I have just returned from my last long drive of the season, finally and regretfully shuttling the last beloved member of the Myers clan off to the distant Minneapolis transportation hub. Now, at last, I can relax, shed of my patriarchal obligations (speaking of which, the hair is getting a bit long and wild, and the beard is looking a bit ferocious…I may have to do something to tame them). I've also feeling the fatigue of waging the war on Christmas — my trigger finger is all calloused, and the recoil bruises on my shoulder would make you weep to see them — so it's nice to have a little armistice until they start up again, six months from now. I've even got a little time to catch up with the neglected blog!
Here are a few quick tidbits.
-
The quixotic Michael Newdow is suing to have godly invocations dropped altogether from the presidential swearing-in ceremony, and our very own Minnesota Atheists have joined in. I don't think they stand a prayer. It's still a good thing to keep speaking out about it, so I support them wholeheartedly.
-
You need a poll to crash. How about one from Lynchburg, VA, home of Liberty University, where they are asking, Atheist group files suit to keep religion out of inauguration. Okay? So far, 17% say OK, 83% say not OK. That might change soon.
-
A bus matron who was supposed to be assisting a young man with cerebral palsy, Ed Wynn Rivera, abandoned him on the bus, still strapped to his seat, while it was parked in the depot…for seventeen hours. She had a good excuse, though.
Hockaday admitted to knowing that Rivera was still on the bus when it was locked up on one of the coldest nights of the year. Her rationale for leaving? She apparently didn't want to be late for church.
-
Good news from Texas! The final draft of the state science standards is done, and by all accounts, it is good.
But with the "weaknesses" requirement removed and a new definition for science, the new plan makes it clear that supernatural explanations like creationism and intelligent design have no place in public classrooms, said Dan Quinn with the Texas Freedom Network, an Austin-based nonprofit group that opposes religious influence on public education.
Good work, Texas scientists and educators!
I hope you all enjoyed your godless holiday. It was much more pleasant than the religious one.
- Log in to post comments
Hooray for Texas! And hooray for non-believers who don't kill each other over ancient scriptures and traditions.
Voted, read, was appalled, and then proud - big post, today.
Glad you had a nice holiday. Love that holyland comic =)
Texas: not quite doomed yet. good job on that :-)
Also, love that example of Christian Love(TM)
Good news from Texas.
Voted once. Where's my other browser to vote twice?
Take the weekend to rest if you want. (No, I don't see that happening.)
currently the poll is:
"Yes, keep ceremony secular": 42%
"No, it's Obama's choice": 58%
wwjd... lock the bus and get his ass to church... sick fucks
poll is now 45% ok, 55% not ok.
But she was praying God would make him better.
52 yes, 48 no.
Well there is now a 6% margin the other way. Hmm - wonder how that happened. Poll was unscientific - that's what they said.
"the hair is getting a bit long and wild" - thank Darwin (or your genes) you still have hair.
You don't need another browser to crash this one. Just hit the back button, heh.
re: Texas standards - don't rejoice yet. The last paragraphs of the story read:
Pharyngula poll crashing strikes again!
Yes - 64%, No - 36%
Atheist group files suit to keep religion out of inauguration. Okay?
Yes, keep ceremony secular
67%
No, it's Obama's choice
33%
Total: 661 votes
I also support Michael Newdow's efforts to defend our constitution.
Her rationale for leaving? She apparently didn't want to be late for church.
OK, no problem. Nothing could be more important than being on time to worship the magic fairy, not even a human life.
67% voted for "Yes, keep ceremony secular". Let's get it over 90%.
Becca beat me to the most important point in Texas: The State Board of Education (the state's bastion of ignorance) still gets to vote on the state standards and is free to do whatever it wants. I'm betting on their ignoring the professionals' draft of the standards and going with a pro-Bible agenda for science.
The battle may not be over in Texas, but at least now the Board will have to go against the professional recommendations, which will not look good in a lawsuit.
'In the end, the wording in the final draft may not matter because the board is not required to use it.'
So it does not mean sweet FA what the wording and definition actually is in the document...if there are jeebus hystericals on the Texan board...and I think there are...they will go with their own preferred anti -evolution carve up anyway...
Never trust a Christian to do the honourable thing...because they simply will not...especially if it is for jeebus!
So Liberty University is promoting recognition of the fact that Obama is the one choosing to add "religion" to an otherwise secular event?
Will anyone bring this up if when one of the Falwell Bros. starts ranting about the new president's "atheism"?
Good for Texas. That state hadn't done anything right since it made its own toast.
"Yes, Keep it Secular" is now at 74%.
Keep pushing.
You have to love the only comment posted on the poll,
"Christians should keep their stupidity in their churches. They shouldn't use our secular government to push their insane death cult on everyone else. America is not a theocracy."
As a Texan, I can say that I don't hold out much hope for Texas's science standards. They're probably going to just ram in their creationist drivel last minute. Maybe there's a reason why I'm applying to all out of state colleges.
Bah, I couldn't resist.
Creationists compose the most dishonest bunch of crazies we have running around in the world. They've never added anything of worth to the world that comes directly from creationism. Everything they believe is worthless garbage that deserves nothing but ridicule and derision. They explain nothing while taking the beauty out of the world. They want us to be satisfied with not understanding the Universe because doing so allows them to continue in their delusion. The fact that this group had a voice at all in a worthy process such as the creation of science standards for children shows a pathetic lack of education among those involved in the process.
So, if I correctly understand the reasoning of the bus matron, apparently God would be less pissed off by the reckless endangerment of a helpless handicapped person, than by her missing a church service...
I think I'd rather go to hell than worship such a self-centered monster, if that's really what God's priorities are.
Okay, so maybe I went a little link crazy.
Poll:
yes 82%
no 18%
number of votes 1289
'Brooklyn Bus Haiku'
Job Dedication
Young Lad in Cold Dark Horror
Matron: "Goddidit"
Yes, Christmas is over - Hurrah!
Unfortunately the shops are already stocking the shelves with Easter tat - mainly chocolate eggs and bunnies.
I dunno, part of me thinks it is Obama's choice. He has faith, or says he has, so why not let him express it?
"Unfortunately the shops are already stocking the shelves with Easter tat - mainly chocolate eggs and bunnies."
Begun, the War On Easter has.
Oh, if people want to kill each other, they'll find a way, even if they are godless. Think Stalin and Mao. The human mind is ingenious.
Because the inauguration ceremony is not just for him.
I dunno, part of me thinks it is Obama's choice. He has faith, or says he has, so why not let him express it?
He can express his theism in some church. Presidents should set a good example and respect our constitution.
I can't read people's minds but I bet Obama is a closet atheist who invokes god for political reasons.
Just voted. 2061 votes, 88% from evil spoilsport secularists, 12% from the persecuted hordes.
OK, what is the source of the story about Hockaday? Is it trusted? Because the AP just says she was late for an appointment, mentions nothing about church. Our local paper carried the story, but left out any reason why she the man in the bus. It's fairly unbelievable isn't it? What person in their right mind would leave a fellow to freeze on a bus overnight?
Daily News Article
"The prosecutor said Hockaday failed to report Rivera was on the bus because she didn't want to miss an appointment.
Sources told the Daily News Hockaday was running late for church, and assumed one of the other bus company employees would spot Rivera."
UPI NewsTrack
Who would Jesus abandon?
That's just what you want to believe. You have zero evidence for that, and plenty of evidence to the contrary.
I absolutely love that editorial cartoon. Brian Gable from Toronto, right?
Consider the poll crashed!
Ms. Hockaday should be sentenced to 17 hours on a freezing bus.
W00t! We in the Lburg were mentioned!!! o......... That wasn't a good thing was it...... I hate this city......
We're at 90% now. :)
Also, I'm sure all of us from Minnesota Atheists know that the lawsuit is going to tank. I am just happy to even be a small part of it. Not long ago, I would have thought a lawsuit like this was useless, but now I see the good it does in raising awareness, which is totally priceless. Like crashing a poll.
Also, Al Franken currently holds a 49-vote lead in the recount for Senator in Minnesota.
Um, what? The holidays are not over. Now that the two-month-long X-mas Season is over, it's time for the two-month-long Darwin Day Season to begin. Except this year, we should run it all year long, in honor of this being the one-and-a-half-centennial of the publication of Origin of Species.
Happy Darwin Day Season, to one and all!
My Goodness whatever could have happened ;)
Atheist group files suit to keep religion out of inauguration. Okay?
Yes, keep ceremony secular 91%
No, it's Obama's choice 9%
Total: 3387 votes
Woah there! The key part there is *chocolate*. Plus you get to bite a bunny-wunny head off. What could possibly be bad about that?
BobC #34: I can't read people's minds but I bet Obama is a closet atheist who invokes god for political reasons.
fdfa #40: That's just what you want to believe. You have zero evidence for that, and plenty of evidence to the contrary.
I agree my idea that Obama is an atheist is wishful thinking and I agree I have no evidence for it.
I think Obama could be an atheist because he knows he never would have been elected if he didn't at least pretend to be religious. He could have been going to church all these years only because politics is his career. I noticed he's pro-science and accepts the facts of evolution. So I would bet he's an atheist, but I agree it's something I wish was true.
OK - someone fill in a Canadian here on exactly what the problem is...
the lawsuit is about the oath Obama will swear right? Something about the "so help me god" line?
So, if Obama believes in God, and wants to say this, and there IS an affirmation version available for those who do not want to swear an oath, what exactly is the problem?
I'd like it if there was no invocation, but I didn't think the lawsuit had anything to do with that, just with the form of the "repeat after me" oath.
Based on my understanding, limited as it is, I could see making a fuss if an atheist or really, anyone who believed in a god other than "God", didn't want to say "so help me God" and was forced to, but I don't think that's the case at all, is it?
And it IS Obama making the oath, so shouldn't he be able to express it that way if he so chooses?
My immediate family isn't exactly "atheist" (mom would totally blanch if I used such a word to describe her), but they're certainly all non-practicing, non-religious, kinda-sorta-Episcopalian, not-really-anything types, and we (hardcore atheist me and them) had a perfectly lovely holiday, completely devoid of woo. We had a tree, yes, but who can argue with twinkly lights and lovely colored orbs? There was much good food, fun games, lots of reminiscing and stories, a few small but special presents for all . . . can't complain. And no woo to be seen.
You may want to click on "More polls" on that site after you get bored with that one. (I think it's pretty demolished now.) The one right before it is "Would you support an amendment to ban gay marriage in Virginia?", currently running at 68% Yes, but with fewer than 200 votes total.
CanadianChick asked: And it IS Obama making the oath, so shouldn't he be able to express it that way if he so chooses?
Down here in the United States, one nation under Canada, we have something called the Establishment Clause in our constitution which forbids our government from favoring any religious ideas, including the belief in Mr. God. So if Obama wants to respect our constitution, he will invoke God only in church and not to the American public. This is called the wall of separation between church and state, and this wall is the only thing that can prevent our out of control Christian population from making America a theocracy like Iran.
| Unfortunately the shops are already stocking the shelves | with Easter tat - mainly chocolate eggs and bunnies.
|
| Woah there! The key part there is *chocolate*. Plus you get | to bite a bunny-wunny head off. What could possibly be bad | | about that?
Only that the chocolate is invariably rubbish (unless you go to specialist shops). The supermarket bunnies & eggs are usually a very low level of cocoa mass, plus lots of vegetable oil and flavourings. Nasty!
Hockaday's god must be so proud of her for being such a good neighbour-loving christian.
Kerovon (#23)
There's no need to avoid Texas' secular universities on the basis of the soundness of their science programs. By a recent poll, 95% of our state's science faculty are pro rational thought (= evolution). University professors don't run for office on the State Board of Education which oversees K-12 public schools.
Nothing xian in chocolate eggs, bunnies or pine trees with twinkly lights. Don't let the xians claim stuff that isn't theirs.
Hi. I am from India and have been studying in the US since the last 3 years. I knew the US to be secular, so when I got here and looked at the currency bills, I was surprised to find a reference to god. Ditto with the 'so help me god' part of the pledge. I now know that these were not originally part of US currency and the pledge respectively, but made it there later. How and why did this happen? Why wasn't it opposed as being unconstitutional?
Aseem asked: Why wasn't it opposed as being unconstitutional?
I'm not old enough to remember if there was any opposition to the words IN GOD WE TRUST on our money, and one Nation under God in our Pledge of Allegiance.
Some people are trying to remove Mr. God from both of those things now, but they've been unsuccessful so far. The problem is our majority Christian population doesn't respect our constitution.
The In God We Trust has been on and off our currency all along. I believe it was last added during the Cold War, when the under God was also added to the pledge of allegiance. This was done to help differentiate us from the "godless" communists. There was minor opposition of course, but the constitutional aspects were ignored by the majority.
Thanks BobC and Nerd of Redhead. The 'Cold War' aspect makes sense. But it is still unconstitutional.
Aseem, it happened in stages, but most of it happened during the McCarthy era, when a lot of insane people concluded that communism and atheism where the same thing, where convinced that communism was a real threat to the entire world, and we managed to elect one of the idiots to the presidency, who started running, as him single largest contribution, a witch hunt to track down anyone suspected of communism, or atheism. Adding "god" to damn near everything in sight was his, and those around him, idea. Had he remained in office longer, he would probably have instituted laws stating that "thank god" be posted on every roll of toilet paper, so that good Christians could tell the communist toilet paper from the American. lol
Aseem, SCOTUS has said the phrase In God We Trust isn't religious per se (har!). So until a more liberal composition of the court comes about, the ruling won't change. The pledge of alliance is being challenged.
I do understand that the pledge of allegiance is being challenged, and that some secular groups would also eventually press for the 'In God We Trust' to be removed from the currency. But, it does baffle me that it got there in the first place, no matter how fundie a President got elected to office. No matter what changes he wanted to do, wasn't there a proceeding in the Senate that sought to see if those changes were in compliance with the Constitution? Maybe if I was born and in the US then, the circumstances would make it look more 'normal'. But looking back, it certainly seems mind-numbing!
last time i checked tat poll (after voting, of course) secularisim was winning 95-5. woohoo!
Aseem, most of the pressure came from members of Congress, and Eisenhower signed out of political expediency. The Red Menace gave people a fright in those days.
Our politicians checking to see if it is OK by the constitution? It is ignored all too often. If it is later overturned, the politician can tell his constituents "I tried".
Aseem asked: No matter what changes he wanted to do, wasn't there a proceeding in the Senate that sought to see if those changes were in compliance with the Constitution?
Probably not. Our politicians are no better than the Americans who voted for them, and Americans are, in general, morons. They're scientifically illiterate, and they don't even understand their own constitution. Welcome to Idiot America.
Don't be so hard on Americans, or people in general for that matter. For most of them "we're changing a line on the currency" is just one news item in a whole burble and comes very low on the priority scale, below keeping family healthy & happy, sex, finding or keeping a job or keeping up grades in school, work, friends, lovers, recreation, sports, dental appointments, vacation, raising children, caring for aging parents, making ends meet, etc. etc. We have a lot of security and leisure time that we take for granted.
Hmmm I get it. Then people that like to assert that the US was founded on 'Judeo-Christian principles' should stop pointing out to examples like the pledge to prove their point.
On a related note, India, though its Constitution calls it secular, is not really secular in the sense of having separation of church and state. Secularism in India essentially means appeasing all religions equally. We have different Marriage Acts for different religions, Muslims can practice polygamy, only Hindus can be legal parents after adoption; the rest would just be legal 'guardians', special concessions are given to Muslims going on a pilgrimage to Mecca, textbooks are rewritten if a particular snippet of history offends a religious community, often constructive projects like bridges don't go ahead if it is to be built over some mythological 'holy land'. I hope there are like-minded Indian readers here who understand that this is wrong, even if it is constitutionally right, and that secularism does not mean sucking up to every religion equally, but being oblivious to its presence while running the country.
Let us see the wild hair and beard!
Keep it, after all you do have a reputation as a heathen berserker to maintain.
Pirate gear photo op.
That so called "comic" with atheists and agnostics enjoying a friendly drink with the religious mayham in the background was the January 2, 2009 editorial cartoon in the Globe and Mail, Canadas' leading newspaper. Any chance a major US daily would have had the nerve to print that?
Nitpick time:
A bus matron who was supposed to be assisting a young man with cerebral palsy, Ed Wynn Rivera, abandoned him on the bus
This makes it sound as though Rivera was the bus matron. He was the passenger.
Accuracy matters, when we're talking about someone who committed a crime.
94% keep it secular. Given the current state of affairs in this country, I'd be willing to bet that god wants nothing to do with it anyway ;-).
I thought the comic was funny. And truthful.
And if you need another poll to crash, "Should the motto "In God We Trust" be removed from U.S. currency?" needs more pro-separation-of-church-and-state votes.