Interesting PEW Survey

I was looking through my Twitter feed this morning to find that the PEW Research Center had mostly taken over my feed with new surveys about religion and homosexuality.  I love, love, LOVE the PEW Research Center and frequently use it as a trustworthy source when citing Americans attitudes on life, both on this blog and in my own day to day doings.  As much as I do love the PEW Research Center, a lot of the time the findings can be slightly redundant or state the obvious.  However, I found this one in particular kind of interesting:

We all have a tendency to believe that our hunches on the world are right, but non-biased surveys like these can ground us.  I must admit that I found myself being humbled on some of my world views with this one.  The Muslim religion was viewed as the least friendly.  OK, duh.  In terms of world wide participation, they are the most archaic of religions when it comes to every day lifestyles and attitudes towards non-straight males.  The Mormon Church was very closely behind, and again, that makes sense.  You have to be pretty by the book to make it to your future planet of eternal happiness, and being gay will not get you there.  And as much as Mormons have a solid reputation for being very friendly and polite in day to day life, they did heavily fund the overturn of Proposition 8 (and succeeded), so I guess it's not a shock they are viewed almost as unfriendly as Muslims when it comes to being accepting of gay people and their rights. 

While it's hard to debate the least friendly faiths, I was somewhat surprised by the 3rd place one.  Sure, every Pope expresses over and over again that homosexuality is a sin.  But with the whole phrase "Cafeteria Catholic" being mostly true with practicing Catholics-at least in America, I guess I personally, a straight woman, didn't see them as big as a threat as people and preachers from the Evangelical churches.  That blanket covers everyone from the late Jerry Falwell who infamously blamed gay people (among other groups) for 9/11 and the somehow still alive Elder of Crazy Town Pat Robertson who basically blames the gays for every natural disaster.  All of the above have devout followers and those followers are the ones who actively campaign against gay marriage, as well as all other social rights not involving a Christian motive.  Unlike Mormons, they're way less known for their friendliness when engaging in a religious debate and are notorious for using tactics to get the opposing people rallied and up angry- as seen by multiple documentaries, news stories, and hidden agendas that have become leaked (like in The Good News Club by Katherine Stewart).  Not to mention, unlike the people of Islam, they have a way bigger population, presence, and funding here in America.  I personally and humbly feel that this group should have at least been in the top 3, if not the top 2 as they are a huge threat to progress with the gay lifestyle in the US.

I continued to be somewhat surprised by this poll until the very end with Jewish people being marginally more threatening than Protestants.  I mean, sure, more and more Protestant churches are welcoming their arms towards their gay and lesbian members and the Episcopalian Church famously elected Gene Robinson as their first openly gay bishop in 2006.  That said, there are still plenty of Protestant churches and congregants who are very much against gay rights.  I've never heard of anyone from the Jewish faith, in my own personal life as well as in the news, really getting blood red mad at gay people or their growing acceptance.  Maybe there was an occurrence and my memory is lapsed, but even then it's still the least reoccurring group by far that I've heard of being anything remotely unfriendly towards gay people.  How are they not last on the list of least friendly religious organizations?

The people have voted and they disagree with me.  That's more than fine.  But that's why I like PEW and other reliable polling places because they show if your world views are congruent towards what you think you "know" is right.  What about you guys?  Any thoughts/comments on the order of this list?

Follow me on:
Twitter- @LogicPolice
Facebook- Logic Police Page

Quote of the Day #31

"I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish, where no public policy from the pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source-where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials-and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is an act against all."- John F. Kennedy

Amen to that!  And he was a Catholic.  Separation of church and state helps all-the religious and the non religious.  Let's get back to a country where sound bites like these are things that not only go viral but are things we can generally believe in, mmmkay? 

 

 

 

 

Follow me on Facebook!

 

Twitter- @LogicPolice

UK Secularism Debate

I found this article from BBC this morning.  It's a debate between a Muslim woman who wants the UK to remain a country with strong ties to religion (despite the strongest of those ties being to Christianity) and a left-wing Christian man.  This post intrigued me for several reasons.  For starters, this was a separation of church and state debate from another country with a different context.  Additionally, it felt like opposite day when the Christian was fighting for religious freedom and was generally quite liberal.  Plus the other voice was that of a Muslim (woman!) and we really don't get afforded that opportunity too often here in the States.  Not to mention, this debate was incredibly conversational and worded with a lot of thought-which is also something that is a rarity in the States because we're so sound bite-y and emotional.

I'd comment further but I'm a bit out of my league when it comes to the politics, societal norms, and other such related facts when it comes to England's relationship with religion.  (I'm aware that most of Europe is way more secular than America nowadays even though it once wasn't.  Past that, I'm out!)  So I don't care to comment too much in case I put my foot in my uneducated mouth.  However, I was vastly confused as to why a woman with a minority religion (...isn't Islam growing at a ridiculously fast rate throughout Europe and especially in the United Kingdom?) would want to uphold a largely Christian norm and government to protect the minorities.  That seems backwards to me, with the consideration that sometimes with new rules or laws certain detail, groups, and persons get lost between the cracks.  But...I thought the purpose of separation of church and state was to protect all religions, big and small.  Again, I'm out of my league with British politics.  (Yes, this is an open invitation for all my UK readers to comment and fill in some blanks I may be having.  I can and will look stuff up, but it's always great hearing about an insider perspective too). 

But for my 'Merica readers and all other countries, read the link as it's a good read and a good thing to compare various world views.  You're welcome!

Like me on Facebook!
Twitter- @LogicPolice

What's a Good News Club? Plus, I met Richard Dawkins!

As I've mentioned before, I was privileged enough to meet Richard Dawkins in late February!  As you can probably deduce from the picture, I was at a book signing.  However, the signing was after a lecture event by Dawkins, Katherine Stewart, Sean Faircloth, and Eric Cernyar.  The whole event was about The Good News Club, which I must admit is something that I was unfamiliar with. 

The Good News Club is a bible based after school group that is allowed in public schools.  While that probably raises several eyebrows to begin with (and I'll tackle those gut instincts about whether or not this is legal later), it's even worse than it sounds.  Instead of being a kid friendly intro to the bible with watered down bible fables, it's actually an incredibly well structured lesson (it has a script accounting for each minute) that teaches children that they are sinful and will go to hell if they don't accept Jesus as their savior and live a Christian life (based on the opinion of what the GNC says a Christian life is).  As you probably suspect, the kids that go to these "studies" often take their lessons to the playground and tell their classmates that they're going to go to hell because they aren't Christian/don't go to the Good News Club/believe anything remotely different (even liberal Christians and Catholics are not fan favorites of the organizers of the Good News Clubs by a long shot).  Does this sound like what Jesus would do or what?!  Not to mention the obvious pun of this sounding more like a "Bad" News Club. 

Before I proceed further into the nuts and bolts of the rest of the information I learned and how the lecture was set up, let me tackle the obvious issue of what many of you must be thinking: how is this legal?  Well first and foremost, religion is allowed to be taught in public schools within the confines of class.  It's not allowed to be preached, but comparative religion classes are legal (I had one in 2001 and it was an elective).  A lot of schools opt out of that kind of option because of potential uproars from parents and potential lawsuits.  In 2001, the supreme court ruled that Good News Clubs could indeed exist on school grounds.  Here's the Wikipedia page on the ruling that can probably answer your questions better than I can as I'm still familiarizing myself with all the ins and outs and loop holes.  But yes, it's entirely legal.  And since the 2001 ruling the GNC has hit the ground running by expanding into new school systems each year.

Katherine Stewart, and journalist, first discovered the GNC when her daughter was early elementary aged and she heard of kids on the playground damning each other to hell because of this club had come to their school.  Being a journalist, she began a thorough investigation of who the GNC are, how they operate, and what their true agenda really is.  In 2012 she published a book called The Good News Club: The Christian Right's Stealth Assault on America's Children.  (I'm only two chapters in but I'm finding it to be a page turner.)  She was the first speaker of the evening and basically broke down all the facts of what the GNC really is.  Here are some of the lovely facts I learned:

• The GNC targets young children.  Research shows that the younger children are, the more impressionable they are.  Furthermore, very young children can't distinguish what's being taught in class versus what's being taught as an after school function that is being held in the same classroom, therefore will take all things said in school as fact.  The people who lead the "bible study" often volunteer in the classroom as aides during the day, which further blurs the lines between teachers, being taught, and extra curricular activity.  This specific practice of targeting young children is called the "4-14 Window".  It's also the same age bracket that the most people convert to Christianity.
• In their workbooks they make no less than 5000 references to sin, punishment, and hell.  They're also huge fans of the story when God gets pissed at Sol for not killing a baby (very appropriate for kids still in the single digits and who likely have baby siblings, no?).
• They teach Creationism and believe it's a sin not to believe in this. 
• Stress that not being obedient to God is not only a sin, but deserves death.
• Good News Club organizers believe that public education is evil and "satanic."  Moreover, they hope to destroy public education eventually and start over with more religious based schooling for all (their religion, not other religions).
• They claim to be non-denominational, but that's only to get parents to sign the consent forms (only children who's parents have signed the paperwork are allowed to participate).  But instead of being all-inclusive they actually guide kids away from other religions and have the children tell the other kids they're going to hell.
• There's a lot of false advertising to the schools about what the Good News Club really is.  In fact, there's hardly any real and truthful disclosure.  And they use the legal loop hole of the 1st amendment in the name of free speech.  There's also legal advocacy groups of the religious right that help with everything from funding and helping out with legal loose ends.
• Currently there are 4000 Good News Clubs in the country.  Yet this particular group is only one of dozens of similar ones. 

Horrifying.  Completely horrifying.  To sum up, they manipulate children at their most impressionable by using scare tactics and turn them against other students.  I'm all for free speech, as well as religious education (comparative, not scripture based) but this sounds like pure evil with too many ulterior-motives to count. 

From Stewart's speech the floor was then turned to Eric Cernyar and Richard Dawkins.  Cernyar is a Colorado based lawyer who grew up in a fundamentalist home where he was indoctrinated by Good News Clubs when he was a child.  Back then, the Good News Clubs basically only operated in people's homes, but the curriculum is still exactly the same (much to his chagrin).  Richard Dawkins interviewed Cernyar asking him what he remembers from his time participating with the Good News Club, how he emotionally reacted (not good: he struggled WAY more than his fair share with his self worth of being told he was a sinner who deserved to be punished which sadly lasted well past childhood), and why these clubs aren't a good idea in any capacity.  Basically, Eric Cernyar was something of a smoking gun.  Katherine Stewart did a ton of good research, but Cernyar had the personal experience that corroborated everything Katherine discovered, with no exaggeration. 

Cernyar also stressed that most of the bible stories came from the Old Testament.  This confuses me greatly as a secular citizen.  Time and time again when the Christian Right makes their way into the public spectrum they're spitting out bible verses and stories from the Old Testament.  Spoiler alert: Jesus, you know, the guy kinda sorta responsible for Christianity, only makes his introduction in the NEW Testament.  I get that there's some connections, but preachers, scholars, Jews, Christians (the lesser of the crazy ones), and anyone with deductive reasoning skills can see that the teachings are vastly different.  And yet, some of these ideas, mostly from Leviticus, define so much of their moral behavior. 

After the Q&A with Dawkins and Cernyar, Sean Faircloth did a slide show presentation on what we can do to try to combat this.  Some of them include going to your local school board and presenting the issues other schools have had with this (via online articles or Katherine Stewart's book) and not so much highlighting the religious differences between students but the psychological damage the kids may experience of being told that you're not worthy and deserve to go to hell.  HERE is a more comprehensive website with more information on why this is such a bad thing happening and other ideas of what WE can do.

Additionally, the Good News Club is slated to hit Denver area schools in the Fall of 2013.  So if you're a Denver based reader, please comment and/or email me to get in touch, brainstorm, and rally together (as that's where I live). 


Twitter: @LogicPolice
Facebook Page

YouTube Series Delayed

I announced last week that I was going to be starting a YouTube series on an atheist's perspective of the bible.  Starting today I was going through the books of the bible chronologically with a new book each week.  I'm still doing that (yay!) but unfortunately I have to post pone this project.  Without going into a long story that's neither here nor there, I've had a lot of unfortunate life circumstances come up the past few weeks.  While everything is OK and clearing out, this past week was way more busy with dealing with these issues than I anticipated.  I'm super excited about this project but want to do it right and make sure I'm well prepared in the content and what I'm going to say.  I feel it's the lesser of two evils to delay it two weeks (I could probably do it in one week, but with my luck lately I'm going to play it safe and just say two) than do a sloppy first job.

I apologize for the false alarm.  But I promise in two weeks (April 3rd) I will be posting a video on Genesis and will be finally getting back to more regular blog posting in the meantime.  Thank-you for your understanding! 

This devout atheist is now an ordained minister.

Just call me Reverend Lauren Blair.  Seriously!

But how?

A year or two ago I toyed with the idea of becoming ordained in Colorado so I could maybe perform secular weddings on the side.  I never did anything with this idea though.  Recently I've been trying to focus more on writing and activism, so the idea came back to me as a potential idea.  Additionally, I must give some credit where credit is due: during the past year I dated a man who got ordained online when he was in college to win an argument about the "sanctity of marriage" in a political science class against a right wing classmate (who knew my ex was far from..."holy").  Frankly, that's the stuff of comic genius.  Remembering that I had the idea once of becoming ordained for practical purposes, I realized how awesome that would be for my long-term career in terms of having a hilarious trump card.

Flash forward to tonight and I start to actually look into how to become an ordained minister online.  After digging around a bit I find a site and begin to fill out my most basic of information (name, address, phone number, birthdate, and email).  I figure that I would take it as far as I could without actually becoming ordained so I could check out the process of how "easy" I've heard it is.  After filling out my information I hit submit where I was immediately linked to a page congratulating/informing me that I was now ordained and prompting me about what kind of certificates I want.  Thinking that this is too easy to be true, I looked through the site a bit and realized that I was in fact now in a directory where people could contact me to marry them.  (I can even list myself as an atheist minister).

That's right fuckers!  I'm a minister with the oh-so holy power to marry y'all!  Now I knew that this was an easy process, but I had no idea how easy this truly was.  I thought there would be one or two questions, or at least some more information they would need.  In fact, you could argue that I accidently became a minister as I genuinely had no intentions of going through with this fully tonight.  That's how easy it is to marry people; you can do it by accident!

Naturally I began bragging about this to a few of my friends who were still awake and would find the humor in the situation.  One of my friends not only found this hilarious, but inquired about the site as he actually has considered becoming ordained to marry friends.  Within a matter of seconds, he too was ordained.  Me and my friend can now tag-team and become a marrying duo!  Mind you, this is also the kind of friendship where we go out of our way to offend each other and basically believe that that line will never be crossed.  Ever.  Jesus and Jerry Falwell are surely smiling down on us, no?

In addition to me being an atheist who can marry people (you're welcome, Focus on the Family...I am doing my part to keep the sanctity of marriage alive and devout), my friend is a gay male.  He can not legally get married in this state, but he sure as fuck can marry straight heathens!  I'd say that this is a huge loop hole in the argument of keeping marriage holy and sacred, but they have been allowing hundreds of Catholic priests to marry for centuries... Ba-dum-DUM!

New YouTube channel + weekly series

On Wednesday March 20th, I'm going to begin a series where every Wednesday I will post a new video that will feature me talking about each book of the bible in chronological order.  My purpose for this is partially to refresh my own knowledge of the "good book", but also to mock the people who believe that if you read the bible you will realize that it's written by god and you will feel so inclined to convert to Christianity.  And hopefully everyone can learn something too!  Armed with years of historical research, cultural context, and translations...it should be a very fun-if not hilarious- time. 

Later this week I'll be posting a video further explaining these reasons as an introduction to the series, but the cat is now officially out of the bag for my loyal readers so subscribe to me please! 

NEW YouTube Channel

Facebook Page

Twitter

Logic Police Meets Richard Dawkins!

Boom!  How lucky am I?

The signing was after an event featuring Dawkins, Sean Faircloth, Katherine Stewart, and Eric Cernyar focusing on separation of church and state in public schools because of the many Good News Clubs hitting schools across the US.  I have plenty of more details and insights coming to a post later today...but for now I just HAD to brag!!

The Catholic Church wants change...and I'm confused

Ever since it was announced that Pope Benedict was abdicating his throne the Catholic Church has been back in the limelight.  This morning while perusing the news I kept coming across countless articles like this one talking about how the Catholic church must change.  It's undeniable that we're living in a culture where the values have vastly changed in a short period of time.  Right after the election, countless articles came out about how the Republican party must change or die.  This made sense, regardless of your political affiliations, because the party does not resonate with the modern common people and they've more or less put on a circus for the past decade.  You can still be conservative, but the blatant racism, sexism, and homophobia needs to go by the wayside or the Republican party won't survive. 

But with religion?  Despite being an equal opportunity hater of all religions I get very torn on the ideas of religion keeping up with society.  While I'm never one to hate on someone for believing in something I don't, I get weirded out when people claim a belief in a god/religion and then go and commit as many or more "sins" as I do.  The people of middle ground religious who take the parts of religion they like and leave the parts that don't suit them kind of piss me off.  You either believe what the "sacred" text tells you...or you don't.  Anything else is by definition hypocritical.  Sorry, but those are the stone cold facts. 

I once got in a debate with someone who was raised Catholic but didn't really practice as an adult.  I was very stunned to hear that she was not for gay marriage because she across the board was pretty liberal.  I politely inquired as to why she thought that way and she said it was because the church didn't support it.  I gently fired back that the church can do whatever it damn well pleases, but not everyone in America is Catholic and anyone should be able to get married in a court house.  I stand by this.  I'm not going to demand that centuries upon centuries upon centuries old religions change their ways.  If you're dumb enough (sorry!) to subscribe to archaic ideas based on stolen and/or dead mythology that only (barely) made sense in the context of BC times, then go to your little clubhouse with the other freaks that should wear tin foil hats and pray to your imaginary friend.  I won't stop you.  And you shouldn't stop me from advocating for everyone to have equal rights and freedom from religion from a government stand point.  Deal?

I'm not taking the Catholic Church out of the hot seat.  I was very vocal about my celebrations of the current disgusting pope resigning.  This guy defended and protected the molesters of children-and not the children themselves.  I can't think of any other evidence that's as damning as that in regards to how fucked up this religion is.  They should pick a pope who is more sympathetic towards the wounded than the people who wound.  Case closed.  And to quote the article I cited, sure a little redirect towards reinforcing the nuns helping the poor instead of going to pro-life rallies is good too.  But honestly?  If you don't like what your church is doing, which ultimately means that you don't like what they stand for, unsubscribe from your religion!  That's how these institutions lose power.  Case closed!  Asking your religion that has many, many more birthdays than you to change it's ways is egocentric.  Leave your religion or find one better suited for you.  If the culture is changing it's probably because it needed to and certain things need to be left in the past.  We no longer use leeches to bleed out our illness; if your religion doesn't fit your paradigm of morality maybe you should leave it in the dark ages too.

Just because he's so creepy and a little perspective never hurts:

Follow me!
Twitter: @LogicPolice
Facebook: Click here and hit "like"!

Lent?

And yet he's "allegedly" the path to God...  Any chance we're getting punked and he's just giving up the papacy for Lent?

Buh bye, Benedict!

I'm a equal opportunist religion hater.  And I can't imagine I'm going to truly admire the next Pope either.  But this Pope has tons of documentation that he was instrumental in covering up, defending, and basically taking the sides of the molesters and not the victims in the infamous Catholic church's child abuse scandals.

How anyone could have stood behind this pope is unimaginable to me.  Frankly, how anyone could remain Catholic with this guy being in charge is beyond me too.  The Pope is supposed to be infallible and have a direct link to god.  And yet he helped aid in protecting the evil priests and other higher ups who sexually abused innocent children?  How can you defend that, people?!  At least the next Pope will be the lesser of two evils.  In the words of the SNL skit with David Spade and Helen Hunt, "Buh bye!"

 

 

 

Follow me:

Twitter: @LogicPolice

Facebook Page

Most hilarious thing I've seen in a while

Compliments of the Richard Dawkins Facebook page.