Religious Protestors Prove Religious Displays Don't Belong on Pulbic Property

From kgw.com today...

Hundreds of demonstrators rallied in front of the Washington state Capitol Sunday, outraged over an atheist display inside.

The display stands next to a nativity scene. It has a sign that says "there are no Gods" and that religion is but a myth and superstition.

Outside, the protest included an opposing sign that portrays Governor Christine Gregoire as the Grinch. It also shows a balloon featuring Bill O’Reilly punching the governor.

Excellent. Now maybe Governor Gregoire will get a damn clue and realize that religious displays of any kind on public property are (besides grossly unconstitutional) ultimately disruptive of the government doing it's job (which does NOT include establishing an official state religion) and don't fucking belong there.

Atheists Teaching the Bible?

I got a good chuckle when I read this letter to the editor on the Lufkin Daily News. I couldn't find the original story it referenced.

"Teaching religion, a recipe for legal trouble" (LDN March 30, 2008) makes a good point. The state mandated teaching of the Bible in public schools will most certainly lead to many devastating lawsuits eventually costing local school districts millions. But be of good cheer Bible believers because there may yet be some light at the end of this narrow tunnel.

Will the Bible be taught as literature, history, sociology or religion? I say history, because the "Good Book" has a long and interesting secular history stretching back some 5,000 years. It's all very well researched and recorded, often in great detail. However, the perplexing question is, "Who will do the teaching?" No self-respecting Roman Catholic parents would allow a Protestant to teach the Bible nor would Baptist parents stand for a Catholic teacher. By the same token, orthodox Jewish parents would be well within their rights to reject a Christian teacher in favor of a rabbi. Needless to say, they would all disallow a Muslim. The obvious answer then is to require that all Bible teachers be atheists.

An atheist would be ideal for this job because in addition to being knowledgeable about the Bible and its history, as many of them are, atheists would bring no preconceived agenda of proselytizing to the class-room. They are the only ones who could be completely objective and honest in presenting the often controversial and contradictory course material.

The atheist teacher would have no reason to play favorites by being partial to any particular group of students and would therefore treat them all equally and fairly. In doing so those time and money consuming lawsuits, so correctly warned about in the above-mentioned editorial, would be avoided, and the students would come away with an unbiased view of the Bible for what it really is — an ancient cultural artifact originally produced by an obscure Middle Eastern tribe of ignorant, superstitious, desert-wandering nomads.

Scamming The Credulous

I had to laugh when I got this email today. Obviously, it was broadcast out to many thousands of email addresses, but I was still amused to see it in my inbox, considering.... you know. In fact, the way it started out I thought it was a real email from a real person, and I was thinking "Oh boy, here we go...", but I quickly got suspicious about the time the "only surviving lawyer" died midway through the first sentence.

Dear Friend

Greetings in the name of God, Please let this not sound strange to you for my only surviving lawyer who would have done this died early this year. I prayed and got your email id from your countries Christian guestbook which i have been with my late husband and liked to visit once more if God will in his infinite mercies.

I am Mrs. Joy Hoffman from Kuwait, I am 68 years old, I am deaf and suffering from a long time cancer of the breast which also affected my brain, from all indication my conditions is really deteriorating and it is quite obvious that, according to my doctors they have advised me that I may not live for the next two months, this is because the cancer stage has gotten to a very bad stage. I was brought up from a motherless babies home was married to
my late husband for twenty years without a child, my husband died in a fatal motor accident Before his death we were true Christians.

Since his death I decided not to re-marry, I sold all my inherited belongings and deposited all the sum of US$5.6Million dollars with a Security Firm. Presently, this money is still with them and the management just wrote me as the true owner to come forward to receive the money for keeping it so long or rather issue a letter of authorization to somebody to receive it on my behalf since I can not come over because of my illness or they get it confisticated.

Presently, I'm with my laptop in a hospital here in Mauella Hospital Germany where I have been undergoing treatment for cancer of the lungs. My doctors have told me that I have only a few months to live. It is my last wish to see that this money is invested to any organization of your choice and distributed each year among the charity organization, the poor and the motherless babies' home.

I want you as God fearing person, to also use this money to fund churches, orphanages and widows, I took this decision, before i rest in peace because my time will so on be up.

As soon as I receive your reply I shall give you the contact of the Security Firm. I will also issue you a letter of authority that will prove you as the new beneficiary of my fund. Please assure me that you will act accordingly as I stated herein.

Please reply me through this my private email address: DELETED@aim.com

Hoping to hear from you soon,Waiting for your reply

Yours in Sincerely,


Mrs. Joy Hoffman

It's pretty obvious who the scam's targets (aka "marks") are. I guess these scams have gotten enough publicity by now that most people aren't fooled anymore forcing the scammers to start scraping the bottom of the credulity barrel.

Responding to a Newspaper Editorial

I responded to an editorial in the Hazelton, PA Standard Speaker today. Who knows if the staff will publish my response or how much they'll "adjust" it, so here's the original editorial and my response below.

It’s hard to know what impact the election of Barack Obama as president will have on many of the things that concern Christians the most.

While we all know he is in favor of some of the things some Christians are not, like abortion and same-sex marriage, there are many other arguments that could be affected by the future governing powers.

At the Civil Forum held before the election at Saddleback mega-church in Lake Forest, Calif., Obama was asked what Christianity means to him on a daily basis. Obama responded, “It means I believe that Jesus Christ died for my sins and that I am redeemed through him. That is a source of strength and sustenance on a daily basis. I know that I don’t walk alone. But what it also means, I think, is a sense of obligation to embrace not just words, but also through deeds and expectations that God has for us. And that means thinking about the least of these — acting justly, loving mercy and walking humbly with our God.”

Noble words! But what effect will they have?

In Fredericksburg, Va., city Councilman Hashmel Turner opened council meetings with prayer and ended them “in the name of Jesus.” That brought trouble and a lawsuit.

“If you’re on government property these days, even (at) a public school or you’re a city council member,” he said, “the theory now in a lot of the courts is that you don’t have a right to speak or mention Jesus’ name.”

The lower courts ruled against him. They agreed — leave Jesus out of things.

The city has filed a petition before the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal to reverse the ruling.

Utah Highway Patrol Association is having a similar problem. Activists insist they must leave Jesus out.

The association, a private group, honors fallen state troopers who have been killed while doing their job. It has been doing this since 1974.

The group erects 12-foot steel crosses displaying the trooper’s name, rank and badge number and other brief information. Most of the crosses are erected on private land but there are a few on government properties with appropriate approval.

Now the American Atheist Association wants them removed.

Never mind the sacrifice the troopers made! Just keep Jesus out!

The Highway Patrol Association has said that it consults with the family of the slain trooper and puts up whatever symbol they desire. If the family were Muslims, they explain, they would have no problem in using a Muslim symbol instead.

But that doesn’t suit the atheists!

And on top of that, an appeals court has ruled in favor of the atheist group. The case has been in federal courts for some time and is now being taken before a higher appeals court.

It’s a pity some minority people can’t at least leave memorials alone!

On a different level, a Jewish stepmother did not win her court case against a Christian church. A little different from those mentioned above, she had filed an invasion of privacy lawsuit after her stepson made a prayer request for her that she might come to know Jesus and it was subsequently printed in a Florida church newsletter.

The Florida Supreme Court rejected her complaint, which, although it is possible to see how this would offend a person of Jewish faith, it still would have had enormous impact in the future on what could be said, or not said, in church newsletters. It would have meant that churches that publicly publish prayer requests could have been liable any time someone was offended by their doing so and might have affected church Web sites or e-mails as well as newsletters.

Schools have come under fire for a long time and there still seems to be much confusion about what students can do, say and wear when it comes to Christian symbols and beliefs.

A 12-year-old sixth-grader wore pro-life T-shirts to school in Hutchinson, Minn. That’s the way he felt and he wanted to make a statement. His plan was to wear them for a whole month, but during that month he was constantly told by teachers, and even the principal, to turn the shirt inside out and not to wear a similar one again. He was even threatened with suspension.

Attorney Brian Rooney of the Thomas More Law Center went to bat for him. The organization is a national public interest law firm whose services are free of charge.

“The school has a written policy that allows children to wear these types of messages,” Rooney found. The school policy states that students may wear them so long as the messages do not cause disturbance in the classrooms.

The only disturbance, according to Rooney, was caused by the teachers and principal who fussed at the boy.

In this case, the school district settled out of court and agreed that T-shirts like Rooney wore are allowed in school.

While the Constitution states that there can be no congressional establishment of religion, it does protect the right of citizens to exercise religion and protect freedom of speech. To me, it does not seem that wearing a T-shirt, or erecting a cross as a memorial, is doing any more than simply stating the way that person feels. It’s a far cry from establishing a religion!

I’m glad in this case the school wised up!

And my response...

The author seems to be incapable of recognizing the difference between "free speech" and "government endorsement".

A child wearing a t-shirt to school could not be interpreted as "government endorsement" by any reasonable American citizen.

Erecting crosses on government property (regardless of who paid) can easily be construed as "government endorsement" of religion. Erecting the crosses on private property with private funds however is not "government endorsement" and easily falls within the realm of "free speech".

A city councilman openly leading a prayer, at a city council meeting, on city taxpayers time is absolutely "government endorsement" of religion, and only an idiot wouldn't be able to see that. The councilman is however free to say prayers non-stop on his personal time outside of government business, be it at church or in the grocery store, as long as it's clear that he's expressing his personal views and not acting as a government representative.

Besides the US Constitution prohibiting government endorsement of religion, in 1797 the US Senate unanimously passed the Treaty of Tripoli which clearly states "the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; ". There was no dissent and no angry mobs protesting in the streets.

Our government was founded on secular principals of freedom for all. God was only recently forced into our government by people insecure in their religious beliefs and needing government endorsement to validate them. It's time that we returned our government to it's original values of freedom and liberty. If your religious beliefs are so tenuous that you require the government to prop them up, then maybe it's also time for you to reevaluate those beliefs.

Christian Monks Brawl in Jerusalem... Again.

Mike, of Mike's Weekly Skeptic Rant posted a news story today about Monks from two different Christian Sects in Jerusalem engaged in a knock down drag out fight, all over who would be allowed to participate in a silly parade.

The news story Mike links to says that...

Six Christian sects divide control of the ancient church. They regularly fight over turf and influence, and Israeli police are occasionally forced to intervene.

No kidding. I recall a news story from last December when the monks were cleaning up another church after Christmas services when one monk put his ladder in the wrong spot, and... you guessed, mayhem ensued.

Witnesses said that the robed and bearded priests scuffled for more than an hour using fists, brooms and iron rods as weapons.

These are not harmless "fights" with a bunch of robbed monks calling each other names and maybe pushing each other around a bit. In both fights, people were hurt, blood was drawn and the fight had to be broken up by Israeli police, who also got hurt in the process. These "good christians" are are not just politely disagreeing, they're beating each other with weapons intending to do real harm.

Don't Just Leave Your Potatoes Lying Around

A Vicar turned up in agony at a hospital — with a potato stuck in his bottom.

The clergyman told stunned casualty nurses he fell backwards on to his kitchen table while hanging curtains.

He happened to be nude at the time of the mishap.

The embarrassed reverend, in his 50s, had to undergo a delicate operation to extract the offending vegetable.

The spud was yesterday revealed to be among a litany of objects medics in Sheffield have removed from people’s nether regions.

Others include a can of deodorant, a cucumber, a Russian doll — and a carnation.

Like most of the other patients, the red-faced vicar insisted to staff at the city’s Northern General Hospital that his predicament was NOT the result of a sex game gone wrong.

Somali Rapists Not Forced to Wed Victim

From a recent news report.

A 13-year-old girl stoned to death on accusations of adultery had apparently been raped, according to the UN.

The girl was put in a hole and stoned in Kismayu on October 28, in the first public killing by Islamic militants for about two years.

Local leaders claimed she was guilty under sharia law, while witnesses said they thought the victim was a 23-year-old woman.

In a statement, UNICEF said: "Reports indicate that she had been raped by three men while traveling on foot to visit her grandmother in the war-torn capital Mogadishu.

"Following the assault, she sought protection from the authorities, who then accused her of adultery and sentenced her to death. The child was victimized twice - first by the perpetrators of the rape and then by those responsible for administering justice."

UNICEF said the incident showed the vulnerability of girls and women in Somalia, which has suffered civil conflict for the last 17 years. In the latest cycle, Islamist rebels are fighting the government and their Ethiopian military backers.

A Human rights group identified the girl as Aisha Ibrahim Duhulow and said she was killed by 50 men who stoned her to death in a stadium in Kismayu, in front of around 1,000 spectators.

Her father and other sources said that she had been raped by three men.

When the family attempted to report the rape to the al-Shabab militia who control Kismayu, she was accused of adultery and was detained. None of the men she accused of rape were arrested.

A horrible tragedy, by any measure. If the rape had occurred in a good and civilized Christian country where laws are derived from the Bible, then this poor girl would still be alive today and the rapists would have been severely punished.

They would have been required to pay fifty shekels of silver each to the girl's father, and then, they would have all been forced to marry the girl and keep her as their wife for the rest of their lives.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

Obviously a more appropriate punishment. According to the Bible, you may only put the girl to death if she was married at the time of the rape.

Deuteronomy 22:22-24

If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman:

If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;

Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die;