Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
org
JULY 2007
Vol 45, No.6
CONTENTS
4
Designer
Elias Scultori
by Ellen Johnson
Cover Design
Tim Mize
Editorial Assistants
Gil and Jeanne Gaudia
Published monthly (except June &
December) by American Atheists Inc.
Mailing Address:
P.O.Box 5733
Parsippany, NJ 07054-6733
phone - 908.276.7300
FAX- 908.276.7402
editor@americanatheist.org
www.atheists.org
2007 by American Atheists Inc.
All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part
without written permission
is prohibited.
American Atheist Magazine is indexed
in the Alternative Press Index.
American Atheist Magazine
is given free of cost to members of
American Atheists as an incident
oftheir membership.
Subscri ption fees for one year of the
American Atheist magazine:
Print version only: $40 for 1
subscription and $25 for each
additional gift subscription
Online version only: $35
(Sign up at www.atheists.org/aam.)
Print & online: $55
Discounts for multiple-year
subscriptions: 10% for two years
20% for three or more years
Additional postage fees
for foreign addresses:
Canada & Mexico: add $1O/year
All other countries: add $30/year
Discount for libraries and institutions:
50% on all magazine subscriptions
and book purchases
16
19
Appointment
13
by Jim Corbett
Damnable Syllogism
by Robert M. Price
ZJ
15
Book Review
The Mussolinis Among Us
by Jim Burgtorf
21
20
A Personal Story
by Jorg Aadahl
26
30
February
n
of this year, U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gon- issue at the Balch Springs, Texas Senior Citizen Center in 2004. At
zalesannounced a new initiative called The First Freedom Project the city-run senior center, a group of seniors were praying, holding
allegedlyto protect religious liberty. The attorney general made Bible studies, singing gospel music, preaching and doing blessings.
his announcement at an Executive Committee Meeting of the Another group of seniors didn't like it and complained. The CenSouthern Baptist Convention. On the same day, the Department of ter stopped the proselytizing and rituals and when they did they
Justice (DOJ) releasedits "Report on Laws Protecting Religious Free- were sued. The court sided with the believers. Curiously, the attordom, for FiscalYears2001 to 2006."
ney general didn't refer to this as a "free exercise" or "establishment
My first reaction is to say that the words "religious liberty clause" case. He called it a "free speech" issue.
and religious freedom" are not found in the Bill of Rights. I have
The court ruled that the Center had the right to allow this
to throw that in there because so many Theists say this about the and all other speech. That's not so bad. I suggest that the complainphrase "separation of church and state."
ing seniors take them up on that. A bit of Atheist proselytizing,
Ironically, the DOJ has even appointed a "Special Counsel singing, studying and more will be just the ticket to get them to
for Religious Discrimination." Well isn't this a case of the pot call- decide that maybe there shouldn't be that much .free speech.
ing the kettle black? What single institution in America is allowed
When the religious give examples of violations of their
to discriminate against its fellow citizens in the name of Jesus? Yes, rights, they don't usually tell the whole story. In this controversy,
religion. The religious discriminate against each other, and us, and you cannot get the other side of this issue anywhere. There aren't
the law allows them to do this in hiring at their universities for any reports from the defendants on how bad it was. The attorney
instance. But they love to cry "discrimination" every time they are for the defendants wouldn't even talk to me about the case.
accused of not abiding by the law.
There is no doubt in my mind that the Theists at the senior
The First Freedom Project initiative doesn't confer any added center went over the line with their religious practices and were
protections for "religious liberty." The law is the law. This initia- bothering everyone else. This case should never have gone to court
tive is just a bunch of feel-good pandering to the religious by the or ever had the Department of Justice get involved. It's simply
Bush Administration. The Department of Justice is even going to a case of religious people annoying the hell out of everyone else.
give seminars to the religious to help them to better understand
It's about people being obnoxious and the religious are famous for
what their rights are.
that.
Since when does "religious liberty" need a Department of
Attorney General Gonzales asks, "Why should it be permisJustice initiative to protect it? The majority of U.S. Supreme Court
sible for an employee standing around the water cooler to declare
Justices and most of the Federal District Judges were appointed by that 'Tiger Woods is God,' but a firing offense for him to say 'Jesus
Republicans who overwhelmingly vote conservative on social issues is Lord?' These are the kinds of contradictions we are trying to adlike state-church separation. Our schools, military and prisons are dress."
overrun with extremist Christians, yet they apparently think they
Our government is investigating "contradictions?" Surely
need the government to provide another layer of protection for there are more pressing issues for our government to focus on. Isn't
their rights. This initiative may be a bit extreme but it shows how drug addiction more harmful? Isn't cancer more serious? Doesn't
worried the Theists are. Religious liberty isn't what is being undermental illness deserve more attention? Nope. We'd rather focus on
mined, rather it is their liberty to engage in religious violations that a senior citizen center where a group of adults wants the right to
is being undermined.
.
annoy the hell out of other seniors.
This "call to arms" on their part reveals that we are doing a
There are ten times as many violations of our rights than
very good job of fighting back against their attempts to use the gov- there are of the religious. We know this because we hear about these
ernment to promote their religiosity. We may not be winning all of violations from Atheists like you, all the time. But you don't have
the battles but we are fighting back like never before. The religious the government on your side. You have US on your side. And with
are getting sued more often and people are complaining about their YOU on our side we will continue to work, like no other group can,
violations on a large scale.
to protect your rights and the rights of Atheists all across America.
One of the examples that Attorney General Gonzalez cited
So, on behalf of all the Atheists who are helped by American
of the government's protection of our "religious liberty" was over an Atheists; Thank you for your continued support.
AMERICANATHEIST ~
JULY2007
NYCby two Atheist writers (I forget their names) and one of them (a
feminist Atheist) declared "we won" when referring to the November 2006 election. The people in the audience applauded and yelled
their delight. I almost puked!
I don't know about you, Ellen, but I have turned my back on
the Democrats because they have turned their backs on Atheists
and other freethinkers. I recall how many Democrats showed up
at GAMOW and the Atheists in Foxhole rallies in D.c. (Does "zero"
sound about right?) I recall Sen. Joe "Praise Jehovah!" Lieberman,
who declared that Americans do not have freedom from religion. I
recall every Democratic senator racing out to the Capitol steps with
their GOP counterparts to yell out "Under God" as they recited the
Pledge of Allegiance after the 9th Circuit Court ruling. I recently saw
"liberal' Senator Chuck Schumer on C-Span declaring that"of course
"under God" belongs in the Pledge of Allegiance!" Eliot Spitzer, New
York's new Democratic governor, wanted to give $1,000 tax vouchers to parents so they could send their kids to private schools, mostly Catholic (this betrayal of the public school system was thankfully
defeated).
And when Hilary Clinton was reelected this November, the grinning people standing behind her at her victory celebration were not
Atheists, but Hasidim! All men, of course! The same group that she
pandered to in 2000, and who block-voted for her like they always
do in elections to obtain special privileges no one else receives.
What did she promise these religious bigots and zealots, who are
against gay rights, modern science, abortion, military service and
reporting for jury duty? These people literally get away with murder
in New York, and one day some one will expose their crimes. I know
for a fact that Hasidic slumlords hire drug addicts and gang members to terrorize rent-controlled tenants they want removed so they
could turn the buildings into "condos" or market rentals. Many tenants flee, and some have been killed. The police do nothing. Whenever, a Hasid is a crime victim, the whole community riots, and in
one instance Hasidim stormed and vandalized a police station! The
police did nothing because they know they are dealing with "untouchables': Any other ethnic group would be greeted with gunfire
if they stormed a police station and attacked police officers. These
are Hilary's allies!
The Democrats have also extended their outstretched arms
to the growing Islamic community. Anti-American mullahs are embraced and courted for the same reason the Hasidic rabbis are. To
deliver their community's votes to the Democratic party! Think of
it, Ellen! No Democrat would be caught dead appearing at a free
thought event anywhere in the country, or make any positive statements about Atheists or Humanists. They even give the Ethical Culture Society and Unitarians a wide berth!
But these bearded nightmares from the Middle Ages are declared to be "good Americans" because they are "people of faith"!
But of course, the Democrats who spit in our faces welcome
our votes. They know that "seculars" probably account for about
20%-25% of their base. Where else would we go, they say. So they
take our support for granted and reach out, slobbering, to the "Religious Reich," right-wing Catholics, the Hasidim and the mullahs.
After all, the Democrats are a "party of faith" too!
No "lesser-of-two-evils" approach will ever get me to vote for a
Democrat. The Democratic Party is not our ally and "we" most certainly did not win in November!
Dennis Middlebrooks
Brooklyn, NY
JULY2007
AMERiCANA:rnEiST
AMERICANArunsr
JULY2007
NEW Affiliates
Saint Petersburg Atheists
Free-thought Group
Gary Thompson
PO Box 22304, St. Petersbury, FL 33742
Seattle Atheists
11008 NE 140th Street, Kirkland, WA 98034
www.seattleatheists.org
Oklahoma Atheists
2026 NW 31 st Street, Oklahoma City, OK 73118
www.aok.taxreligion.org
Damnable Syllogism
by Robert M. Price
at is Christianity all about? Or, as at least two important books (by Adolf von Harnack and Ludwig
Feuerbach) from around the turn of the century put
it, what is the "essence of Christianity"? For this is
what we want to know, e.g., when we ask in the abstract how Christianity is to be estimated alongside the other world religions. Is it
just one more can of soup in a row of others? It might be so even if
this can has a label reading "Hinds," while that one says "Campbell."
Often such redundant products are even made by the same company!
To a great degree, I think the analogy is not a bad one. On the one
hand, there are theological differences within each faith that are easily as great as those separating one faith from another. So no religion
has a monolithic unity of identity. But on the other hand, all of them
sooner or later, here or there, turn out to be facing the same agenda
of issues and to have evolved a similar smorgasbord of responses to
those issues.
So we must ask what makes Christianity unique, or more
modestly, what is distinctive about it in the sense that every religion
is unique or distinct unto itself. Jacques Derrida (Limited, Inc.) contends that there is no "proper" use of any piece of language. There is
no inherent "real" meaning that governs "correct" use. There is only
convention. Dictionary writers and grammarians just agree that a certain cross-section of current usage will count as "proper English," "the
King's English." But every "straight" use of it invites "twisted" use.
Without "isn't" it would be no fun to say "ain't." Everything invites a
parody of itself, a distortion of itself. The straight line doesn't rule out
flexibility; rather, it gives you something to be flexible with.
This implies that any definition of what Christianity "really is"
or "is supposed to be" is going to be merely descriptive, not prescriptive. Any textbook orthodoxy will be useful only as an "ideal type,"
a conceptual yardstick to use in measuring the varying proportions
of real live Christian groups. Their variations from the norm do not
count against them. They are not "heresy" in the sense of "thoughtcrime." To the contrary, these differences reveal what is distinctive
about a particular Christian sect or thinker. If they are to some extent
"not true to type," unorthodox, so what? That just helps to chart their
position on the theological map. It doesn't mean they're charting a
course to Hell, or out of the True Church. Maybe the Moonies or the
Mormons or Matthew Fox are getting pretty far from the essential
Christian norm. That may mean they are in the process of evolution
into something else, just as Christianity eventually reached the point
where it could no longer be counted a Jewish sect. Maybe you. think
they should call themselves something else than Christian. Eventually
they'll probably agree with you. Till then, why be in such a rush to
segregate the wheat from the tares?
JULY2007 -
AMERICANATHEIST
say morally noble non-believers are not saved. The options would
seem to be:
1) You are saved by good works, regardless of your belief. This
means God's grace overlooks error in belief, but not immoral actions.
2) You are saved by orthodox belief, regardless of your works.
This means God's grace overlooks immoral actions but not errors in
belief. He is a strict theology professor, and he doesn't curve grades.
If Jesus Is the Answer, What is the Question?
But neither does he care how wild you party, as long as you study for
the exam.
3) Everyone is saved by the grace of God, regardless of their belief
This salvation, this solution, raises more problems than it
or deeds.
solves.
4) The traditional popular Christian view, that you are saved by
One: What about the future? Are you on your own with the
sins you may commit before you die and get past the finish line? a combination of faith and works (a diversified portfolio), each being
necessary but neither being sufficient by itself. But in this case, grace
Many early Christians lived in fear and postponed baptism till their
has little to do with it.
deathbed just to play it safe.
I'd say Christian theology has usually
gone
with number rwo. You are saved
btt>fJnl @/l!'lus.~t~
by right belief. When all is said and done, a
caglecartoons.com _
"sinner" seems to mean simply "not a Christian believer," since the latter is the dangerous and depraved state from which one must
be extricated. That is not to say that immor\H~
al behavior is ignored. No, specific sins are
CONS\DSR
roundly condemned. But the crucial point is
tS
that conversion does not necessarily change
this. If you're lucky, it may, but stories of
such dramatic night-and-day turnabouts are
tall tales that float around the evangelical
community like water-cooler chatter about
someone on TV who won the Lottery. Most
lives are mediocre and stay that way, despite
all the "Dieting with Jesus" books.
What conversion does change is your
beliefs, or the intensity of them, or your
membership in a particular religious group.
So belief, being in with in-crowd of the
144,000, is what matters. You can still commit sins and yet be a Christian, as the bumper sticker assures a surprised world: "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven." And why
are they, and not you, forgiven? Because they
are Christians. Not because Christ has died
for them. If that were all there was to it, why,
then you, Mr. Satanist, you, Ms. Secular Humanist, would be forgiven, too! But there are
#. # , ,
no bumper stickers proclaiming these glad
tidings.
Two: if the change conversion makes is more than a clean slate
No, they are forgiven because, unlike you, they believe Christ
("Go and sin no more, lest something worse befall you" John 5:14),
died for them. It all comes down to passing that exam. Thus the old
if it is rebirth as a new creature who walks in the Spirit, why do we joke is no joke: Junior sees his Grampa reading the Bible and religious
tracts and he asks mom why. She says, "He's cramming for his finals!"
still find pretty much the same old temptations and defeats awaiting
us after the initial period of neophyte enthusiasm?
Damn right! He'd better!
Three: why should your response to the atonement, or even
your knowledge of it, make any difference? If Christ died to save you, What a Tangled Web We Weave
When We Practice to Believe
mustn't it have worked?
To make salvation depend on your believing in the atonement, i.e., in the doctrine of the atonement, aren't we simply saying
You see, Christianity did not bring into the world an answer
you are saved by cognitive works? Maybe not doing the right thing,
to an ancient longing, a long-delayed salve for a festering wound.
but by believing the right thing. This is the inevitable result once we No, it created the problem to be able to peddle the solution. You
MIGtfT I-IAVf 70
TtlE PossrB",1Y
"T\'tAt \l
A FAK ..
AMERICAN All-IEIST
JULY 2007
only think you have the problem the Christian gospel will solve
if you already accept the Christian bill of goods. Karl Barth put it
euphemistically by saying that we are so blinded by sin that we do
not even know the right question to ask till we hear the answer. But
I think Dietrich Bonhoeffer was more to the point when he said
Christianity survives by circling like a vulture, trying to make the
healthy believe they're sick so they will buy the patent medicine we
have to sell. Like asbestos in your basement: the stuff's only toxic
once the environmental experts get there to remove it and start stirring up the dust of death.
How did the doctrine first emerge? Here is one plausible scenario. Jesus of Nazareth is put to death for anti-Roman sedition. His
followers denied he deserved a criminal death; he was innocent of all
charges. (Was he? That's another can of worms.) His disciples faced
two options for understanding what had happened. Either he was a
sinner abandoned by God to a richly deserved fate, which is what
Jesus' enemies thought, or he did not deserve his fate. They believed
the latter. But then a related problem had to be addressed: how come
God let him die? He wasn't being punished for any sins of his own.
But death is a punishment for sin, so he must have died for some sins.
It must have been the sins of others.
This was nothing new. Jewish martyrs' deaths were typically
explained this way. At this stage of the game there was no central
doctrine of an atonement. It was simply a rationalization for the otherwise apparent failure of divine providence to safeguard Jesus. The
earliest Jewish Jesus sectarians probably did not view him as a savior
in the now-traditional Christian sense at all. Nor were they called
Christians. (The word "Christian" appears only three times in the
New Testament, and in late writings, Acts and 1 Peter, and it is always
a term applied by outsiders.) This is an important point, implying
as it does that Christianity as such did not exist till the atonement
doctrine existed. Thus the atonement is what constitutes a religion
as Christian.
The atonement doctrine may well have emerged (as Sam K.
Williams argues in Jesus' Death as Saving Event) as a piece of Hellenistic Jewish missionary theology. Gentile "God-fearers" admired
Jewish theology and ethics, but they remained hangers-on at the
margins of the synagogue, not full, circumcised proselytes, because
they did not relish embracing the whole mass of Jewish dietary and
ceremonial customs. Some of them began to join communities of
Jews who expected the return of Jesus as the Messiah, and a new
problem arose. Jews looked to the Jerusalem temple sacrifices to
atone for their sins. Gentiles were beyond the pale, unclean before
God, outside the Levitical system of sacrificial atonement. How
could God accept them as full members of the household of faith?
In other words, how could they now receive full admission to the
synagogues of Jews who revered Jesus? We can see the controversy
over this point in Paul's Epistle to the Galatians: do Gentile believers in Jesus have to become full proselytes to Judaism and keep
the Torah regulations? Many Jewish Jesus sectarians assumed so.
Remember, they weren't trying to start a new Jesus religion. That
came later.
A big step in that direction was the theological answer to this
question that said Gentiles did not have to keep the rituals of the Torah, because the death of Jesus had cleansed Gentile unholiness, like
the atoning deaths of sacrificial animals had for the Jews. God had
accepted Jesus' faithful martyr death as an atonement on the Gentiles'
behalf The Epistle to the Ephesians and 1 Peter both make this point
clearly. Christ's death has included Gentiles in the Jewish fold. His
death has torn down the Berlin Wall that separated Jew from Gentile.
What was it Gentiles needed to be saved from? Ritual uncleanness, being "unwashed heathen." Traditionally Jewish thought
held that God required of Gentiles only the rudimentary commandments of Noah in Genesis 9, an elementary slate of decency laws.
Non-Jews were not required to keep the 613 commandments of the
Torah. Those were for Jews alone. Gentiles weren't damned, unless
they were immoral pagans, whose idol-worship led them into immorality. Righteous Gentiles would be saved all right, but in the
meantime, they just weren't part of the House of Israel. Even so, the
question Paul and others faced was not whether Gentile God-fearers
would be damned. The issue was whether they were entitled to full
membership in the Household of God. And the death of Jesus provided for their adoption as sons and daughters, as Jews already were
by birth. This early version of the atonement doctrine was still quite
a different thing than it has since become.
The big change came once the Jesus sect had spread further in
time and space beyond its Jewish origin. Since Jewish ritual taboos
were dropped, the distinction between sin as ritual uncleanness and
sin as moral guilt was lost. To say that Jesus died "for the world" first
meant "for the rest of the world outside Israel," but now it came to
mean "for the whole human race, including Jews." The original Jewish Jesus sect did not necessarily think their fellow Jews were damned
for not believing in Jesus, any more than Rabbi Akiba would have
damned Jews who didn't agree that Simon bar Kochba was the Messiah in 132 CEo But now Jesus was understood as the Savior from
moral guilt and from divine damnation. So everyone had to jump on
the bandwagon!
Epidemic of Salvation
Here is the logic as I see it: Look, we've got an explanation for
the death ofJesus that says he can't have died for sins of his own, so it
~gion
&!M
,
RickB.A. WIse
JULY 2fX)7
AMERICAN
ATHEIST
Illustrated
stock # 5232
$6.00
Please see order form for
member discount and S&H
must have been for someone else's.This means these others must have
needed him to die for them. So their sin must have been something
more serious than the Jewish concept of "spot sins" that could be
dealt with by "spot forgiveness" here and there. Otherwise, why go to
the trouble to send a divine savior? Again, Galatians: if things are still
as they were under Judaism, then what was the point of Christ dying?
It must have been necessary, so let's posit a condition serious enough
to require it! That's original sin, total depravity, something going way
beyond the Yetzer Harah (evil imagination) that Judaism ascribes to
human nature.
Ironically, redemption theology only begins to make sense
once you drop the expectation that it makes sense! That is, you only
begin to see what's really going on once you recognize that it is not
theoretically coherent. You can stop looking for the logic of the thing
and start looking for the "psycho-logic" that went into it. It is not an
inference inductively arrived at. It is an after-the-fact rationalization.
You stop looking for the reasons that account for it, for there are
none. You seek instead for what the atonement is rationalizing. E.P.
Sanders recognizes this. He observes that Paul "thought backwards,
from solution to plight, and ... his thinking in this, as in many respects, was governed by the over-riding conviction that salvation is
through Christ. Since Christ came to save all, all needed salvation ....
Paul did not begin by analyzing the human situation" (Paul, the Law,
and the Jewish People, 68).
How can the Christian be sure everyone needs Christ's atonement? This is what we are asking when we tell the pushy evangelist
that his faith is fine for him, but that we prefer another way. Why do
I have to go your way? The answer, the real, psychological answer, is
that "It has to be the way for everybody without exception. If it's only
for some people, I won't know if I am one of the ones it will work
C
I"
ror.
Sometimes, like Paul, who claimed to have been the chief of
sinners, an evangelist will say, "If it worked for me, it can work for
anybody." But what this really means is, "Since it will work for everybody, then I can be sure, deductively, that it will work for me."
The revival chorus celebrates "All sufficient grace for even me." I
must have certainty! So for me to be sure the gospel will redeem me,
I have to believe that you need it, too. Hence I cannot be satisfied
10
AMEiuCANATHElSf -
JULY2007
thinking you might not need it. If! admit that something else might
do the trick for you, I have to suspect that something else might work
better for me, too. And since the much-vaunted claims that "Christ
changed my life" are usually more statements of faith than accurate
descriptions of experience, this suspicion would be fatal. I might then
have to recognize that Christ is not living up to the advertising rhetoric and get back on the road looking for another panacea. And I'm
sick of that.
A good but partial analogy might be the disingenuousness
with which certain AIDS activists warn us that heterosexuals are every bit as much at risk as homosexuals are. The assumption is that
straights will not get serious abour stamping out AIDS if they don't
think everyone needs a cure or vaccine for it.
It's another version of the problem that plagues Calvinists.
God predestines the elect to be saved; there's no way they can fumble
the ball. So the belief in predestination should be a source of great reassurance, right? Calvin thought so. But he was wrong. His successors
realized that since one could never be sure one was in fact one of the
elect, since not everybody was, there was more reason to worry than
ever before! This is pretty much the same anxiety that the Christian
evangelist is trying to fend off by insisting that you need his gospel,
too, whether you like it or not. If it's not for everyone without exception, it may not be for him either. And the fundamentalist wants
nothing so much as security.
Once unleashed, the doctrine of the atonement runs amok
like a computer virus, corrupting every file. Once the question arises
as to how sin could first have entered the picture in Eden, how the
Fall of Adam was even possible in the first place, God himself gets implicated. (And it is himself, not "herself" half the time, because I am
willing-to argue that the maleness of God is a structural necessity in
traditional Christian theology, the kind we are discussing here.) The
logic will sound familiar to us by now, though no less pernicious. And
Calvinists did not hesitate to embrace it. God, being all-knowing and
all-powerful, cannot, in the nature of the case, have merely waited to
see whether Adam would obey or disobey him. No, God must actually have caused the Fall of Adam. Oh, don't worry, Francis Turretin
reassures us, God didn't force Adam's hand. He just pulled the plug
of sustaining grace at the crucial moment so that Adam lacked the
wherewithal to resist Satan's temptation. (As if that gets God off the
hook! At least it shows the uneasy conscience of the Calvinist in the
matter.) Why would the Almighty pull such a stunt? Well... if it's not
broke you can't fix it, and God had this little plan of salvation in his
pocket, see?
This doesn't sound kosher to you? Despite their protests that
it all makes perfect sense, theologians know how it sounds to any
fair-minded person. "You will say to me, then, 'Why does he still find
fault? For who can resist his will?' But who are you, a mere mortal,
to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, 'Why
have you made me thus'?" (Romans 9:19-20). In other words, Sit
down and shut up! But we are not answering back to God; we are
answering back to fellow mortals who seem to think they are God.
Mortals who think it lies in their power to condemn you to Hell for
not believing in the doctrine of the atonement.
Apologetics Means Never Having to Say You're Sorry
Once things assume such nightmarishly surreal proportions,
wouldn't you think someone would conclude their theory had, like
Bugs Bunny, made a wrong turn at Albuquerque? How much more
could the atonement doctrine find itself reduced to absurdity? By
AMERICAN
ATHEIST
11
KurtVonnegut
1922-2007
obituary
RTVONNEGUT
whose literary works
used satire,
social commentary
and philosophical
criticism, died April 11,
2007 at his home in
Manhattan. He was 84.
Vonnegut was
a staple for several
generations of readers,
beginning with his
dystopian science fiction novel Player Piano
published in 1952. It
established some of
the key literary themes
that characterized his
future work, including
a caution about the
effects of technology on the human community and the dangers of
media indoctrination and government bureaucracy.
Vonnegut grew up in Indianapolis, IN,and during high school
was editor of the school newspaper. After a short stint at Cornell
University, he joined the u.s. Army in 1942, and became an infantry
scout in the European theater of operations. In December, 1944, he
was one of several thousand Americans captured by the Germans
during the Battle of the Bulge, and ended up in a POW camp in
Dresden. He and fellow Americans were secured in the basement
meat locker of a slaughterhouse, where they were fortunate enough
to survive the devastating firebombing of the city. An estimated
135,000 civilians and soldiers were killed. His experiences in
Dresden became the basis of his future novel, Slaughterhouse Five,
published in 1969. Its pacifist and humanitarian themes resonated
with the growing opposition to the Vietnam War.
Other novels and collections of short stories included The Sirens ofTitan (1959); eat's Cradle (1963); God BlessYou, Mr. Rosewater
(1965); Breakfast of Champions (1963); Galapagos (1985); Bluebeard
(1987); Hocus Pocus (1990) and Timequake (1997).
In his political essays,Vonnegut was a relentless critic of the
Bush administration. He spoke out against military adventurism,
economic inequality and other government policies. He served as
honorary president of the American Humanist Association, replacing the prolific science-fiction author Isaac Asimov, in what Vonnegut described as"that totally functionless capacity." Nevertheless,
Vonnegut expressed his Humanism and Atheism in talks, essays
and opinion pieces. A survey of his writing, particularly his novels,
reveals a spectrum of attitudes in respect to religion, ranging from
the humorous to the acerbic.
In Slaughterhouse 5,Vonnegut wrote:What the Gospels actually said was: don't kill anyone until you are absolutely sure they
aren't well connected."
His novel The Sirens ofTitan presented readers with a bizarre
alternative reality (complete with a manipulative spiritual movement headed by a wealthy, interstellar vagabond named Winston
12
AMEuCANATHEISf
JULY2007
Niles Rumfoord). He
wrote,"The name of
the new religion,"
said Rumfoord,"is The
Church of God the Utterly Indifferent. The
two chief teachings
of this religion are
these: Puny men can
do nothing at all to
help or please God
Almighty; and Luck is
not the hand of God."
Freethought author James A. Haught
in his work 2000 Years
of Disbelief: Famous
People with the
Courage to Doubt,
quoted Vonnegut, as
saying,"How on earth
can religious people
believe in so much arbitrary, clearly invented balderdash? The acceptance of a creed, any creed, entitles the acceptor to membership
in the sort of artificial extended family we call a congregation. It is a
way to fight loneliness. Any time I see a person fleeing from reason
and into religion, I think to myself, 'there goes a person who simply
cannot stand being so goddamned lonely anymore,"
Another entry from Haught reveals that Vonnegut clearly
rejected the supernatural and other trappings of religion. "I am of
course a skeptic about the divinity of Christ and a scorner of the
notion that there is a God who cares about how we are or what we
do .... Religious skeptics often become very bitter towards the end,
as did MarkTwain .... I know why I will become bitter. I will finally
realize that I have had it right all along, that I will not see God, that
there is no heaven or Judgment Day."
In Bluebeard, Vonnegut combined satire with philosophical
insight."The trouble with God isn't that He seldom makes Himself
known to us. He's holding you and me and everybody else by the
scruff of the neck practically .... Contentedly adrift in the cosmos,
were you? ... That is a perfect description of a non-epiphany, that
rarest of moments, when God Almighty lets go of the scruff of your
neck and lets you be human for a little while."
Writing in FatesWorse than Death: An Autobiographical Collage of the 1980s,Vonnegut deciared,"1 am an atheist (or at best a
Unitarian who winds up in church quite a lot)." He also cautioned,
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith. I
consider the capacity for it terrifying."
During his lifetime, Vonnegut was the quintessential literary provocateur, critic, nonconformist and a bit of a polite cultural
bomb-thrower. Many have compared his wit and writings to those
of Mark Twain. His essays and novels were a staple, particularly of
the generation that came of age in the 1960s,and was at the chaotic
center of the civil rights struggle, opposition to the Vietnam conflict
and other movements for social change. In death, Vonnegut's
creative output will hopefully inform, stimulate and motivate future
generations to doubt, question, investigate and, if necessary, rebel.
But, wait. What really struck me about the entire article was
that the premise Collins was actually asserting, though unwittingly,
is a form of transitional fossil itself The premise follows along the
evolutionary line that leads away from religion and to complete acceptance of science as the only necessary tool for learning about and
interpreting the universe in which we live. His observations are like
a little mutation in a gene that may help people who are trapped in
their fundamentalist way of thinking. And by exposing them to a
radical new idea (i.e., Genesis doesn't have to be taken literally) they
may move their thinking in the correct direction.
We know that life forms did not emerge all at once in their
final forms. Even Dr. Collins knows this. Creatures evolve in tiny
increments that provide some benefit to the organism, and then another change occurs and another and so on until a new entity is created. There is neither a set time schedule nor a preferred end game to
the process; it simply changes in the way that nature provides. Well,
ideas evolve in the same way and some ideas require a longer time to
be accepted and integrated into a culture than others do.
AMERiCANAnmsr
13
content with their religion; their social structure is built around that
religion; people are naturally resistant to change and, of course, they
are really invested in the whole "life after death" thing.
But Darwin's idea is compelling. So scientists continue to investigate, and much to the dismay of the fundamentalist believers in
religion, the scientists make an escalating number of discoveries that
make it really hard to accept some of the religious tenets on their face.
But ideas evolve. So now, instead of rejecting the scientific theory in
its entirety, the religious community is taking steps to accept the hard
evidence but continue to pander to their audience with the "soft-sell"
stuff of "we can have our cake and eat it too," which is the position
espoused by Collins.
This transitional phase will lead to the next one after more
compelling information is discovered. Scientists will get inside the
DNA and unlock its secrets, and life forms that share the DNA of
earth creatures will be discovered on other planets and numerous
presently-unthought-of discoveries will be made. When that happens, new generations will look back and realize that the comment
by Collins, in which he says that science cannot answer the questions
listed above, is really incorrect. Science CAN answer those questions-Collins just doesn't like the answers.
It took 300 years for Christianity to become fully accepted in
the community at large. But Darwin's revolutionary idea was only
introduced a little over 150 years ago. So clearly, more work needs to
be done to educate the masses, and patience and perseverance will be
needed to wait out the evolutionary process of teaching a society a
new set of rules and values. Along the way we should be thankful for
the transitional fossils like the one provided by Dr. Collins. That will
help move people away from superstition to acceptance of rational
thought.
It can be done, but it will take time. And even though Dr.
Collins will make a fortune on his book by pandering to fools (and I
won't make a nickel by sharing my observations) I am grateful for the
service he provides by stepping into the role of gene mutation that
may ultimately help humanity to move in the right direction.
Humanity needs all the
help it can get. *
Jim Corbett lives in Edmonds, Washington with his family and works as an executive in
the online legal research business.
He also runs two golf web sites
and his most recent golf book, The
Pocket Idiot's Guide to Golf Rules
and Etiquette came out in May,
2007. Mr. Corbett can be reached
at mrgo!j@mrgo/fcom
Lawndale, CA
Kenneth H. Bonnell - Los Angeles, CA
ROGER MARTINEZ -
14
AMERICAN ATHEIST
JULY 2007
Denying Evolution
by Massimo Pigliucci
stock # 16007
$33.00
Please see order form for
member discount and S&H
Murray O'Hair
HISTORY'S
GREATEST
LIARS
stock # 5524
$9.00
Please see order form for member discount and S&H
The Mussolinis
Among Us
book review
by Jim Burgtorf
AMERICAN
FASCISTS
II1Ctll!1l11111111111l!1I11U1IlIIitl
American Fascists:
The Christian Right and
the War on America
[Free Press, 2006, 254 pp.l
assigned "prayer partner" until they are delivered flawlessly. It is considered essential that the testimony explicitly state that the fear of
death has been banished forever.
Hedges does fault liberals for being too tolerant-too eager to
be "inclusive," to engage in debate and dialog. It is time, he feels, to
be intolerant of intolerance. The dominionists, for their part, have
no interest in any dialog with "evil." Their enemies can only be vanquished and destroyed. But, he puts forth no coherent program for
countering this movement, as if awareness alone is adequate. Surely
something more is necessary.
The biggest problem this reviewer sees with Hedges is that
after throwing out the baby, he clings desperately to the bath water in
the form of a supposedly compassionate "liberal" Christianity. In the
book's first chapter, he does indulge in some biblical criticism, and
accuses the dominionists of being "selective literalists," picking and
choosing Bible texts that conform to their ideology, and ignoring or
distorting what doesn't. And he correctly observes that the literalists
can't have it both ways. But, after admitting that mainstream Christians can also cherry-pick the Bible, he insists that it must "be read
in another way." Somehow he thinks that this can salvage an ethic of
tolerance and compassion, often exemplified, he claims, in the "life of
Christ." Is this the same Christ who said, "But those mine enemies,
which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay
them before me" (Lk. 19:27)? And told his followers they must hate
their families (Lk. 14:26; Mt. 10:21, 10:34 ff.), and that he came not
to bring peace, but a sword? Hedges can't have it both ways, either.
How can the "life" of Jesus-if he lived at all-negate such hateful
words?
Chris Hedges has written a very readable, compelling book
from the viewpoint of a reporter on the scene. Anybody who thinks
"it can't happen here" should read it. But a non theist cannot help but
be disappointed in Hedges' refusal to take the final step and reject
Christianity and the Bible altogether. The answer to the Christian
Right and the dominionists is reason and critical thinking, not a
more "tolerant" religion.
JULY2007 -
AMERICAN
Aruasr
15
American Atheists
Parsippany,
lJ
IConventio
I !nnual convention in Seattle, Washington on April 6, 7
~.~joyablethat we have ever held. The weather in Seattle
folkstook the time to see the beautiful sights of the city.
'owed with conventioneers. C-SPANand ABC's20120 were
s, Theseprograms will have aired by the time you read this.
tIearea and many of them gladly volunteered their time to
ade us feel very welcome and our convention run smoothly.
American Atheists
Scholarship Winners
We fly our scholarship winners to the annual conventions so that you can see the
young deserving winners who you help with your donations and memberships.
Our 2006 winners were Anna Ka and Hemant Mehta.
Our Youth and Family Director, David Silverman announced our scholarship
winners for 2007. They are Meghan Regis and Greg Hartman.
Play God!
David Fitzgerald set up a contest in the book and product room for people to
create their own religion. It was called Play God. We'd like to thank the judges Clark
Adams, Lori Howard and Susan Harrington. August Berkshire's "Sinergy"was the
First Place winner. Runners up were Rayanne Silverman with "Singulism," David
Fitzgerald with "Divine Love Boat" and Hanley Gunman with "Fitzism."
Synergy:
Everyone agrees that synergy is a good thing; the natural and perfect coming
together and the synchronizing of various elements. Is it really an accident then, or
is it synergy, that "synergy" sounds exactly like my new religion "Sinergy?
To do good requires merely doing nothing. A Christian couch potato is guaranteed
heaven merely for believing. Not so with a Sinergist!
Any sin worth committing - such as smoking, drinking, gambling, dancing,
fornicating, or drinking coffee -requires some energy. Therefore, to achieve the
Heaven on Earth that the Sinergy religion promises, you've got to get up off your
butt and go out and have some fun!
Blasphemy!
David Fitzgerald also coordinated our version of
Jeopardy which we called Blasphemy! The three teams
who played were the "Baby Jesus Butt Plugs" with Lori
Lipman Brown, Eddie Tabash and Clark Adams. The "Pig's
Eye Atheists" were August Berkshire, Steve Petersen
and Vanila Mishra. And "Donate To CQSSA MAAF" were
Amanda Warner, Jason Torpy and Hemant Mehta. The
First Place winners were the "Baby Jesus Butt Plugs.
Congratulations!
Special thanks to Edwin Kagin, Bradley Hawkins and Paul Case
for the convention photos.
A few of
our state
directors at a
meeting with
Bart Meltzer
AMERlO\NAnlilSf
JULY2007
note.
RON
PnTsER is a forty-eight-year-old
"out and proud" Oklahoma Atheist with deep roots in the state. After
growing up in a typical religious smalltown environment Ron eschewed his
faith while in college. He is a graduate
of the Community College of the Air
Force with a degree in Safety Technology, and a degree in Business Administration (Marketing) from Oklahoma
State University. He is a twenty-sevenyear veteran of the military in active,
reserve, and civilian roles.
Ron's experience as a military
enlisted man and an officer, a banker, an Internet entrepreneur and
consultant, as well as a community organizer and activist rounds out
an eclectic array of life experiences that forms the basis for a realistic
and worldly point of view.
Ron is a board member of the Citizens League of Central
Oklahoma and the Oklahoma Community Coalition. Both of these
are community organizations that encourage central Oklahoma's
civic vitality through non-partisan, broad-based citizen involvement,
research and educational forums on such issues as immigration, aging, and public schools.
Ron is currently pursuing a graduate degree and has aspirations for law school. He has an enlightened conviction of purpose
and the passion to act as the active voice for the Atheist cause in what
has been described as the "Buckle of the Bible Belt."
is a second generation
Atheist, who was raised in Berkeley,
CA. During recess at school, when the
other kids spoke of angels and heaven
and Jesus, she asked them what they
were talking about, so they invited her
to church nearly every weekend. After
living in 6 states. by age 16, she gave
up all church going as she felt she had
collected enough data to explore other
options.
After college, she got a job in
Austin, TX where it was really tough
to be an outspoken Atheist. She joined
American Atheists in 1992 and set up a Seattle Atheist Yahoo group.
In 2003 Wendy founded Seattle Atheists, a new affiliateof American Atheists and started doing charitable works in the community.
WENDY BRITTON
In 2005, she started a national group called Freethinkers United Network (EU.N.)which is also affiliated with American Atheists,
for organizing charitable works among Atheist groups around the
country.
Wendy is very excited to be working on a local level with the
ability to make a national impact.
heard about and tracked
Dr. Madalyn O'Hair's career from
the early l%O's until he met her at
an Atheist convention in Dallas some
time in the mid 1970's. He had an opportunity to listen to her and was impressed by her frankness and candor.
Dick later joined American Atheists in
1988 and became a life member 1992.
He became a member of the board of
directors in 1995 and the board treasurer in 1997.
Dick Hogan is a lifelong resident of Texas. He has been married
for thirty-eight years and has three children and five grandchildren
DICK HOGAN
is an ex-Catholic who
became an Atheist in 1983. He served
three years in the military police of
the Texas National Guard, and studied psychology at Austin Community
College. He has lived most of his life
in Texas.
He plays in two Austin bands
and does volunteer cleanup work in
his neighborhood
in conjunction
with the Austin Code Enforcement
Department, which has resulted in
several city-inspired property cleanups.
Joe worked for American Atheists for eight years, starting in
Austin and then in New Jersey.
He served on the board of directors of the Atheist Community
of Austin and became editor of its newsletter.
In 2005, Joe was awarded the American Atheists Meritorious Service Award at the American Atheists' National Convention
in Philadelphia.
Joe has been a Life Member of American Atheists since July
4th, 1997.
JOE ZAMECKI
JULY2007 -
AMERICANATHElSf
19
A Personal Story
The Most Destructive Drug!
by Jorg Aadahl
tarecent
seminar on
the Dead
Sea Scrolls
(indigestion alert for serious
Christians!) a slightly
younger, fiftyish woman
squeezed down nextto
me and proceeded to
stare me in the face with
a strange look. I began
to wonder what she was
after, my body or my soul.
It turned out to be the
latter. Failing to stare me
down onto my knees, she
finally asked how I found
out about the seminar, so
I confessed I had seen an
ad in a church bulletin.
That did it! She wanted
to know which church I
belonged to.
"None," was my
answer, which was all
the encouragement
she needed to pressure
me for which church I
normally went to, how
often, etc., etc. Not that
it was any of her damned business, but to be polite I informed her
that I never go to church. Startled, she wanted to know why. The
simplest answer at this point was to admit that I am not a church
person. Again she wondered why. When I told her I am an atheist, I
expected her to run away screaming bloody murder and calling for
divine protection. But, it wasn't my lucky day.
Now she wanted to know why I was an atheist! "Why not?" was
my logical response. She couldn't understand how anyone could
live happily as a nonbeliever."No problem," I assured her.Tm quite
happy both with life and myself, without a platform of superstition,
thank you."
She then insisted on helping me find a church that would
make me much happier, because I couldn't possibly know what I
was missing. That did it. This lady had pushed me too far, so I asked
who she thought she was, giving me advice on my life, which she
knew nothing about. I also suggested that she ought to respect
that I didn't need a religious "upper," as long as I respected her apparent dependency on divine fixes.
Undeterred, she wanted to know what I had against religion! I
informed her that in my book, religion doesn't have a very impressive track record, because not one of the numerous movements
has set a good example, and personally I considered religion the
source of all evil and the cause of all problems. Consequently, I
preferred to steer clear of such hoaxes.
At that she gasped, so to be sure I had made myself perfectly
20
AMERICAN
Aruasr -
JULY2007
In Memoriam
Mr. Quentin Searles
Naches, Washington
CLARK ADAMS
Las Vegas, NV
"For there are some eunuchs which were so born from their mother's
womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men:
and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive
it. "
Matthew 19:12
"He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off,
shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. "
-Deuteronomy
23: 1
"Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love with the
prince of the eunuchs. "
-Daniel
1:9
"Brothers,
if 1am
persecuted? ... As for those agitators, 1wish they would go the whole way
and emasculate themselves!"
-Galatians 5:11-12 (New International Version)!"
that actually found its way into Matt. 19: 12. One of the more likely
candidates, however, is the mystery religion that involved the worship
of the "Great Mother," Cybele, and her lover Artis. Indeed, one of the
earliest critics of Christianity, a Greek philosopher named Celsus who
wrote ca. 170 CE, compared the credulous Christians to the Metragyrtse, the begging priests of Cybele. [2] A fine description of this cult is
given by Homer W Smith in his Atheist classic, Man and his Gods.
The Phrygian Cybele, the 'Mother of the Gods,' had for a lover Attis, who was destined to become almost as famous as Dionysus.
According to one legend, Attis was beloved by the hermaphroditic
monster Agdistis, who had been deprived of male organs by the gods;
about to wed the king's daughter, Artis was struck with madness by
the jealous Agdistis, emasculated himself [beneath a pine tree], and
died from loss of blood ... In another legend Cybele ... was inspired
with chaste love for Artis, which he pledged himself to reciprocate;
on his proving unfaithful she slew the nymph of his affection, whereupon in madness he mutilated himself as a penalty.
In 206 BC the sacred stone which embodied Cybele at Pessinus was taken to Rome ... Thereafter her priests became a familiar sight in the capital city; clad in female garb, wearing their hair
long and fragrant with ointment, they moved through the streets to
the accompaniment of flutes, cymbals, tambourines and castanets,
while the people showered the image of the goddess with roses. In the
spring a freshly cut pine tree was brought to the sanctuary, its trunk
swathed like a corpse and decked with violets ... and an effigy was
tied to the middle of the stem in dramatization of the god's death.
On the next day the chief ceremony seems to have been the blowing
of trumpets, but the third day was devoted to animal sacrifices and
to the emasculation of the novices who were being inducted into the
priesthood. While the high priest and the lesser clergy worked themselves into a mad frenzy with wild music, gashing their bodies and
spattering the altar and sacred tree with flowing blood, the novices,
wrought up to the highest pitch of excitement by self-scourging and
laceration, castrated themselves and dashed the severed organs against
the image of the goddess. Later the instruments of fertility were reverently wrapped up and buried in the earth. The blood sacrifice, the
self-mutilation, the burial of the phalli, all aided to recall the dead
Attis to life, while a sacramental meal of flesh and blood effected a
mystic union berween the god and his worshipers. On the fourth day
the divine resurrection was celebrated with a ceremonial purification
of the image and other sacred objects, and on the last day the people
gave themselves over to a licentious carnival called the Hilaria. [3]
The attentive reader may conclude that a caponized clergy was
not the only thing Christianity filched from the Cybele-Attis cult!
Although tangible statistics concerning the popularity of selfemasculation in the early church are practically non-existent, indirect
JULY2007 -
AMERlCANAnrnsr
21
evidence leads me to conclude that the practice was extremely widespread. One of our earliest sources of information on the Christianized version of this psychopathology is the second-century churchman
known as Justin Martyr (ca. 110-165 CE), who mentions Matthew's
castration logion (an alleged saying of Jesus) in a work known as the
"First Apology of Justin Martyr." Addressed "To the Emperor Titus
lElius Adrianus Antoninus Pius Augustus Cesar," the apology was
intended as a defense of Chris-tianity against the not-entirely unfounded charges of its detractors.
After refuting the charge that Christians are "atheists," Justin claims that Christians serve their god rationally, but that demons
misrepresent Christian doctrines. To undo the damage done by the
demons, he decides to start out by giving the Emperor some direct
quotations from Jesus himself It cannot be doubted that Justin found
the quotations edifying and prima facie evidence of Christian "rationality." It is nothing less than mind-boggling, therefore, to find that
he chose not to lead off with the "Golden Rule," but rather Matthew
5:28: "Whosoever looketh upon a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart before God." Shades of
Jimmy Carter!
www.cagle.com
AMERICAN ATHBST
JULY 7007
Jesus Is Dead
by Robert Price
stock # 16005
$18.00
Please see order form for
member discount and S&H
AMERICAN
ATHEIST
23
cil) was won over to the Arian camp, and ptoceeded to persecute the
partisans of Athanasius - upon whom the fortunes of political history came to bestow the title of Orthodox. Relating how Constantius
attempted to win over to the Arian camp even Liberius, the Bishop
of Rome (the Pope), Athanasius wrote that Constantius, expecting
easily to draw over all men to his side by means of Liberius, writes to
him, and sends a certain eunuch called Eusebius with letters and offerings to cajole him with the presents, and to threaten him with the
letters. The eunuch accordingly went to Rome, and first proposed to
Liberius to subscribe against Athanasius, and to hold commu-nion
with the Arians, saying, "The Emperor wishes it, and commands you
to do so." ... [121
But Liberius didn't give in to the eunuch's demands, which
increased the anger of the mutilated creature against him. Consequently he exasperates the Emperor against him, saying, "The matter that concerns us is no longer the obtaining the subscription of
Liberius, but the fact that he is so resolutely opposed to the heresy,
that he anathematizes the Arians by name." He also stirs up the other
eunuchs to say the same; for many of those who were about Constantius, or rather the whole number of them, are eunuchs, who engross
all the influence with him, and it is impossible to do anything there
without them... [131
After describing the beginning of persecution of his fellow
partisans in Rome, Athanasius proceeds to describe Arianism as a peculiarly eunuchoid heresy:
It was the eunuchs who instigated theseproceedings against
all. And the most remarkable circumstance in the matter
is this; that the Arian heresy which denies the Son of God,
receives it support from eunuchs, who, as both their bodies are fruitless, and their souls barren of virtue, cannot
bear even to hear the name of son. The Eunuch of Ethiopia indeed, though he understood not what he read [Acts
8:27j, believed the words of Philip, when he taught him
concerning the Saviour; but the eunuchs of Constantius
cannot endure the confession of Peter, nay, they turn away
when the Father manifest the Son, and madly rage against
24
AMERICAN ATHEIST
JULY'2fYJ7
those who say, that the Son of God is His genuine Son, thus
claiming as a heresy of eunuchs, that there is no genuine
and true off-spring of the Father. On these grounds it is
that the law forbids such persons to be admitted into any
ecclesiastical Council; notwithstanding which they have
now regarded these as competent judges of ecclesiastical
causes, and whatever seems good to them, that Constantius decrees, while men with the name of Bishops dissemble
with them. Oh! Who shall be their historian? Who shall
transmit the record of these things to another generation?
Who indeed would believe it, were he to hear it, that eunuchs who are scarcely entrusted with household services
(for theirs is a pleasure-loving race, that has no serious
concern but that of hindering in others what nature has
taken from them); that these, I say, now exercise authority
in ecclesiastical matters, and that Constantius in submission to their will treacherously conspired against all, and
banished Liberiusp41
It would take an entire book to trace the shifting fortunes of
Christ's Castrati during the course of the last two millennia. Modern
sensibilities recoil at the thought of eunuchism as a religiously sanctioned condition, and modern 'scholarship' tells us that Jesus never
intended his words to be taken literally. Modern scholars fail to tell
us why, however, if their guru meant celibacy or chastity instead of
self-castration, he didn't say celibacy or chastity. Despite the unambiguous wording of the Greek text of Matt. 19:12, some modern
versions of the Bible completely whitewash the logion and make it
entirely suitable for Sunday afternoon discussion groups in Miss Priscilla Propriety's parlor. A particularly egregious example of this is the
rendering of the passage in The New English Bible:
For while some are incapable of marriage because they
were born so, or were made so by men, there are others
who have themselves renounced marriage for the sake of
the kingdom of heaven. Let those accept it who can.
Notes
The quotation from Galatians is taken from the New International Version of the Christian bible.
[2] The Anrc-Niccne Fathers, Translations of The Writings of the Fathers
down to A.D. 325, Volume IV, Ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids, MI, reprinted 1982,
page 399.
[3] Homer W. Smith, Man And His Gods, Grosset's Universal Library, NY,
1957, pages 124-5.
[4] The Ante-Nicene
Fathers, Translations of The Writings of the Fathers
down to A.D. 325, Volume 1, The Apostolic Fathers, with Justin Martyr
and Irerueus, Ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI, reprinted 1985, page 167.
[5] Ibid., page 172.
[6] A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene
Fathers of The Christian
Church, Second Series, Volume XIV, The Seven Ecumenical Councils Ed.
Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Col. Grand Rapids, MI, reprinted 1983, page 595.
[7] Ibid., page 364.
[8] A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian
Church. Second Series. Vol. 1. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Ed. Philip
Schaff and Henry Wace, Reprinted 1982 Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.,
Grand Rapids, MI, page 254.
[9] Ibid., page 316.
[10] The Ante- Nicene Fathers, Translations
of The Writings of the Fathers
down to A.D. 325, Volume X, Origen's Commentary on Matthew, Ed.
Allan Menzies, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI,
reprinted 1980, pages 512-13.
[II] A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of The Christian
Church, Volume X, Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of Saint
Matthew, Ed. Philip Schaff, Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., Grand Rapids,
MI, reprinted 1983, page 384.
[12] Ibid., page 282.
[13]
Ibid., page 283.
[14]
Ibid., page 283.
[I 5] The Encyclopedia Americana, International Edition, Volume 5, Article
"Castrate," 1975.
[I]
representin
YO
JULY2007 -
AMERiCANAIHEIST
25
AMERICAN ATHElSf
JULY2007
When snake-oil is sold day after day, hour after hour on every
en closely examined, all the claims for god's existence-personal experience, the miracles, First Cause, street corner, recommended by citizens from every walk of society, it is
apparent holes in evolutionary theory and the stability hard for the average man and woman to understand that the concoction
they are offered does more harm than good.
of the universe and so on-prove to be groundless.
In some countries and communities, from Pakistan to Poland,
A being from another planet or another dimension would be surprised by that statement, given the number of places of worship, the Brazil to Israel, religious delusion is widespread. In the United States
heads bowed in prayer, the books, films and music devoted to god, that where presidents, rock stars, athletes and average citizens must refer to
it would see. Observing the devotion, the ecstasy,the pity and the anger the deity regularly, religious hysteria is deep rooted and widespread.
At first glance, it seems strange that America, founded on ideals
that faith inspires, it might easilyconclude religion was real.
After some time, however, our visitor would discern the void be- of freedom and liberty of thought, with its progressive history, its worldhind the smoke and mirrors, the sound and the fury. No matter how class universities and scientists, with thinkers and doers on the leading
sincere the belief of preachers and believers, it would see that their faith edge of civilization, should be so retrograde when it comes to religion.
was built on sand.
Why is it, when all the evidence before us
points to the single conclusion that god does not ex"Whether the fire of faith within us is lit by the desire for a father-figure
ist, that so many people believe in him?
or eternal life, once aflame, it is kept alive by endless propaganda from
The answer lies in the previous paragraphchurches and the media insisting that God exists."
the "void." Even the slightest suspicion, that life is no
more than birth followed by a series of painful and
pleasurable incidents that end in oblivion, can be
On reflection, however, it is less surprising. The nation was
highly disturbing to the human psyche.
We are born weak and vulnerable. In our formative years we founded by contrarians-people who rejected, or were rejected by, the
depend on others for nourishment and safety and life itself Authority majority consensus in the countries they emigrated from. Unwilling to
figures dominate our lives. To protect ourselves, we mold our evolving change their religion or to remain mired in poverty, they left their homes
personalities around these figures. We are profoundly affected by their to seek a land where they had greater freedom to determine their own
fate.
presence or absence and by their beneficial and harmful actions.
This streak of independence and distrust of society persists,
As we grow older,we place lessrelianceon the realmen and women
who surrounded us in childhood. Nevertheless,we remain strongly attract- thriving in conspiracy theories and the NRA, in home-schooling and
ed to the ideaof an all-powerfulfather who rewardsthe just (i. e., ourselves) maverick politicians, in belief in aliens and a thousand other contrarian
and punishes the unjust (i. e., those who harm or threaten us).
positions.
Religious faith in America, particularly the faith of televangeBecause that figure does not exist, we are free to create him in
whichever image suits us best-aggressive, dominating, kind, loving, dis- lists and the newer, creationist sects, continues the tradition of rebelling
against mainstream society (science and reason), while comforting the
tant, close, whatever.
Monotheists-Jews, Muslims and Protestants-have to make do believer with the illusion of god.
That does not mean that Americans will always be believers. As
with only one god, with each believer manipulating their deity into the
religion is increasingly seen as the establishment, increasing numbers
personality that comforts them the most. Polytheists, including Catholics are luckier, since they have a multitude of god-figures, male and fe- of people question the sugar-coated fairy tale. A generation from now,
Atheism is likely to seem as American as apple pie-and with luck it will
male, each with their own traits-that they can choose from.
Not all believersare seduced into religion by the mythical authorbe more permanent.
If god existed, he would ...
ity figure. Others are less concerned with god than the afterlife.
admire the beauty of a universe that he did not create
For many who do not want their life to end after seventy or so
years, the idea of life after death, no matter how vague, is highly appeal recognize that eternity is meaningless
ing. Not only does it offer a better life than the one we endure now, but
deny both heaven and hell
disown all men and women who speak in his name
it allows us to meet again individuals whom we have loved but whom
denounce the harm caused by religious "morality"
have died.
help the human race to thrive without him
Whether the fire of faith within us is lit by the desire for a fatherfigure or eternal life, once aflame, it is kept alive by endless propaganda
If god existed, he would be an Atheist.
Mr. Foreman can be reached at martin@godwouldbeanatheist.com
from churches and the media insisting that god exists.
JULY2007 -
AMERlCANATHEISf
27
GODLESS AMERICANS
IPolitical Action Committee
Ellen Johnson, Executive Director of GAMPAC with Sen. Feinstein and Rep. Conyers
If you are one of the millions of non-believing, non-religious Americans, you have a voice in
Washington, DC! The Godless Americans Political Action Committee (GAMPAC) actively speaks
out for your First Amendment issues on Capitol Hill. We monitor legislation, take action to preserve the separation of church and state, and work to elect candidates to public office who uphold
the Establishment Clause.
Religious groups have a powerful presence in our nation's capital. As a result, they receive billions of taxpayer dollars through unconstitutional schemes like the faith-based initiative. Preachers
like Pat Robertson have become political bosses, and boast how they deliver millions of votes to
candidates who comply with their agenda to "bring America back to God."
~6w, thanks "to the GAMPAC, Atheists, Freethinkers, Humanists and other non-believersand every American who upholds the separation of religion and government-have
their own
voice in legislatures across the country, in political conventions and our nation's Capitol. Yes,
we're still small, but we're growing-and
we intend to hold politicians accountable for their votes
on issues like vouchers, the use of public money for faith-based social experiments, and "special
rights" for religious groups. We also endorse candidates for public office-candidates
who will
uphold the separation of religion and government and protect our civil rights. GAMPAC is building a
nationwide presence by helping secular politicians get elected. But we need your help! Won't you
contribute today?
GAMPAC
PO Box 5674, Parsippany, NJ 07054-6733
www.gampac.org
Paid Advertisement
news
New Zealand
Parties Reach
Compromise
To PassllChiid
Smacking" law
by Ray Lilley
Associated Press Writer
WELLINGTON,
NEW Zealand (AP)New Zealand's main political parties
agreed Wednesday to support reforms that outlaw child beating but
do not criminalize parents who use
"inconsequential" force-such
as a
disciplinary smack-against
their
children.
More than 1,000 people, mostly
conservative Christians, protested
outside Parliament as debate on the
so-called anti-smacking bill was held,
arguing that it impinges too far into
the lives of families. Nearby, Anglicans held a vigil in support of the bill,
saying it would protect children.
Lawmakers
overwhelmingly
supported
the
changes-which
close a legal loophole that currently
protects parents charged with child
beating-after
the governing Labor
Party and main opposition National
Party reached a compromise.
Later Wednesday, the bill was
passed through committee stages in
the 121-member Parliameni: with
117 votes in favor and just three opposing. One lawmaker abstained.
A final vote is expected before
month's end, when the measure is
expected to pass easily into law.
The new law will make it an offense for parents to use force to discipline their children.
But under the compromise, police would have discretion "not to
prosecute complaints ... involving
the use of force against a child where
the offense is considered so inconsequential there is no public interest in
proceeding with a prosecution," the
bill says.
"Nobody wants to see those parents marched off (for giving a child)
a light tap in the supermarket,"
Prime Minister Helen Clark told
National Radio.
"We think we've ... allayed any
concern from ordinary, decent parents trying to bring up kids," she
said.
Study: More
Catholic priests
foreig n-born,
well-educated
by The Associated Press
WASHINGTON, DC
(AP)-This
year's new crop of Roman Catholic priests in the United States has
an average age of 35 and includes a
large number of foreign-born priests
and men who entered the seminary
with college degrees, a study shows.
The survey, closely watched
because of the country's welldocumented priest shortage, was
conducted by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolare at
Georgetown University for the U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Researchers gathered information
from 282 seminarians, or about 60
percent of the 475 candidates for the
priesthood in 2007.
Although final numbers will not
be available until next spring, a rise
in ordinations is possible. This year's
projected class would be an increase
over 431 ordinations in 2006, according to Georgetown researchers.
Even so, ordination classes remain smaller than in decades past.
The total number of priests serving
in the United States has declined 29
percent in the last 40 years while the
Catholic population has grown 40
percent.
Among the characteristics of the
2007 class:
1 in 3 candidates for the priesthood was born outside the United
States, with the largest numbers
coming from Vietnam, Mexico, Poland and the Philippines.
7 in 10 report their primary race
as white or European-American.
Asian priests are over-represented
when compared with the U.S. Asian
population, while Hispanic priests
are
underrepresented .
The average age of35 is approximately the same as in 1998, the first
year for which data are available.
More than 6 in 10 completed
college, and 1 in 5 had attained a
graduate degree in areas such as law,
medicine and education.
The surveyed seminarians included 221 men studying to serve
for dioceses, and 60 studying to join
religious orders. One did not indicate an affiliation.
Baptist Homes
Accused of
Forcing Religion
on Residents
by The Associated Press
LOUISVILLE, KY (AP)-A
statefunded Baptist social-services program forced children into Christian
or specifically Baptist practices and
discouraged the practicing of other
religions, according to interviews released as part of a lawsuit.
The interviews were done as part
of a suit filed by a fired employee and
four other taxpayers who are challenging state funding for Kentucky
Baptist Homes for Children.
Several of the complaints came
JULY2IJJ7 -
AMERICAN ATHEIST
L9
dispensed. (No, I would not pray for their soul, tell him that they
offended god, or that they were surely headed for hell and damnation if they didn't do right!) Instead, I leveled with these boys. We
discussed pragmatic things, such as how to survive their army stint
and how, after their military service, they could go on to become
productive citizens. In the trial, I had the accused take the witness
stand (which was very unusual in the military}.Their personal
stories of confusion or being needed at home were moving. I think
this went a long way in convincing the juries to be lenient in their
sentencing.
I was so successful in getting reduced sentences for these
boys that the Sixth Army General (a three-star general) had his
Adjunct-General request that I resign as defense counsel.l respectfully informed him that I would not, and if they relieved me of my
duties as defense counsel, I would appeal it up the chain of command and make sure that the press was well informed. As a result,
there was no further word from the military brass and I continued
as defense counsel for the next year.
In doing what I felt was the right thing for these boys, I think
my strong sense of the here-and-now, and my belief that all
humans have some good in them and can be rehabilitated, gave
me the courage to do what was right, even when someone else
thought it was wrong. These boys'decision making was hampered
by the lack of equality in education, opportunity and home life that
my own Atheist outlook on life, provided me. I was not handcuffed
by any religious dogma; my Atheism helped me have the common
sense,courage and confidence to buck the system. I'm hoping
there are a lot of men out there, now working as farmers and clerks,
teachers and construction workers, who may remember a young
military officer who believed in them and tried to put them on the
right road.
sf
d
Founaer nen s.
The
AMERICAN ATHEl!IT -
JULYXXJ7
INFORMATION
ABOUT
TAX DEDUCTIONS
MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION
IRS rules state that the tax-deductible
portion
of membership
by subtracting
any goods
the fair-market
www.atheists.org
American Atheists
value of
908.276.7300
Name
in return.
Address
LESS than
City
subscription
to our magazine.
tax-deductible.
Life membership
Zip
dues are
Signature
subscriptions,
This means
Phone
State
magazine
they would
Date
cost at
is the Associate
because Associate
receive a magazine
Couple/Family
tax-deductible
The remainder
memberships,
Individual
Couple/Family
now include
to pay a separate
a subscription
to
American Atheist
type:
magazines,
membership:
or foreign
addresses,
order, or credit-card
the name(s)
of your
(in the year
Life membership:
calculations
below.
members:
information.
membership:
Please include
For multiple-year
is tax-deductible
membership
years, online
to be a
Wall-Builder)
of
and $110
are considered
donation.
Associate)
necessary
(For multiple
Simply
For the
(except
do not
subscription.
subscription.
types
So, it is no longer
membership
members
($150) membership
magazine
magazine!
$1500 (includes
bag)
TO your membership
dues are
Price/Year
fully tax-deductible.
Number
Multiple-year
discount:
10%
20%
online
online
AND receive
addresses,
printed
postage
printed
countries,
I am paying
by check or money
$
only):
X __
years
X __
years
I am paying
by credit
Expiration
Signature
=
=
$
$
of
Total:
donation
must be in US dollars.)
order
(Ail payments
For foreign
of Years
$--
date
__
Date
/ __
(month/year)
_
Atheists,
explanation
Inc. is a nonprofit,
ofThomas
Jefferson
ATHEISTS
IS ORGANIZED:
nonpolitical,
educational
organization
dedicated
to the Constitution
to the complete
of the United
and absolute
separation
accepting
between
the
state and
church.
AMERICAN
To stimulate
To collect
and promote
and disseminate
To advocate,
To act as a "watchdog"to
challenge
To encourage
the development
To develop
happiness
To promote
To engage
and propagate
ofthought
information,
To advocate,
people
freedom
and inquiry
in all lawful
and public
breach
responsibility
a social philosophy
of a humane
in relation
humankind
of them, their
origins,
and their
available
to all;
histories;
between
and maintenance
ethical
a more thorough
separation
of each individual
in which
and promote
and absolute
acceptance
religious
on all religions
any attempted
in all lawful
concerning
of a thoroughly
system stressing
the mutual
secular system
sympathy,
of education
understanding,
and interdependence
of all
to society;
is central
progress,
of humanity;
the study of the arts and sciences and of all problems
in such social, educational,
activity
affecting
the maintenance,
perpetuation,
and enrichment
to the members
of American
of human
Atheists
(and other)
and to society
life; and
as a whole.
and