August, 1984

A Journal of Atheist News and Thought

$2.95

CONVENTION '84
.14th .Annual National Convention of American Atheists
Lexington, Kentucky; April 20-22, 1984

********-*-*-~---**-***----*--*---**-*--*-*-*-**-----****-*****-*-**
AMERICAN ATHEISTS
is a non-profit, non-political, educational organization, dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of
state and church. We accept the explanation of Thomas Jefferson that the "First Amendment"
to the
Constitution of the United States was meant to create a "wall of separation" between state and church.
American Atheists are organized to stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry concerning
religious beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals and practices;
to collect and disseminate information, data and literature on all religions and promote a more thorough
understanding of them, their origins and histories;
to encourage the development and public acceptance of a human ethical system, stressing the mutual
sympathy, understanding
and interdependence
of all people and the corresponding
responsibility of each
individual in relation to society;
to develop and propagate a culture in which man is the central figure who alone must be the source of
strength, progress and ideals for the well-being and happiness of humanity;
to promote the study of the arts and sciences and of all problems affecting the maintenance,
perpetuation and enrichment of human (and other) life;
to engage in such social, educational, legal and cultural activity as will be useful and beneficial to
members of American Atheists and to society as a whole.
Atheism may be defined as the mental attitude which unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and
aims at establishing a lifestyle and ethical outlook verifiable by experience
and the scientific method,
independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.
Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own
inherent, immutable and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that man finding his resources within himself - can and must create his own destiny. Materialism restores to man his
dignity and his intellectual integrity. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve
it. It holds that man is capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism's "faith" is in
man and man's ability to transform the world culture by his own efforts. This is a commitment which is in very
essence life asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation and impossible without noble
ideas that inspire man to bold creative works. Materialism holds that humankind's potential for good and for an
outreach to more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited.

-***--**--**********************-*-**-*._**-*-*******-******-*-*****
American Atheist Membership Categories
Life membership
Sustaining membership
Family/Couple membership
Individual membership
Senior Citizen/Unemployed*
Student membership*

$500.00
, $100.00/year
$50.00/year
membership

$40.00/year
$20.00/year
$12.00/year

*I.D. required
All membership categories receive our monthly "Insider's Newsletter," membership card(s). a
subscription to American Atheist magazine for the duration of the membership period, plus additional
organizational mailings, i.e. new products for sale, convention and meeting announcements, etc.

American Atheists - P.O. Box 2117 - Austin, TX 78768-2117

Vol. 26, No.8

August,

REGULAR FEATURES
Editorial
Ask A.A
News & Comments: AdvertisingDial-An-Atheiston Salt Lake City Buses
- DavidChris Allen
Dial-An-Atheist
The Atheist Next Door
Poetry
American Atheist Radio Series
Historical Notes
Letters to the Editor
Reader Service

2
4
5
30
31
32
33
36
39
40

CONVENTION NEWS '84

A Summary of the 14th Annual National Convention of American Atheists
-- MadalynMurray O'Hair
Welcome to Kentucky -- Herman Harris
Return to Lexington -- John Crump
Eulogy: A Forgotten Man -- Gerald Tholen
Politics and Religion in the Middle East -- Dr. AlfredLilienthal
The Black Atheists of the Harlem Renaissance (1917-28)
-- John G. Jackson
Photo Section
'
Atheist Liberation -- Barbara Smoker
Sex As An Argument For Atheism -- Ben Edward Akerley

9
10
11
13
14
18
19
25
26

FEATURED COLUMNISTS
Those That Are Still Among Us -- MichaelBettencourt.
Women and the Law of Karma -- Margaret Bhatty
Editor
Robin Murray-O'Hair
Editor Emeritus
Madalyn Murray O'Hair
Managing Editor
Jon G. Murray
Assistant Editor
Gerald Tholen
Poetry
Angeline Bennett
Gerald Tholen
Production Staff
Alexander Stevens
BillKight
Richard M. Smith
Gloria Tholen .'
Non-Resident Staff
G. Stanley Brown
Jeff Frankel
Merrill Holste
Margaret Bhatty
Fred Woodworth
Clayton Powers
Michael Bettencourt
Cover Photo
Bruce Senior

35
37

The American Atheist magazine is published monthly by the

American Atheist Press (an affiliate of American Atheists), 2210
Hancock Dr., Austin, TX 78756-2596, and @ 1984 by Society of
Separationists, Inc., a non-profit, non-political, educational organization dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of state
and church. (All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part
without written permission is prohibited). Mailing address:
P.O. Box 2117/Austin, TX 78768-2117. Subscription is provided as
an incident of membership in the organization of American
Atheists. Subscriptions alone are available at $25.00 for one year
terms only. (Frequency monthly. Library and institutional discount:
50%.) Manuscripts submitted must be typed, double-spaced and
accompanied by a stamped, self-addressed envelope. A copy of
American Atheist Magazine Writers Guidelines is available on
request. The editors assume no responsibility for unsolicited
manuscripts.

ON THE COVER
An excursion was made to the
grave of Charlie Moore on Sunday
morning during the Convention
weekend. The heavy clouds finally
broke; the sun came out; the sweet
rain-cleared air, the wet green grass,
the budding trees, and the early
Spring flowers made the trip to the
cemetery a buoyant and uplifting
experience. A large daisy-covered
American Atheist symbol was placed
on the grave; Gerald Tholen read a
poem of praise which he had written;
then Herman Harris, John Crump,
Jon Murray and Dr. O'Hair furnished words of recognition and
praise for this bonafide Atheist
locked into a culture of stifling religious dogmatism.
By coincidence that Sunday was
"easter," and a television station
took the proverbial poll, asking the
residents of the city only one question: how many Atheists were there
in the city that an Atheist organization would dare to hold a Convention
there. When the tabulation was
completed, 25% of those who responded said they were Atheists.
Nothing better could have capped
the day, or the Convention! And, at
long last, dignity and honored remembrance of a brave, defiant and
historical Atheist giant had been renewed.
A good time was had by all.

NEW ADDRESS: (please print)

Name

Address

City

State

--L..Zip,

OLD ADDRESS: (please print)

Name
The American Atheist magazine
is indexed in
Monthly Periodical Index
ISSN: 03324310

Address

City

State

Zip

1984

ARE YOU
MOVING?
Please notifyus six
weeks in advance to
ensure uninterrupted
delivery. Send us
both your old and
newaddresses. Ifpossible, attach old label
from a recent magazine issue in the bottom address space
provided.

Mailto: AmericanAtheists/P.O. Box 2117/ Austin,TX 78768-2117

Austin,Texas

August, 1984

Page 1

EDITORIAL / Jon Garth Murray

THE NUMBERS GAME

ecently, in an article in the April 24th edition of Woman s Day

magazine, the title screamed out "We Found God Again." It
was the story of three families, protestant, roman catholic and
jew, who had "strayed" from their mother church to some nonmainline denomination or toward inactivity or nonattendance. The
three subject families all found harmony at the end of the rainbow by
getting back to that good old mainline religion - or so they
conveniently claimed for their interview. After all, their names and
pictures were going to be in Womans Day. That was probably the
high point in an otherwise boring ordinary life.
The article was loaded with maccurate and misleading statistical
information about church attendance. It was stated that, "[Njearly
seven out of ten Americans are church or synagogue members, and
the most recent Gallup poll found that on a typical weekend more
than half of these believers are in houses of worship" (which would,
incidentally, be only 35%).
In 1981 when Jerry Falwell did his Penthouse interview (which he
has been denying that he did ever since), he talked about some
statistics, too. Speaking in answer to a Penthouse question and
referring to pope John Paul, he said, "He (the pope) ... believes that
the bible is the inherent word of god and therefore is not to be
questioned. And this is where I am .... That's where Dr. BillyGraham
is; that's where at least 110,000 fundamentalist pastors are in America
today. And this is where the action is going. Ifyou'll get the numerics,
the churches in America that are growing, really growing, and are
filledand running over, are churches that adhere to that position. The
mainline denominational churches that are merging are those
churches that have decided: 'We don't want an authoritative
.message; we want rather to create our own religion, do our own thing,
and rewrite it and update it as time passes.' So that is where the
neo-evangelicals and the liberals are today, and that is why they are
going out of business. People want what people have always wanted:
they want a message from God. They don't want your message; they
want Gods message. And there's a big difference, by the way ... "
(emphasis added).
At the end of the interview Penthouse asks, "Who Comprises the
Moral Majority?" and Falwell answers, "The Moral Majority is a
coalition of 'religious people,' and I put that in quotes, of all sorts:
Mormons, Catholics, Jews, fundamentalists, you name it. We've got
70,000 such pastors and religious leaders in that group right now and
several million lay people .... " (emphasis added). He never noticed
that he had dropped 40,000 by his own admission.
Womans Day and Penthouse are not the only places where one
can find these kinds of claims these days. They appear in practically
every major magazine and newspaper in the nation now in increasing
frequency. The electronic media persons play the game of" everyone
is going back to religion" also. It is a classic self-fulfillingprophecy. If
the public hears and reads over and over again that America is
returning to church and to god, whether or not the trend is or is not
real, individuals will begin to wonder what is wrong with them that
they are not a part of the "great tide sweeping the country." This is
what the religious community hopes, fundamentalist or mainline. The
media is helping to create an epidemic of religious fervor when there
isn't one.
The majority of Americans remain, as they have been since the
beginning of this nation, lukewarm and not all steamed up about

Page 2

August, 1984

religion. The majority's attitude toward church attendance is not one

of obligation; it is one of convenience, expediency, and complacency.
I remain convinced that in the majority of cases people attend a
religious institution when they "feel like it" or "don't have anything
better to do that day." It is impossible to discern with any scientific
accuracy at all what the "majority" god belief is in this country. God
beliefs are as individual as fingerprints. Geographical location,
socioeconomic status and other environmental factors have such a
great influence on how one perceives a deity (ifone does at all) that no
statistics, despite any claims to the contrary, can be held valid in the
area of personal belief systems. The only thing that can be counted
with anything even bordering on accuracy is church enrollment and,
to a lesser degree, church attendance. It is easy to simply count the
number of persons in the pews of a given church on a given Sunday.
There is no way in the world to discern, without error, why each
person is in attendance or how many are repeat attenders. To really
be accurate churches would have to take roll call like public school
classes do each day to pin down attendance figures, and I don't think
that is very likely.
My conviction that most church attendance is done out of
expediency comes from personal input from a great number of
persons with whom I talk every year concerning religion in my travels.
I could not verify my position with hard statistics for anything in the
world, but neither could any clergyman. There is simply no way to
accurately get inside the head of enough persons on an individual
basis to find out for sure. In fact, even in the case of asking someone
how many times a month they attend church they are liable to think,
"Well, if I tell the truth it may look bad or someone may think less of
me if I don't say that I go more often than I do." It is like asking how
many times a month one engages in sexual intercourse a month. If
you asked that question to a male the answer is almost always going
to come out higher than the actual figure.
We therefore find ourselves in the position of needing to rely on
church enrollment and attendance figures that all must be taken with
a grain of salt. We have a situation of the clergy, religion editors and
other journalists taking those attendance and enrollment figures and
trying to infer conclusions from them or extrapolate them into
"trends" that really cannot be verified. In addition to this we have the
mercenary poll takers, of which Gallup is the best example, who will
take any poll for the highest bidder. The "facts" always seem to add
up on the side of proving the point that the person or institution
paying for the study wants the "facts" to prove. We must also
consider the reluctance of both individual religionists and religious
communities and organizations to submit to polls for fear that the
polls will show what they do not wish to hear. I think that of all the
statistics floating around, none of which are really reliable, the best
place to start has to be with the U.S. Bureau of Census. The Bureau
of Census has been looking at the demographics of American life in all
areas since 1790, although it was not made a permanent organization
by Congress until 1902.
.
Let's take a look at what the Census has found since 1790. We must
first remember that many different kinds of governmental censuses
are taken. In addition to the general regular decennial Census from
time to time there have been a number of "Censuses of Religious
Bodies." Although no provision was originally made by Congress for
this special census, information was gathered on a voluntary basis
The American Atheist

from the first Census of 1790 forward. When that first census of 1790
was in preparation James Madison expressed reservations about the
inclusion of a question concerning "belief in God" under the category
of "the learned professions," referring "to those who are employed in
teaching and inculcating the duties of religion." Madison felt that
"there may be some indelicacy in singling them out, as the General
Government is proscribed from interfering, in any manner whatever,
in matters respecting religion; and it may be thought to do this, in
ascertaining who are and who are not ministers of the Gospel."
(Gales, Joseph, Debates & Proceedings in the Congress of the United
States.) Madison's words hold true to this date. Reluctance to reveal
head counts on the part of religionists on all levels has been the name
of the game since 1790.

"In 1790 the U.S. population was only

3,929,000; of that only about 58,000 persons
(about 1.5%)attended some 3,105 churches ....
At the same time the religious community
claimed that the figure should really be more
like 4%."
In 1790 the U.S. population was only 3,929,000; of that only about
58,000 persons (about 1.5%) attended some 3,105 churches. That
only averages out to about 18 persons per church, which means a
large number of small congregations. At the same time the religious
community claimed that the figure should really be more like 4%. All
through the years from 1790 to 1906 the religious community has
always claimed more of a percentage than was actually reported
through the Census. If they had cooperated more, perhaps their
claims would have been substantiated. No one willever know, since
they took the option of balking at reporting and then complaining
about whatever figure the Census published from the reports they
could manage to gather. I really don't understand the reason for this
as the bible itself speaks of head counts of the "faithful." In~ii.samuel
24 it says, "And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel,
and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and
Judah." In i. chronicles 21 it says, "And Satan stood up against Israel
and provoked David to number Israel." We have both "The Lord"
and "Satan" demanding censuses of the "faithful." Why don't the
religious leaders take the lead of their own holy book? Perhaps they
are fearful of what they may find. It has always served their interests
better to rely on faith anyway.
In the period from 1800 to 1865 the percentage of the "churched"
versus the "unchurched" rose from about 1.5% to 5%, with the
churches claiming 23% if all had been reported. Then the percentage
began to drop in the post Civil War period of 1865 to 1890 - even
according to the churches. This was the period of the emergence of a
whole plethora of "freethought" groups under various leaderships
and nomenclatures. In actuality they were more anticlerical than
"freethought." It was the period of the coining of the word "agnostic"
in England, and the influence of that kind of thinking was felt across
the ocean in America.
When we moved into our industrial period and large numbers of
immigrants poured in from many, chiefly catholic, countries like
Ireland, Italy, France, Poland and Germany, naturally percentage
attendance figures began to rise. The first officialand congressionally
mandated "Census of Religious Bodies" took place in 1906, followed
by others in 1916 and 1926. Perhaps because of the anticatholic
feeling among the protestant majority against the large catholic
immigration, Congress wanted a head count. Under authority of Acts
of Congress approved June 7,1906 and June 18,1929, a penalty was
instituted for the first time for noncompliance by a religious body with
the "Census of Religious Bodies." The penalty was a fine not to
exceed $500, or imprisonment not to exceed 60 days, or both. The
willful giving of false answers could subject an individual to up to
$10,000.00 in fines, and a prison term of one year, or both.
The 1906 "Census of Religious Bodies" showed 41% "churched"
Austin, Texas

out of a population of about 85,450,000. The censuses of 1916 and

1926 showed 41% and 43% respectively with the churches claiming
43% for both. Then came the 1936 census. It was a crucial one. It
showed a drop of some 24,000 churches and congregations from the
1926 census. The difference was mainly among southern baptists and
methodist and episcopal church denominations. The primary factor
for this was that the local ministers were noncooperative. This
attitude, it was felt, was due to the fact that the legal penalties for
noncompliance were at the end of the census schedule for the first
time in the 1936 survey. In 1938 the Alabama Baptist State Convention resolved that its member ministers decline to cooperate in future
federal censuses of religion on separation of state and church
grounds. As a result Congress passed a law directing the Bureau of
the Census not to require a religious body to report its statistics if its
"doctrine" prohibited that. The controversy led to the omission of the
1946 and 1956 census of religious bodies.
In 1940 some denominations sought to have a religious question on
"belief in God" included in the regular census of that year. The
Bureau rejected the idea for 1940 and 1950 both. Then in April of 1956
the Bureau issued a statement that a religious question was under
consideration for the 1960 decennial census. It would be "What is
your religion?" with multiple choice answers of 1) catholic, 2) jewish,
3) protestant, 4) all others, and 5) none. The Bureau also toyed with
the idea of making this single question in the census voluntary but it
dropped the idea as impractical. In July of 1957, spawned by a letter to
the editor of the New York Times by the president of the American
Jewish Congress in objection to the inclusion of a religious question in
the 1960 census, a nationwide controversy began in the major city
and religious papers. National groups, religious and nonreligious
alike, took sides and in December of 1957 the Bureau decided not to
include the question.
From 1940 on, religion controlled the Census Bureau by pressures
upon it, and forced the government to take only those numbers that
they were willingto give. Religion could count themselves, ifthey saw
fit, by their own methods. Since 1940 the Census Bureau calculates
that the religious figures are off by a minimum of 15%. Why?
1) Not all groups follow the same calendar year.
2) Some groups only give approximate figures.
3) Roman catholics count all baptized persons. It does not
matter that they may have given up the church years ago. They
even include infants.
4) The jews count as members alljews in any community having
a congregation.
5) Eastern orthodox churches count all persons in a given city in
their nationality or cultural group as members.
6) Protestants count only persons who have attained full
membership in a church.
7) Lutherans and the episcopal church report all baptized
persons in their church, and not just those confirmed.
With this kind of haphazard reporting, with no continuity. of
method or definition, no one can tell anything. Yet, considering all of
the above, the churches' maximum and fanciful claim is for 63% of the
current population. Keep in mind that 20% of our population is under
the age of 13. If we take into account the 15% fudge factor for the
mixture of reporting methods, that brings the figure down to 48%,
with 20% of that being children, so at most we have 28% consenting
adults attending church of their own free will.Then one must consider
how often? Are persons counted who only attend once.a year or.for
events like weddings or funerals? No one knows. I am quite sure that if
church leaders had their way they would count noses on christmas,
easter and thanksgiving and extrapolate for the rest of the year from
there.
What this all boils down to is that the religionists feel that ifthey say
that America is a deeply religious country often enough and loud
enough - with the media behind them - they are hoping that they
can make it come true in a case of wish fulfillment at its best. It is a
gamble. It is a last ditch effort. A cornered animal always fights the
hardest when the end is near.

August, 1984

(continued on page 40)

Page 3

ASK A.A.

Dear AA:
Are you sure Einstein would have appreciated being classified as an Atheist? After
all, he did like to say things like"God doesn't
play dice with the universe," and he did
believe strongly in zionism. I realize his idea
of god had little to do with organized religion, but still I am curious about your
answer to my question. Maybe you could
answer it when you send me my sample
copy?
Eytan Wronker
New York
Dear Eytan:
The religious, on the one hand, and
humanists, freethinkers, agnostics, on the
other hand, have for too long reached out to
claim whom they could as their oum. There
have been struggles over Jefferson, Lincoln,
Einstein, etc.
Effective as of 1984, American Atheists
have just decided to quit playing that game_
Religion can have them all. The era of the
great Atheists begins now. From here, and
now, forward we will show the world what
Atheists think, can do, and represent.
Without equivocation we will say that our
Weltanschauung is posited in Atheism.
In the final analysis George Washington
wanted to be president of the United States
more than anything else, and he was in such
a cultural milieu that he felt he had to play
the game. O.K. Religion can have him. At
that time religion had sufficient power in the
United States that it caused fear and trembling in the breasts of these so-called giants.
Religion is just as pernicious, just as allpervasive, just as reactionary, just as dangerous,just as threatening now as then. We
have the courage of our convictions and we
dare to stand up and publicly pronounce
what those convictions are.
Because the persons under discussion
equivocated, the religious plan has been to
grab insignificant contextual statements,
vague or guarded word or language metaphors, and present them as "bona fide
proof" of a particular person's alleged generai compliance with various religious postures. No person's lifetime can be so judged.
A fragmental statement from Einstein, a flip
remark, is used to twist a life commitment
to science 'into a recognition and praise of
god.
We are not going to argue further. All of
these persons belong to an era when they
would not do that which was required to be
done. Other persons were more brave and
made their positions known. They did not
hint, make double statements, equivocate,

Page 4

or deliberately obfuscate. All of those brave

Atheists ended up in the garbage dump of
historical oblivion, while those who lied or
equivocated became national heroes.
The era of apology, rationalization, excuse ends now.
The jews want Einstein - all right, they
can have him.
The unitarians want Sagan - he is
theirs.
We don't need them. We can start with a
clean slate and on it written loud and bold is
the first requirement of Atheism: honesty in
respect to one's position.
Editor

Dear AA:
In the only four months we have been
members of American Atheists we have
learned a great deal from your magazine,
been stimulated to research deeper into the
purpose and history of religion, and recently
met some very interesting people through
our local chapter. It sure is nice to realize
how at peace with themselves Atheists are.
It is quite rewarding to come together with
others with whom we can openly speak the
same "language." My wife and I are finding
all this largely what we wish we had known
about for years.
By the way, some of the most damaging
fundamental religious groups such as the
Campus Crusade for Christ, Christian Intervarsity, New Testament Fellowship, Navigators, and many others are preying upon
college students who they know are a prime
target at their usual age group. Many times I
used to joke to myself while attending
college about forming a "Campus Crusade
Against Christ." What can we Atheists do to
start politely promoting Atheism on college
campuses? I really feel this is very important. College students are sitting ducks for
religious indoctrination.
James Steamer
Massachusetts
Dear James:
American Atheists have a comprehensive program titled U.S.A. (United Student
Atheists). With this we reach out to students in public and private colleges and
universities,
as well as in secondary
schools. What has happened is that a lively,
interested student contacts us and begins
the program. (S)he stays with itfor the time
of her (his) enrollment in the school, and
when graduation arrives the program flounders for want of a successor. We have seen
this happen again and again on a number of
campuses across the country. At this time

August, 1984

there are USA groups on the following

campuses: University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill; University of Kentucky at
Lexington; Arizona State University at
Tucson; and University of California at
Davis.
We must take our lessons from the
religious. THEY FUND THEIR PROGRAMS. Churches cluster on the outskirt
grounds of every college and university
campus in our nation. Often the very
grounds are invaded with religious clubs,
housing, and promotion programs. The
religious know that they must capture the
next generation or die. Atheists have not
learned that lesson. We often remark that
Atheists believe in miracles and especially in
the "big miracle" that a state-supported
monster such as religion can be defeated by
wishing that it could be done. We need
minds, bodies, hands, money, dedication
and determination. We have programs.
The programs cannot be implemented with
good thoughts or complacence. A continually staffed office is needed on every campus.
A salaried employee needs to keep a flow of
Atheist information and literature going. A
meeting place must be had where camaraderie can be established. Regular events
need to be scheduled. In fact, there should
be a dorm situation which could act as a
central hub.
American Atheists have long recognized
this need and attempted to do with voluntary work and no funding the beginnings of
what must be done. All we can do at this
moment is try for a strongly funded national
office and then slowly begin to fund these
peripherally needed groups.
Editor

In "Letters to the Editor" readers give

their opinions, ideas, and information.
But in "Ask A.A." American Atheists
answers questions regarding its
policies, positions, and customs, as
well as queries of factual and
historical situations. We invite you to
address questions to:
Ask A.A.
P.O. Box 2117
Austin, TX 78768-2117

The American Atheist

NEWS & COMMENTS / August, 1984

ADVERTISING DIAL-AN-A THEIST

ON SALT LAKE CITY BUSES
by David Chris Allen

his past Winter passengers of Utah Transit Authority (UTA)

buses in Salt Lake City were treated to something new - an
advertisement for the local Dial-An-Atheist service, Among the
advertisements lined up over the windows was a caricature of
Michelangelo's famous Sistine Chapel, showing an anthropomorphic
god reaching out to Adam with a life-givingtouch. In this caricature
god has a telephone receiver in his hand. The poster had a very simple
message: "DIAL-AN-ATHEIST 364-4939_"There was some fine print
along the bottom edge indicating that the poster was from the Salt
Lake City Chapter of American Atheists, P_O_Box 11622, Salt Lake
City, Utah 84147_
The idea of advertising in the city buses was first suggested to the
Salt Lake City Chapter in early 1983 by member Aerie Visner,
Successful advertisement in the classified sections of the city, college,
and shopping center newspapers had been carried out for years. But
the Chapter was ready to look into new methods of'outreach. Utah
Transit Authority will put up 200 bus posters for only $50, a special
rate for nonprofit organizations. That is a very low rate. Checking into
it we found that the nonprofit ads were being left up for six months
and longer _The commercial rate is $4 a poster for the first month, and
$2 a poster a month thereafter _At that rate 200 posters for six months
would cost $2800_
In the buses most of the advertisements were for nonprofit
organizations. Ads for churches and other religious organizations
were not on every bus, but were definitely present Even if they
weren't, Atheists have every right to express their opinion in any
public forum on an equal basis with any other group. To refuse an
advertisement from American Atheists would be discrimination on
the basis of religious preference.
Furthermore, UTA is a quasi-public corporation receiving public
funds from federal grants and from county sales tax on a local option
basis. It is governed by a board of directors whose members are
appointed by the county commissions of the counties served by UTA
State laws were passed to establish, authorize and fund UTA To
provide a huge discount to churches and other tax-exempt institutions for their advertisements and to deny the same discount to

Atheists would be a violation of the constitutional principle of

separation of state and church.
Other projects took up the Chapter's time until the end of the
summer. Then a call was paid on the bus company _The lady in charge
of UTA advertising, Ms. Terry Mallin, said she could put up our ads,
but there was a catch. If the public found our ads to' be "objectionable," and UTA started receiving complaints, it would take the
signs down. The Chapter representatives were a bit suspicious of
that, but a decision was made to go ahead anyway. Another
suspicious practice was that UTA wouldn't give anything in writing
stating the terms of the nonprofit agreement It was strictly a verbal
agreement One of the Chapter's members went to UTA independently and, without identifying himself with American Atheists,
asked for a written statement of the nonprofit advertising rate, and he
too was refused.
Chapter representatives assured Ms. Mallin that our advertisement would be low key and in "good taste." Chapter representatives
even offered to bring in a sketch of our ad for prior inspection.
In full 'cooperation with the bus company's requirement, the
Chapter chose the god-and-Adam caricature as a background for the
ad. That painting is so well known that it is commonly caricatured in
advertisements and is clearly part of the public domain, Furthermore,
the portrayal of god with a phone in his hand, a product of modern
science and technology, coupled with the words Dial-An-Atheist,
gives an effect that is both clever and humorous in a nonthreatening
way. There was no message of any kind about Atheism; only the
phone number of our Dial-An-Atheist and the Chapter address were
given. An artist sketched the ad. The sketch was examined and
approved by the UTA
The cost of producing the 200 ad posters was more than had been
expected, so the Chapter had to ask for special contributions from its
members. The artist's fees for sketching the preliminary ad, for
drawing the final ad, and for lettering, were $94.41. The printing cost
for 225 ads was $336.17 for a single color poster in black. The ads had
to be exactly 11 inches high and 28 inches long, and had to be printed
on either four- or five-ply posterboard. The total cost, including the

Dial an Atheist
364-4939

merican Atheists.

Austin, Texas

August, 1984

ta

84147

Page 5

NEWS & COMMENTS / August, 1984

$50 to the bus company, was $480.48.
Richard Andrews, State Coordinator of American Atheists, and
Founder and former Director of the Salt Lake Chapter of American
Atheists, delivered the 200 posters to the UTA advertising department on December 13, 1983, paid the $50, and was given a receipt: I
put a message on the Dial-An-Atheist machine about the pagan
origins of the christmas story and christmas celebration traditions.
The Chapter had no other advertising out at the time and calls were
down a bit, so we expected to see a very noticeable increase in calls
when the posters went up. Christmas came and there was no
increase. New Year's Day came and went, and there was still no
increase. At our January meeting the spare ad posters were shown off
at our book table, and a couple were bought by members as
souvenirs. Everyone was pleased, but concern was expressed at the
suspicion that the posters may not have been installed.
Richard called Terry Mallin at UTA and asked if the posters were
up yet. Oh, yes. They were all up. Great! UTA has 403 buses in Salt
Lake and Ogden. If it distributed the ads evenly to all bus yards, the
ads should now be on half of the buses. We called the American
Atheist Center in Austin and gave them the good news. Great! Get a
picture for the magazine.
Before trying to line up a photographer, Richard went downtown
and started riding buses just to make sure we could find buses with
ads on them. He rode ten buses and didn't see ane of the ads. The
next day he rode ten more buses and still didn't see any of the ads. If
the ads were really up, he should have seen about ten ads - more if
the ads had only been put up in Salt Lake City - and there should
have been some increase in calls to the Dial-An-Atheist. There was
none. Richard called Ms. Mallin again and asked if she would please
double check and verify that the posters were up. She checked. The
posters were all up. Why can't we find any buses with our ad on them?
She didn't know. but we should be assured that they were all up.
This process was repeated several more times. Both Richard and I
rode buses around town. We began making lists of the numbers on
the buses that we checked. We gave the numbers to Ms. Mallin at
UTS, who made it plain that she didn't appreciate being pestered by
us every few days. We weren't even paying the commercial rates.
None of the other nonprofit groups ever pestered her like that. Well,
would UTA give us permission to check the buses while they were in
the bus yard since there was obviously something wrong somewhere?
Absolutely not. We were not to be permitted to go onto UTA
property.
She explained that we hadn't seen any ads on the buses because
the ones we had looked at, according to the bus numbers, were all
from the Central bus yard, and she had sent all the ads to the
Meadowbrook yard. Oh, see, that explains it. How many buses were
based in the Meadowbrook yard? Could she tell us which buses we
could ride to find our ads? No, she didn't have that information, but
most of the buses on State Street and Redwood Road were
Meadowbrook buses. We had checked the buses on State Street and
hadn't seen any of our ads.
A few days later, I noticed that the call rate had increased on the
Dial-An-Atheist machine. The following night, while driving across
town, I spotted one of the ads in a passing bus through the windows.
The next day, on January 23, 1984, I went back downtown and
inspected eleven buses on State Street, finding one bus with a DialAn-Atheist ad on it. Later in the week the Chapter post office box was
found to contain two inquiries referring to our bus ad.
At this point it was clear to us that UTA was not being completely
fair and honest with us. We had managed to badger it into belatedly
putting up a few token posters, but obviously it had not put them all
up. We decided to increase the scale of our monitoring so we could go
to the bus company with more comprehensive data on the placement
of our ads. A form was prepared for monitoring buses with a place to
enter the date, time, location, bus route, bus number, and whether
our ad was on the bus. The situation was explained to the members at
Page 6

August, 1984

the February meeting, and everyone was invited to help out in the bus
monitoring project. The forms were passed out, and everyone was
asked to ride some buses, write down on their form what they saw,
and send it in.
Riding buses is time-consuming and bothersome, so I decided to
minimize wasted effort by finding out which buses were supposedly
carrying our ad. Ipaid a visit to the bus company and asked for a list of
all the bus routes covered by Meadowbrook buses. Curiously, that
turned out to be over 90%of the Salt Lake bus routes. A fistful of route
maps was picked up, one for each route.
While I was there I decided to ask Terry Mallin about the
Meadowbrook bus routes. She said that we should not expect to see
our ad on every Meadowbrook bus because many of the ads were
now on Central buses.
"Now, wait a minute. We've been checking buses in locations
serviced by both Meadowbrook and Central buses for several weeks
now, and we've only recently seen two buses with our ads on them.
How do you account for that?"
Reply: We are taking up far too much of her time with our
complaints. We're not even commercial customers. Don't we realize
that those ads are put up by volunteers on an overtime basis?
"I see. But ifthat's been the case, how is it that she has been making
such definite statements about the ads being all up?"
Reply: Boy, we Atheists really are obnoxious. Who do we think we
are coming in there and cross-examining her that way? None of the
other advertisers have ever come in that way and made such
demands of her. By the way, she has had a complaint about our ad,
and as soon as she has the paperwork processed the ads will all be
coming down anyway.
"Who complained? What was the nature of their complaint?"
Reply: UTA doesn't give out that information. It doesn't want us
hassling the person who complained.
"Not who specifically. Was it a passenger, a public official, or an
employee of UTA? It makes a difference in terms of whether we are
being discriminated against. Also, what is your criteria for evaluating
complaints? Can any crank send in a complaint and get any ad he
doesn't like taken down?"
At this point Ms. Mallin indicated that she thought she had already
spent more time listening to our complaints than we were entitled to,
that she had already done everything she thought was necessary, and
that if we had any further complaints, we should take them to her
superiors.
At the March meeting bus monitoring forms were again passed out.
On assessing our results, though, it became apparent that this
method was also inadequate. It was not providing enough information
fast enough to be of use. We needed to be able to check the buses at a
point of concentration.
On the evening of March 14, I went to the Meadowbrook bus yard
to see ifI would be able to check buses as they pulled into the yard. As
each bus came in, it stopped outside the yard gate for removal of the
money box from the fare meter. Iexplained that I was from American
Atheists and that we had paid for advertising in the buses. Would they
mind if I looked in each bus as it came by to see if our ad was up?
"Seems fair enough. Sure, go ahead."
Ibegan checking buses. As each bus came up, I hopped on, looked
around and noted whether our ad was there. Some drivers asked
what I was looking for. I explained that I was from American Atheists
and was looking for the Dial-An-Atheist ad we had paid for. One bus
driver said that a lot of our ads had been pulled down already, and that
he had seen a large pile of our ads crumpled up over by the trash bin.
Another said that other bus drivers were tearing them out of their
buses and that there were a bunch of them under the overpass at 39th
South and Wasatch Boulevard at the end of the line. One bus driver
said that he was an Atheist too, and had enjoyed hearing us on talk
radio the previous week. He too confirmed the story about bus
drivers tearing down our signs. Finally, a lady bus driver said,
The American Atheist

NEWS & COMMENTS

I August, 1984

"Atheists, I have no use for them. I'll tear down any ad I see."
At the end of an hour and a half I had checked 65 buses, and the
tally was 13 buses with our ad and 52 buses without. That is one out of
four. According to UTA's own figures, it has 194 buses in the
Meadowbrook yard, 97 in the Central yard, 73 in the Ogden yard.and
39 new buses being distributed. Since our ad was reportedly not being
placed on the Ogden buses, our 200 ads should have been distributed
over 291 Salt Lake area buses, which means that over two-thirds of
the buses should have been carrying our ad.

"One bus driver said that he was an Atheist

too, ... He too confirmed the story about bus
drivers tearing down our signs. Finally, a lady
bus driver said, 'Atheists, I have no use for
them. I'lltear down any ad I see.' "
The next day I drove out to 39th South and Wasatch Boulevard.
Pieces of our bus ad were littered all over the area. Ipicked up some of
the pieces to take to UTA to support a complaint.
On March 12th a larger survey was conducted by Richard
Andrews, Bill Lockman and David Faggioli at the entrances to both
the Meadowbrook and the Central bus yards. At the end of the
evening an additional 130 buses had been checked and the combined
result of the two surveys was 49 buses with our ad and 146 without.
That is about one out of four.
We decided to take our complaint, our bus survey data, and the
torn up bus posters to the General Manager of UTA, a Mr. John C.
Pingree. I called Mr. Pingree's secretary to get an appointment, but
Pingree didn't want to meet with us. He wanted to take care of the
matter right then on the phone.
Very well. I presented the complaint and described the evidence
that had gathered. Mr. Pingree expressed surprise that the bus
drivers were tearing down our posters, but that there was no need for
us to show him our evidence. He said he was willing to accept our
statement as true, but that he was surprised since in his opinion any
bus driver could have simply complained and all the posters would
have been removed. He added that so far he had received no
complaints about our advertisement at all.
I asked if UTA would be willing to pay the cost of printing new
posters to replace the ones destroyed by employees. No, it would not.
The $50 we had paid covered only the cost of installing the ads. The
Chapter had not paid for advertising space as a commercial customer
would, so UTA was under no obligation to reimburse us for loss of our
ads. UTA had fulfilled its part of the bargain and owed us nothing
more.
Then what was he going to do about the bus drivers destroying our
posters? What is to keep them from ripping out the rest of our ads?
Mr. Pingree said he would notify all the bus drivers and tell them to
leave our ads alone. How about telling the drivers that UTA would
replace any posters that are torn down? That would at least give them
a good reason to stop. After all, bus drivers were openly admitting to
me, knowing that I was the Director of the Salt Lake City Chapter of
American Atheists, that they were tearing down the ads. They seem
to be very confident that their actions are condoned by UTA.
Sorry. That was the best he could do. If we wanted to, we could
always pay another $50 and bring in another 200 posters, and UTA
would be happy to have them put up.
Needless to say, we were very disappointed at UTA's concept of
fairness. We called the American Atheist Center in Austin and
discussed the problem with Madalyn Murray O'Hair and Jon Murray.
It was suggested that the American Atheist Center could print up new
posters for substantially less than we had paid, if we wanted to print
up more posters. Perhaps we should take Mr. Pingree up on his offer
and take him some more posters.
As we were trying to decide what our next steps should be, it
Austin, Texas

occurred to us that we now had what we needed to go ahead and get

pictures taken of our ad on a bus. Aerie Visner and Iwent with Charlie
Snyder, our photographer, to the Meadowbrook bus yard to get
pictures taken on one of the buses that has our ad poster on it. When
we arrived, the security guard immediately came out and told us that
he had been ordered not to allow anyone on the buses without
specific permission from UTA management. We left.
Later I called Mr. Pingree and asked ifhe would give us permission
to enter the bus yard after hours. We wanted to get some pictures
taken of our advertisements on the buses and we had a list of most of
the buses that still had our ad poster on them. Mr. Pingree agreed to
give us permission to go into the bus yard on Sunday morning, April
1st.

left to right: Richard Andrews, Aerie Visner, and David Chris

Allen, delighted to find Dial-an-Atheist sign in use.

August, 1984

Richard examines vandalized signs.

Page 7

NEWS & COMMENTS / August, 1984

UTAH

TRANSIT

360(} South

AUTHORITY

700West

P_O,8ox3\810
Salt LakeCitv,Utah84131
Telephooe
1800
262-S626

April

Chris
Utah
P.O.
Salt

Allen.
Director
,
Chapter
of Anerican
Atheists
Box 11622
Lake City,
utah
84147

Dear

Mr.

1)

3)
The
non-profit

On Sunday morning, Aerie Visner, Richard Andrews, Charlie

Snyder and I showed up at the Meadowbrook bus yard and were
admitted to the bus yard. Very few buses operate on Sunday, so most
of the buses were parked on the lot. We found a bus with our ad
poster on it and took some pictures. Before we left we took advantage
of the opportunity and looked into 29 of the buses that had posters in
them when we had taken our survey. The posters were missing in 9 of
the 29 buses. This was several weeks after Mr. Pingree had said he
would tell the drivers to leave our posters alone. Clearly, our concern
about the lack of effectiveness of that measure had been justified.

_AMERICAN
ATHEISTS
Salt Lake City Chapter
P. o. Box 11622
Salt Lake City, Utah 84147
Ph. (801)532-1957
Apri 1 s , 1984

Hr. John Pinsree

General
Manager,
UTA
P. O. Box 31810
Salt Lake City,
Utah 84131
Dear Hr.

Pingree

V;~!~~~~ri~;
:~;i~r.
~~~~:~
:::!;f' b~~:!1\Ii~~s~' o~~sr~~r~~~;il~::P~~
1I::nw~:eC;~~ei~oon
on yo;:a~~s~~~

us pC'rmission

to take

some pictures

~i ~~

pictures
inside
the buses a~~ ~u~e:~lio;r.m;nt. i~l them and were. able to get
an article
I am writing
oeecr tot 51 o .
he ~l{:tures
are to Illustrate
I was also hearten'd to lea~~ ~:Jrt"xp('rlt:lent.\Iith
bus advertising.
at UTA about our advertisement.
We ;;rl,nn1c()mrlalnts
have been received
print
more ad post cr-s for us at ,) r ...
,hl(' ...
~t ...
~s:tlcated
a prin~er
Who will
in the placement
of annt he r- 200 pos r or s ,
..
W~ WOuld hkf' to invest
into !~m:l~;
~~e t~~::/~~n~~i~~
~~o~~~he Opptlrtunity
on Sunday to look
the buses on Harch 8th and 12th
O.
foun,] our ad vnen we surveyed
th still
had our ad in t h
Wh! 29 suet: buse s <'xamined, only 20 of
etnee our survey,
about a th~~~ of ~~~ mea!l~ ~hat in the three weeks
It may be that the memor-andum 0
. reM.nnln:. ads have been removed.
our advertising
seen on an eQu:l ub~~~ew~~~poltlng
our rig~t
to have
has not been received
by all the bus drivers~ther
non-pr-of i t; advertising

w~~;

vith ;~u;n!u~~;~
~~e
~;~~:;d
w~ ~~ a pos i t i ve out look.
I think that
a. a part of living in a free cou ~l
come to accept our adver t t semem s
released,
I would like very muchu~ r~.
~en my article
is written
and
of bu. driver
vandalism
were only ;ra~s~to;y~O
report
that the incidents
Ple.aae acknowledge
receipt
of t h i
OTAwould be willIng
to accept anothe~s26~t~er
and le~ us know when
~~:~!/;~o~~~m:our

help

both

with

the

Phr,tor,~:p~~\':~~l~:~~n~~;

At

b~~:S

agencies
that
pay. fc:'r
of Freeway
AdvertlSlng.

goes
to UTA bus ~nformation
,:"hich
dicections,
publlC
or co:nmunlty,

use

third
categ'ory
organizations

or
rex

thZ

of

the

IS public
when they

we

bus.
s~r~i~~e""~~~~e;e
pr i n

a~~k~a~V:;~a~~~

costs.
the

present

~~~~~ga~~~l:~~:
demands

the

regarding

A~~~~e 5 ~i ~~~ ~.

to ocganizations
through
Mr. Nyle

The second
priority
the buses
to provide

installation

Visner, Allen and Andrews surveying posted Dial-An-Atheist

signs in UTA Meadowbrook bus yard.

i~oyu~o;e;~~~r~~;~~g

Priodty
is given
rtu s IS contracted

information

to

~tp~i

2
i~

place

1984

Allen,

am in receUTi
present
time the
the
follo
ing:
I

space.

12,

for

time,

h~~~i~e:~r~~;~~~~

~~~u:~i:~reT~at
insides

of

the

can

;~:~

change

in

the

~~e~~f~~~,h~~~
future

not

depending

buses.

I mus~
~orrect
your
as:::'~~;~~v~~a~w~e
c~~~!~~~s
" b~~~!~~n~~a~n
your
advertls~ng.
~n fact,
the
asters
in the
buses.
In diswe would
con t i nue s i nce you had
MP11'
she
informed
me you agreed
cussing
your
poster
w~th Ms. Ter~~
t:kel~he
posters
down f r crn the
that
if we had canplalnts
we cou
"
on the
first
buses.
While
we have not
p~rsu~d
th~~
~~t~tY~~
the complaints,
as well

;~s:ai!~~i~~'
another

s~:C!~e~h:~
200

bus

advertisement

~~l:o~~~e~o~

be

in

your

Respect

to

print

fu lly,

,/..<~,',/~;',
John
C.
General

JCP t cw
cc : Terry

interest

posters.

~~-<..

PinQ~ee
Manager

Mallin

On April 5th I sent Mr. Pingree a letter thanking him for allowing us
to come in and take pictures, and advising him of our wish to accept
his offer and place more advertisements. In his reply Mr. Pingree
reneged on his offer to place more advertising for us. He said there
was no longer any room for nonprofit ads on the buses. On April 1st,
when we checked the advertising on over 30 buses in his bus lot, we
found many buses with less than half a dozen ads in them, and hardly
any of the buses were completely full. He also reneged on his
statement that UTA had received no complaints about our ad poster,
calling it our "assumption," and claiming to have received two
complaints.
And that is where the situation stands at the time of this report. We
did have our advertisement put up in at least 49 city buses for a few
weeks, and we did get a couple of inquiries from that advertising. The
response was not at all impressive, and from a purely financial
perspective, this advertising is not a good investment, even with the
nonprofit discount. Certainly it would be more effective if the
vandalizing of our ads were stopped. Still, classified ads are far more
effective.
Just the same, we need to establish our right to equal opportunity
of expression. On that basis alone we will persevere. If Mr. Pingree
cannot give us satisfaction, we willjust have to seek other recourse.
We willlet you know how it turns out in a future report. ~

b~~ain,

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Rf'spectfull,V,

CI,rj, At Ie n , Dir('ctor
llla1, Chapt<'r of American Atheists

'---

Page 8

Dial-AnAtheist (BOI) 3M-4939

__

Not/onal

Office:

Po.t

Of::.-::.

lox

2117,' Au.tln. TX.78'"

----August, 1984

David Chris Allen is the Director of the Salt Lake City Chapter
of American Atheists. Mr. Allen holds an M.S. degree
in Electrical Engineering and is currently employed as a
Senior Computer Programmer/Analyst.

The American Atheist

CONVENTION

'84

14TH ANNUAL NATIONAL CONVENTION

OF AMERICAN ATHEISTS
eginning in early March the U.S. Congress, both the House of
Representatives and the Senate, staged a political spectacular
over the return of prayers to the public schools. For days the media
followed the circus. American Atheists were very involved in the
struggle, reaching all the congressmen and senators by mail on
several occasions, and furnishing each one of the senators a lOS-page
book, Nobody Has A Prayer (authored by Madalyn Murray O'Hair),
which reviews a century of legal war over the issue of prayer in the
public schools. The Atheist Center was inundated with radio talkback shows, interviews with the hard media and television appearances on the issue.
Because of this the media took much interest in the projected 14th
Annual National Convention of American Atheists in Lexington,
Kentucky, scheduled for the weekend of April 20th through April
22nd. From the questions which the reporters asked and how they
handled the interviews before that Convention, it was obvious that
there was an anticipation of a "shoot-out" between fundamentalists in
Kentucky and the visiting Atheists. As you remember, during the visit
which Jon Murray had made to Lexington prior to the Convention,
he, John Crump (State Director of Kentucky), and Herman Harris
(Director of the Lexington Chapter of American Atheists) had been
the objects of an assault and battery attack in a Chinese restaurant in
that city. Also, the ku klux klan had, the week before, been absolved
of any wrong in the killings in which it had been involved in
Greensboro, North Carolina. The media, therefore, attended the
Convention in strength. The hotel at which the Convention was
staged also picked up the feeling tone of fear which the news media
carried so openly with it. Security was increased by the management,
and for the first two days of the Convention the front door of the hotel
was locked, forcing guests and visitors to enter by a side door which
was covered by hotel security. Although discreet, any suspicious
demeanor or bulge in clothing caused one to be stopped before entry
by that security. The weather was ugly, cold and raining, which only
made the hotel seem more warm and cheering.
As usual, the Atheists comported themselves with dignity. The
hotel was architecturally devised to give it a "feeling of intimacy,"
which added to the rapport which quickly developed among those
present. Friendships were reinforced. The Murray-O'Hairs had the
so-called presidential suite, which was continually full of Chapter
Directors and Board Members.
Dr. O'Hair, Jon Murray, and Barbara Smoker - the President of
the National Secular Society of England (the principal Atheist group
in the nation) - drove up from Austin, Texas because a number of
television and radio talk-back appearances had been scheduled -in
many in-between cities. Leaving Austin, Texas on Sunday, April 15th,
they did not arrive in Lexington until late the day before the
Convention start. On April 20th, the Press Conference was jammed
with reporters, television cameras and radio mikes. Coverage was
nationwide, and the Wall Street Journal sent a reporter who stayed
for the entire Convention.
As always, the initial thrust of the Convention was to have a Board
of Directors meeting, as well as a Chapter Directors meeting. In the
evening a cocktail reception was well attended, followed by a formal
dinner for members of American Atheists. Regrettably, Dr. O'Hair
was ill and could not attend that function.
Beginning at 9:00 a.m. on Saturday and continuing through 6:00
p.m. on Sunday, speeches and presentations were continuous. A
singular pattern developed during this Convention. Whereas before

Austin, Texas

the conventioneers have often attended one feature or another,

picking and choosing between those desired to be heard, on this
occasion the lecture hall was always full, an intense interest being
taken in what was said and done. There were never less than 150
personsin the room for any speech or activity. It is felt that you can be
the best judge of the subject matter presented by reading some of the
speeches for yourself. Therefore, six of them are reproduced in full in
this issue of American Atheist. Besides these, other speakers
included Arnold Via (State Director of American Atheists for
Virginia), Bob Harrington ("chaplain of Bourbon Street"), Dr.
Madalyn Murray O'Hair, Bill Talley (Denver Chapter Director and
Founder of the American Atheists Alcoholics Recovery Group), Jon
Murray, and Robin Murray-O'Hair.
The Convention had been held in Lexington at the suggestion of
John Crump, who had discovered in that city the memory and works
of Charles Chilton Moore, the editor of an Atheist newspaper which
had had its inception in 1884. We had planned an intimate gathering to
honor the centennial publication of that paper, The Blue Grass Blade.
Lexington, however, is not an air hub, and one can hardly get to this
small city tucked away in Kentucky. We planned on an attendance of
150. The media counted every nose and reported over and over that
302 Atheists were there.
The Convention featured awards, as usual, and those given for the
year 1983 included:
Atheist of the Year: Bob Campbell, former Director, Atlanta
(Georgia) Chapter of American Atheists, for his participation in the
litigation which prevented the erection of a cross on public property
along 1-75near Atlanta.
Freedom of Speech Award: Dr. Alfred Lilienthal for his courage
in exposing international zionism with its inherent dangers to the
world.
Outstanding Chapter Director: Jon and Suzanne Van de
Wetering, Orange County, California Chapter, for convincing the
mayor of Irvine, California to discontinue the practice of placing
markers bearing christian crosses as "death markers" on city
property (highway or street sites of a traffic related death). Designed
to warn drivers of a possibly hazardous intersection or roadway, the
death markers remain, but they have now had the christian crosses
removed from them.
Chapter Achievement Award: Utah Chapter, for placing DialAn-Atheist ad panels in public buses in Salt Lake City for the last eight
months. See the News and Comments section on page 5.
Outstanding Chapter Worker Award: Cathryn (Bula) Bulicek
for unending devotion to the Chicago Chapter secretarial and other
duties, including the maintenance of the Dial-an-Atheist service.
Distinguished Service Award: Christopher Drew for his twenty
years of Atheist activism, unrelenting picketing and over a decade of
Chapter directorship for the Chicago Chapter.
Meritorious Service Award: John Crump, Kentucky Director,
for discovering Charles C. Moore and restoring him to history.
Honorable Service Award: Herman Harris, Director of the
Lexington Chapter, for his logistical assistance and enthusiasm in the
planning and culmination of the 14th Annual National Convention of
American Atheists.
Most Hated Atheist of the Year Award: Arnold Via presented
his yearly award to John Marthaler, Director of the Southern
Mississippi Chapter, for his relentless letters-to-the-editor campaign
in the heart of southern Mississippi.
Madalyn Murray O'Hair

August, 1984

Page 9

CONVENTION

'84

In tfUsyears speda Convention section you wi[ fou! a summary of the Convention {on the preceding JXl9e}, sevemf speeches which were presen.td ~
the Convention, and" carufUfsfiots of the participants. The spucfres forrow, ~inttif19 with. the opening address 6y Herman Harris, Director of the Lexin9ton
Chapter of American. Atheists. The photo section ~in.s on.JXlge19.
.

WELCOME TO KENTUCKY
by Herman Harris
Herman Harris has a B.S.M.E. and is a registered
professional
engineer in Kentucky. He has a background
in tool-and-diemaking and currently works as a facilities engineer for a large
manufacturing
plant in Lexington. As a typical Eastern
Kentuckian,
he grew up surrounded
by christians
and,
naturally, tried to believe those things that peers and family
believed. After a long period of unsuccessfully
trying to
"reconcile
what you know with what you believe" he turned to
a study of comparative
religion and cultural anthropology.
This
course of study led to the realization that he was - and always
had been - an Atheist.
'

ello - and welcome to Kentucky.

The Kentucky Chapter of American Atheists has the distinct
pleasure and privilege to host the 14th Annual American Atheist
National Convention here in Lexington. We welcome you to Kentucky and hope you enjoy the Convention and your stay in here.
I'm sure that most of you know why Lexington, Kentucky was
chosen as this year's Convention site. It's in recognition of Charles C.
Moore who started publishing a newspaper known as The Blue- Grass
Blade just about a century ago. Mr. Moore had the courage to include
in the paper's masthead the following statement: "Published by a
heathen in the interest of good morals."
In a short while, I'll introduce John Crump who is a Chapter officer
and the Chapter Historian. It's through his efforts that we know what
we do about Charles C. Moore. John will talk about Charles C.
Moore at some length, but I'd like to give you a taste of the man's
foresight and vision. The following article titled "What the Blue-Grass
Blade Wants" was published February 19, 1899. The list includes a
total of sixteen demands. Keep in mind that Charles C. Moore was
not a socialist.

WHAT THE BLUE-GRASS BLADE WANTS

Blade, edited by Charles C. Moore, Lexington, Ky., wants thefollowing:
I. Such a suppression - peaceably if possible; by force if
necessary - of the reading of the bible in the public schools, the'
payment of chaplains out of public treasuries, the giving of
public money for any religious purpose, the exemption of
church property from taxes, the enactment of Sunday laws, and
prosecutions for anything said or written against religion or
against any religious dogma, hogma, or pigma.
2. The suppression - by law ifpossible; by force if necessary
- of the liquor traffic, except for medical and other scientific
purposes.
3. The right to vote to be given to women.
4. Such educational qualification 10 vote as will enable one 10
read intelligently, in some language, the Constitution of the
United States.
5. Special national legislation to improve the condition,
financial and educational, of Negroes and Indians.
The Blue-Grass

Page 10

August,

1984

6. An International Congress to arbitrate differences between

nations.
7. The publication and dissemination by the United States
government of the most competent opinions of scientists on the
sexual relation.
8. The government ownership and operation of railroads,
telegraphs, long-distance telephones, steamboats, and steamship lines between this government and Europe, and this
government and China.
9. A national citizenry open to all without regard 10 race or
sex.
10. The coining of all gold and silver, of which coinage is asked
by its owner, by the government of the United States at actual
cost of such coining.for the benefit of its owner, and the making
of such coin legal tender for all debts, public and private.
11. The national ownership and operating of coal and metal
mines sufficient 10 supply the demands of this government for
those articles.
12. The compulsory education, to the extent of learning 10
read and write, of all children that are capable of such
education, resident in the United States, and whose parents are
citizens of this government.
13. The enactment of laws that shall, without prejudice,
disparagement or discrimination, for or against rich or poor,
tend to stop any possible general tendency to make the rich
richer and the poor poorer.
14. The substitution of imprisonment for life, for capital
punishment, by an amendment to the National Constitution.
15. The abolition of all tariffs, and substitution of free trade,
and direct tax for revenue.
16. The disbanding of the army and navy of the United States
further than is necessary for domestic police regulation.
Well, that was some list! Whether or not we individually agree with
all sixteen demands, I think we can agree that Moore was ahead of his
time.
Now to change the subject I'd like to say that the Kentucky
Chapter is a rather young chapter and is based here in Lexington. We
maintain a Dial-an-Atheist machine and work with the local TV cable
service to air the "American Atheist Forum" twice a week. We feel
there should be potential for a chapter in Louisville, which is much
larger than Lexington.
How many people out there are now or have been a Chapter
officer? I've found that Atheists have few, if any, sheep- like qualities,
and they're darn hard to organize. Have you found that to be the'
case? I think the problem is lack of perceived danger. The church is so
huge you can't see it move. It hides a face of fear behind a mask
dripping with "love."
Some polls indicate that about 70% of the people are theists. This
leaves 30% who are agnostics or Atheists. In a city the size of
Lexington there should be seventy or eighty thousand Atheists! I
wonder where they're hiding? Seventy or eighty thousand people can
The American

Atheist

CONVENTION '84
sure keep a secret.
Sometimes I think of the Kentucky Chapter as an "outpost"; a
small chunk of civilization in the wilderness. Please remember one
thing: your presence in the community is very important. Your Dialan-Atheist message and your P.O. Box number will be a life ring to
people who are drowning in theism. There was a time when I thought I
was the only Atheist in Lexington or the world. Thank gawd for
Dial-an-Atheist.
Each of you is an important person to the organization. And that's a
key word - organization. When everybody's out "doing-their-ownthing" then they're not "doing-the-same-thing." If we don't get
organized and "do-the-same-thing" then we can't effect change.
That's why you are so important - you are the nucleus of future
growth.
Do we need change? You bet. With a Supreme Court that's gutting
the Constitution and a president that can't distinguish reality from a

B-grade movie, we need plenty of change. This is no time to quit. Ifwe

play possum now, we'll end up as possum stew.
We are a nonprofit educational organization. It's unfortunate that
so many people emphasize the "nonprofit" part so much more than
the educational part. We don't advocate outlawing religion, like
Charles C. Moore did, but we would like to educate people to the
point where they can recognize a mythology for what it is - and then
walk away.
One final word. You are in the "Bible Belt." When Jon was here last
year we took in a local restaurant. A "gentleman" at a nearby table
didn't care for the topic of our private conversation so he attacked us
with a pitcher of hot tea. Hopefully, that's the only extremely
emotional person in town. So just be careful.
As I said before I'll introduce you to John Crump. John is our
historian. He's spent a lot of time researching Charles C. Moore and
now he's going to tell you a little about him.

RETURN TO LEXINGTON
,.

by John Crump

John Crump is the Kentucky State Director of American

Atheists. He is also the Chapter Historian and, as such,
researched and discovered most of the materials concerning
the illustrious life of Charles C. Moore, in whose honor the
14th Annual Convention was programmed. Added to his
talents of writing, speaking, and historical researching, is that
of musical composition and performance. His diversified
talents have gained for him a position of respect and esteem
in the American Atheist community.

elcome to Lexington, Kentucky, home of the Kentucky

Wildcats! A century ago this was the home of Charles
Chilton Moore - ex-christian preacher, loving husband
and father, Atheist journalist, editor, publisher, author, and prophet.
In his second book, Behind the Bars; 31498, written in 1899 in the
federal penitentiary in Columbus, Ohio, c.c. Moore wrote: "In
abandoning the christian religion, I felt that it would subject me to
many disadvantages, but all the time there was the consciousness
that I was living up to my honest convictions and a strong belief that
the time would come when many intelligent and good people would
honor me for my courage, and these sustained me in my new
departure." It took us 85 years, but here we are, Charlie!
During research into the life of Charles Chilton Moore by myself
and Carl Williams of our Lexington Chapter, we uncovered many
facts and stories, most of which I will not relate here. His autobiography is told in Behind the Bars; 31498. His developing views on
theology are given in The Rational View, written in 1890. And insight
into the wonderful and fascinating character of the man is acquired
through reading Dog Fennel in the Orient, written in 1903,just 3 years
before his death.
American Atheist Press has done an excellent job and performed a
great historical service in reprinting all three books. Every family or
individual here should own and read all of them. They'll cost you
$15.00 in the Lincoln Room, and your life will be immeasurably
enriched. The April issue of the American Atheist journal has a pretty
good article in it, too.
What I would like to share with you is part of our research that will
not be readily available for most of you. I hope someday soon we can
reprint all of the local newspaper articles concerned with Moore,

Austin, Texas

because they tell a part of the story that you can't get anywhere else,
and in their own unique style. In 1886 Moore began publishing the
Blue Grass Blade, which became well known as an InfidelProhibitionist paper.
There has been some confusion on dates. Moore states in Behind
the Bars; 31498 that he conceived of the idea for the Blade while
walking home one night in 1884. Apparently, though, the first paper
was not printed until 1886. Moore took delight in calling the Blue
Grass Blade "the only Prohibition paper published by a heathen."
He was opposed to smoking and drinking, and vices in general. He
once wrote that "I think about Limburger cheese somewhat as I do
about smoking. No man ought to eat it unless he is willing to go out
into a large field and sit on a stump while he eats it and stay there until
the wind drives away the smell."
But so that you won't misunderstand his activities concerning
prohibition, I will read from an article in the Lexington Morning
Transcript of January 6, 1886, headlined "Charles C. Moore Announces the Prospectus of the Bluegrass Blade." (It should also be
remembered that this was a period when moonshine and the liquor
trade were creating serious health and social problems, much like
religion has always done.) From the prospectus: "As an instance of its
purpose and plans in the department of morals, the Blade will be an
avowed temperance paper that willdisavow Prohibition as a means of
furthering that cause; both because it is inexpedient, and not
calculated for this meridian of thought, and because moral suasion
willbe the only principle that willsubtend all the efforts of its editor ....
I am not a member of any temperance society or organization of any
kind, and never expect to be, because I realize in my own case my
ability to exercise the better of what moral power I may possess when
absolutely untrammeled by any kind of restriction, but I shall not
presume to advise others in this."
c.c. Moore was threatened, physically attacked, legally harassed,
and jailed 3 times for printing his opinions. Through the efforts of
Professor J.J. Rucker of Georgetown College (who had tried to start
a christian-Prohibitionist paper and failed), Moore was sentenced to 2
years' imprisonment for sending the Blue Grass Blade through the
postal service. He was 61 years of age when he entered prison, and he
did not expect to leave alive. He wrote:
"Had I ... known that 3 times in my life I would be a prisoner
for my religious opinions I do not know that I would have dared

August, 1984

Page 11

CONVENTION

'84

to let my sentiments be known, but the example of John

Brown, who had given his life for his fellow-men, in defiance of
the plain bible teaching that slavery was right, had so aroused
my admiration for him that I now believe I would have given my
life in attestation of my sincerity. How it would be ifI had fallen
into cruel hands as a convict, I do not know, but as it is now I
congratulate myself that I have had the courage so to stand by
my convictions that I am now in a penitentiary cell, and I am
assured that my being here willmake me friends and willhonor
my family and will do good to the world. It is highly probable
that I willnot live to the end of my sentence, and the longing for
my home is something awful, and yet if it were possible for me
to step out of this prison a free man, merely by recanting or
saying I was sorry for what I have done and written, I would
remain a prisoner here."
He served 5 months before President William McKinley, having
received petitions from Moore's many friends and subscribers,
pardoned him, and Charles Chilton Moore - the former preacher at
Versailles christian church a few miles from here; who in his own
private studies had determined that the bible was wrong; who quit the
only profession for which he had been educated; who became, in his
own words, deistic, then agnostic, and finally Atheist; this titan of
moral courage who had been assaulted, persecuted, and railroaded
into prison at age 61; this American Atheist author.and newspaper
editor - returned home to a hero's welcome on July 8, 1899.
I haven't restricted myself to cold, hard statistics about the life of
Charles Chilton Moore. In fact, I haven't given you very many at all. I
hope you willread his story yourselves. What I would rather leave you
with this morning is a feeling for what took place right outside here on
Broadway and down Main Street a couple of blocks to the old
Phoenix Hotel in 1899. Close your eyes and picture this scene:
(From the Lexington Herald, July 9, 1899)
TEARS AND MUSIC
MINGLE

AS EDITOR MOORE RETURNS

HOME - A WELCOME

FIT FOR A KING.

"Charles Chilton Moore has returned to Lexington.

"His return was marked by a demonstration which would have
done honor to a conquering army returning from some field of battle
with its flag unfurled and proudly flying to the breeze.
"Mr. Moore returned at 9:16 o'clock Saturday night from Columbus, Ohio, where he served five months as a convict for daring to
express his opinion through the columns of his paper.
"The reception he was accorded at the depot showed how many of
the citizens of Lexington honored this erratic and singular character.
The train was due to arrive shortly after 6 o'clock, but because of an
accident it was delayed almost three hours.
"The news that Mr. Moore was to come spread rapidly, and when
the appointed time for the train to arrive came, about 200 persons had
assembled at the depot. When it was reported that the train was late
the crowd began to thicken, and when it finally arrived, more than
1000 people were at the depot waiting to extend a cordial welcome to
Mr. Moore. Saxton's band was there and made the wait less tedious
by playing several selections; finally "My Old Kentucky Home," and
the crowd cheered. When Mr. Moore appeared on the platform, a
shout went from the gathering which completely drowned the music.
As he stepped to the platform, friends rushed to him, all eager to
grasp him by the hand.
AFFECTING

SCENES

"The first person to reach his side was W.W. Goddard, a lifelong
friend. As he grasped the hand of the aged journalist, tears sprang to
his eyes, and one of the most pathetic scenes followed. The two old
men, both far past the noontide of life, clasped each other in loving
Page 12

August, 1984

embrace, and their tears were mingled. Mr. Moore caught sight of his
wife in the crowd, and as he made his way to her side tears sprang
afresh to his eyes, and with voice filledwith emotion, he clasped her in
his arms, and those present bowed their heads in reverent silence.
"With his arm around the neck of his wife, Mr. Moore pushed his
way through the crowd to the waiting carriage on the opposite side of
the depot, stopping at every step to grasp the hand of some friend
who bade him a hearty welcome. When the carriage was finally
reached, he entered it with a number of friends, and other carriages
filled with friends and newspaper men started for the city.
"A special car had been chartered for the band, and as it was
whirled down Broadway it played inspiring strains, and shouts of
welcome came from every throat. The streets were crowded, and all
along the route people stood on the sidewalks and in doorways and
applauded him, and when the carriages finallydrew up to the Phoenix
Hotel the crowd was so dense that it was impossible to force a
passageway through it. Finally an entrance was gained, and Mr.
Moore and his friends went to the parlor on the second floor, while the
band began to play on the sidewalk in front of the building. The crowd
grew denser each moment, and when Mr. Moore stepped to the
balcony, cheering broke out again, drowning the sound of the music.
MADE A SHORT SPEECH

"He was called on for a speech, and with hat in hand he leaned over
the balustrade and made a few touching remarks, thanking everyone
for the cordial welcome extended to him. He said that he forgave
everybody for the alleged wrongs that had been done to him, even the
preachers, and wished to be forgiven by all for anything he might have
done wrong.
"He said that he was the most honored prisoner that ever lived,
from Socrates to Dreyfus, because of the liberties he had been
granted while in prison and the favors he had been shown. He told of
the treatment he received while confined and spoke in eulogizing
terms of the warden. He told of the meeting with his wife, and that she
had said to him that she was glad, under the circumstances, to be the
wife of a convict.
"While he was speaking a streetcar filled with pleasure-seekers
stopped in front of the hotel, and the young ladies and gentlemen
within cheered him to the echo. Mr. Moore then bade the crowd
good-night and retired to the parlor, which was full of friends. A
general handshaking followed. Mr. P. Parrot, one of Mr. Moore's
warmest friends, and who had been instrumental in getting up the
celebration, led him to the center of the floor and bade him be seated.
He then in a few brief remarks introduced Hon. Moses Kaufman, who
delivered the address of welcome.
MRS. HENRY SPEAKS

"When Mr. Kaufman concluded, Mrs. Josephine K. Henry of

Versailles was introduced, and for more than a half hour she spoke.
She was interrupted several times with applause, and when she
concluded Mr. Moore arose and briefly addressed the assemblage.
He recited his trial and conviction and his confinement in the
penitentiary, and the treatment he received. He said that he had been
allowed privileges which had never been extended to a man who had
been confined in the Ohio Penitentiary. He said he was proud of his.
prison garb, and would have worn it at the reception had it not been
for his wife.
EVEN LOVES RUCKER

"He said that he intended to go to the lecture platform and would

wear the stripes. He said that he had become so accustomed to the
prison suit that he felt lost without it, and citizen's clothing made him
feel like he was dressed up. He said that he bore malice toward none,
not even to Mr. Rucker. He said that he forgave all, and that in the
future he would live for his friends. He referred to the fact that he had
been allowed to retain his hair and beard, and said that he was the
most honored prisoner alive, from the fact that every prisoner in the
penitentiary was made to obey the rules and yet he was shown favors
from the moment he entered the walls until he left.
The American Atheist

CONVENTION

'84

WARDEN THANKED

"After, the reading of the letter of a resolution, which had been

adopted by a number of friends, was read, thanking Warden Coffin
and Dr. Wilson for many kindnesses shown. The reading concluded
the ceremonies and the party then adjourned to the dining room,
where a sumptuous banquet had been spread. About 75 guests sat at
the table and several speeches were made."
I hope that you will have some time to acquaint yourselves with
Charles Chilton Moore and that many of you will join us for the
wreath-laying ceremony on Sunday.
Josephine K. Henry was mentioned in the article just read, and
deserves more attention than she has been given by local historians.

She was a champion of women's suffrage and property rights for

women in Kentucky, the first woman in the South to run for a state
office, and a President of the American Freethought Association. She
was highly commended by Elizabeth Cady Stanton for her contribution to The Woman's Bible. Josephine Henry is buried in the
Versailles cemetery, about 10 miles from Lexington, with only her
name and no dates on her tombstone. I plan to do something about
that.
I thank all of you for coming. I can't express what this convention
means to me. I feel good. I suppose my feelings could be summed up
in the first line of this Lexington Herald article: Charles Chilton
Moore has returned to Lexington.
Thank you.

The following poem was presented as a eulogistic remembrance

at Charles Moore's grave:

A FORGOTTEN MAN
A strange place; this corner of the world called Bluegrass
Land.
Where empty passions mold the numerous unenquiring
minds.
And folklore seems to be the only "law" that really binds.
In some ways beautiful - adorned in Nature's un beguiling
style.
Yet hill and glen are steeped in crowded loneliness.
And simple folk are bathed in awkward superstition and
distress.
Will not some gallant champion change the drudgery of this
game?
For surely such a noble act would cause undying recollection
of his name!

But then, what folly to suppose that new ideas could be so

loved;
That human minds, once moved, could be ungloved.
So, no one here dares whisper, "Charlie Chilton Moore."
No portrait of him hangs beyond the Gallery's pompous door.
Forgotten even by his spineless literary peers.
No journal dares relate the stirring story of his trying years.
How disparaging seems his memory's loss.
For with his dying, valor was reduced by one.
Is it likely that no other equalling mentor shall appear?
If so, the needed task of stoking bumpkin minds shall go
undone.
Gerald Tholen

LEXINGTON
leJllntton.

CEMETERY
Kentucky

MOORE'S
GRAVE

-----.-----~.---WEST MAIN STRH'

---_
..
_
..
_-_._---_
..---, \-~..-I---BUCHANAN

Austin, Texas

August, 1984

STREET

Page 13

CONVENTION

'84

POLITICS AND RELIGION

IN THE MIDDLE EAST
by Dr. Alfred Lilienthal
Dr. Alfred Lilienthal, a graduate of Cornell University and
Columbia Law School, at an early age became interested in
public affairs and was a candidate for the New York City
Council on the Fusion ticket. He served with the U.S. Army in
the Middle East, as consultant to the American delegation at
the first United Nations Conference in San Francisco and in the
Department of State. He is the author of many articles on the
Middle East, including "Israel's Flag is Not Mine," and of the
well known books, What Price Israel? There Goes the Middle
East. and The Other Side of the Coin. His 1979 The Zionist
Connection was hailed by critics everywhere, becoming a
bestseller in Canada and in popular demand in the U.S.
Foreign Affairs called it the "culminating masterwork" of his
antizionist crusade. In the fall of 1982, The Zionist Connection
II, an updated paperback version of the bestseller, was
published.
Dr. Lilienthal is a well known lecturer, having appeared on
some 300 college campuses and before club women in 40
states and 12 countries. He has appeared on television and
radio interview talk shows across the country. Since 1968 he
has been editing the monthly newsletter, The Middle East
Perspective. Annually, he tours the Middle East to visit the
Arab countries and Israel and to talk with the leaders and the
people there. Most recently he participated in the Conference
of the International Progress Organization in November, 1980
in Vienna on the legal aspects of the Palestine and Jerusalem
questions and in November, 1981 in the Baghdad International
Seminar on "The Legal Effects of Attacking Iraqi Nuclear
Installations and the Right to Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy."
No one has put more words on the Middle East into English
than this writer, who returned in December, 1981 from his
22nd tour of the area, having visited six countries and the
West Bank. Dr. Lilienthal served as a consultant to the U.N. at
the European Regional Meeting and at the Conference on the
Question of Palestine in Geneva, July and August, 1983.

ncertain circles I am in the same kind of "disrepute" that Mrs.

Q'Hair and others of you are because we have done the
impossible. the verboten: we have offended the establishment. I
came to your 14th Annual Convention to affirm our (that is, Atheists'
and antizionists' in the world) inalienable right to dissent and express
our feelings regarding certain fundamental views. If Voltaire were
here this afternoon, he would express it this way: "I may disagree with
what you have to say, but Iwould defend with my very lifeyour right to
say it."
Unfortunately, people who believe in religion have totally forgotten
the very important principle of separation of church and state, for
which our forefathers fought, and which has been immortalized in the
words of the new testament: "Render, therefore, those things which
are Caesar's unto Caesar; and those things that are god's unto god."
Let me make one thing clear: I am an American of the jewish faith
who believes in the rarely practiced judaic faith of the universal
humanistic principle; and I am as prepared to defend with my life that
principle as I am to defend your right not to believe in god. My area of
competency deals with the most serious problem in the Middle East
- a conflict which has pitted the zionists against Palestinian Arabs,
muslims against christians, jews against muslims.
And yet, far from this conflict, not too long ago, a couple of touring

Page 14

August, 1984

Scotsmen were sightseeing in Rome on their holiday, and at the end of

a very arduous day of running up and down the streets of Rome, they
decided they wanted something to drink. They headed for a bar and
they said, "How about a couple of pints of beer?" And the barman
said, "We don't serve beer here." "Well, what would you suggest we
have?" And the barman said. "When in Rome do what the Romans
do. Why don't you have what the pope drinks? How about a couple of
pints of Benedictine liqueur?" So after drinking a couple of pints of
Benedictine they were more than a little inebriated. They came up
and said to the barman, "Does the holy father really drink this?" He
said, "Yes." And they said, "Well, no wonder they have to carry him
around in a chair!"
If in Rome we do as the Romans do, it certainly behooves us here in
the lovely bluegrass state of Kentucky, at a meeting of freethinkers
dedicated to independence, to raise two very pertinent questions:
(First), have we as Americans given up the inalienable right to selfdetermination of people; and the second, have we forgotten the
words of our third and our most eivil-rights conscious president,
Thomas Jefferson: "For goodness' sake (and I say goodness' instead
of god's sake), let us freely hear both sides."
There are two sides to this conflict that rages in the Middle East, but
only one side gets through. Artemus Ward said it in another way,
" 'Tain't people's ignorance that does the harm, 'tis their knowing so
much that ain't so." And there is no area, no subject matter, of the
world about which people know "so much that ain't so" as the Middle
East. We mix up; we fallfor slogans, for labels; we follow the press and
their sharpened hype in which two extremes are always shown - the
good guys and the bad guys, the cowboys and the Indians - and what
falls in between is lost completely to sight; and yet it is the mediocria
via of Virgil on which we should cast our eyes.
This is a problem that has historical, political, religious, philosophical, psychological, anthropological, and other factors. British
historian, F.W. Maitland, once wrote, "We study the day before
yesterday in order that yesterday may not paralyze today and today
may not paralyze tomorrow." Let us go back briefly in history and
review the beginning of this problem, the beginning of a movement
called "zionism."
In 1895 a Viennese journalist, Theodor Herzl, attended the Paris
trial of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, who was accused by antisemitic
clerics of being treasonous; and as you historians may know, the trial
was going all against the defendant until Emile Zola uttered his famous
"j'accuse" and in the end Alfred Dreyfus was exonerated. Young
Herzl was very much impressed by what he saw and heard, and went
back home and worked on his book called Der Judenstaat, in which
he expressed the view that the only way jews in the world could be
free of perennial antisemitism was to have a state of their own - as a
result of which the first zionist convention came into being in 1895,
and shortly thereafter Home Secretary Joseph Chamberlain offered
what is now Kenya and Uganda as the situs for the jewish state. (Mind
you, they did not talk so much about a jewish state; they talked about
a home for the jews, the word "state" would be too bold.)
Uganda was offered them. Herzl was in favor of it. The vast
majority of the supporters in the newly formed zionist movement
negated his idea. They couldn't think of a state of their own outside of
Palestine, and they rejected it. But contrary to mythology, the zionist
contention that Palestine belonged to them alone (and this was
promulgated by Herzl and those who opposed him at this moment)
did not stand up. Who could say for sure which one of us here in this
room might not have a better claim to go back home to Palestine than
The American Atheist

CONVENTION

'84

Menachem Begin or Yitzhak Shamir or any other zionist now livingin

Israel? Twelve tribes started out in Canaan 35 centuries ago, and not
only did ten of them disappear completely, but more than half of the
other two never returned from Babylon.
How can anyone claim descendance from that relatively small
community which inhabited the "holy land" at the time of Abraham's
"covenant with god," as Mr. Begin, Mr. Shamir and the zionists claim?
If there was a covenant, let us not forget that the Arabs are a part of
the seed of Abraham, through Hagar and her son Ishmael, and that
the promise of god, if it was made, was made to the seed of Abraham.
The difficulty is that "Hebrew," "Israelite," "Judea," "judaism,' and
"the jewish people" are used by the mythmakers synonymously to
suggest one historic continuity, whereas in fact they were different
people at different times in history, with varying ways of life, who
continually intermarried with Amorites, Canaanites, Midianites,
Phoenicians, and other Semitic ancestors of the present-day Arabs
whom they found there.
Another thing that is totally overlooked is the fact that in the early
years judaism was based on a great deal of proselytizing; and even
after the coming of jesus it continued.
Many who have planned to "go back" never had roots ("roots" is
the common word; "antecedent" in that part of the world) there. This
is very forcefully brought forth in Arthur Koestler's book, The
Thirteenth Tribe, where he proves quite conclusively (and this is
backed up by every anthropologist: Ripley, Boaz, Weisenberg) that
the vast majority of today's jews are descendants of the Khazars who
converted to judaism in a colorful ceremony seven centuries after the
destruction of Jerusalem in 70 a.d.; so that makes the word
"antisemitism" totally void of any meaning, based as it is on a
misapprehension shared both by the killers and their victims.
I've used the word "zionism,' and there's one thing I want to make
perfectly clear (and I've tried to do this for 30 years), and that is that
judaism is not zionism and zionism is not judaism. Zionism is a
political movement which insists that jews were and still are an ethnic
people to be constituted in the "holy land" as a nation, and calls for
all-out political, diplomatic, financial and moral support which they
have succeeded in getting consistently from the American people.
Judaism is a spiritual faith, whose tenets of monotheism and
universality were later adopted by christianity and then islam. Where
judaism knows no boundaries, requires no political loyalties,
zionism's center of gravity lies in the new Middle Eastern state (new as
of 1948). Above all we must say that all jews are not zionists, and all
zionists are not jews, and (even above that) that antizionism is in no
way, shape, or manner antisemitism - as the media would have us
believe, and as the authors of the latest book by the Anti-Defamation
League proclaim, in which they say that the "new antisemitism" (not
the old kind of bigotry because of one's religion) "is an insensitivity to
the needs of the state of Israel."

"Antizionism is in no way, shape or manner

antisemitism - as the media would have us
believe."
Now this new zionist movement by Herzl made very little headway
in the world until 1917, when Britain in the then-losing battle issued
the famous Balfour Declaration to win the support of the jews
throughout the world. But this declaration gave the zionists no more
exclusive right to Palestine than the myth of a jewish Semitic race. As
you recall, in sixty-seven ambiguous words in a letter from Foreign
Secretary Balfour to Baron Rothschild, there were these words: "Her
Majesty's Government vows to establish in Palestine a national home
for the Jews." Now, it didn't say a state for the jews; it didn't say to
"establish Palestine"; it said "in Palestine," meaning there were to be
more than one home in Palestine; and it went on to say, "provided"Austin, Texas

and this is very important - "that the rights of the existing nonjewish
community be safeguarded."
Now, just who was this existing nonjewish community? We always
hear that the jews, "the pioneers," came into a land without any
people, into an empty land, as Nordau and other zionist writers had
stated. Actually, the existing nonjewish community constituted 93%
of the then-population of Palestine. There were only 7%jews when the
Balfour Declaration was issued. The wording was to fool the world.
This was the same as if you or I came into a room and there were a
hundred people, and we turned to 93 of them and we said, "You are
the nonsettlers." By this means the British were able to keep not only
from their own people, but also from the outside world, the total
injustice as a result of the then-demographic make-up of Palestine.
But beyond that - this was a conditional grant, a grant that should
not have been given - but beyond that, at the same time, as part of.
British duplicity in diplomacy, the secret Sykes-Picot agreement
meted out certain territories to the powers on the Allied side, and
under this they needed very importantly to win the war, which they
were losing, and the Balfour Declaration was helping to encourage
the United States to enter the war. They also needed stronger
support everywhere, and they needed particularly the support of the
Arabs of the Middle East; and Sharif Hussein of Mecca was
persuaded to enter into negotiations with the British whereby if the
Arab people rose in revolt against their Turkish overlords (who as you
know were part of the Central Powers opposed by Britain, France,
and the United States) they would be given the right of selfdetermination.
Many of you saw the film, repeated on television, Lawrence of
Arabia; you know the great history of T.E. Lawrence and the
important role played by the Arabs in that revolt in pinning down the
Turks in the eastern zone of the war, and as a result of which General
Allenby shortly thereafter was able to march into Jerusalem and
Damascus, the Turkish power collapsed, and the Allies were able to
dispose, then, of Germany and win the war.
The promise of self-determination to what is now the Iraqi people,
to the Jordanian people, to the Lebanese people, to the Palestinian
people, was never carried out; and the Palestinian people then began
to form themselves the national freedom movement, which carries on
today. The struggle in the "holy land" continued as to which side
would win out. The zionists were, despite the fact that they didn't
have a worldwide state, a very important movement, gaining strength
in the United States; and at the approach of the beginning of World
War II we find the zionist movement pitted against the Arab
communities, particularly the Arab community of Palestine, which
resisted the increased immigration.
People were not going to Palestine because they believed in the
zionist ideology. Only in a state of their own could they have complete
freedom. They were fleeing from Hitler. The United States was not
opening its doors, nor was Western Europe, as a result of which illegal
immigration continued. The war in the Middle East region began even
before World War II broke out - Arabs pitted against jews, Arabs
and jews against the British mandatory power under the League of
Nations; and we had fear of a great war breaking out in that part of the
world when the war against Hitler put all this movement into the
background.
At the end of World War II the question came: "What shall we do
with Palestine - now liberated from the Turks - and under whose
rule should Palestine be placed?" It had been a Mandate under the
League; it was now a trusteeship under the United Nations. Britain
was broke. The British surrendered the Trust and Mandate, and in
1947 the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine started to
investigate, both in the United States and abroad, the question of
what to do with Palestine. The Committee reported to Lake Success,
where the United Nations was then assembled, a majority report
favoring the partition of Palestine into an Arab and a jewish state, and
a minority report calling for unitary state.

August, 1984

Page 15

CONVENTION

'84

At the great debate in 1947 at Lake Success it was the United

States' intervention, both governmentally and privately, in support of
the zionists' point of view of partition, that carried the day. Pressures
were brought to bear on small nations. Take the Philippines. They
had twenty bills pending in Congress calling for the reconstruction of
the Philippines; and Romulo, who was then the Philippines' foreign
minister, was told, "Either your government supports our position on
Palestine, even though you may not agree with it, or you willnot have
your bills passed." The Philippines were whipped into line and, when
the vote came, supported the position. Twelve South American
countries, depending on certain aid to build very important roads and
other construction in South America, were likewise told, "Line up."
They were told in a round-robin telegram drafted, in the name of other
senators and himself, by Robert F. Wagner, Sr. (the father of Mayor
Robert D. Wagner of New York), "Either you support our position, or
else."

"At the great (U.N.) debate in 1947 at Lake

Success it was the United States' intervention,
both governmentally and privately, in support
of the zionists' point of view of partition, that
carried the day."
This kind of whipping into line is the first evidence of the enormous
zionist lobby in Washington that we see growing each day.
So on November 29, 1947, at Lake Success, the necessary twothirds majority was garnered at the General Assembly. The state of
Israel's name was only given afterwards. The name was obviously
given to associate it in the minds of christian America with the name
Israel, which appears, as you know, in almost all christian prayer
books, and so they took the name Israel, and the jewish state came
into being. As of today, 1984, the Arab Palestinian state is yet to come
into being.
Why, we might ask ourselves, are we moving to offend the muslim
Arab population situated in 26 important countries around the world
for the sake of support of a small zionist enclave in a state called
Israel? There are a number of reasons. We must remember we were
getting over the shock of World War II, and there was a real
humanitarian feeling which ran something like this: "The jews deserve
to have what they want after their great suffering. The jews want a
state in Palestine. Why not set up a state?" It was not their right or
privilege to set it up. That they were going against - not 93% of the
population; now the population had shifted - 66% of christian or
muslim Arab population (as against 33%jewish) never occurred to the
people. They were ruled by their heart, and they supported it.
Some of the other motivations are not as clean and clear as the
humanitarian motivations: the political motivation. And we see it day
in and day out. We see it in the useless debate that Hart and Mondale
engaged in over whether we ought to move our embassy, which is
now located in Tel Aviv, from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The use of
pandering or bartering for the jewish vote - how did it come about? It
comes about simply because 85% of American jews live in sixteen
cities located in six states with an electoral college vote of 176, and all
you need is 273 to win. If you get the vast majority of the jewish
electoral vote in jewish dominated states, you're home free.
Now you may say, "How many jews are there to be so influential?"
There are only six million. But in the electoral college system - for
example in New York with its 43 electoral votes, if Carter had
received 1,999,999 votes in the last election and Reagan had received
2,000,000 votes, a plurality of one, all of New York State's electoral
.college vote would have gone to Reagan. So a well organized, very
articulate, lobbying group, speaking in the name of many more in
whose name they have no right to speak, can exercise a tremendous
inordinate influence.
Page 16

August, 1984

I remember back - my memory goes back that long because I've

studied this problem that long - in 1946, before the partition vote in
'47, the question was how to get some of the survivors of Hitler out of
the refugee camps, and Robert Taft, a contender for the Republican
nomination, speaking in his home town of Cincinnati, said, "We must
issue 150,000 visas." Tom Dewey, coming into his home state,
speaking in Albany, said, "We must issue 175,000 visas." And the
sweepstakes was won by Harry Truman, speaking in Madison Square
Garden at the end of the 1946 congressional campaign, when he said,
"No, we will issue 200,000 visas." And by the same manner of
bartering for votes we have come to all our conclusions on the Middle
East! We have totally subordinated the questions of equity, of ethics,
of humanism, to the question of how many votes willthis get us in the
16th election district.
I remember - and I venerated him; I even met him once - the late
James Forrestal, who was our first Secretary of Defense. In June
Forrestal had the "wild," ambitious idea that you could get both
parties to agree to take the Middle East out of domestic politics, to
subordinate politics to policy; and he went around talking to many
people. He came to the son of the President, who was then in
Congress, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jr., and he said, "Will you join
me in this plea for bipartisanship?" And Franklin said, "Well, Mr.
Secretary, if we go ahead with bipartisanship, we'll endanger our
stronghold that we have over the jewish voters in New York, and we
may lose New York." And Forrestal first spoke up, "For gawd's sake,
when will somebody worry about whether we will lose the United
States and lose a lot of lives?" Forrestal was looking perspicaciously
ahead and may have been seeing what happened to happen to U.S.
Marines in 1983.
So the question of politics has played a very, very important role in
who the United States picked in 1947 and who the United States
picked in 1984.

"The state of Israel's name was only given

(after the vote for partition). The name was
obviously given to associate it in the minds of
christian America with the name Israel (from
the bible)."
Mention has been made, in my brief moments here at the
Convention, of the media and its slanting. Well, the slant of the media
and the slant of the politicians has led to a total misinformation of the
American people on the rights and wrongs of the Middle East, and as
a result of which we have allowed the media to spread this. They have
spread one side instead of giving a balanced picture, and beyond
spreading one side they have spread something that is totally
extraneous to what is going on in the Middle East. I do not
underestimate the horribleness of the grave crime of genocide against
the jews, the holocaust. But in gawd's name, or in anyone's name,
what in the world has the holocaust of 1940-45 got to do with the
dispersion of Palestinians today, the intervention of the United States
in the Middle East? It is totally irrelevant; it is a horrible crime that one
does not question.
There are certain groups who say there was no holocaust. I do not
associate with them; but I do cry out against the total, thorough
exploitation of the holocaust and its injection into the question of
what our policy for the Middle East should be today, the tricking of
christians' conscience, the tricking of Atheists' conscience, and
making them feel unduly one-sided in their views toward the Middle
East. It is the use of the holocaust that has made possible the kind of
thing that has occurred which I call a blitz. And it is not the blitz that
took place in London; it is the blitz that has taken place from certain
zionist organizations led by my adversary, the Anti-Defamation
League, that has tried to silence every last voice that has tried to
The American Atheist

CONVENTION

'84

express itself on the question of Palestine and the relationship

between jews, Arab muslims and the United States.
This long list of people is amazing - and this is incomplete,
because we don't know (who else has been pressured). These are
only people who have publicly announced that they have been
pressured and that economic reprisals of one kind or another have
been practiced against them. The list: Yales' Millar Burrows, Harvard's William Ernest Hocking, Dean Virginia Guildersleeve, Henry
Sloane Coffin, Henry Van Dusen, Dean Francis Sayre, Dr. A.C.
Forrest, Dr. John Nicholls Booth, Daniel Berrigan, Arthur Garfield
Hays, Vincent Sheean, J. William Fulbright, James Abourezk, Henry
A. Byroade, Moshe Menuhin, Israel Shahak, Dorothy Thompson,
William Snow Ethridge, Margaret McKay, Hannah Arendt, Sir
George Brown, Folke Bernadotte, Dag Hammarskjold, Bruno
Kreisky, Georges Pompidou, Charles de Gaulle, and of course the
founder of your movement, Mrs. O'Hair, and myself. We all have run
up against this namecalling which is an attempt to silence dissent, and
I'm talking about namecalling in reference to the Middle East conflict
and any parallels. A dissenting viewpoint is always labeled "antisemitism," to the detriment of a blackout in the Middle East.
Recently - I don't know what you think, you may have varying
views - they embroidered upon, called it antisemitism, they still do,
the unfortunate remark of Jesse Jackson: "hymie" and "hymietown."
Now, I was born and brought up on the sidewalks 'of New York. I've
spoken since then to six other jews in New York and Washington. No
one has ever heard of the word "hymie" or "hymietown." It is a
derisive term used by blacks in the South against jews. It is not a
pretty thing. Jackson shouldn't have said it, and he shouldn't have
admitted that he said it; but it has been blown way out of proportion in
order to interject again not only against Jackson but to interject
before all the American public the collective picture of one man
named Hitler, who rules our foreign policy in the Middle East from his
grave in Berlin.
Until we can get rid of this business of constantly dealing with the
holocaust, instead of the issues before us, we willbe in terrible trouble
in an area in which armageddon certainly can happen, and will
happen, unless we change our policy there. We have to bury Hitler.
We've got to remember the holocaust; we should not permit it to be
continuously raised, to haunt current studies of current policy.
I have urged that we change our policy, but in order to free
Congress, in order to free our two-client politicians, certain things
have to be done, and this is what I call the domestic side of Lilienthal's
Peace Plan. I believe firmly that we should have a one 6year term for
President. In some instances we may want to get rid of a President; we
may be saddled with two years more, but in the vast overwhelming
number of cases it would serve to our national interest to have one
man who, the minute he comes into his first term, did not stop to
worry about being reelected. It would negate the power not only of
zionist minority pressure groups, but of many other pressure groups.
I think also that we should do away with the electoral college system.
It is antiquated and no longer serves the needs that it served at the
time of our constitutional formation back at the end of the 18th
century.
Ithink that United States foreign policy must adopt what it has tried
to do on several occasions, and that is to be even- handed, to try to
weigh the rights not only of Israel, but to weigh the rights of the Arabs,
and particularly the Palestinian Arabs. I took off a week recently to go
to the island of Antigua. This is a member nation of the United
Nations - (with) no roads, no nothing on the island, a barren island, a
population of about 35,000 - and yet nearly 4,000,000 Palestinians do
not have a home of their own, do not have a land of their own, do not
have a state of their own, and they're not even talked to!
We always have heard, particularly from the zionist groups, ''The
Arabs won't sit down and talk with us." Now that the Palestinians,
through the able leadership - I think, the most able leadership - of
Yasir Arafat, want to sit down and talk with the rulers of Israel, the
Austin, Texas

Israelis not only will not will not talk to them, they have bound our
arms firmly and we cannot talk to them, for under the 1975
disengagement agreement negotiated by Henry Kissinger, the United
States promised, and is bound by that, that they would not engage in
any talks with the PLO until the PLO recognized the existence of the
state of Israel. Most of the Arab countries have. The PLO feels that "if
the state of Israel exists, why should we give up our trump card in
negotiations that recognize Israel, what would Israel do for us?" Israel
has said, "Even if the PLO does recognize us, we will still not
recognize them for anything more than a bunch of terrorists."
On the question of terrorism, there have been acts, well publicized
by the media: what took place at Munich; what took place on the
beach at Tel Aviv. We hear nothing about the acts on the other side.
We hear nothing about the 129 people killed on a Libyan airliner
which was blown out of the skies by Israel six years ago. When one
American who happened to be on that plane, a naturalized American,
was brought home, there was no flaming hurrah, no flags at half mast;
but when two Americans were killed in Munich in a tragedy. in a
worthless tragedy, and were brought home, the papers, the radio, the
television (covered it gruelingly); New York state and Ohio state had
flags at half mast. There is a double standard on terrorism.
By what right does Mr. Shamir or his predecessor, Mr. Begin, talk
about terrorism? Menachem Begin was the arch terrorist of the 20th
century! It was he who blew up the King David Hotel. It was he who
ordered the massacre of the British sergeants at Nathanya. It was he
who started the exodus of Palestinians from their land in 1948 when
the small village of Deir Yassin was attacked, and 254 men, women
and children were killed and their bodies were thrown down a well, as
the little village outside of Jerusalem was overwhelmed. Mr. Shamir
also can boast in the hall of records of having masterminded the
assassination of Count Folke Bernadotte, the first U.N. conciliator
for Palestine.

"It was (Begin) who blew up the King David

Hotel. It was he who ordered the massacre of
the British sergeants at Nathanya. It was he
who started the exodus of Palestinians from
their land in 1948 when the small village of Deir
Yassin was attacked, and 254 men, women and
children were killed and their bodies were
thrown down a well."
So the question of terrorism is not an issue. The question is what I
raised earlier, one of the questions which I posed to you: Has the
United States given up on the right of self-determination of peoples,
or are we going to be selective? Are some people going to have the
right of self-determination, and other people, for one false reason or
other, to be deprived of this right?
Here is a people whose public relations has been very, very poor, I
will admit. The image projected has been poor against the image of
the Israelis which is always excellent, with the best p.r. advice; and
through the fact that many of the media are inclined by their own
background to support them we get a very, very poor distorted view
of the conflict, which is a two-way conflict, with rights on both sides in
the Middle East.
That's not going to be changed overnight. But one thing I can say,
and I think you will agree with me; it certainly does not serve U.S.
national interests that the U.S. has become the arsenal and treasury
for Israel, and this flows from what I call the deification of ethnicity.
Looking at this problem in terms of the ethnicity of the jews and the
right of the jew to return, Israel has been the beneficiary of some $54
billion through 1983 in terms of economic aid, military aid, tax- free
United Jewish Appeal dollars, funds which are given to it, privileges,

August, 1984

Page 17

CONVENTION '84
and other moneys that have gone through various governmental
agencies in Washington, in return for which we have brought upon
ourselves the hatred of a vast majority of the world, which is
disunited, which has never shown its true strength; and one day they
willunite, and unfortunately we willreceive the brunt of their hatred
and their antagonism.
I have visited Beirut many times. It seems that at the American
University of Beirut, the University of Cairo in Cairo, Istanbul,
Roberts College, and other higher educational institutions, the love
and respect of the United States, the wealth of goodwill, once
enjoyed from the people of the Middle East, has all been tossed away,
because of a one-sided policy, which we as Americans must do our
best to change. It's up to everyone of us. I enjoyed and was excited by
Bob Harrington's remarks where he said that each of us can make a
better day. We can certainly make a better day for the Middle East,
both for ourselves and for the people who yearn for justice there.
In my battle, which has gone on ever since I had the temerity to
write an article in Reader's Digest in 1950 called "Israel's Flag Is Not
Mine," I have been inspired by the words of humanist Martin Buber
who said, "In order that man may not be lost, there is need of persons
who are not collectivized, and of truth which is not politicized."; and
of Amos, the Hebrew prophet, who said, "Ye are to me, 0 children of
Israel, as are the Ethiopians." If Amos were alive today, I'm sure that
he would join me in saying, "Let's have justice in the Middle East,
because "yeare to me, 0 children of Israel, as are the Palestinians,' no
more, no less':

A few years back a Broadway musical, some of you remember, The

Manfrom La Mancha, had the haunting lines:
"To dream the impossible dream,
To fight the unbeatable foe,
To bear the unbearable sorrows,
To run where the brave dare not go,
To right the unrightable wrong,
To love pure and chaste from afar,
To try when your arms are too weary to reach those
unreachable stars,
This is my quest, to follow that star,
No matter how hopeless, no matter how far,
To be willing to march into hell, for a heavenly cause,
I know if I only remain true to this glorious quest,
That one day my heart will be peaceful and calm,
When I am laid to rest,
And the world will be better for this,
That one man born and covered with stars,
Still strove with his last ounce of courage,
To reach those unreachable stars."
Yes, my friends here in Lexington, we can reach those unreachable
stars. We can gain your right to dissent, and receive more respect in
the community as Atheists, and gain my right as an antizionist, if we
both reach for those unreachable stars, and help bring that illusive
peace to the men, women, children in the Middle East and the world.

THEBLACKATHEffiTSOF
THE HARLEM RENAISSANCE: (1917-1928)
by John G. Jackson
John G. Jackson is an educator, lecturer, author, and man of
principle. He was born on April 1st. 1907 into a family of
methodists. As he remembers now, he has been an Atheist
since he could think. The family minister once asked him when
he was small, "Who made you?" After some thought he replied
from his own realization, "I don't know." He lived for fifty years
in New York City, 1932 to 1977, lecturing at the "Ingersoll
Forum" of the American Association for the Advancement of
Atheism (from 1930 to 1955). During a parallel period he wrote
articles for the Truth Seeker magazine. He was at the same
time a writer and associate of the Rationalist Press Association
in London, England from 1932 to 1972.
Beginning in 1971 he became a lecturer in the Black Studies
Department of Rutgers University, remaining there until 1973.
From 1973 to 1977 he was a Visiting Professor at the
University of New York. When he moved to Chicago he quickly
became a Visiting Professor at Northeast Illinois University
from 1977 to 1980. One of the courses which he taught was
"Comparative Religion." His approach to that course was such
that university officials cautioned him to "be more discreet."
Another of his courses dealt with "Social Movements."
Jackson has been a consistent friend of labor and has been a
member of the UAW, Dist. 65, AFL-CIO, for most of his life.
His books include Introduction to African Civilizations; A Guide
to the Study of African History, Ethiopia and the Origin of
Civilization; Man. God and Civilization; he is currently working
on Christianity before Christ. His best selling booklet is featured by American Atheists: Pagan Origins of the Christ Myth.

he Harlem Renaissance was a result of t~e p~rticipation of the

U.S. in World War I. The war cut off immigrant labor from
Europe, creating a labor shortage in expanding industrial
areas of the North. This brought a great migration of rural black labor
to northern cities. This movement was promoted by the Black Press.
Among the newspapers were Marcus Garvey's Negro World, Robert
S. Abbott's Chicago Defender, Robert L. Vann's Pittsburgh Courier,
and Carl Murphy's Baltimore Afro-American. These papers had
large circulations, running into the hundreds of thousands.
About 387,000 black troops participated in the war to make the
world safe for Democracy. After the war was over these ex-soldiers
found Democracy at home conspicuous by its absence. This situation
created a large number of angry young men bent on reversing this
unpleasant condition. The propitious spot for this was New York
City; and since Harlem was the center of a large black population, it
became the focus of a Black Renaissance. Among the many
celebrities were a group of radicals: Communists, Socialists and
Independents.
I.n this group were several leaders who called
themselves either Atheists or agnostics. In this category were

HUBERT H. HARRISON, JA ROGERS, GEORGE S. SCHUYLER, RICHARD B.

MOORE, WALTER EVERETTE HAWKINS, ASA PHILIP RANDOLPH AND
CHANDLER OWEN. The outstanding personality of this group was
HUBERT HENRY HARRISON, who distinguished himself as orator,

journalist, scholar and philosopher. Harrison was born in St. Croix,

Virgin Islands in 1883, and died in New York City in 1927. At the age of
16 he left home and made a world tour as a cabin boy on a boat.
(continued on page 23)

Page 18

August, 1984

The American Atheist

Photo Section
AMERICAN

ATHE'STS \

FOURTEENTH ANNUAL
NATIONAL CONVENTION
OF
AMERICAN ATHEISTS

T DAY

TOMORROW

Lexington, Kentucky
Robert Sherman, Dir. Chicago Chapter American Atheists thanks the
convention
for a special service award given to Cathryn Bulacek
Chicago Chapter member while Jon Murray looks on.

Prof. John G. Jackson presents a lecture on "Black Atheists

Harlem Renaissance of the 1920s"

of the

John Marthaler from Mississippi goes to accept the "Most Hated Atheist
of 1983" award presented to him by Arnold Via, Virginia State Dir.
This is the second of this new annual award sponsored by Mr. Via.

Ben Edward Akerley from California speaks on "Sex as an Argument

for Atheism"

Austin, Texas

(PHOTO CREDITS - BRUCE SENIOR)

William Talley, Dir. Denver Chapter American

introduction
to AAARG (American Atheists
Groups), its foundation and accomplishments.

August,

1984

Atheists presents an
Alcoholics Recovery

Page 19

Jon Murray, Atheist Center National Director, displays a placard with the Salt
Lake City, Utah Chapter of American Atheists' Dial-an-Atheist number that has
been on display in public buses in Salt Lake City during 1983. A historical first.

John Crump, former Director Lexington Chapter of American Atheists and Chapter Historian is also an accomplished
musician as he demonstrates
at the Members' banquet.

Robin Murray-O'Hair,

Editor, chats with Ben Akerley during the members'

soiree.

Dr. IV!

Et

George Kniss, Director Pittsburgh Chapter

theists captures a speaker on video tape.

Page 20

American

Gerald and Gloria Tholen enjoy some of the after hours festivities that are a part of
each year's conventions.

August,

1984

The American

Atheist

Bob ILiving

right) John Crump, Lexington Chapter Historian,

'Hair, Dr. Madalyn Q'Hair and Herman Harris stand by the grave of
C. Moore behind the special Atheist symbol wreath made to honor him.

alyn Murray Q'Hair

speaks

on "The

State/Church

Separation

performs

his duties as Master of

Gloria Tholen registers another conventioneer.

Myth".

ington, former Chaplain of Bourbon Street, presents one of his "Balanced

eminars on "Self-Image: Your Key to Success".

Austin, Texas

Jon Murray, Atheist Center National Director

Ceremonies at the annual Members' banquet.

(Left to right) Bruce Senior, Photographer, Kathy Diederich, Treasurer and Kim
Kerns, Secretary of the Houston Chapter pose for a picture after returning from
a swim in the hotel pool.

August,

1984

Page 21

E,

Barry Weatherly, Dir. Atlanta Chapter American Atheists accepts the

Atheist of the Year award for Bob Campbell of Atlanta winner of the
award for 1983.

Herman Harris, Dir. lexington,

Kentucky Chapter American Atheists
admires his certificate of special recognition for his fine work in preparing for the lexington meeting.

ISTS

Barbara Smoker, President of the National Secular Society of England

speaks on: "Atheist Liberation in Great Britain".

Dr. Alfred Lilienthal presents his views on "Politics and Religion in the
Middle East".

Christopher Drew, former Director of the Chicago Chapter of American

Atheists and a former National Board member thanks the convention
for a special award presented to him for 20 years of outstanding service.

Arnold Via, our "man in Virginia" displays a clipping about his Atheist
cemetery after conventioneers
had viewed a film of the first burial
therein.

Page 22

August,

1984

The American

Atheist

CONVENTION

'84

(continued from page 18)

Landing in New York a year later, he worked on routine jobs by day

and attended school at night. Shortly afterwards he became a special
foreign-language clerk in the Post Office for four years. In his spare
time, since he could not afford to attend college, he educated himself,
reading widely in the fields of Anthropology, Sociology, Philosophy,
Science, Literature and Drama. He joined the Socialist Party and for
many years was one of the most influential leaders of that organization. He was also an organizer for the Industrial Workers of the
World, a militant labor organization of the early part of this century.
Harrison was a champion of the underprivileged, at all times and
places. Besides defending the constitutional rights of his own group,
he advocated Irish home rule and the independence of India and
China. He wrote extensively for such left-wing and anti-religious
periodicals as The Truth Seeker, The Call, The Masses, The Modern
Quarterly, and The New Republic. At the age of 24 Harrison was
writing book-reviews for the New York Times. He also wrote articles
and reviews for the New York Sun, Tribune, and World. For four
years he was Editor of The Negro World, a paper with a circulation of
about 200,000 copies per week. He was also Assistant Editor of The
Masses for four years. As an orator, Harrison talked wherever he
could find an audience. He lectured day and night at colleges and
universities, on street corners, public libraries, and YMCAs. As an
outdoor lecturer, Harrison spoke frequently at Columbus Circle, and
from the steps of the U.S. Subtreasury, directly across the street from
J.P. Morgan & Co. and the New York Stock Exchange. On
September 11, 1922 the New York Times reported that "Hubert
Harrison, an eloquent and forceful speaker, broke all records at the
Stock Exchange yesterday." On this occasion he spoke to an
audience of about 11,000 listeners. The Police Department had to
rope off the area and stop all traffic at the corner of Wall & Broad
Streets.
Doctor Hubert Harrison never used any notes. He could discourse
learnedly on the theory of evolution and quoted long passages from
the works of Darwin, Huxley and Herbert Spencer. I recall attending
a street-corner meeting in Harlem when Harrison was discussing the
ancient history of Egypt. He recited a brilliant passage from Winwood
Reade's great world history, The Martyrdom of Man, which is cited
below:
"There is a land where the air is always tranquil, where
nature wears always the same bright yet lifeless smile; and
there, as in a vast museum, are preserved the colossal
achievements of the past. Let us enter the sad and silent river;
let us wander on its dusky shores. Buried cities are beneath our
feet; the ground on which we tread is the pavement of a tomb.
See the Pyramids towering to the sky, with men like insects
crawling round their base; and the Sphinx couched in vast
repose, with a ruined temple between its paws. Since those
great monuments were raised, the very heavens have been
changed. When the architects of Egypt began their work there
was another polar star in the Northern Sky, and the Southern
Cross shone upon the Baltic shores. How glorious are the
memories of those ancient men whose names are forgotten for they lived and labored in the distant and unwritten past. Too
great to be known, they sit on the height of centuries and look
down on fame .... The men are dead and the gods are dead.
Naught but their memories remain. Where now is Osiris, who
came down upon earth out of love for men, who was killed by
the malice of the Evil One, and rose again from the grave and
became the judge of the dead? Where now is Isis the mother,
with the child Horus on her lap? They are dead; they are gone
to the land of the shades. Tomorrow, Jehovah, you and your
son shall be with them! ... There was a town named Heliopolis;
it had a college garden, and a willow hanging over the Fountain
of the Sun, and there the professors lectured and discussed on
the Triune God, and the creation of the world, and the Serpent

Austin, Texas

Evil, and the Tree of Life, and on chaos and darkness and the
shining stars; and there the stone quadrant was pointed to the
heavens, and there the laboratory furnace glowed. And in that
college two foreign students were received, and went forth
learned in its lore. The first created a nation in the Egyptian
style; the second created a system of ideas; and, strange to say,
on Egyptian soil the two were reunited. The philosophy of
Moses was joined in Alexandria to the philosophy of Plato, not
only by the Jews but also by the Christians; not only in Philo
Judaeus, but also in the Gospel of St. John."
Doctor Harrison lectured on the contradictions and absurdities of
the bible with telling effect. He advised his listeners to read the
Lectures of Robert Ingersoll, and such freethought classics as Paine's
Age of Reason, Volney's Ruins of Empires, Draper's Conflict
Between Religion and Science, and Andrew Dickson White's Warfare
of Science and Theology. On one occasion a ministerial association
offered Harrison a position as the president of a theological seminary,
with honor; of course, he turned it down. Harrison was a belligerent
antichristian. He held that any black person who accepted orthodox
christianity needed to have his head examined. According to the
christian theologians, god placed a curse on the black race,
condemning those of dusky hue to be slaves of their more fortunate
brothers. In the christian heaven, god is white, so is Jesus, the holy
ghost, and all of the angels. The only black member of the christian
pantheon is the devil, who presides over hell. If given a choice
between the christian heaven and hell, Harrison said he would rather
go to hell. When asked why he rejected christianity, Harrison stated
that he refused to worship a lily-white god and a Jim Crow Jesus.
Edwin Walker, a prominent freethinker, organized the Sunrise
Club in 1889. This club held fortnightly meetings which featured
outstanding speakers. As a rule these meetings were held in the
dining room of a hotel, and a dinner went along with the lecture.
Harrison was a popular speaker at meetings of the Sunrise Club. On
one occasion Doctor Harrison found himself surrounded by literary
celebrities. Burton Roscoe, literary Editor of the New York Tribune,
reported in that paper, September 11, 1922, that:
"Mencken asked me to introduce him to Doctor Hubert
Harrison, who sat next to me at the dinner, and very soon
Doctor Harrison was the center of the most serious discussion
of the evening; for Theodore Dreiser, Heywood Broun, Ludwig
Lewisohn, Charles Hanson Towne came over for the pleasure
of talking with the distinguished Negro."
At the time of his death in 1927, Harrison was Staff Lecturer for the
New York City Board of Education. He was not an organization man,
and in his later years, like Colonel Bob Ingersoll, he spoke only for
himself. But he was admired by the Messenger Group. A. Philip
Randolph and Chandler Owen founded the Messenger Magazine in
1917. This publication was launched as a Journal of Scientific
Radicalism. J.A. Rogers was a "disciple" of Harrison, and also a
member of the Messenger Group. "Harrison's views," said Rogers,
"profoundly influenced the Messenger Group, headed by A. Philip
Randolph and Chandler Owen, two leaders who did more than
anyone else to focus the attention of the government and of the
thinking whites on the injustices suffered by Negroes during the war.
While the old leaders capitulated and urged the members of the race
to submit while the war was on, the two brilliant young men spoke out
fearlessly. Largely because of opposition from the War Department,
the Messenger received nationwide publicity; by showing that
progress towards obtaining justice lay not in barren agitation about
race, or in dying and going to a white man's heaven, but in awareness
and intelligent application of economic laws, it opened new vistas to
the minds of thinking Negroes and not a few Whites." (World's Great
Men of Color, Vol. II, p. 615, New York, 1947.)
In 1918 Eugene V. Debs was imprisoned for giving a speech
opposing the entrance of the United States into the European War.

August, 1984

Page 23

CONVENTION '84
Randolph and Owen went on a lecture tour the same year, appealing
to the American people to petition Congress to agree to a negotiated
peace, and thus bring the European conflict to an end. They were
arrested by federal marshalls on a charge of treason. The presiding
judge dismissed the case. He was convinced that the defendants were
victims of war hysteria and that the government did not have a valid
case against them.
Joel Augustus Rogers (1880-1966) was a prominent member of the
Messenger Group. He was a fine example of a self-educated scholar.
He never finished high school, yet he was recognized as a historian,
anthropologist and journalist. He wrote brilliantly polemical works,
which he had to publish himself. The big publishing houses thought
his works were too controversial; so they rejected them. His best
known books are: Nature Knows No Color Line, Africa's Gift to
America, World's Great Men of Color, (2 volumes), Sex and Race, (3
volumes), and From Superman to Man. Rogers lectured at such
outstanding educational institutions as The University of Chicago,
and at the Sorbonne in Paris. In 1930 he was elected to membership in
the Paris Society of Anthropology, and in 1931 he was invited to
address the International Congress of Anthropology. Mister Rogers
was a personal friend of mine for many years. He told me that he
admired the lectures of Colonel Ingersoll. When asked what lecture
he liked best he said, "The Lecture on Shakespeare." As a field
anthropologist, Rogers traveled around the world, visiting sixty
different nations. He told me of a visit to a primitive tribe in Ethiopia.
These people had no civilization and no religion; and they were the
happiest people in the world. This journey convinced him that
civilization and religion are the two greatest curses of the human race.
George S. Schuyler was another member of the Messenger Group.
It was his conviction that all intelligent people are Atheists. In The
Messenger, February 27, Schuyler reviewed a scholarly book tending
to show that Jesus christ was a mythological character. The following
passage is a condensation of the review:
DISROBING SUPERSTITION
Jesus: A Myth, by Georg Brandes
(reviewed by George S. Schuyler)

"It is doubtful whether any intelligent person accepts the

Jesus Christ of the Scriptures as a fact. His alleged exploits,
career, death and resurrection can only be wholly swallowed by
the same gullible folk who swarm into the sideshows at Coney
Island; who believe that George Washington never told a lie;
that Congressmen are exceptionally honorable; that the
YMCA is something other than a training school for young
babbits, or that the common people rule this country. The
reviewer ditched this Jesus Myth about the same time that he
threw Santa Claus overboard; i.e., at the age of eight.
"Now comes Mister Brandes, the noted Danish critic. He
cleans up for this old myth in a very effective manner. His
disposal of Jesus willsatisfy most any rational being, that is to
say, it will satisfy about one-twentieth of the people. The rest
want to believe such myth because of the satisfaction and
compensation they derive therefrom. Ifthey didn't swallow the
Jesus Myth, they would be worshipping Buddha, Osiris or
Jupiter. Mentally inferior people must worship something or
somebody. Thus, while this book willbe read with interest by
the intelligent minority, it willbe shoved into the trash can with
shocked silence by Baptists, Catholics, Methodists, Holy
Rollers, Christian Scientists, Rotarians and such folk.
"The author holds that Jesus is as much a myth as William
Tell.... The author's criticism is always keen and searching ....
This is probably the most Spirited and iron-clad attack that has
ever been written on the authenticity of the so-called Savior of
Mankind."
The Poet's Corner of The Messenger was edited by Walter Everette
Hawkins. One of his poems was published in the November 1917
issue of The Messenger. It is reproduced below:
Page 24

August, 1984

Here and Hereafter

Now you preach a lot of Heaven,
And you talk a lot of Hell,
But the future never troubles me 'Tis plain as tongue can tell;
And it's a mighty poor religion
That won't keep a man from fear,
For the next place must be Heaven,
Since 'tis Hell I'm having here.
Some years ago The Truth Seeker offered a prize for the best letter
on the topic: "Why I Became an Atheist." The prize-winning letter
was written by Walter Everette Hawkins, under his pen name:
Gaulterio Quinonas. The following is the complete letter:
"I became an Atheist after witnessing a devout Christian put
the Bible to test. This man grew up in the Church. At 17, he was
a Church Officer, a Sunday School teacher, and a leader of the
Church Choir. He married young, and became the father of five
children. His wife fell sick when his youngest child was still
nursing.
"Confident that the Bible was true, this young man with Bible
language on his lips, knelt in tears beside the bed of his sick wife
and prayed for her recovery; 'The prayer of faith will heal the
sick, and the Lord willraise them up - Ask and it shall be given
- Seek and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened. Every
man who asketh, receiveth.' If any man ever prayed faithfully,
earnestly, believingly, this man did. Ifany man ever needed the
answer to a prayer, he did. His young wife died, leaving him
broken-hearted with 5 young children, all mere babies.
"I was a member of the same church, and was an eyewitness
to this incident. I knew this man to be as sincere as any man can
be. He helped to convert others and persuaded them to join the
Church. His prayers and faith meant nothing whatever.
"This incident convinced me that the Bible is false; that
prayer is wasted, and that no God exists. At once I became an
Atheist, and at once experienced for the first time the feeling of
being a man -free and unafraid. Shortly after this, I discovered
Thomas Paine's Age of Reason, and later a copy of the Truth
Seeker. My Atheism was strengthened and confirmed. It is now
my most treasured possession. I will never surrender it."
Most of the Messenger Group were originally socialists, but some
of them, like Owen and Schuyler, became disillusioned and wound up
in the capitalist camp. Chandler Owen had a brother, who was a
custom tailor with his own shop in Columbia, South Carolina. The
business failed and Toussaint Owen was urged by his brother to come
to New York and seek work in one of the union shops controlled by
the socialists. Chandler Owen used his influence to obtain a job for his
brother in a socialist dominated union, but the union would not admit
a black tailor as a member. From a dediated socialist Chandler Owen
became a confirmed capitalist. He left New York, went to Chicago,
where he became a successful businessman.
During the Harlem Renaissance there were other men of eminence
who held unorthodox religious opinions, but were not avowed
Atheists. The famous novelist and poet, Claude McKay, became a
freethinker at the age of eleven. In his declining years he joined the
catholic church. Doctor James Weldon Johnson, a man of many
talents, was a journalist, poet, diplomat, and a University Professor of
Creative Literature. In his autobiography, Along the Way, he
confesses that religion meant nothing to him. He could neither prove
the existence or the nonexistence of god, so he concluded that he was
an agnostic.
This essay is not exhaustive. Many Atheists, from motives of
expediency, pretend to be religious. In my fifty years of residence in
New York, I lectured at the Ingersoll Forum, the Harlem unitarian
church, and the YMCA, and frequently members of the audience
would confess that they agreed with me, but for economic reasons
they dared not say so in public.
The American Atheist

CONVENTION '84

ATHEIST LIBERATION
by Barbara Smoker
Barbara Smoker, born into a devout (and prolific) roman
catholic family in London, England in 1923, received an
intense convent education and, but for the war, would have
become a nun. She devoured theological books to boost her
faith - and the more she read the less she could believe.
Finally rejecting christianity in 1949, she found her way into
the secular humanist movement, and for the past fourteen
years has been President of the National Secular Society (ninth
in succession to Charles Bradlaugh, the Atheist founder of the
group), becoming well known in Britain for her lectures,
writings, broadcasts and TV appearances as the main
British spokeswoman for Atheism.
In the '50s and '60s she was active in Bertrand Russell's
Committee of 100, and once she made an illicit speech against
the Vietnam War from the public gallery of the House of
Commons. She is currently the Chairwoman of the Voluntary
Euthanasia Society. A few months ago she launched in
England the slogan, "Atheist Liberation."
Her booklet, Humanism, first published in 1973 by Ward Lock
Educational, has run into five editions and is still used in
British schools (though, of course, a minority). In 1977 she
published Good God! - a string of verses to tie up the deity.
She was the National Secular Society's representative at the
United World Atheist Meet in Finland in 1983. An effective
spokeswoman, well educated on the issues, she best knows
how the battle goes in Britain.

Androcles: What can I do, my dear?

Megaera: What can you do! You can return to your duty, and
come back 10 your home and your friends, and sacrifice to the
gods as all respectable people do, instead of having us hunted
out of house and home for being dirty, disreputable, blaspheming Atheists.
Androcles: I'm not an Atheist, my dear; I am a christian.
Megaera: Well, isn't that the same thing, only ten times
worse? Everybody knows that christians are the lowest of the
low.

n this scrap of dialogue from Androcles and the Lion, Shaw

typically turns the subject on its head, with adherents of that most
respectable religion, christianity, despised as "dirty disreputable
blaspheming Atheists." (Mrs. Whitehouse was to echo the association of Atheism with dirt in her phrase "disbelief, doubt and dirt.")
Shaw knew, of course, that putting the boot on the other foot would
get a laugh in the theatre - but he also knew that it was historically
correct, for every religion began as a heresy, and the Romans are on
record as referring to the early christians as "Atheists." And why not?
After all, they rejected the prevailing gods. Their bringing in a foreign
tribal god to worship hardly mitigated the crime of Atheism!
So the ancient Romans recognised Atheism. The ancient Greeks
did, too. It was generally frowned upon by the establishment, and was
sometimes punished, but the harshest penalties for heresy were to
wait until christianity itself had become the established religion. It is
not surprising, therefore, that we hear little about Atheism during the
ages of faith; most Atheists would have been rational enough to keep
their mouths shut in those days.
Austin, Texas

Not until the eighteenth century do we see a resurgence of avowed

disbelief in the prevailing god - mostly by those who called
themselves "deists" - meaning believers in an impersonal but
purposive force of creation. Even then it required a great deal of
courage to say one was a deist.
No Freedom FROM Religion Yet
Since 1829, there has been freedom of religion in England, but it has
never extended to freedom from religion.
.Straightforward Atheism came into its own as scientists began to
demonstrate, inter alia, the mechanics of evolution (Darwin) and of
heredity (Mendel and, in our own day, at the microbiological level,
Monod), the increasingly manifest element of chance leaving little
room for creative purpose. But it still required courage to come out as
an Atheist.
One of the pioneers in the public avowal of Atheism was Charles
Bradlaugh. When elected to Parliament, he was prevented from
taking his seat for almost six years: as a "self-confessed" Atheist, he
was permitted neither to take the bible oath of allegiance to the
sovereign nor to sit in the House of Commons without it. (What we
should now call a "Catch 22" situation!)
When Bradlaugh was finally allowed to take the Parliamentary seat
to which he had been elected five times, one of the first reforms he
managed to get on to the Statute Book was the right of members of
Parliament to substitute a secular affirmation of allegiance for the
religious oath. That was just one of many victories that he won for
secularism - for" Atheist Liberation."
Some years earlier he had founded the National Secular Societyadopting the words "Secularist" and "Secularism," coined by G.J.
Holyoake for the removal of nonreligious affairs from the undue
influence of the established church, and extending the meaning of the
words to indicate more or less what I mean by my slogan, "Atheist
Liberation."
So why do I need to introduce a new phrase for the existing word,
"Secularism"? Simply because that word, which was familiar a
century ago to the man on the Clapham horse-bus (Holyoake was
able to claim in 1876 that "the word secularist is in every newspaper, it
is heard from every pulpit, it is frequent in parliamentary debates, and
it is the word of battle in every school board in the kingdom"), is no
longer in many people's vocabulary, whereas "Atheist Liberation" is
readily understood.

"... 'Atheist Liberation' is readily understood.

... The response is ... not (as with secularism)
'What does it mean?' - requiring a sterile
dictionary answer - but the same question
that Womens' Liberation has always provoked:
'Why do you need it?' "
By analogy with Women's Liberation, it is immediately recognised
as a demand for legal and social equality with believers. The response
is therefore not (as with secularism) "What does it mean?" requiring a sterile dictionary answer - but the same question that
Women's Liberation has always provoked: "Why do you need it?"
That question is a profitable one, inviting an answer that concerns
topical social issues. And the questioner willprobably be amazed to
learn that in many areas of life in Britain today one cannot be a

August, 1984

Page 25

CONVENTION '84
first-class citizen without belief - or at least no obtrusive disbeliefin an ancient myth.
An Education Free From Religious Propaganda
One issue that has never been out of the secularist programme
since the 1860s is secular education: which really means neutral
education, free of religious propaganda, not the substitution of our
"propaganda" for theirs. We oppose church schools, not only
because the dual system of education is uneconomical, and most of
the extra cost is a charge on the public purse, but because we see it as
a denial of the basic right of access to different opinions to segregate a
child in a school devoted to reinforcing the controversial prejudices of
the home. We also oppose the statutory compulsion on state schools
to provide religious instruction and, even more, a corporate act of
daily worship (which implies that the Parliament of 1944 was
competent to guarantee the existence of a god to be worshippedl).
Certainly many schools today interpret "worship" very liberally and
use the Religious Education slot mainly for moral education - but,
progressive though this practice is, we are not entirely happy about it,
as it suggests an association between morality and religious belief
which is utterly unjustified, though a very popular misconception.
Christian chaplains to hospitals. prisons and the armed forces are
also paid out of the public purse in England, while secularists who
apply to provide an analogous service are not only given no financial
subsidy for it but are usually not even permitted to do it for nothing.
Many crematorium chapels - which are lor the use 01 members 01
all religions and of none, their upkeep being a public charge - have
immovable crosses and crucifixes as part of the decor. The

authorities responsible for this seem to be totally unaware that it

constitutes a gross affront to jews, muslims and hindus, as well as to
Atheists.
Religious charities get away with political campaigns that would
jeopardise the charity status (with all its fiscal privileges) of any
nonreligious charity.
Unbelievers are also grossly discriminated against in broadcasting;
every radio and television company in this country has its religious
broadcasting department, with a special budget for each station or
channel, all monitored by the Central Religious Advisory Committee.
There is, of course, no comparable budget, either of time or money,
for broadcasting the Atheist or agnostic viewpoint.
Not until the birth of the Women's Liberation movement did most
people - women as well as men - even realise that sex discrimination remained very much a fact of life, despite the female
franchise and the Married Women's Property Acts. And the introduction of Gay Liberation likewise opened the eyes of the public to
the degree of social and legal discrimination that the 1967 Homosexual Act had left untouched, and gave many gays the courage to
"come out of the closet" - this, in turn, giving strength to the
movement. The introduction of the term "Atheist Liberation" could
have a similar effect on the consciousness of both Atheists and of the
general public as to the need for it - what the women's movement
calls "consciousness-raising."
We have no desire to turn the tables on believers - I am strongly
opposed, for instance, to the discrimination practised by communist
governments against religious belief - but we do demand equality
and justice for nonbelievers: in other words, Atheist Liberation.

SEX AS AN ARGUMENT FOR ATHEISM

by Ben Edward Akerley
Born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Ben Edward Akerley was
reared as a methodist but converted to seventh-day-adventism
at age 16 with such fervor that he planned to become a
missionary for that faith. However, during his theological
studies he soon arrived at Clarence Darrow's conclusion that
"doubt is the beginning of wisdom" and entered the rarefied
realm of the freethinker.
He earned a B.A. from UCLA and an M.A. from Cal State LA in
both music education and language teaching. After many years
as a music and language instructor, he resided for a brief
period in Sao Paulo, Brazil, where he began a new career as a
specialist in teaching English to the foreign born.
As a professional musician he served as accompanist for the
UCLA Men's Glee Club, the Robert de Cormier Chorale in
New York City and the New Jersey Symphony Boys' Chorus,
and has worked for many churches and temples as both
organist and choir director.
In 1972, while a member of the faculty of USC, he was
instrumental in bringing Madalyn Murray O'Hair to the campus
as a guest speaker for their Great Issues Forum and
subsequently collaborated with her by doing background
research for her book Freedom Under Siege. During that time
in Austin, Texas, Ben discovered Robert Ingersoll's
unchallenged offer to expose the bible as a grossly obscene
book and decided to compile an irreverent anthology of sex as
found in the scriptures. The result of that effort was The
X-Rated Bible from the American Atheist Press.
No establishment publisher would touch the manuscript,
Page 26

August, 1984

and one house even said, "We could get into a lot of trouble if
we published this."
Taking full advantage of the long summer vacations available
to teachers, Ben has become a globetrotter and has especially
enjoyed traveling in countries where the cultures are free
from the baleful influence of the antisexual tradition of
the judeo-christian ethic.
As a longtime gay activist, he has been particularly interested
in the effect of religion on sexual mores and behavior,
and feels that the most convincing argument for Atheism
is sex, the most direct link between humankind
and the animal kingdom.

uring the early 1970s I was on the faculty at USC where I had
the good fortune to know Dr. Addie Klotz, director of
student health services. A wonderfully warm woman and an
Atheist, Addie was especially sympathetic to the plight of sexually
active USC coeds, and freely provided them with birth control
information and contraceptives, and even arranged pregnancy
termination before the 1973 Supreme Court legalization of abortion.
When Addie was interviewed by the campus newspaper one day,
she expressed her extremely liberal views on sex. At one point the
student reporter asked, "Dr. Klotz, what is your feeling about sexual
perversion?" I shall never forget her straightforward reply. In her
whimsical and matter-of-fact way she said, "An abnormal sex act is a
sex act that would be impossible!"

The American Atheist

CONVENTION '84
Like all Atheists, Addie saw a universe devoid of benevolent
purpose, and nowhere is this lack of benevolent purpose more
evident than in the area of sex.
Item: The female praying mantis devours her mate upon impregnation for a very good reason - he is a handy source of protein.
Entomologists call this act a cannibalistic love feast!
Item: The homosexual feels just as strong an attraction for the
same sex as the heterosexual does for the opposite sex, yet any
homosexual coupling, intense though it may be, could never result in
any progeny.
Item: In their physiological studies, Masters and Johnson recorded
the most convulsive climax ever - not in a couple bringing each other
to sexual peak in the usual missionary position, but instead in a female
masturbating herself to orgasm - once again an act which could
never have a reproductive purpose.
Item: The clitoris is unique in human sexual anatomy since it has
one function and only one function: that of providing exquisite
sensual pleasure for its lucky mistress.
Item: In an average ejaculation, male semen contains approximately 200 million sperm - nearly enough to spawn a replacement
population for the entire United States.
Yes, the sexual impulse is a blind, multidirectional force which is
humankind's most direct link to the animal kingdom and which
characterizes the human animal (to borrow Sigmund Freud's term)
as "polymorphous perverse." In plain English, anything goes, so do
whatever turns you on.

"This 'animal behavior,' then, is the principal

stumbling block to the religious person since
there is no more forceful reminder than sex
that we are indeed members of the animal
kingdom."
It is sex, therefore, the center and core of our existence, which
becomes the most problematic aspect of life for religion to deal with.
Let's face it; two humans copulating do not look all that different from
two dogs going at it on the street. This "animal behavior," then, is the
principal stumbling block to the religious person since there is no
more forceful reminder than sex that we are indeed members of the
animal kingdom - human animals, to be sure, but animals nonetheless. So religion could only channel the indomitable sex drive by
legitimizing it solely for procreation and then only in a monogamous
state of matrimony.
But what happens when you attempt to suppress and to sublimate
a force as potent as sex'? Freud had a theory to explain it, and he
called it Eros vs. Thanatos, the life-affirmativeor love wish as opposed
to the life-negative or death wish. According to Freud, when Eros, or
the love wish, is suppressed on one end of the human emotional
spectrum, the violent Thanatos, or death wish, gains ascendancy on
the other end of that spectrum.
How else can you hope to turn young men in the military into killers
after no more than a few months of basic training? Sequester them so
that they do not see the opposite sex or even have access to a copy of
Playboy magazine; deny them their usual sexual outlet; tell them that
this sacrifice is for God and Country, and presto - after just a short
period of this kind of indoctrination you have turned young men in
their sexual prime from active lovers into active, gung-ho killers.
And to illustrate how wellthis military brainwashing works and how
absolutely effective it really can be, let me quote two slogans which
Marines freqently have on the back of civilianjackets which they wear
when off duty. Slogan #1: "Death before dishonor." Slogan #2:
"Those who kill for money are called mercenaries; those who killfor
pleasure are called sadists; those who do both are called United
States Marines."
Austin, Texas

Some years ago the allied forces in Europe were holding NATO
maneuvers near Denmark. A Danish pacifist organization was
outraged by having these war games quite literally in their own back
yard since Denmark has always been a freedom-loving and a peaceloving country and its people have wholeheartedly subscribed to the
life-affirmative principle of "Make love, not war."
The members of the pacifist group decided that the best way to
sabotage these war exercises was to get the young men's minds off
Thanatos, the death wish, and on to Eros, the love wish. Consequently, they took a huge supply of erotic magazines which were
completely legal in Denmark and distributed them to all the NATO
troops. So successful was this clever ploy that once the soldiers got
hold of the sex pictures, the entire NATO operation fell apart.
I was in Denmark shortly after their much-publicized legalization of
pornography, and I still recall vividlyan experience which I had in one
of the porno shops in Copenhagen. Inside the front cover of a porno
magazine there were four pictures: the upper left picture was a still
frame from the violent movie Bonnie and Clyde; the upper right
picture portrayed a man in kneeling position being shot by a gun held
to his head - a ritual execution; the lower left picture showed some
Vietnamese holding the severed heads of several Vietcong prisoners
whom they had captured; the bottom right picture showed a man and
woman making love. In a caption written in English for U.S.
distribution was the following paragraph:
"There is only one picture on this page showing normal
human behavior, yet it is the only picture which censoring
authorities in most of the so-called civilized countries of the
world would not allow in any of the media."
Clearly, something is right in the state of Denmark.
Another sexually emancipated culture is that of the Eskimos.
Anthropologists concur that Eskimos are one of the most sexually
free people of our planet. From Greenland to the Aleutian Islands,
Eskimos practice wife-swapping, sexual hospitality in the form of a
husband offering his wife as a sign of friendship and other types of
uninhibited sexual behavior. It is no mere accident that there is no
word for war in the Eskimo language. Contrast, if you will, this
sexually liberated milieu where the concept of war is incomprehensible and repulsive, with the rest of the sexually restrained
world on the brink of nuclear disaster, and you have a most graphic
and dramatic example of the Eros vs. Thanatos theory.

"Anthropologists concur that Eskimos are

one of the most sexually free people of the
planet .... It is no mere accident that there is no .word for war in the Eskimo language."
In my book, The X-Rated Bible, I enumerate many biblical
examples of sexual capital offenses; for in their obsessive desire to
direct all sexual activity toward reproduction, the Israelites exacted
the death penalty for fornication, for bestiality, for homosexuality, for
adultery, and even for sex during menstruation. Think of it - murder
as punishment was considered less heinous than committing a mere
sexual infraction - another clear-cut instance of Freud's Eros vs.
Thanatos principle in action.
On April 9, 1984, Time magazine proclaimed in its cover story that
the sexual revolution has met its demise now that we are well into the
1980s. Some argue whether there has been a true sexual revolution in
force or whether it has merely been sexual evolution in progress.
Probably no one would argue, however, that if a date had to be
chosen as to when a revolution began, it would be 1948. Why 1948?
Because that year marked the publication of Sexual Behavior in the
Human Male (popularly known as the Kinsey Report), and the world
has never since been quite the same.
A zoology professor turned sex researcher, Alfred Charles Kinsey,

August, 1984

Page 27

CONVENTION

'84

was able to bring to his work the objective approach of the true
scientist as well as the impartiality of an observer freed from the
strictures of religious orthodoxy. While initially the research was
heavily underwritten by the Rockefeller Foundation, after publication
of the female volume in 1953, under heavy pressure from religious
leaders, this support was withdrawn precipitously and many intended
research projects had to be abandoned.
Which of Kinsey's findings were particularly threatening to the
religious establishment and in fact shook it to its very foundations?
First of all, true believers wanted to perpetuate the myth that public
profession of morality and private behavior were really one and the
same phenomenon, but Kinsey's statistics were, to say the least,
shocking.
Before Kinsey, who would have thought that 50% of all men and
25% of all women have extramarital relations? His explanation was
simply that it is part of our mammalian heritage to desire sexual
relations with a variety of partners. It may also account for the
findings of a recent survey of heart specialists studying men who had
heart attacks during sexual intercourse. None of the men in the study
had a heart attack while having relations with their wives - all of the
heart attacks occurred while the men were having extramarital affairs
- further evidence that men in particular show a stronger basic
mammalian need for variety in their sex life. But religion has always
encouraged the romantic notion that people marry and live happily
ever after. As Los Angeles Times critic-at-large Charles Champlin has
repeatedly stated, rather than marrying and living happily ever after,
most couples are lucky to make it through the weekend. Yet, Christ's
alleged exhortation (that ifa man looks at a woman and lusts after her
he has already committed adultery in his heart) even made born-again
Christian Jimmy Carter admit that he had often committed adultery
in his heart, much to the chagrin of most of his born-again Christian
admirers. Carter confessed that he thought that Christ's teaching
about adultery was an impossible standard to live up to.
Before Kinsey, who would have guessed that In some rural areas
65% of farm boys have sex with animals? He comments that if city
boys were in as intimate contact with animals as farm boys are, the
incidence of sex with animals would be quite stable for the entire male
population because of more favorable conditions for such activity.
Before Kinsey, who would have suspected that one-third or more
of all males and one-fourth of all females are involved in homosexual
activity some time during their lives? He really outraged moralists by
explaining, "The homosexual has been a significant part of human
sexual activity ever since the dawn of history, primarily because it is
an expression of capacities that are basic in the human animal."
However, to this very day many of our states still have on their statute
books laws outlawing homosexual intercourse with penalties as
severe as life imprisonment. In California, as recently as 1973, a law
was being considered that would legalize all consensual sex acts
between adults. An elderly Pasadena solon who happened also to be a
devout fundamentalist arose to address the floor and proudly
proclaimed in the climax of his appeal to reject the proposed law:
"Our capital is Sacramento - not Sodom and Gomorrah!" Muchto
the dismay of this legislator and others of his ilk, California finally
passed the consensual sex law in 1975 and as of right now, both San
Francisco and Los Angeles, the modern equivalents of Sodom and
Gomorrah, are thriving without divine interference.
Before Kinsey, who would have dreamed that besides the "Godordained" missionary position, a variety of coital positions was
commonplace and that so-called perversions such as oral and anal
sex were also widespread? One of the most surprising revelations of
the studies was that sexual behavior varied significantly according to
socioeconomic and educational levels.
Before Kinsey, who would have estimated that 92%of all males and
62% of all females admit to masturbating? His research also helped
dispel the falsehood that masturbation was physically harmful. While
Kinsey referred to masturbation as self-gratification, it had previously
Page 28

August, 1984

been called self-abuse and was thought to lead to insanity ifpracticed

to excess, but of course there never was any standard by which to
judge what excess really was. It was also believed that masturbation
would cause blindness; in some quarters (boys in particular) it was
thought to be OK to do it to the point where glasses were needed, and
then to stop!
In a refreshingly candid book, Boys and Sex (1968), Dr. Wardell
Pomeroy, Kinsey's closest associate, suggests that boys practice
masturbation slowly rather than trying to see how fast they can
ejaculate, in order that they might become more effective lovers and
husbands later on. How dearly I wish I had had such a book to guide
me through my turbulent adolescent years!
As self-gratification came farther out of the closet during the sexual
revolution, Playboy magazine quipped in its Party Jokes column with
typical humor and irreverence: "Our Unabashed Dictionary defines
masturbation as an organ solo." Yes, things were definitely loosening
up with sex, thanks largely to Dr. Kinsey.
And there were other signs that attitudes were changing with a
proliferation of bumper stickers and lapel pins declaring that "Chaste
makes waste!" or "Use it before you lose it!" and other such sexually
positive epithets.
Another great benefit of the Kinsey studies was to indicate what a
tremendous range there was to human sexual experience, a concept
even the researchers themselves had great difficulty in grasping. The
magnitude of this range could be from 1 to 10,000, and nowhere did it
show up more impressively than in the statistics on frequency. Some
women, for example, never had an orgasm, and others experienced
50 to 75 orgasms in a 20-minute period.
Prior to Martin Luther, no one had ever given a specific recommendation on how frequently indulgence in sex was allowable for
married couples. The early church fathers had advised continence on
Thursday in remembrance of Christ's arrest; on Friday out of respect
for the crucifixion; on Saturday to honor the Virgin Mother; on
Sunday in regard for the resurrection; and on Monday out of
deference to souls who have departed this life.That left only Tuesday
and Wednesday for couples to satisfy what the church called their
"base instinct."
But Luther still viewed sex as a necessary evil, assuring his
followers that god "winks" at marital intercourse. He once described
marriage as "an emergency hospital for the illness of human drives,"
and when he was asked how often married partners might legitimately
copulate, he said that about twice a week would be permissible. Thus
we have the great reformer to thank for the much-too-long-held
notion that intercourse twice a week is "normal" for everyone. While
to some such a declaration by Luther might seem completely
harmless, the degree to which this normalcy factor has been
incorporated into our own sexual mores can be most strikingly
demonstrated by an actual legal case uncovered by Kinsey during his
background research for the female volume.
The usually reserved and undemonstrative researcher had to stifle
the tears when he came across a situation in which the Minnesota
Supreme Court in 1943 upheld the commitment as a sexual
psychopath of a 42-year old father of six who was mentally bright,
capable and a good worker, because of his uncontrollable craving for
sexual intercourse with his wife. And what did the court consider an
uncontrollable and psychopathic amount of sex in 1943? This
particular man had wanted sex with his wife three or four times a
week!
Although we no longer institutionalize people who want sex more
than twice a week, just how successful has the so-called sexual
revolution been in negating the antisexual conditioning to which we
have all been subjected? Not very. Consider this mind-boggling
statement from Masters and Johnson in their book Human Sexual
Inadequacy (1970): they estimate that 50% of all marriages suffer from
some form of sexual dysfunction.
Without doubt, then, the most frequent sexual dysfunction among
The American Atheist

CONVENTION

'84

women, the inability to achieve orgasm during intercourse, and the

most frequent sexual dysfunction among men, premature ejaculation, are deeply rooted in our puritanical programming. In the case of
women, many still have not overcome the feeling that it is really not
nice or ladylike to have a sexual climax; in the case of men, I theorize
that they ejaculate prematurely because, rather than prolonging the
ecstasy of sexual satisfaction, they are subconsciously trying to get it
over with as soon as possible.
Masters and Johnson state that: "the fact of religious orthodoxy
stillremains of major import ... in almost every form of human sexual
inadequacy. "

"Masters and Johnson state that, 'the fact of

religious orthodoxy still remains of major import ... in almost every form of human sexual
. d
,,,
ma equacy.
Now, what relevance or special significance does all of this sex
research and statistical enlightenment have for Atheists? The mere
acceptance of Atheism is sufficient to ensure sexual liberation, isn't it?
Unfortunately, it is not. Consider this sobering statement from A.S.
Neill,founder of the world-renowned Summerhill School in England:
"I have never had a pupil who did not bring to'Summerhill a
diseased attitude toward sexuality and bodily functions. The
children of modern parents who were told the truth about
where babies come from have much the same hidden attitude
toward sex that the children of religious fanatics have. To find a
new orientation to sex is the most difficult task of the parent
and teacher."
In a culture as supersaturated and permeated by religious influence
as ours is, Neill's observation indicates that young children have
already picked up this life-negative mind-set to a remarkable degree.
Since most people who arrive at Atheism do so relatively late in life,
the damage to their sexual psyche has already been done and it
requires heroic effort to undo it.
Just being Atheists, then, and holding the rationalist-humanist
Weltanschauung, or viewpoint, does not exempt us from the negative
feelings about sex and sexuality shared by the rest of society.
Consequently, we have to make a deliberate, consistent and continuous effort to liberate ourselves and to raise our own consciousness.
For proof of just how staggering a task it is, let us consider the
woefully neglected and under appreciated theories of one of Freud's
most gifted pupils, Wilhelm Reich. In his two masterpieces, The Mass
Psychology of Fascism and The Function of the Orgasm, Reich
insisted that the world is turned upside down sexually ifwe accept the
maxim that sexual pleasure is incidental to the reproductive urge; he
turned the world right-side up sexually by expounding the revolutionary theory that the reproductive urge is incidental to sexual
pleasure.
To prove his point, he elaborated his views by explaining how
virtually everyone has internalized the shame, guilt and anxiety about
toilet training, masturbation and sexual desire to the degree that the
bodily musculature has become so stiffened or "armored" - to use
Reich's own term - that at the moment of sexual climax, the
discharge and release of sexual energy which nature intended to
occur is largely blocked. Consequently, few individuals, including
Atheists, are able to experience complete sexual fulfillment and, as a
result, fall easy prey to manipulation, to political exploitation and
especially to drugs, as a method of seeking vicarious satisfaction.
Reich's own words about drugs were, "The drug experience is always
a substitute for the genital experience."
Atheists, therefore, must disabuse themselves of the false supposition that shedding sexual inhibitions is as easy as shedding one's
clothes. The October, 1965 Playboy magazine interview with
Austin, Texas

Madalyn Murray O'Hair began with the question: "Mrs. O'Hair, why
are you an Atheist?" Her reply was: "Because religion is a crutch and
only the crippled need crutches." Nevertheless, discarding the
crutches that cripple us with theism is one thing, and discarding the
crutches that cripple us with prudery is quite a different matter.
Atheists who are alcoholics or drug addicts must attempt to
understand the real reasons for their addiction and work on their
problems from a different perspective of gaining a new appreciation
for the ultimate natural high which evolution has bestowed on us sex.
Atheist women who suffer menstrual discomfort must analyze
whether their distress is primarily physical or possibly a psychosomatic reaction. In an article entitled "Women Learn to Sing the
Menstrual Blues" in the September, 1973 issue of Psychology Today,
author Karen E. Paige examines the problems women experience
during menstruation according to the profile of our three major
religions: Catholicism, Protestantism and Judaism.
She found that Jewish women who think that sex during menstruation is unenjoyable and embarrassing and who follow a variety of
social and hygienic rituals during their period are those most likely to
have severe menstrual problems, both physical and emotional.
Catholic women were more likely to consider menstrual distress as
an integral part of their traditional female role, and this meant that
those women who believe most strongly that a woman's place is in the
home and who have no personal career ambitions are the most likely
to have severe menstrual difficulties.
Protestants were more difficult to categorize since they represent
more heterogenous backgrounds, but in general they shared with
Jewish and Catholic women the tendency to suffer from menstrual
problems in direct ratio to their religiosity and to their view of
traditional femininity. What Protestant women didn't share with their
Jewish and Catholic sisters was the strong taboo against sexual
relations during menstruation.
In the case of Catholic women the church merely urges abstinence
during a woman's period, but among Orthodox Jews women are
supposed to abstain from sex during their entire period as well as
during seven fulldays thereafter. They must enter the mikvah, a ritual
purification bath, which certifies that they are "clean" again and able
to return to their regular duties and to engage in intercourse with their
husbands once more.
The author summarizes her excellent article by stating: "The
United States does not relegate menstruating women to special huts,
but we have our share of superstitions, and the implicit belief lingers
that the menstruating woman is unclean."
Where do Atheist women fit into this picture? Of course they
summarily reject the silly concept that menstruation is a curse from
God, but they have not necessarily escaped completely from the
stigma attached to their monthly period.

"... few individuals ... are able to experience

complete sexual fulfillment and as a result fall
easy prey to manipulation, to political exploitation and especially to drugs as a method of
seeking vicarious satisfaction."
Atheist men must learn to regard women not only as sexual equals,
but also as possessors of such far greater sexual capacity that their
own sexual potential seems quite limited by comparison. And they
must learn to do this without threat or envy, which is no mean feat.
Atheist mothers who nurse their babies but who may feel guilty
about being sexually aroused by the nursing experience must not
rationalize their anxiety and cop out by saying that they are going to
bottle-feed their infants because nursing is really too much of a
bother. Instead, they must learn that the let-down reflex which

August, 1984

Page 29

CONVENTION '84
triggers the release of milk stored in their breasts is remarkably
similar to the reflexes involved in female sexual arousal and orgasm,
for nature intended that the act of breast -feeding would be maximally
rewarding to mothers in order to assure the highest quality of
nutrition for their offspring.
Atheist parents must learn to accept the sexuality of their children
- admittedly a task which is much more easily said than done. When
puberty signals the onset of sexual maturity, it is unrealistic to ignore
the sexual needs and imperious urges felt by adolescents. It also helps
to recall that such famous lovers as Romeo and Juliet were only in
their mid-teens.
Atheist parents who discover that they have a gay son or daughter
must learn to accept their child's difference as just that - a difference
which is part of the human sexual spectrum. As parents, they never
need stop to ask themselves: "Where did we go wrong?" since any
variation provided by nature has to be right.
Atheists who feel that masturbation is juvenile, unnecessary or
unsatisfying must realize that those reasons are just as psychologically untenable as feeling that masturbation is harmful, sinful or
perverted. Once again, it is part of the human sexual spectrum nothing more and nothing less.
Older Atheists must learn to reject the stereotype that sexual
activity is only appropriate for the young. Sex researchers assert that
there are no physical reasons why senior citizenscannot enjoy a
healthy, vigorous sex life right up to the point where their biological
clock runs down and it is time for them to return to the embrace of
nature.
And finally, all Atheists must rejoice that in the important arena of
birth control and abortion, only freethinking leaders were able to
counteract the resistance and opposition of organized religion which
considered regulation of human fertility too indecent, too immoral,
and too obscene to be worthy of serious consideration. On the one
hand, religion has done a great deal to retard the progress of
humanity, but if it had done nothing more reprehensible than to
thwart the birth control and abortion movement, it would deserve the
most severe denunciation and condemnation; on the other hand,
Atheism has done a great deal in furthering the advancement of
science and rational living, but ifit had done nothing more than foster
the magnificent pioneering work of Margaret Sanger and her fight for
birth control, it would have made what ultimately may prove to be the
single most important contribution to the survival of our civilization.
In his last public address Robert Ingersoll said,
"There is but one hope. Ignorance, poverty and vice must
stop populating the world. This cannot be done by moral
suasion. This cannot be done by talk or example. This cannot
be done by force, physical or moral. To accomplish this there is
but one way. Science, the only possible savior of mankind,
must put it in the power of woman to decide for herself whether
she willor willnot become a mother."
We Atheists have a legacy and a heritage of which we can be justly
proud. And since our philosophy insists that this lifeis the only lifewe
can ever be assured of, let us revitalize the hedonistic view that the
unmitigated enjoyment of sex enhances the appreciation of our brief
span on earth.
W.C. Fields put it well:
"Sex isn't the best thing in the world, or the worst thing in the
world - but there's nothing else quite like it."
How true! For during the genital embrace with a loving partner we
truly become one with the cosmos and readily understand why Christ
said that there would be no sex in heaven since our heaven is here and
now. And while in the rest of the animal kingdom other animals eat
only when they are hungry, drink only when they are thirsty, and have
sex only during the mating season, we human animals can truly live it
up and eat when we are not hungry, drink when we are not thirsty,
and make love all year long. After all, that is our birthright!

Page 30

August, 1984

DIAL-AN-A THEIST
CHAPTERS OF AMERICAN A THEISTS
The telephone listings below are the various message services
where you may listen to short comments on state/church
separation issues and/or viewpoints originated by the Atheist
community.

DIAL-THE-ATHEIST
Tucson, Arizona
Orange, California
S. Francisco, California
Denver, Colorado
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
Tampa Bay, Florida
Atlanta~ Georgia
Chicago, Illinois
Central Illinois
Des Moines, Iowa
:
Lexington, Kentucky
New Orleans, Louisiana
Boston, Massachusetts
Detroit, Michigan
Reno, Nevada
;
'
Northern New Jersey
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Schenectady, New York
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Portland, Oregon
Houston, Texas
Dial-a~Gay-Atheist
Salt Lake City, Utah
Northern Virginia
Virginia Beach, Virginia
Toronto, Ontario, Canada

(512) 458-5731
(602) 623-3861
(714)
(415)
(303)
(305)
(813)
(404)
(312)
(217)
(515)
" (606)
(504)
(617)
(313)
(702)
(201)
(505)
(518)
(405)
(503)
(713)
(713)
(801)
(703)
(804)
(416)

974-7110
668-8085
692-9395
584-8923
577-7154
962-5052
772-8822
328-4465
266-6133
278-8333
897-9666
969-2682
721-6630
972-8203
777-0766
884-7360
346-1479
677-4141
771-6208
664-7678
527-9255
364-4939
280-4321
588-0118
277-4663

The American Atheist

THE A THEIST NEXT DOOR

Cecil Walton is a thirty-six year old physical therapist, who claims to spend his spare time "at Monty Python movies and reading
Chapman Cohen." He is from New Hampshire.

What is Atheism?
Basically, it is the rejection of the idea of a supernatural being. But
more than that, it is a non-acceptance of notions which are
unsupported by facts. If one is an Atheist, one doesn't "believe" in
such and such a thing; one investigates the facts and finds it is or it
isn't.

Why are you an Atheist?

I'm an Atheist because Atheism makes the most sense to me. That
and nothing more.
I actually was reared by a very religious family. I think that I first
called myself an Atheist because of an emotional response to the
various restrictions placed on me by my family's religion. But as Igrew
older, I began to try to find intellectual reasons 'for "alternative"
ethics. As I began to investigate various religions, I realized that I
could not really accept any as a lifestyle. None made any sense; none
had any proof. At this time, I became an Atheist on an intellectual
level. Atheism seems to me to be the only realistic way to view the
world. Everything else is in my opinion a fantasy unsupported by
facts.

What do you consider to be specifically Atheist values and

ethics?
That's not an easy question to answer in less than 100,000 words.
But I'll do my best.
First, I think that when you no longer accept the illusion of the
supernatural, you realize that there is no "life after death." One only
has one chance to live, to be a unique organism. Therefore, you
should endeavor to enjoy that life as much as possible as long as
possible.
Second, if there is no supernatural, you are obviously not going to
receive aid from a supernatural being. Neither Jehovah, nor Thor,
nor Zoroaster, nor the Easter Bunny is going to aid you in times of
trouble or send you gift packages. If you need help, you have to help
yourself or look to another human being. And if you make a mistake,
you can only blame yourself, not a god, and only try to correct it, not
expect a god to do so.
Lastly, I would say that an Atheist realizes that he is just another
animal. As such he has no "dominion" over other species, no special
license to killthem off. Andjust like any other animal, he can't foul his
nest.

What have reactions to your Atheism been? From family,

friends, co-workers?
When I actually tell someone that I am an Atheist he usually is quite
surprised. The shocked round-eyed expression is most often followed by a question that shows a complete misunderstanding of what
an Atheist is. Such questions range from "Oh, then you don't believe
in love?" to "Why would you want to worship the devil?" Though it is
irritating to be asked such things, I feel that this gives me a chance to
clear up mistaken notions about the nature of Atheism.
Austin, Texas

Has your weltanschauung caused you any personal or professional problems?

I was once engaged to a beautiful young woman who unfortunately
happened to be roman catholic. When the wedding plans came up, I
found that - despite the fact that she had previously displayed no
signs of advanced religiosity - she insisted that I "convert" to roman
catholicism. She also put down the law on the type of ceremony - it
was to be quite orthodox. As to be expected, I had objections. This
led to a full-scale discussion in which I argued that since I, as an
Atheist, respected her beliefs, she should respect my weltanschauung. At the drop of the word "Atheist" the engagement was
cancelled.
Fortunately, however, not everyone I have met has reacted in that
way. Most of my colleagues, ifthey do not agree with me, tolerate my
views. I have also found that most of the time, ifyou do a good job, you
could be a cannibal for all your employers and customers care.

Do you feel that the general situation for Atheists has grown
better or worse in recent years?
I would definitely say much better. When I was growing up, you
didn't even hear the word "Atheist." You couldn't find any
information on it anywhere. Now, I can find Atheism mentioned in the
newspaper - without the word "communism" next to it. I can walk
into my hometown library and find an Atheist magazine.

Do you feel that Atheism affects your day to day life? your
performance on the job or in personal relations?
I don't feel that Atheism makes a difference in an obvious way in my
life. Like any other single man my age, I eat name-brand food and
drink name-brand beverages. I go to work and try to socialize.
There's no scarlet "A" for Atheism on my chest.
On another level, however, I would say it makes me regard my life
as more precious than a theist would regard his.

If you have children, how will you deal with Atheism and
religion with them?
I willrear my children as Atheists. It took me considerable effort to
get rid of the ideas of sexism and theism with which I was reared. I
don't intend to weigh my children down with that intellectual garbage
too.
"The Atheist Next Door" is an attempt to supply
information regarding the contemporary
Atheist, his
feelings, problems, and perspectives written by the experts
in this field: average American Atheists. Each month the
life and opinions of an Atheist is spotlighted in this column
through the answers to our questionnaire.
Anyone interested in being "The Atheist Next Door"
should write to: American Atheist/P.O. Box 2117/ Austin,
TX 78768-2117 and ask for our questionnaire.

August, 1984

Page 31

POETRY

SUNDAY MORNING
They yell and sing Their money bring
And put in the pot;
They pray the GREAT IMPOSSIBLE
And reason they have not.
By waving arms
And wild alarms
The preacher will begin
To rant the tribulation
And rid the world of sin.
THOUGHTS OF AN IRISH ATHEIST
I watch awhile
And then I smile,
And turn the TV off;
I have a rendezvous with life It's called a game of golf.
William E. Hammons

I never met some Hebrew god

Or saw an angel fair.
But I have seen green Erin's sod
And I know she is there.
I understand the exile's heart
Who longs to see his home
The dream of Irish Washingtons
An Ireland free - their own.

FULL SERVICE

I know the treacherous Irishmen

In public office high
Who aid the bloody British dogs
While Irish heroes die.

Boat, bleached and lifeless,

Sun-bleached and dried,
Flung on these shores
By the restless tide,
A hulk that the
Rippling sand will cover,
A rest for the gull
Or the searching plover.
Broken and shattered,
Your life's duty done,
A hapless victim
Of wind and sun.

I don't know of this heaven place;

But it seems clear to me
A life can be well-spent on earth
To help make Ireland free.
John B. Denson

A WICKED AFFLICTION TO ALL OF MANKIND

If you believe in a god
You are truly an enemy of self and all.
It is not in itself that belief
Which makes you the enemy at all,
But rather with your stupid gods
You poison and strangle
The very concept of nature for all.
Thus - a gross harm to the delicate flow
A heavy blow to happiness and joy
A terrible stick in the spokes we know
To the forward motion of all
Quite a fall, not only for nature
But, a piety, an ugly hoax!
For all of mankind.
William Roger Sawyer
Page 32

August, 1984

Yet, in your ancient

Bones you still know
The throb of the sea,
The bluster and blow
Of savage waves
That once were your glory
In the days when you served
As a sea-going dory.
What for you now?
Sand incarceration?
Will a beach party fire
Be your cremation?
Let the warm flames leap.
Let young song arise.
In a final service
The old wreck dies.
Beth M. Applegate
The American Atheist

AMERICAN A THEIST RADIO SERIES / Madalyn Murray O'Hair

AGNOSTICISM
Program #79; originally

broadcast December 29, 1969

When the first installment of a regularly scheduled, 15-minute, weekly American Atheist radio series on
KTBC radio (a station in Austin, Texas owned by then-president Lyndon Baines Johnson) hit the airwaves
on June 3, 1968, the nation was shocked. The programs had to be submitted weeks in advance and were
heavily censored. The series was concluded on October 18, 1975 when no further funding was available.

here has always been a great deal of confusion in respect to the

word "agnostic" and perhaps in our time this confusion is greater
than ever.
As I go from place to place I am constantly confronted with persons
who call themselves "agnostics," and when I ask them to define what
they mean they generally do not come close to the meaning of the
term. When we go to the dictionary to see what the meaning is, we
find some variables.
Webster says that the word derives from the Greek agnostos,
which means unknown or unknowable and defines an agnostic as "of
or relating to the belief that the existence of any 'ultimate reality' (such
as god) is unknown and probably unknowable." The second
definition is "non-committal," or "undogmatic," and the synonym is
"Atheist." When one looks at the word Atheist, there the word
agnostic is separated in this wise:
ATHEIST - one who denies the existence of god and rejects
all religious faith and practice.
AGNOSTIC - one who withholds belief because he is unwilling
to accept the evidence of revelation and spiritual experience.
Other dictionaries indicate about the same, saying that an agnostic is
one who holds that the ultimate cause (god) and the essential nature
of things are unknown and unknowable and that human knowledge is
limited in experience.
I have been in the Atheist community about 10 years now. I have
been an Atheist for 37 years, but I did not know there was an Atheist
community for the first 27 years; and during that time I heard much by
word of mouth of the traditional invention of the word Atheist; and
about 7 years ago I wrote a booklet titled Why I Am An Atheist. In
that booklet I gave the story, as I knew it, from oral tradition of the
creation of the idea of Atheism. Let me read it to you.
I had said simply and "dogmatically" (if you will excuse the
expression) in this booklet that "there is no god," and then I went on
in this way:
"How can you say that, you ask? Wouldn't it be better if you
said you didn't know one way or the other? Why don't you
admit that you are an agnostic? Well, it's elementary why I do
not. Let me tell you in one word the difference between an
Atheist and an agnostic. The difference is guts. I lose more
agnostic friends by saying that! But let's go into detail again ...
about agnostics who are gutless Atheists.
"The term agnostic wa"scoined by Thomas Huxley in 1869.
He designed a word which would indicate the exact opposite of
gnosticism. Since the prefix 'a' in words of Greek derivation
ofttimes is a privative, that is, giving to the word a negative
sense, he coined the word 'agnostic' or agnosticism. He was
apparently studying gnosticism at the time.
"Gnosticism was an eclectic system of philosophy and
religion which flourished during the first six centuries of the
present era. It sought to mediate between christianity and
paganism, from which christianity was derived, and it taught
that knowledge more than philosophy or more than faith was a
means of salvation. According to this doctrine, all existences
Austin, Texas

both spiritual and material originated in the deity by successive

emanations or waves.
"And, here we are back again to the same questions which
opened this booklet (or talk): mind or matter, which came first
and which is most important to livingas we know it. The gnostic
solved it by saying that each came in waves. First came mind
and then came a wave of matter, and then a wave of mind and
then a wave of matter. These emanations or waves were called
'eons' and Jesus Christ was conceived to be only a higher 'eon'
than ordinary men.
"One simple doctrine was that 'emancipation' (whatever that
meant at that time to those poor serfs and peasants in Europe)
came from knowledge or' gnosis.' The possession of this gnosis
saved the initiates from the dreadful clutch of matter. The
'gnosis,' or knowledge, which they sought was so obscure that
Huxley apparently was scoffing at it, and in scoffing at them he
was scoffing at the type of knowledge which was present in his
own day in England, and in the scientific world, and which is
present now.
"If you want just a small sample of what 'knowledge' was to
the 'gnostics,' here is a little gem from their book of the savior;
and it is a central idea therein:
" 'And they that are worthy of the mysteries which lie
in the ineffable are prior to the first mystery and also prior
to the three statements which follow after them that all is
myself, I am the treasure of all men.' "
"If you can decipher that, send in three wrappers from any' kind
of bubble gum and win a prize. So, technically, agnostics are
those persons who do not believe in this kind of knowledge and
who feel that it is relative and uncertain. They know that
salvation willnot come in this way either - no matter what we
mean by 'salvation' today.
"Huxley also referred to the bible. acts 17:23, where it is
related that Paul visited Athens, Greece and admonished the
people for a statue he found there. He said, 'as I passed by and
beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, "to
the unknown god." , Huxley believed, apparently, that god was
unknowable in 1869 just as in the time of Paul. So, Huxley
coined a word which meant that we could not find god through
knowledge such as this, for god was unknowable in any event.
"Popularly, the word has been corrupted, probably deliberately so, as the words Atheist and Materialist have been
corrupted and by the same persons, the very powerful
religionists. Popularly, the word agnostic is felt to mean that the
nature of god cannot be known - but that there is a god lurking
somewhere in the background. Therefore the agnostic is
accepted in the community and he is accepted in the church.
Agnosticism is very closely related to the religious doctrine that
the ways of god are unfathomable, that human reason is fallible,
and that man requires a different, nonscientific path to the
truth. Agnostic philosophers, as distinguished from the man on
the street agnostics, are always allies of the church. The reason

August, 1984

Page 33

is that agnosticism, which puts forward the false notion that the
world is unknowable, undermines science and reinforces
theology. It inclines man to faith, inducing him to trust religious
doctrines.
"The test is always the same: Does the church accept the
existence of the creed? If it does, then the creed is not one
which is in opposition to religion. The church does not
anathematize the agnostic, he is an ally of the church."
Since I wrote that booklet, so long (it seems to me) ago, I have come
upon some more specific information in respect to Huxley and what
he said and did in relation to this intellectual child of his.
I now know that Mr. R.H. Hutton, a personal friend of Huxley,
avowed that Huxley formed the idea from Paul's idea of the
"unknown god."
Huxley himself wrote:
"Most of my colleagues were ists of one sort or another; and
however kind and friendly they might be, I, the man without a
rag of a label to cover himself with, could not fail to have some
of the uneasy feelings which must have beset the historical fox
when, after leaving the trap in which his tail remained, he
represented himself to his normally elongated companions."
It is rather shocking to realize that Huxley desired to have a tail, or as
we say, a-handle, or a name; he wanted to classify himself. He goes
further:
"When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask
myself whether I was an Atheist, a theist, or a pantheist, a
Materialist, or an idealist, a christian, or a freethinker, I found
that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the
answer; until at last I came to the conclusion that I had neither
art nor part with any of these denominations except the last.
The one thing in which most of these good people were agreed
was the one thing in which I differed from them. They were
quite sure they had attained a certain 'gnosis' - had, more or
less successfully, solved the problem of existence."
... and he was against such "gnosis," or knowledge, and hence called
himself an a-gnostic. We consider that agnosticism as defined and
used by Thomas Huxley and the general community is "illegitimate
agnosticism," for there is a very legitimate agnosticism which is a very
old form of thought. But before we get into that, let me touch here on
some of Huxley's ideas and popular agnosticism.

"Huxley was saying that god was unknowable. . . . We can only think in terms of the
knowable for we cannot even think in an
'unknowable' way, so that term is a nonsense
word."

Atheist receives the kicks so that the agnostic can receive the
respectability. The more logical thinker pays for the comfort enjoyed
by the less logical one, and the more timid one.
In propounding on agnosticism Huxley coined a general rule and I
quote him:
"Positively the principle may be expressed: in matters of the
intellect, follow your reason so far as it can carry you without
regard to other considerations. And negatively, in matters of
the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain that
are not demonstrated or demonstrable."
This is all well and good - but why call it agnosticism? It can exist on
every level of intellectual thought irrespective of the god issue, and it
can be a criteria for politics, social mores, or anything of that nature.
Agnostics have no difficulty about the scores or hundreds of
particular gods in the world which they can deny, from the ancient
god Ra of the Egyptians to those of Latin America of antiquity. They
blithely deny all of the gods of savage human history which come
before us in battalions, gods of all sorts of qualities, of all sizes, of all
colours, of all backgrounds. There is no hesitation at denying the
existence of each and everyone of these particular gods, but when it
comes to the god concept - the generalization, "god" - the agnostic
says, "Well, I think I willsit on the fence on this one - and depending
on later events jumps the way it willmost benefit me." And hence we
term him gutless.
The word Atheism is a thoroughly honest, unambiguous term. It
means that one does not believe in the generalization or concept of
"god," and it means neither more nor less.
We reaffirm what I have said here before. Anyone who has absolute
proof there is a god is quite insane. Anyone who has absolute proof
there is no god is equally insane. The Atheist functions as ifthe entire
matter is irrelevant to what he is doing in life- simply because it is not
relevant; and the fact that it is irrelevant is evidence that there is no
god, for if there were a god, as defined by the religionists, then the
matter would be relevant.
The agnostic cannot sit on his fence his entire life, and say,
effectively, that god might indeed be relevant as well as not. He must
sooner or later make a commitment and run either with the hare or
the hounds. Either he believes there is a god, or he does not. He
cannot under the color of suspending judgment, under the cry of not
being able to know the answer, commit himself to both sides.
Don't be a gutless agnostic. Come out in the open. It's all right now.
This is 1969, and you don't need to live in fear anymore. ~

.~..~., 11~L -_..

,.

",..

...:-~..2-

Huxley was saying that god was unknowable. Yet, he used the
reference of christian Paul who was speaking of an "unknown god"
and these two things are quite different. I am in a sense unknown to
many people, but I am not unknowable. We can only think in terms of
the knowable for we cannot even think in an "unknowable" way, so
that term is a nonsense word.
Second, the term "belief in god," has nothing to do with the
"problem of existence." The problem of existence is a philosophic
one, and I plan to discuss that in one separate program later. Atheism
makes no pretence whatsoever of solving the problem of existence. It
is not concerned with problems of cosmical theories. Atheism is
concerned only with the validity of the belief in god.
Huxley invented popular agnosticism as a refuge from the label of
Atheist - for a man by the name of Bradlaugh was making that term
famous, or infamous, as you prefer, and he was suffering tremendous
reprisals for it. Huxley needed a "respectable label."
But, the agnostic can purchase peace and retain status only so far
and so long as the Atheist is there in the front ranks to bear the brunt
of religious animosity. The agnostic is always sheltered behind the
Atheist whether he likes it or not, and whether he knows it or not. The
Page 34

August, 1984

HEAR YE.

"

HEAR VEl

Sanity Is In Sightl
Let it be known to one and all
that subscriptions are herewith
solicited throughout the land
FOR

THE MATCHI
The APEX of

ATHEISTIC

A NARCHISM

Available at the astonishingly

low price of only $6.00 per year.

BOX 3488
TUCSON, AI. 85722

The American Atheist

END OF THE TUNNEL / Michael Bettencourt

THOSE THAT ARE

STILL AMONG US
I

sit me, or are the TV commercials more stupid, crass, and insulting
than usual? The only ones that interest me (I should say
"interested," since the company no longer runs them.) are the
vignettes by Anacin of working people - a welder, coal miner,
waitress, school teacher, truck driver - who talk about how they
need to get rid of their headaches to do their jobs well. (I'll talk more
about these commercials in a minute.) But what does it mean when
we have beamed at us quasi-religious experiences with cereal,
deodorant commercials where even athletes don't sweat, and the
creeping possibility that you might be a computer illiterate, or even
raising a brood of them.
We can round up the usual suspects for answers. Some people will
declare that the commercials are simply marketing gimmicks and
have no meta purpose beyond getting people to buy products. Others
will snicker in superior tones about how the commercials reflect
vulgar American culture, how we're all acquisitive, fearful, unsecured
atoms leeching onto material objects in lieu of spiritual or existential
fulfillment. A third group will react against the commercials' want of
aesthetic quality, feeling offended that the commercials lack the
cultural panache of, say, the muted company announcements on
PBS. Geographically, the first group can be found in New York City,
the second in the Back Bay in Boston, and the third in Newport,
Rhode Island.
All their answers, to the same degree, miss the point. The first
group is purely wrong, as Vance Packard pointed out 25 years ago in
The Hidden Persuaders. Commercials are mini-myths, the writer's
and director's distillation of what he or she sees as the overriding
concerns of the society at large. Their effectiveness lies in how well
they can exploit those small but corrosive fears we have about our
fullness as human beings. The second group feeds off this exploitation
in a particular way. American culture has traditions of communal
living, radical resistance, and charitable giving, in addition to the
rapacious history of capitalism; but these traditions have values that
must be denied by these often young, often well-schooled, often
spoiled beneficiaries of the nation's wealth. This group needs to
believe that the commercials' America is the America so that they can
feel above and therefore not responsible for America. They need to
deny so much of what America is so that they can justify their
avarice - by the grander term of entrepreneurism - and buttress
inflated claims of merit and entitlement. They need a bad America to
make themselves look good. This is where they overlap with the third
group, who see the crassness as a personal affront, having been
taught to reduce "the world" to whatever happens to fall within their
cataracted and geriatric vision.
Something should be becoming obvious. These three groups are all
strung on one common thread: The world they describe, and as well
as the world they inhabit, is a specialized one. There is no hunger in it,
no disgruntled doctors, no snooping social workers, no leaky
plumbing, no lead paint, no police harassment. It is specialized
because, as small as it is, it dominates all perception of reality,
determines all limits to discussion, directs all production of expenditure and wealth. "The world," the middle-class bourgeois world,
like the sun, crowds out all other light. What the commercials are
beaming at us are messages to keep the faith, fight off the barbarians,
indulge all whims, and believe that everyone wants to be like us. It is a
call to maintain the fortress of class blindness and prejudice.
Really? Isn't this claim, well, a little radical, a little 60s-ish? Think
about it. Yes, we have oriental people on commercials, black people,
maybe jews - and this is supposed to say to the viewer that because
Austin, Texas

blacks can now make fools of themselves just like whites, equality has
finally been achieved, so don't worry, we are all brotherly in this
country. Lean Cuisine and Le Menu tell us that food isn't a problem.
Bowl cleaners liberate us from guilt, women as vice-presidents can be
as surly as men, and the only real problem is choosing the right hair
coloring. Things are getting along just fine.
But look at how and what is not included in the well-feeling
panorama. No poor people, no working-class people, no homosexuals, nobody that might offend middle-class sensibilities. That's
why I applauded the Anacin commercials when they first came out.
Not only because they were well-made and elegantly simple, but
because they depicted real working people on TV. Yes, the people
were actors, the commercials were somewhat sentimental (John
Steinbeck doing TV hack work), but how many times, outside of a
Rolaids commercial, have you been forced to see and hear simple
people out of a Studs Terkel book? But now even Anacin has fallen
prey to the marketing strategy of facts and figures. Recently they have
inserted a jangling scientific report in the middle of the actor's
monologue and it ruins the whole quiet integrity of the performance,
as if they couldn't trust a viewer to pay attention for 30 seconds
without some bells and whistles. (And now the people in the
commercials are edging socially upward, med students instead of
welders.) Yet, for a moment, the television opened a crack in the
myths, and another world - reality - pooped through.
That world, for many, is a frightening one. Statistics do not even
come close to measuring it. A simple fact that poverty increased by
15% under Reagan (along with its attendant hunger, disease, and
humiliation), and that Reagan's designate for the highest law officialin
the land can blithely say that there aren't hungry people in this
country, should make us allpause in disgust and worry. That it usually
doesn't is partly a measure of the commercial world's strength on our
imaginations: What we don't see we cannot know about; what we
don't see does not exist. It is also partly due to an unvoiced belief that
somehow they belong down there, they deserve their poverty,
because if they had the right (read: middle-class) attitudes (read:
opportunities, luck and contacts), they would work themselves up
and be like us. This is "blaming the victim," as William Ryan called it in
a book by the same title written in 1971.
That there are poor and hungry in the U.S. is bad enough, but we
compound the social and moral dishonor if we believe even for a
second that people actively want the degradation and marginal
survival that a life of poverty is all about. Some may say that even
though we've thrown so many dollars at the problems, they still exist;
it must therefore be the fault of the people themselves. Ryan, in his
book, again and again shows that the money did not go to the people
but into the pockets of bureaucrats who worked hard to keep the
poor dependent and powerless to change their lives. A world of pain
and starvation, just underneath the commercials' veneer, just outside
the fake walnut cabinet of the TV set, walks silently and angrily
through the streets of the city. It is a world to which we willhave to pay
attention either by choice, and thus redeem our ethical selves, or by
force of circumstance, when the comfortable life is bought at a price
too dear for those who do not have. ~
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mr. Bettencourt, a Harvard graduate and teacher at a private
college preparatory school, joined the writing staff of
American Atheist in October, 1983.

August, 1984

Page 35

HISTORICAL NOTES

100 YEARS AGO ...

On August 27th, Abner Kneeland, an
Atheist writer, publisher, lecturer and editor, died. The founder of the Boston Investigator, the oldest rationalist periodical of
the United States, had once, in 1833, been
sent to prison for a profession of Atheism,
For more information on this extraordinary
man, please see February and March '81
issues of the American Atheist.

On another front, the August 16th, 1884

issue of The Truth Seeker, which had been
founded by D.M. Bennett, contained the
followingeditorial:
"... Leaving aside all considerations of
good or ill,there are many reasons why the
Bible (sic) should be excluded from the
schools. In the first place, our government is
not religious. The intention of the Revolutionary fathers was to separate church and
state. That they are separated when the
taxpayers are compelled to pay for the
reading of a religious publication in the
public schools is a preposterous claim. The
school is a creature of the law, carried on for
secular education only, and its use to teach
a sectarian religion is a plain perversion of its
purposes. . . . In most states compulsory
education bills are in force. A child is bound
to go to school, and is of course bound to
read the Bible (sic). How can anyone
contend that in such cases our guaranty of
religious liberty is not violated?
"In a suit to restrain the teachers from
reading the Bible (sic) in the common
schools, brought by F.W. Moore, of Bloomfield,Iowa, the trustees in their own defense
used this argument of "if no good, no harm,"
and quoted the opinions of several eminent
gentlemen upon the subject. They also
'considered the Bible (sic) merely as to its
literary merits.' In his brief answer, Mr.
Moore, the appellant, used the following
sharp language: 'We started out in this case
with the proposition that the public school is
not the place in which to teach any kind of
religion, and we propose to stick to that
text. ...
" 'Whether the Bible (sic), 'considered
merely as to its literary merits,' is a great and
good book, is a question of taste ....
" 'Suppose these teachers should introduce into the school, as paper-weights, on
the children's desks, a lot of Smith and

Page 36

Wesson No. 38 caliber revolvers, loaded. If

we should attempt to enjoin their use in that
manner they would probably urge in their
defense that 'considered merely as to their
artistic and mechanical merit they are unsurpassed; that as a source of esthetic
delight, no other mechanism could for a
moment compare with them; that they were
not there to shoot anybody, but simply as
paper-weights - very necessary things.' No
court for a moment would consider such a
defense. This same reasoning apples to the
'sacred songs' of which we complain.
"'Now, this Bible (sic) is a religious book;
it is so admitted on all hands; it is loaded with
doctrins (sic) about gods and devils, and is
liable to go off at any time. We complain of
the matter of the book; appellees praise the
manner of the book. .. .' "

The August 21st, 1884 issue of The Index

contains the following article by Elizabeth
Cady Stanton. Excerpts follow:
"The woman suffrage movement in America has arrived at the point where it was
supposed that success would be assured. At
one time, only the most liberal men in
politics and religion were favorable: the
press, the church, the bar, the bench, the
world of fashion, were all against us. Now,
our leading journals generally treat the question with respect. Popular reviews and magazines entertain it quite hospitably in their
pages. Judges and lawyers have come to
discuss our political demand as one of
constitutional law, and the clergy are giving
us new interpretations of scripture in harmony with the spirit of the age. And now,
just as all these classes are advancing in one
direction, lo! our Liberals come to a dead
stand. They say they are in favor of woman
suffrage per se, but they are afraid of the
practical working of the principle. They say
women are naturally so conservative, so
entirely under the control of their priests
and bishops, that ifthe right of suffrage were
conceded they would use their political
power to destroy the secular nature of our
government. This objection to woman's
enfranchisement is made alike in America,
England, and France.

August, 1984

", . . I have often talked with husbands

who were liberal in their religious ideas, who
would stop the conversation the moment
they heard their wives coming, by saying: 'I
do not discuss these questions before Mary.
She is happy in her religion, and I do not
know but a religion of authority and fear is
good for women and children, it makes
them more patient of control; and the same
might be said of the laboring masses. We
should never be able to hold them in subjection as long as we have, had they not
been taught the divine authority of the
upper classes.'
"I think much of this fear I hear expressed
among Liberals as to the danger of destroying the secular nature of our government by
extending the suffrage to women has its
roots in man's love of authority ....
"The primal work today in every country
to secure the progress of the race is the
freedom and education of its women. Seeing
that her indirect influence is generally acknowledged to be all-powerful for good or
for evil, there is only one road to safety; and
that is to accord to woman all the advantages and opportunities for higher development, and thus enlarge her sympathies, clear her vision, and strengthen her
judgment, that the race may be lifted up a
few degrees ... ."

25 YEARS AGO ...

The August, 1959 Liberal noted that:
"Roy R. Torcaso of Wheaton, Maryland,
a suburb of Washington, D.C., was refused
a commission as notary public last month
because he refused to declare his belief in
the existence of god. He has filed suit to
invalidate the law under which such a
declaration was required .... it is too bad he
has to go to court to enforce his rights,
which decent public officials ought to grant
without being forced to do so."
The August 14th, 1959 edition of The
Freethinker, an English publication, reported that:
"Mr. Mark Lillingston of Magdalene College, Cambridge, devoted two weeks of his
Summer vacation to door-to-door canvassing in Basildon New Town, Essex ....
"Mr. Lillingston visited 735 houses and, of
the people interviewed, about 500 were
believers in god, about 160 were nonbelievers, and 75 were doubtful. .. .'

The American Atheist

REPORT FROM INDIA / Margaret Bhatty

---:=

WOMEN AND
THE LAW OF KARMA

ince I was considering doing an article on the hindu custom of

suttee whereby a widow was burnt alive on the funeral pyre of her
husband, I was particularly interested in Bergman's article "The
influence of the religious belief in an afterlife on homicide." (American
Atheist, January, 1984). I doubt if there is any other society on earth
where other-world beliefs so drastically affect the quality of life as in
India. I refer particularly to the hindu law of karma, a belief so
pervasive that many non-hindus also subscribe to it.
Simply stated, this vedic belief is based on the immortality of the
soul and its transmigration after death. It teaches that humans are
reborn, some as humans, others as birds, beasts or reptiles,
depending on their good or bad actions in previous existences. The
manu samhita, an ancient authoritative text on hindu law, even lists
the kind of sins which could decide one's future form. For stealing
. grain one might be born a rat. For stealing cloth, a partridge. But most
hindus prefer to believe that human souls are reborn hindus with their
entire status and material prosperity decided by the merit accumulated in former lives.
Of the law of karma, Jadunath Sinha said: "Apart from its
ontological difficulties, which are numerous, the law of karma
degenerates into fatalism in the uneducated and unreflective person.
Thus it comes to be misinterpreted as the negation of human
freedom. It is confused with predestination. It undermines human
initiative and incentive to action. It confuses morality with passive
surrender to circumstances. It confounds religion with absolute
submission and resignation to overmastering fate. This is the
preservation of the law of karma as adumbrated in Indian thought.
Originally it meant nothing more than the law of moral causation."
Indian Atheists are outspoken in their condemnation of the law of
karma. Premnath Bazaz in Secular Morality describes it as an
"enervating theory" which has been subtly used by higher castes to
hold in abject misery millions of lower castes, untouchables and
women. They are persuaded that spiritual salvation lies in submitting
without protest. This sanctioned defeatism accounts for their lifenegating pessimism.
The belief in karma is undoubtedly responsible for our backwardness, fatalism, superstition, and seeming inability to pull ourselves out
of a moral morass. How can one's present condition be remedied if
the solution is beyond reach in the unverifiable past? The best one can
do is bear one's lot with patience and expect to enjoy the fruits of that
patience in the next life.
Before proceeding, it might be worthwhile to look at some of the
hindu beliefs in an afterlife. If utterly virtuous, the soul is rewarded
with moksha, or salvation. Its chain of existences finally broken, it
returns to merge with the oversoul. If still found deficient in merit, it
might return to human or animal form. Another belief claims the soul
ascends into heaven or goes down to hell (a place even more vividly
detailed than the christian one). Finally, a soul may be condemned to
return, but only as a ghost. But of all belief, the most common is that
souls return in the form of humans.
In direct conflict with this popular belief is the theory that dead
ancestors go to dwell in a region akin to Limbo or Hades. And to
achieve that, families must perform compulsory rites of passage, with
the provision of ritual food for sustenance made in offerings of gram
Austin, Texas

or flour balls with water. Shortly after death a feast is held and families
often go into debt to ensure that every detail of ceremony is carried
out. Only male descendants can participate in these rituals, which is
why it is obligatory for a hindu householder to have a son, otherwise
oblations to the manes willlapse. That this idea of apitri-Ioka (world
of manes) cancels out the belief in transmigration doesn't appear to
bother anyone. I recall when our hindu landlord in Bombay died
suddenly; the family went to considerable expense and trouble
feeding guests, providing meals to a brahmin and even feeding the
local milkman's cow. His daughter explained to me that even though
he might have died a good man worthy of salvation, one couldn't be
sure how his karmic record stood. So they must carry out all the
rituals to make sure he didn't return as a ghost and haunt them.
The law of karma not only justifies all suffering and injustice, it
absolves people from feeling too much pity for the miseries of the less
fortunate. Many thoughtful people are convinced it lies at the root of
Indian callousness. Beliefs in an afterlife have also shaped many moral
and social concepts. Nirad C. Chaudhuri in Hinduism writes of how
child marriage was justified in the 19th century by the belief that one's
ancestors reside in pitri-Ioka. "It was held that unless a girl was
married before her first menstruation, the menstrual blood would go
into the mouths of the departed ancestors."

"The law of karma not only justifies all

suffering and injustice, it absolves people from
feeling too much pity for the miseries of the
less fortunate. Many thoughtful people are
convinced it lies at the root of Indian callousness."
Hindus constitute 85%of our population and many of their customs'
and traditions have found their way into other communities. Thus the
family system which prevails is patriarchal and patrilineal. Sons are
highly regarded, daughters are a liability, destined to drain away a
man's hard-earned money in dowry. According to the law of karma,
marriage becomes a spiritual bond transcending all material considerations. A wife is socially conditioned to accept the unquestioned
authority of her husband, regard him as a god, and serve as the
guardian of his honour in the community. Ideally, she must be utterly
loyal and devoted, subservient to her in-laws, steadfast even in
adversity, always putting herself last in matters of material comfort.
This stereotype is very popular in Indian films. Sexual inequality is
institutionalized, and among the orthodox any woman who thinks in
terms of autonomy is seen as wayward and possibly unchaste. If
divorced, separated or widowed, she suffers social stigma, and is
unwelcome even in her parent's home.
Not surprisingly among the cases of suicide by women, married
ones outnumber the unmarried by ten to one. Domestic violence
against women appears to be linked with a tradition of homicide.
Almost daily our papers report deaths by burning of daughters-in-law
in hindu households where demands for more dowry were not met by
their parents. In 1980 about 300 married women committed suicide

August, 1984

Page 37

because of maltreatment and quarrels over dowry. But more

ominously 400 other cases reported to the police were ascribed to
stove "accidents."
Since the marriage bond is supposed to transcend the present
existence, it continues forever - for the woman. A man losing his
wife wastes no time getting himself another.
The custom of child marriages continues in rural areas, despite the
law. Special fairs are held where babes in arms are united in wedlock,
though they will not live together until they attain puberty. In a
country were plague and pestilence often swept through the
population in former times, hundreds of little girls were widowed. But
remarriage was out of the question. Their bangles were broken, their
hair shaved off and their food reduced to one meal a day. They were
regarded as inauspicious, denied access to the domestic hearth, and
forced to pass their lives in self-denial, joylessness and rigorous piety.
Thereby they added great merit to their husband's karmic balance
sheet and ensured that their fidelity kept the marriage bond unbroken
into subsequent existences. This was the reason why 19th century
reformers met with such strong resistance when they tried to
encourage the remarriage of child widows. Even today among certain
classes the idea of widow remarriage is regarded with strong
opprobrium.
The idea of the utterly faithful wife is exemplified in religious myths.
The most popular is the legend of Shiva and his consort Sati (spelt
thus to make a distinction between her and the practice of widowburning, known in the west as suttee). The great goddess, Mahadevi,
reflects Shiva's female aspect ranging from the geritlest to the most
ferocious in Sati, Parvati, Durga, and finally Kali. Sati was utterly
faithful to her lord and master, Shiva. When her father held a great
sacrifice to which he failed to invite Shiva, she was so mortified by the
dishonour done to him that she threw herself into the sacrificial fire
and thus died. As the undisputed ideal of hindu womanhood, a similar
rite was carried out for centuries in her name through the practice of
suttee.
The custom probably flourished in earliest times, though the first
recorded case was in a.d. 510. It later became well-entrenched,
particularly among the kshatrya, or warrior castes, where mortality
rates among males were higher because of endless intertribal conflict.
In Rajasthan, famous for its military tradition since it bore the brunt of
all invasions of the peninsula from the north, there was another
variation of this morbid rite known asjauhar. When the Rajputs saw
that a battle was indeed lost, they chose death to dishonour. Donning
saffron robes, they emerged on the battlefield to die, sword in hand.
Meanwhile, in the fortress, their womenfolk prepared an immense
pyre and committed collective suicide by jumping into the flames
dressed in bridal finery.
The practice of suttee, however, was more widespread in the rest
of the country. Hindu law codes upheld the custom as highly laudable
and worthy of merit. It was a matter of prestige when a prince died to
have his wives, concubines and female slaves burnt alive with his
body. In the independent Sikh kingdom of the 18th century, one such
prince had three hundred immolated with him.
A famous brahmin historian of the 12th century, Kalhana,
describes with obvious approval cases of suttee in Kashmir. But a
more modern historian noted that in Calcutta and its neiqhborhoodin
three years there were 253, 289, and 441 cases. And this was in 1815,
1816 and 1817 - when the British had already begun to establish
themselves in India.
We willnever know how many of these cases were voluntary. But
girls were so strongly conditioned in placing family honour above all
else, and so convinced that the act was religiously sanctioned that
many probably went willingly.
The abolition of suttee was brought about by a 19th century hindu
reformer from Bengal, Raja Rammohan Roy (1774-1833). His
repugnance of this primitive and cruel rite dated to the time when as
an impressionable boy he saw his dead brother's young widow
dragged to the funeral pyre against her will. Her anguish and agony
remained with him, and he resolved to fight the kind of religious
orthodoxy which sanctioned such inhumanity. He later extended his
Page 38

August, 1984

reformer's zeal to attack idol worship, polygamy, the caste system,

and the denial of remarriage to hindu widows.
It was largely through his efforts that the British government made
suttee a crime by an act of Parliament in 1829. Anyone assisting a
widow in burning herself on her husband's pyre was held guilty of
culpable homicide. Anyone using violence to force her to the act was
sentenced to death. The act not only prohibited immolation, but also
the burial of widows with their dead husbands - a custom prevalent
in some parts of Bengal.
The law was vigorously resisted by orthodox hindus who
denounced it as blatant interference of their religion by the British. In
1830 they presented a petition to the Privy Council in England, but
Roy travelled to London to present a counter-petition to the British
Parliament.
Today suttee is no longer practiced, but the superstitious hold of
the rite still continues. One sometimes reads a news story of a case
occurring in some remote and backward rural area. Interestingly, all
have certain similar features: One, the police always arrest and
charge members of the victim's own family, village elders or priests;
Two, none of the crowd of witnesses to the ghastly incident makes
any effort to rescue the hapless victim. Instead, all are stirred into a
religious frenzy and raise cries of "Sati Mata ki jail" (Praise to Mother
Sati!); Three, the site of the immolation immediately becomes a shrine
where devotees flock to pray for favours and make offerings. And
finally, it is found that the ones who stand to gain most are the ones
who urged or forced the widow to burn herself. There is much money
for them in the commercialization of this personal tragedy.
I have before me an account of a suttee which took place close by
here in the neighboring state of Madhya Pradesh two years ago.
Sandel village with its 970 inhabitants is one of the most backward in
the state. Here lived SO-yearold Duvasi Bai, whose husband died after
twenty years as a consumptive. When the body was taken away by
the men for cremation, Duvasi Bai suddenly appeared at the site,
dressed in bridal finery. She quietly circled the pyre with her head
bowed and then climbed on it to cradle her husband's head in her lap.
The men immediately raised the cry of "Sati Mata ki jail" and watched
her burn. They later told the police that nobody forced her to it.
The news of the immolation spread to other villages and people
came flocking to offer flowers, garlands and coconuts on the spot.
The police arrested the woman's four brothers who protested that
they had in fact tried to dissuade her.
None of the crowd displayed any remorse. In fact, some went about
with a loudspeaker lauding the feat. The villagers themselves were full
of admiration. "She has brought honour to our village," they said.
"Why should we not appreciate her action?"
Her old mother was extremely proud of her. "Why have they put
my sons in jail?" she demanded. "Who can prevent the will of Sati
Mata?"
Duvasi Bai's daughter in her turn provided a clue to the kind of
benighted thinking which is behind such ghastly religious belief. She
was also very proud of her mother, she declared. She said her mother
had constantly instructed her never to forget that for a married
woman there is no other god but her husband and a faithful wife must
be prepared to live and die for him. ~

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

In 1978 your editors, assisted by Joseph Edamaruku,
editor of an Indian Atheist publication, combed India
seeking writers who would consistently offer an interpretation
of Indian religious events. Margaret Bhatty, in Nagpur,
a well-known feminist journalist, agreed that she
would attempt to do so in the future. She joined the staff
of the American Atheist in January, 1983.

The American Atheist

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Editor,
To add to your article on May Day, Kurt
Sach's book, World History of the Dance
(Norton pub.) has an interesting discussion
of the maypole and morris dances, both
identified as fertility dances.
He says the morris dance was changed by
the church during the Middle Ages to a
depiction of battle between Moors and
christians and incorporated into religious
ceremonies in Spain. The original elements
were fertility and magic symbols - the
blacking of the face representing underground or earthly elements. Sachs found a
similar Balkan dance and says "The fool, the
phallus, the whip, the fertility demon in the
shape of a horse, the leaps, the bells, the
feminine disguise, the sword game - these
are well known defense and fertility motifs.
One form of the morris dance in England is a
bean-planting dance.
The maypole dance is also similar to
worldwide circular fertility dances around
an image or plant representation. The custom of decorating the image and dancers
with flowers and vines is also universal.
Sachs says the primitive peoples identified
sowing and copulating as one. The circular
form was given a "spiritual significance." To
encircle an object is to take it into possession, to incorporate it, to chain it, or to
banish it," and represented a magic ritual to
acquire power in many societies.
Emily Stevenson
Georgia

Editor,
The year 2001 seems to be an ideal time to
institute a new dating method. People like to
start over. Then we can begin with the year
1. History books and old dating systems
cannot be changed and are best remembered in their own eras. I suggest leaving all
old systems intact and starting over in the
year 2001.
There is enough time to prepare the mind
and create excitement for the year 1.
Fred Wieber
Ontario, Canada
Austin, Texas

Editor,
Re: American Atheist, June, 1984; a.d.
and b.c. nonsense was solved for me in
Geology class this year with "Y.B.P."
YEARS BEFORE PRESENT accurately and
visually describes historical time. This epoch is named Holocene and the time covered is from the present to 10,000 years
before present.
Keep me on your mailing list. One day
soon I shall be able to land direct support to
your effort to stamp out ignorance.
Michael J. Mahoney
Oregon
Dear Michael:
We would agree that the "Y.B.P." dating
system would be preferable if one were
discussing prehistoric times. But there's a
little problem with using such a system all
the time. A textbook published in 1984 with
that system would date the signing of the
Declaration of Independence as 208 Y.B.P.
In 1985 the date would be incorrect, since
then it would be 209 Y.B.P.
Editor

Editor,
Recently I received a sample copy of the
American Atheist magazine, along with a
variety of your literature.
Sifting through all of it was like taking a
very-hard-to-acquire
drink of fresh, unmuddled water. You see, though I have for
all of my nearly 26 years maintained the very
views for which you have fought for so long,
I have met and known very few people who
shared (at least openly) my "coldly" rational
way of experiencing life.This is not to say, of
course, that emotion does not playa great
role in my appreciation of the world and all
matter; it is to say, however, that I accept
things on a day-to-day basis, attempt to live
my life as fully as I can while it exists and
accord absolutely no credence to things
religious and theist. How "normal," natural
and obvious it seems to me - but it is
incredible to me how difficult it is to engage
someone in a discussion regarding "existence" or "the nature of things" and avoid
embarking on a frustrating and seemingly
winless argument about (as I view it) the
unjustifiable belief in a god. Well, none of
this is new to you, I'm sure. In any event, I'm
delighted to find out that there is a contingent of rational people in the world; after all,
sometimes, when ones sees the sorts of
things that Ronald Reagan says (in public,
no less - and I'm supposed to believe that
he represents me?!), and see also that there
appears to be little outcry about such non'sensical and dangerous oratory (not to
mention action), I begin to feel like the only
member of the human race that seems to
August, 1984

see things for what they truly are.

I greatly appreciate what you did back in
1963 at the Supreme Court, and what you
continue to do in the same vein. (Could
someone please tell me - please! - why we
still have "In God We Trust" on our
currency?) While I wonder if I possess the
courage or integrity of a Madalyn Murray
O'Hair, I do have a strong interest in running
for the U.S. Congress in the next six or
seven years (I graduated last month from
law school), and when I attain some political
power I intend to push - in whatever
practical way I can - for an alleviation of the
socio-religious constraints (as heretofore
fostered by legislative means) that still burden us. I'm sick and tired of them, too, and
we all should be made free, once and for all.
Meanwhile (I'm afraid that this is my
weak, but temporary!, apology), I am flat
broke - having just concluded my tenure
as a student, and presently jobless and
studying for the New York bar - and so I
shall be unable to join your organization and
order a subscription to the magazine for
(probably) several months. But I willas soon
as I am solvent. I hope that you willkeep my
name on your mailing list until then.
I wish you the best in your endeavors.
Thank you for trying to make this a better
world. Anyone who understands certainly
appreciates it.
Clifford E. Douglas
Maryland

Editor,
I am grateful and a bit mortified at the
thought of how hard your staff works to put
the magazine together. I could write ad
liberum for all the encouragement and sympathy that I share with you. But since 1realize that you must get caught up with the
thousands of letters received, I want to be
brief.
I am with you "in spirit" as well as
financially. I am 21 years old, raised without
a father after the age of 2. I attend community college - fulltime, ifI can manage it.
I have been reading American Atheist since
about 1980. In my household lives my sister
and her 9-year old son. As could be expected of an Atheist, I am conscientious of a
sound balanced education in my life as well
as in my relatives.
Presently, I am the only one in my family
in college - a community college at that.
My financial resources are more and more
being committed to the establishing of some
sound college fund for my nephew Michael,
as I am hoping that he will want to enter
John Hopkins University to become a doctor of medicine.
Right now I am going through a phase in
which I must decide positively where my
Page 39

short-term and long-term financial commitments must lie. I hope you will be glad to
know that your organization has a high
priority in my financial commitments, inasmuch as I am able to contribute $10.00 to
our Survival Fund and something to our
Legal Fund. Please accept my contribution
in good "faith" and with best wishes. I have
much more to say but now I must get to
studying for a final exam in Calculus II. My
classes at community college are just to
satisfy the basic requirements for an eventual degree in Engineering - and at a more
future date, Aerospace Engineering.
I bid the O'Hairs and the staff of American
Atheists a friendly greetings. Hello!
David Uribe
California
Dear David:
The entire staff at the American Atheist
Center wishes to thank you for your warm
wishes and support - and to extend to you
best wishes for your college career.
Editor

READER SERVICE
SEND A GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONI

To send a special gift subscription" of American

Atheist magazine, enter the name and address of the
recipient here:
Name __ ~ __ ~~
Addres~s

.IPlease

Print)

City

State

--'Zip,

"By taking advantage of this special gift subscription

offer, you save $5.00. You may send the American Atheist
magazine to anyone in the U.S. for $20.00 for a one year
period (for orders outside of the U.S. add $5.00for postage).

TO SUBSeR/BETO AMERICAN
A THEIST MAGAZINE OR TO RENEW
YOUR PRESENT SUBSCRIPTION!
Enter your name and address (or attach your old
magazine address label) here:
Name __ ~(Please
__ ~~----------------Print)
Address

THE NUMBERS GAME

(continued from page 3)

I don't plan to be bluffed into falling into line with the rest of the
herd. In our modern and increasingly complex world we have more
and more to occupy our time and stimulate our minds in every
direction than ever before. The competition between those who
would capture and hold the interest of sections of the population is
becoming more intense than ever. As that competition increases,
religion is going to find it harder and harder to keep pace with more
modern, stimulating and interesting pursuits and diversions. Even
now religion is losing to the video games, computers and rock music.
Why do you think they have stepped up their attacks in these areas?
They are losing to libraries; that is why they attack them. They are
losing the battle over human sexuality; that is why they form "Pro-life"
crusades.
The numbers game is just one more sign that religion is on its way
out. They must use the ploy of "Join the millions who have faith," or
"What is wrong with you if you are in the minority who do not
believe?" Nothing is wrong. If we stand firm and do not let them claim
the majority which they do not have, they cannot dominate with the
old "majority rule" argument any longer.
I urge each Atheist to write his/her congressman and ask that the
proposed religion question of the 1960 census be included in the 1990
census. Let us see how many persons choose 5) none. I am sure that
the religious don't want to know. ~
REFERENCES
1. Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1957. U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
2. Churches and Church Membership in the United States, 1980. Glenmary
Research Center, Office of Research, National Council of Churches of
Christ.
3. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1982-83. U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of Census.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR

City'....:.

State

Zip

One-year subscription is $25.00.

For orders outside the U.S., add $5.00.

TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE

AMERICAN ATHEIST ORGANIZATION.
Membership

categories are (check appropriate category):

o Individual; $40/yr
o 65+/unemployed"; $20/yr
o Student"; $12/yr
o Info packet only; free

Couple ; $50/yr

0 Sustaining; $1 OO/yr
0 Lifetime; $500
"Send photocopy of 1.0., etc.
""Include partners' name

Membership includes the American Atheist (monthly)

Newsletter
and subscription
to the American Atheist
magazine - plus a/l regular additional mailings that are
made by the organization.

Enter your name and address (or attach your old

magazine address label) here:
Name
~------------------------------(Please Print)
Spouse/PannerName
Address~

(Please Print)

City

State

,Zip

I enclose check or money order, or authorize a

charge (VISA or MASTERCARD only), for the above
orders in the amount of $
_
MC/VISA #

A second generation Atheist, Mr. Murray has been the

Director of the American Atheist Center for 8 years
and is also the Managing Editor of the American Atheist.
He advocates aggressive Atheism.

Page 40

August, 1984

Ba nk Code,
Signature

_
Exp. Oat .
e

_
Oate

The American Atheist

THE ORIGINS, STRATEGY AND POWER

of the
RIGHT TO LIFERS

This remarkable book offers the pro-choic~

'movement
its best resource for understandmg
the origins, strategy ahndpowde~a:~~~s:u:aon
seek to deny women t e tun a
h
right of abortion. It reveals just how much ~ne
Right-to-Life movement has beco,!,e a
of the New Right, whose agenda l~ anyt, ,mg
but 'pro-life' and 'pro-human dignity.

Pf:.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ
Harvard

Law School

BY CONNIE PAIGE

The Right to Lifers, Who They Are, How They Operate,

Where They Get Their Money by Connie Paige, an
investigative free-lance reporter, is a 5W' x 8Yz" hard- back
book of 286 pages. It is the single best book written to-date
on the subject. That is saying a helluva lot. But, your
reviewer is prejudiced, leaning toward theo-political investigations, naming of names, digging for facts and figures,

Please send me
Texas State Residents

cop(y)ies of Right to Lifers

please add

5'\h

286 page hardback

$15.95 (includes $1.00 postage/handling)

$15.95 (includes $1.00 postage and handling).

sales tax

Send check, money order, or VISA/MASTERCARD

AMERICAN

sparing no one, being ruthlessly objective. This book has it

all. The author has really done her home work.
The American Atheist Center has extensive files on
abortion, legal squabbles, right-to- lifers and primary source
materials on the issue. We probably know more about the
right-to-life issue than any other group of persons in the
United States - and here is Connie Paige, as well informed
as are we. This is so shocking in a time of shallow news
reporting that the American Atheist Center is attempting to
find the author to request that she speak at the American
Atheist Convention coming up. She is outstanding.
Her writing is direct, clear, blunt. She does not involve
herself in "style" or "cognitive expression," or any of the
trappings of so-called "writers." She simply plunges right
into the facts. It is an excitingly different approach.
These
are the people. This is where they are. This is whence they
came. This is what they are trying to do. This is where they
get their money. And, she is crisp and sharp. Often a
reporter does not like a person and subjectively couches
description of that person in such a way that the bias is
obvious. Connie Paige does not even have faint damnation .
Just the facts, without bias, are enough to make anyone
want to throw up.
Your reviewer yellow highlights passages and by the time
she was done, the entire book was highlighted. It is page
after page of "Right Stuff."
Beginning with the arrest and trial of Kenneth Edelin,
going through the Roe u. Wade and the Doe u. Bolton
cases, she traces the judicial route. Starting with Jimmy
Carter and going through Ronald Reagan she traces the
executive branch of government. And, the legislative she
lays bare when she gets to the new radical religious right.
Throughout the-book weaves the Roman Catholic Church
and the trials and tribulations of Planned Parenthood .
.The author is thorough. The appendix is excellent. The
source notes are copious. Every Atheist woman should
have her hands on this book - and any Atheist who thinks
(s)he knows anything about the abortion issue should pick it
up. The difficulty is the price. We attempted to bargain over
it with the publishers and there was NO way. Of course, you
can buy it at your local bookstore - which will then make
40% of the price as a profit, or you can buy it from The
American Atheist Center and have 50% of the price go
toward financing the Atheist cause.

TOT AL $

authorization

to:

ATHEISTS / P.O. Box 2117 / Austin, TX 78768-2117

Name

VISA/MC#

Address

City

Bank Code
Sig nature
Date

State

-L.Zip

_
Exp. Date

_
_
_

AMENDMENTI

CONGRESS

SHALL MAKE NO LA W RESPECTING

>

Z
tTJ

ir:

--l

>
to
r.....

tr:

:::c:
~
tTJ

Z
--l

o
'Tj

:N
tTJ

r.....

a
.....

o
z

:N
""0

:N

o
:::c:
.....
to
.....

--l
.....

MOORE

FAMILY GRAVESTONES

--l

:::c:
tTJ
'Tj

:N
tTJ
tTJ
tTJ

><

tTJ

:N

n.....

tr:

t'T1

:d03~3Hl