested in my 28 day contraception blog, please visit The Shamed Slut Diaries. It's a sarcastic yet somewhat serious documentary about the monthly cycle, contraception, and other family issues written as a testimony to the state legislators and governor who think it's their business to regulate my ladyparts.

A Better Understanding of Church and State Separation Is Needed

A lot of people do not fully understand the reasoning behind the church and state violation cases that have made the news as of late. Jumping to the "I'm being persecuted!" claim has made it even harder to talk to people about this subject. There are facts at hand that have been established long before these violations have come to light. That being said, I think a little bit of history is needed to educate both the religious and non-religious.

Did you know that the phrase "wall of separation" to describe the relationship of the church and state was first used by Roger Williams back in the mid 1600s. He and his wife arrived in the "new world" (Boston) at the beginning of 1631.

"His search for the true church eventually carried him out of Congregationalism, the Baptists, and any visible church. From 1639 forward, he waited for Christ to send a new apostle to reestablish the church, and he saw himself as a "witness" to Christianity until that time came."

He strongly believed that "everyone had the natural right to freedom of religion" and thus the church and state must be separated in all aspects. Later in 1802, Thomas Jefferson would use the phrase "wall of separation" that echoed Roger Williams in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association.

"In the spring of 1636, Williams and a number of his followers from Salem began a settlement on land that Williams had bought from Massasoit, only to be told by Plymouth that he was still within their land grant. They warned that they might be forced to extradite him to Massachusetts and invited him to cross the Seekonk River to territory beyond any charter. The outcasts rowed over to Narragansett territory, and having secured land from Canonicus and Miantonomi, chief sachems of the Narragansetts, Williams established a settlement with twelve 'loving friends.' He called it 'Providence' because he felt that God's Providence had brought him there. (He would later name his third child, the first born in his new settlement, "Providence" as well.) He said that his settlement was to be a haven for those 'distressed of conscience,' and it soon attracted quite a collection of dissenters and otherwise-minded individuals."

Something most people didn't know or have forgotten is the establishment or creation of the town of Providence. It was created and became a safe haven for various people regardless of their religious views. It was their "like-mindedness" that drew them together. Now the significance of Roger Williams and Providence, RI, in religious history is about to be revealed:

"Williams had himself baptized by Ezekiel Holliman in late 1638. Thus was constituted a church which still survives as the First Baptist Church in America. A few years later, John Clarke, Williams’ compatriot in the cause of religious freedom in the New World, established a Baptist church in Newport, Rhode Island. Roger Williams and John Clarke are variously credited as being the founder of the Baptist faith in America."

It's a really good read and we strongly suggest it - you won't learn about him in public schools and probably not in most religious schools outside of baptist ones. I didn't even know about him until Tweenky and Jessica had mentioned him recently. I hated history class in school and I blame 50% of that on the way it was being taught and/or presented, the other 50% was me not being interested since I was taught that "the world was going to end soon" or "we are in the last days". After looking back at the history of most religions, I have found that every couple of generations you see them saying something about being in the last days.

Just want to start off with a couple examples and then the feedback or backlash I've noticed from said examples:

One of the main examples that is continuously being brought up here in the South is "prayer in schools." This isn't just something that happens in the South either as we have all probably heard about events in Cranston, RI. Here in the South most of the school games are preceded by a prayer over the P.A. system or at graduation ceremonies.

The problem is not the prayer that is being said (although it is usually exclusively from one denomination) at the school games or ceremonies. Prayer that is lead by teachers, school faculty or even a local priest, preacher, bishop, or father is in itself an endorsement by the school. That is the violation and what makes it unconstitutional regardless of how long they have been doing it. The U.S. Supreme Court first ruled government-sponsored prayer in the public schools unconstitutional in 1962. Ala,s most southern states have held onto their prayers in school thinking that, "We'll do it until we are told or made to stop," as one school principal said at a faculty meeting in Tishomingo County, Mississippi.

Is the bible belt and other places really that thick in thinking they can just do as they please when it comes to our school systems and, most importantly, our children? Indoctrination at a young age is a must for most these religions - get them young and it's harder to lose them. They become entrenched with the constant reminder of being a sinner or threatened with going to hell.

The other example that seems to make headlines every year is the nativity scene "on public/governement property." This was seen last year all over the country with only a few places getting air time on the news. Athens, Texas, was a huge one that got most the publicity. Rick Perry may have had something to do with that, not sure. This was a case in point of an obvious church and state separation violation.

This whole thing was not about the nativity scene but rather its location on the grounds of the government building. Had they just moved it across the street or down the block to a private property location there wouldn't have been an issue. But it was a long standing tradition and had been there for over 50 years. That just means it has been in violation of the law for the last 49 years.

The backlash from all this was a feeding of the faux news trolls and their so called "Christian persecution". They used it to further claim a persecution on Christians by saying they were trying to "take Christ out of Christmas". No one ever said it had to be taken down and never shown again; they just wanted it moved off public property. Simple, right?

So with that I leave you with the following facts available for everyone to look up and read for themselves:

The phrase "separation of church and state" itself does not appear in the United States Constitution. The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

The Supreme Court did not consider the question of how this applied to the states until 1947; when they did, in Everson v. Board of Education, all nine justices agreed that there was a wall of separation between church and state.
(Kermit Hall, ed. The Oxford companion to the Supreme Court of the United States (2005) pp 303-4)

The decision of Everson followed in 1947, the first incorporating the Establishment Clause.
(Larson, Edward John (2003). Trial and error: the American controversy over creation and evolution (3, revised ed.).)

The establishment clause has generally been interpreted to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another. The first approach is called the "separation" or "no aid" interpretation, while the second approach is called the "non-preferential" or "accommodation" interpretation. The accommodation interpretation prohibits Congress from preferring one religion over another.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Establishment_Clause)

Like any other case that goes before the court, once ruled on they can set a precedent.

The issue at hand is not the fact that this was a religious prayer but that it was displayed on public school property. It is a matter of location, every citizen can display this prayer on their private property to show how religious they are if need be or wear a T-Shirt. That is your private property. If the government were to pass a law that controls what you can and cannot wear or display on your private property, then you will see people unite from all faiths and non-faiths alike.

Again it is a matter of location, the precedent has been set and will continue to be upheld as long as we have the 1st and 14th amendments intact.

We applaud and thank you, Jessica, and the many others religious and non-religious people over the years that have stood up for church and state separation.

An Idiot's Ten Commandments

What could be better than starting off your day with an idiot's rewrite of the Ten Commandments? Fortunately, Johanna Heckler of WND has written them for you.

First, she claims that the Ten Commandments don't promote Christianity because they predate Christianity and were followed in all ancient societies. "What religion then do they establish?" she asks. "Judaism? Islam?" How about all 3 in a twisted sort of way?  And I would love to see a copy of these tablets from Babylon, Sumeria, or Assyria. I'm sure they'd be word for word.

But the really funny thing here is that she mentions how even in pagan societies, people have a conscience. Therefore, conscience is built within us - obviously a sign of God's handiwork. Then she goes right on to craft a list of "Pagans' 10 Commandments" that she really means are for atheists. In doing so, she manages to insult pagans and atheists in one blow.

01. There is no God, you may do as you please without restraint. Love yourself above all else. Be selfish.

Well, we can't put that on government buildings because it promotes atheism. The government has to stay neutral. Also, neither pagans nor atheists generally advocate such selfish hedonism and certainly not to the extent that they would have no regard for other people.

02. Graven images are obsolete, but you may worship anything you choose, your appetites, your possessions, or those of anyone else.

Yeah, that's kind of what the First Amendment says: worship whatever and however you choose. And if we weren't constantly trying to fulfill our desires and get more stuff, capitalism wouldn't work. Why does this lady hate America?

03. Profanity and obscenities are the language of choice. Express yourself any way you want to, the more offensive the better.

First Amendment again, free speech. Be glad we have it because I certainly consider Johanna's words here offensive. It would be a shame if she got censored because of her own stupidity.

04. A day of rest or worship is totally unneeded, so heap upon yourselves all the work or play you desire until your physical bodies are completely worn out. Work your employees, animals and machines the same way.

In my experience, workaholics in this area are often Christian men and I think a lot of that has to do with them being raised "old school" that they have to provide for the family no matter what it costs them physically or emotionally. My Dad certainly fell victim to that. But I do not know of any atheists or pagans who actively promote this ideal. Why would we? We enjoy family and friends and quiet time like anyone else.

05. Regard for your parents or their teaching is an hindrance to your freedoms, so ignore their needs completely, curse them if you wish, and arrange for their demise as soon as possible.

Not all parents are created equally. Some are negligent. Some are abusive. Some are so dysfunctional that they harm the mental and emotional well-being of their children through manipulation and guilt. In the happy fantasy world of Christians like Johanna, parents (and parenting) are a blessing and a child should be grateful. I say children should give respect where earned and care for their parents according to what they believe is proper and healthy. But nowhere have I seen any pagans or atheists promoting general disrepect to parents, much less plotting to have them all killed.

06. You may steal whenever you please. Don’t bother to guard your possessions, as others have a right to steal them as well.

Huh? We don't advocate stealing and we don't like it when others steal from us. She seems to be accusing us of her brand of "socialism" or something. I'd love for her to recite this to a gun-toting pagan (Jessica, are you out there?)

07. Adulterous affairs should be a daily occurrence for your ultimate pleasure. You may even steal a same-sex partner from his mate. Satisfy your lust with whomever, wherever and whenever.

Adultery should be a daily occurrence, gay or straight or both? We can do it all day, in the streets, on the bus, in the churchyard? Seriously, this is just absurd. She seems to think we have no self-control and no ability to be honest and faithful to our chosen partner(s). I think she's mad because her gang has to lie about their affairs while we can at least be honest about our sex lives.

08. You may kill your enemies at will, including anyone who annoys you or causes you distress.

If we believed in this, I'd already have taken this lady out. She annoys me. Luckily for her, however, I do not advocate murder. Still can't think of anyone who does...

09. Lying should be a natural part of your communication. Don’t bother to take an oath to establish identity or viability as a witness. A false witness is completely acceptable.

Johanna's already following this rule very well because everything she's written about us is absolutely false. If anything, most of us think we need more realization of the truth, not less. 

10. By hook or crook, obtain what you desire, no matter where or whose it is. Greed is the only way to get ahead in life.

Again, this is kind of the driving force of capitalism - certainly of unregulated capitalism. The human race can't advance without pursuing our desires. Our goal is to weigh those desires against the needs of others. Most of us manage to do this pretty well without any help from gods.

Johanna concludes by saying, "Is this the society we really want? This is what we are getting!"

I don't know what the hell is going on in her corner of northern Minnesota, but here in the real world, we're getting along pretty well and the situation is absolutely nothing like the picture she painted. False witness indeed!

Christian Flags for the Courtroom

So I return from my vacation to see that something strange is happening in Alcorn County. I know, I shouldn't be surprised to see church/state entanglements but I thought I'd have at least a little reprieve between Dec. 25 and Jan. 1. Wow, I was wrong.

According to the Daily Corinthian, the Woodmen of the World Lodge 64 is donating new flags to the Alcorn County Courthouse. This organization provides a lot of flags to various businesses and non-profits so that within itself is not much of a surprise. The problem comes with the kind of flag being donated:

A group of local leaders including Police Chief David Lancaster, Justice Court Judge Steve Little and Sheriff Charles Rinehart accepted a state, national and Christian flag from Corinth's Woodmen of the World Lodge 64. The flags will be on display in the Alcorn Justice Center's Courtroom. (emphasis mine)

What? These officials accepted a Christian flag and plan to display it in the county courtroom? Say it ain't so! In what universe does anyone think that it's ok to have a religious flag on display in an American courtroom? What kind of message is this sending?

Well, the message I get is that Christian values will be upheld in that court and, therefore, Christians can expect special consideration. That's unconstitutional. The Christian flag has no place in that courtroom.

So first, we need to verify that the Christian flag is indeed being stationed in the courtroom as the article says. Unfortunately, I couldn't link to the article so I'm having to read it straight out of the Dec. 27 paper for you. Also, unfortunately, I'm not a resident of Alcorn County so I lack the ability or standing to take any action.

But some of you do and if this issue is important enough to you, I hope you'll consider checking it out. If you can verify that the Christian flag is indeed in that courtroom, you can make a phone call or write a letter. You can contact the Freedom from Religion Foundation and have them send a letter.

Why should you care? Why should we waste our time on these little things? Because they aren't trivial. They send a clear message of preference for Christianity. The longer these things go unchallenged, the more the people (and the courts) can fall back on the argument from tradition.

It's great to support state and national efforts to keep church and state separate. But sometimes the most important work we can do is to keep things straight at home. The more these small communities have to deal with this stuff and learn, the less of this crap will filter to the upper levels.

It's really important that we address this wherever we find it. Who from among us will make a stand?

*Edit to add photos from the actual newspaper since I couldn't find a link to it online:

A Growing Intolerance Toward Intolerance

I have long known Zip Ribar as a letter-writer guaranteed to make my eyes roll up in the back of my head with disbelief. His latest letter to the Sun Herald entitled "A growing intolerance toward Christians"  does not disappoint. I wish to address some of his claims and then one of the comments left on the site.

So many terms don’t mean what they say. “Social Justice” now refers to the redistribution of wealth and power to those who didn’t earn it. “Affirmative action” requires preferential treatment based on race. “Liberty” means the license to do my own thing regardless of the people around me.

Words actually mean whatever the majority decides they mean. That's how language evolves over time.  You can make up your own special meanings but that doesn't mean that anyone else will accept your definition, much less use it. 

So when you decry the current usage of "social justice," I think you need to know that most people who advocate for social justice do not mean robbing the rich and giving to the poor. They mean putting policies in place to prevent corruption and giving everyone real equal opportunity to achieve rather than just the illusion of it. They are not advocating for equal outcomes, just equal opportunity. The difference between those concepts is crucial.

"Affirmative action" does indeed mean giving some preferential treatment based on race. If we as Americans lived up to our ideals, such programs would be unnecessary. The only reason we need Affirmative Action programs is because many Americans still discriminate based on race, gender, ethnicity, and other factors. You can say that's untrue but both the facts and experience prove you wrong. I have worked in quite a few places that did not want to hire a black candidate or a woman who might be pregnant. Perhaps when Americans start obeying the law, we can get rid of programs like this.

And as for liberty, it does mean that I can do my own thing. What it does not mean is that I can do anything with callous disregard for anyone else. I can't drink and drive regardless of what you think. I can't run my car into your living room just for fun. But I can do what I want with other consenting adults in the privacy of my own home and whatever you might think about that isn't really worth a damn.

However, in American, the characteristic intolerance nowadays is not by religious people, but against them, especially where they are in the majority.

That's a big charge. Mind backing it up with some examples or evidence?

Public prayers are being banned from public schools.

Yeah, how dare we hold you to our social contract (the Constitution) which guarantees that the government will stay neutral on the subject of religion. How intolerant of us to ask that the government not tell us how and when to pray. Tell me, has anyone stopped children from praying in schools? I think not!

Creches and crosses are being banned from public sites.

How dare we hold you to our social contract (the Constitution) by demanding that the government either stay neutral or give us all equal time. That's the law. If the government lets you put up your nativity, then we all get to put something up. And if we can't put up our signs and stuff on government property, then you have to take yours down. We're not banning religion - we're demanding the government play fair. What do you have against fairness?

The legal sanctification of infanticide, homosexuality and hedonism proceeds unhindered by Christian scruples.

First, please show me where infanticide has been legalized in the U.S. Oh right, you can't. Next, explain to me how homosexuality has been "legally sanctified" when most states still do not allow same-sex marriage. Again, you can't. As for hedonism, what else is it but the liberty to pursue happiness? Do you hate the Declaration of Independence too now?

The same Sun Herald also reported that the “Department of Justice probes discrimination claims” against the city of Lomita, Calif., for not permitting a local Islamic Center to expand in a crowded part of town. Liberty of Muslims means they have an absolute right to ignore that will of the majority.

News flash for you, Zip. Religious rights aren't up for a majority vote. If this city denied Muslims a permit because it didn't like Islam, then it is breaking the law - just like if they denied Christians a permit because they didn't like Christianity. The First Amendment trumps your petty majority vote. This is not a pure democracy - it is a republic. Learn the difference.

Some may think of this as politically correct. Others, like myself, however, may regard it as a form of federal discrimination against Christians.

You're welcome to think that but your position is wrong and stupid. It's wrong because the federal government is moving toward a more neutral stance which is both ethically and legally sound. It's stupid because Christianity is still by far the largest religious group in the country and, if they really cared about any of this, they could outshine and outspend any other group. But these people aren't really interested in doing the work of Christ - they are interested in sitting back and making the government do it for them. It's lazy religion at its worst.

*******************************************************************************

And now I wish to take on one of the comments by bederest:

This country was founded on the principal that the 'majority rules.'

Not when it comes to Constitutional Rights. Don't go there.

In my 64-years, I have never seen (in your false words) Christianity "forced" down anybody's thoat.

Then you haven't been looking very closely. That's part of your Christian privilege that you need to get over. Every time I see In God We Trust on my money, or hear "one nation under God," or see a Christian cross on government property standing alone, I'm forced to pay for and participate in your religion.

To the contrary, we all have seen the Muslim faith being shoved down our school children's throats, in the name of "Multural Culturalism." No protests form the nihilistic liberals there, though !

No, I've not seen this. I've seen people being encouraged to live together peacefully and respect each other's rights. I have not seen any of us forced to learn Islamic law, recite the Quran, or dress like a Muslim. 

I attended a football game at Milner stadium a few years ago. My neighbor, a Muslim (born in the USA) sitting next to me, refused to stand up for the prayer. I'm OK with that, but when he refused to stand up for the National Anthem, I gave him my opinion of his nhilistic attitude toward the country that feeds him. He refuses to speak to me to this day. Fine with me. I know he hates it when I fly the American flag on the appropriate holiday.

One of the most meaningful patriotic moments in my life was during an event where everyone stood up while the national anthem was played. They took off hats and put their hands over their hearts. I just sat there as I have done since I was in my early twenties when I decided that freedom had nothing to do with going along with the crowd. As I sat contemplating my forefathers who had fought on this land and in foreign countries, I became aware of eyes on me. I realized I was the only one sitting and it had not gone unnoticed. I closed my eyes (probably looked like I was praying) and sank deeper into my meditation. I considered that the freedom that flag and song represented was the freedom to sit quietly and thank my forefathers without having someone take me to jail. That was the freedom so many bled and died for. By the time the song was over, I was in tears - tears filled with gratitude and joy. Everyone else sang a song and had their moment of blind patriotism. I had a moment of sincere reverence for this country's values and the sacrifices many have made to preserve them.

My point is: you don't know shit about what someone is thinking or what they believe just because they didn't stand for the anthem. And if you scorn them for dissent or for exercising their right to sit, then you don't get the point of freedom at all.

The majority of American' s are Christian -- they should prevail, because they are THE MAJORITY! Once again, that's why we hold elections. The MAJORITY wins! Liberals usually find a way to cheat on that though, (dead voters and unregisterd winos) so in the same ilk, they demonize Christianity -- through false information, such as your lying attempt here !

You did go there again. Let me try to spell this out so you can get it. Constitutional rights are not subject to majority whim. You can't just vote out my religious freedom with a 51% majority. If you love this country, then you ought to learn how it works! There is a process for amending the Constitution that requires a hell of a lot more than 51% so if you want to take away my religious freedom, you're going to have to work harder.

Also, there have been several investigations over the past few years into voter fraud and it's quite well known among thinking people now that this whole thing is a myth. For all the mud you're slinging out here, none of it sticks.

This is nothing more than liberal - invented, and directed political correctness. I want my country back!

As someone who grew up in the '50s, the rest of you young liberals have no idea how much damage you've done to the nation, culture and spirit that we once had -- because you just don't have enough knowledge of history or life experience.

You can't have your country back because those days are gone. Things don't stay the same no matter how fondly we may remember the "good ole days." Those who cannot or will not change will ultimately fall.

I get that you don't really understand the world you're living in and I do have some sympathy for you. Things have changed very fast and life looks very different through the eyes of a child than it does through the eyes of an adult. But I fear this sort of attitude is indicative of a desire to keep that precious 50s childhood experience at all costs. It's a delusion fostered and maintained by those who don't want to grow up.

I fear life doesn't give us that option. It moves along as it will.

I must say that if anyone doesn't have any knowledge of history or life experience, it's these two men. They don't know how anything works or why it should work that way. All they see is their Christian privilege eroding and they are crying out like kids having their sweets taken away. 

I'm growing intolerant of all this intolerance. Why can't we just all play fair and get along?

Answering the Critics: Anti-Atheism & the Solstice Sign

More than likely you'll hear some things in here that will require some clarification on my part. I have plans to address some of it at a later time but if something strikes a chord or just hits you the wrong way, let us know below in the comments. Hopefully, I'll be able to hammer my thoughts out in a way that will make more sense now than it did at 5 am. I'm thinking in particular of my comment about not caring what people believe. My actual view is more complicated so you can wait for a future post or just ask me here. 

Cling to the Constitution Because We Fought to Have It

Another letter to the editor entitled, "Cling to prayer because we fought to save it."
Another rage.
Another petulant but, hopefully, poignant response.

The Supreme Court, Congress and federal judges are oppressing one religion, Christianity.

Sir, please exit the mothership and return to Earth. Can you please give me one, just ONE, example where a court, a police officer, or a politician has prevented you from going to church or praying privately? Can you show me just one time in the past century when American Christians (except for Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses - who you probably don't consider "real Christians") have been rounded up by their government and imprisoned for their beliefs?

Of course you can't because you're dead wrong.

Christians do not force others to be a Christian, neither do they kill one who decides to leave their ranks, as many religions do.

Sir, have you not heard of ecclesiastical imprisonment and the Inquisitions? Do you not know that the Catholic Church has spent most of existence torturing pagans, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Protestant Christians until they converted, died, or agreed to stop observing their religious rites? Do you not know that Protestants and Catholics have been killing each other for ages in Europe? Do you not know that the Puritans ruthlessly persecuted the Quakers?

It may be that Christians are not supposed to coerce or kill non-Christians but the sad fact is that they have done so for many centuries and some still do.

Other religions can express their religion anywhere in the U.S., but Christians are deprived of free speech.

Sir, again, can you please show me one instance where a Christian was deprived of free speech and another religion was not. Please give me evidence of any single case where Christianity was mistreated in America. You can't because the persecution you describe simply does not exist.

My school teachers taught me about the Founding Fathers of this great nation. These were brave, God-fearing men.

Some of them were but not in the way you think. Do you know that George Washington was an Anglican and usually left before communion without participating? Do you know that Dr. Ben Franklin was born to Puritan parents but became a deist and then later blended his deist and Christian beliefs together, rejecting many of the Bible's claims including Jesus's divinity? Do you not know that Thomas Jefferson was an Episcopalian but his beliefs were far more deistic? Do you know that he accepted the morality of Jesus but not the divine attributions? Do you know that Jefferson made his own Bible by cutting out all the parts he thought were ridiculously untrue or harmful? Do you know that he couldn't stand priests and advocated for a full separation of church and state? Do you know that John Adams and his son John Q. Adams were both Unitarians and did not accept the divinity of Jesus? 

By today's mainstream Christian standards, that means that Franklin, Jefferson, and the Adamses are all in hell.

My teachers taught me about Christianity. The main reason people came to America was religious freedom.

If that's the case, your teachers taught you wrong. Just one more reason why public school teachers should NOT teach religion. There were some people who came to America for religious freedom but most people who came here did so for another reason: wealth. People fled debts and poverty in Europe by coming over here and claiming land. Some groups (like the Puritans) came over here to set up their own little theocracies so they could be free to persecute anyone they didn't like. Greed was the biggest motivator for coming to the New World - not religion.

For my country's freedom, I served almost three years in the U.S. Navy, about half of that in the Pacific on the USS Manila Bay. Then it took another three years to get my health back enough so I could hold a public job. That all was minor compared to what thousands of others serving our country have gone through.

And this is where it gets difficult for me. It would be incorrect for me to say that I'm not grateful for the sacrifices of those who did serve to protect our values and way of life. So many of my family made those sacrifices for the freedom I have that I cannot be ungrateful. But I must be honest here: if you went to war and fought so that you could set up a Christian theocracy here and take away my right to dissent, then I cannot be grateful for that. And while you have not said that you wish to take away my religious freedom, I have to wonder what your intent is when you repeat lies designed to make people like me look like persecutors of the faith.

When the tornado destroyed Smithville, almost everyone heard talking was saying, "I was praying to God and He saved my life."

Again, this is difficult because I had friends in Smithville but I must be honest. Nobody survived because of prayer. If you believe that your god saved those people then you must believe that those who died either did not pray or their prayers were not heard, or they just didn't deserve mercy. Do you have the balls to say that about those people?

A few months later we were ordered not to pray at ballgames. So we tucked our tail between our legs and lay down.

No, the government-operated school was ordered not to pray. It's that "freedom" thing you fought for - the First Amendment. Read it and please get a clue what you were fighting for. And I seriously doubt there was any tail-tucking going on. I expect you were all madder than ole wet hens and probably screamed the Lord's Prayer as loudly as you could. After all, Jesus didn't mean any of that stuff he said in Matthew 6 about not praying in public like a bunch of hypocrites, right?

We are in the process of building our churches back in Smithville. Are we building them back so we can hide in them or are we building them back so we can worship God in them and prepare ourselves so we can carry His message outside the building?

That's very much your business, sir, but I've got to tell you: if you don't offer us a message any better than the lies you've repeated here, we aren't going to listen to you.

The commentary in the Daily Journal on Nov. 13 was sad. Since a prayer by a person that was not an elegant speaker embarrassed Sonny Scott, he should not write about prayer, because he doesn't even know what prayer is about.

No, what's really sad and pathetic, what's really downright embarrassing here, is that you just said that Sonny Scott doesn't know what prayer is about when the very model for prayer he quoted is JESUS CHRIST.  My stars, man, do you not even know which god you, as a Christian, are supposed to pay attention to? Or do you think that maybe Jesus just didn't know what he was talking about when he gave out those instructions? Maybe Jesus was wrong about praying privately to the Father. Maybe he should have been holding up some gaudy sign and screaming like a banshee at the local arena during the gladiator games.

I don't know what you went to war and fought for but I hope you'll review our history and our law and understand that the thing that binds us Americans together is supposed to be freedom. And I've got to tell you, sir, I can't find any sign in your letter that you understand freedom or support it. I hope you'll take the time reflect on this; otherwise, everything you went through was in vain.