Also, I don’t often talk about politics, but I told you about the federal funding of religious schools bill that Joe Lieberman was pushing. I thought you might like an update. In this case, secular values won! Woot!

Here’s what the Secular Coalition for America said about the victory:

Two weeks ago, we alerted you to Sen. Joe Lieberman’s proposed amendment to the Senate jobs bill [...]]]> Remember the other day I told you I was working on my computer, installing some hardware upgrades? That saga continues and is yet to be resolved. Sigh! Unfortunately I know just enough about computers to get myself into trouble and not be able to fully get myself back out again. So I’m telling you because it’s taking up a lot of my brain power, trying to figure out how to get everything to play nice. So that’s that!

Also, I don’t often talk about politics, but I told you about the federal funding of religious schools bill that Joe Lieberman was pushing. I thought you might like an update. In this case, secular values won! Woot!

Here’s what the Secular Coalition for America said about the victory:

Two weeks ago, we alerted you to Sen. Joe Lieberman’s proposed amendment to the Senate jobs bill that would reauthorize the “D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program,” an initiative that forced American taxpayers to subsidize religious institutions through school vouchers.

A July 2009 report by Rutgers University on the D.C. voucher program concluded that the way the voucher program is structured “essentially push[es] students into Christian Association and Catholic schools, pricing out independent (non-religious) schools and Hebrew schools.”

Those of us who do not wish to subsidize religion with our tax dollars would continue to be forced to do so if Senator Lieberman had his way.

Thousands of you responded, writing to your senators to tell them that public funds should be never be used to pay for anyone’s religion. The amendment never made it to the jobs bill–though Senator Lieberman promised he would bring it back as soon as he could.

So the Secular Coalition for America took your message directly to the Senate. SCA staff met personally with over fifteen key senators to make the case that our tax dollars must not be used to fund religious activities, particularly in schools.

Tonight, Senator Lieberman managed to bring the amendment to the floor, attaching it this time to a bill funding the Federal Aviation Administration. Debate was heard, votes were cast, and the amendment was defeated, 42 to 55. We worked together, and helped to stop the unconstitutional public financing of religious education.

It’s only the latest sign that the secular movement is growing. Just last month, the Secular Coalition for America and representatives of the secular movement met with the Obama administration for an official policy briefing-the first of its kind for our movement in history-opening up new lines of dialogue between our community and the White House. Many more issues lay before us, and we need your help to keep up the momentum.

If you are interested, sign up for the SCA Action Alerts. When the rights and values of nontheistic Americans are on the line and you can put in your two cents, the SCA makes it really easy.

Want to see how your senators voted on this bill? Go here. Then if they voted nay, consider going to that senator’s official contact page and thanking them for respecting the separation of church and state.

Please keep commenting about Advertisements and Logical Fallacies. I am still thinking about your input for a follow-up.

Related posts

• Tell your Senator to Stop the Federal Funding of Religious Schools (0)
• Your Two Cents About the Faith Based Initiative Program (0)
• Don’t Give Up! (2)
• Today’s Score: Atheists 2, Churches -100 (5)
• Separation of church and State Benefits Everyone (24)

By design, voucher programs aid struggling Christian schools. A July 2009 report by Rutgers University on the D.C. voucher program concluded that the way the voucher program is structured “essentially push[es] students into Christian Association and Catholic schools, pricing out independent (non-religious) schools and Hebrew schools.”

By continuing this program, those of us who do not wish to subsidize someone else’s church [...]]]> Last night Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) filed a D.C. voucher amendment to the second jobs bill under consideration by the Senate.  The D.C. voucher program uses taxpayer funds to pay for parents to send their children to private religious schools. The program is called the “D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program,” but a 2007 government report found that these vouchers do not give D.C. students seeking a private school education sufficient secular choices, forcing them to attend religious schools or remain in the failing public school system.

By design, voucher programs aid struggling Christian schools. A July 2009 report by Rutgers University on the D.C. voucher program concluded that the way the voucher program is structured “essentially push[es] students into Christian Association and Catholic schools, pricing out independent (non-religious) schools and Hebrew schools.”

By continuing this program, those of us who do not wish to subsidize someone else’s church will continue to be forced to do so through our federal tax dollars.

The vote will occur sometime today. Please take five minutes and email your Senators below and tell them to vote against this amendment that would re-authorize this program.

The Secular Coalition for America opposes the use of government funds for religious purposes, including vouchers for religious schools. We agree with the founders of the United States that no individual taxpayer should be required to pay for someone else’s religion. We agree with James Madison. Senator Lieberman wants us to go in a different direction.

The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship, with your tax money, funds and enables proselytizing and religious discrimination. Recipients of the vouchers who attend religious schools are not even allowed to opt out of religious activities at their school—a direct affront to religious freedom.

It is critical that you write your Senators today and ask them to oppose Sen. Lieberman’s amendment that would re-authorize this program and spend your taxes to fund the religious education of children in D.C.

Go to Secular Coalition for America to send a letter today.

Related posts

• Your Two Cents About the Faith Based Initiative Program (0)
• Don’t Give Up! (2)
• Today’s Score: Atheists 2, Churches -100 (5)
• Separation of church and State Benefits Everyone (24)
• Podcasts and Internet Radio Stations You May Enjoy (0)

Seriously, this country was founded on the incredibly important idea of religion and politics being separate. If you want to see a country where there is no separation, just go to Iran. I’m pretty sure they are a theocracy. Don’t hold me to that, though. My world politics skills have never been very sharp.

Anyway, I think letter writing campaigns work best when the people or organization targeted gets absolutely inundated from all over the place with the same request. Here is what the [...]]]> The Secular Coalition of America sent me a request a few minutes ago, asking me to write a letter to Obama about the Faith Based Initiative Program. I pretty much keep my nose out of politics, but I thought I’d pass this along because I firmly believe in the Separation of Church and State as my God Given Right!

Seriously, this country was founded on the incredibly important idea of religion and politics being separate. If you want to see a country where there is no separation, just go to Iran. I’m pretty sure they are a theocracy. Don’t hold me to that, though. My world politics skills have never been very sharp.

Anyway, I think letter writing campaigns work best when the people or organization targeted gets absolutely inundated from all over the place with the same request. Here is what the Secular Coalition for America says:

As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama promised to abide by “a few basic principles” that would protect the constitutional separation of church and state in his plan for an expanded faith based initiative program. He was specific: “First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them – or against the people you hire – on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs.”

On February 5, 2009 President Obama issued his Executive Order establishing his Faith Based Intiative program. Twelve months later at the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama claimed that his administration had “turned the faith-based initiative around” from its misuse during the Bush administration. But it appears the only thing President Obama has changed about how millions of federal dollars are spent is that the office guiding the direct funding of houses of worship is now called the “White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships” rather than the “Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives.” Twelve months, Two words. That’s not a turn around, it’s a re-branding.

Go Here to Send a Letter to Obama through the Secular Coalition of America. Hey, maybe if enough of us say something it might just make a difference.The Secular Coalition for America has called for reform and oversight of the Office and the agencies that it oversees for years. Government reports and hearings have documented the constitutional problems and gross abuses rampant in this program, but a year later all Americans continue to have their federal dollars used for government-condoned religious discrimination, while reforms to prohibit proselytizing in these purportedly secular social service programs have still not been enacted.

No law is required to fix this – simply the stroke of a Presidential pen.

America’s Founding Fathers strongly believed in a clear separation between church and state. They gave us a Constitution that forbids government to support or oppose any religion, leaving Americans free to follow their own consciences when it comes to matters of faith. In the words of the First Amendment, government shall make “no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”

Churches and other houses of worship are free to spread their beliefs. But they are expected to raise their own funds through the voluntary contributions of the faithful. Taxation to support religion and religious endeavors was forbidden under the Founders’ constitutional framework. No American should be compelled through taxation to subsidize any religion. Twelve months, Two words.

I will resist the urge to climb up on my tallest soapbox and rail against the machine and leave you with another lolcat lolbear.

Related posts

• Tell your Senator to Stop the Federal Funding of Religious Schools (0)
• Remaking America – Day One (4)
• My Letter To President Obama (0)
• Separation of church and State Benefits Everyone (24)
• Kingsville: King of Ignorance (7)

From January 1, 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law became operational, and those in Atheist Ireland began their campaign to have it repealed. Blasphemy is now a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. The new law defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of [...]]]> From Michael Nugent in Ireland, I found the following and thought I’d spread the blasphemy around and share it with you. Here’s to hoping Ireland gets a bit of sense and repeals this dangerous and ridiculous law. It’s a giant step backwards for human progress, as is the UN blasphemy movement that’s been going on for awhile now. I’ve added some nice religious imagery for eye candy.

From January 1, 2010, the new Irish blasphemy law became operational, and those in Atheist Ireland began their campaign to have it repealed. Blasphemy is now a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine. The new law defines blasphemy as publishing or uttering matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby intentionally causing outrage among a substantial number of adherents of that religion, with some defences permitted.

This new law is both silly and dangerous. It is silly because medieval religious laws have no place in a modern secular republic, where the criminal law should protect people and not ideas. And it is dangerous because it incentives religious outrage, and because Islamic States led by Pakistan are already using the wording of this Irish law to promote new blasphemy laws at UN level.

We believe in the golden rule: that we have a right to be treated justly, and that we have a responsibility to treat other people justly. Blasphemy laws are unjust: they silence people in order to protect ideas. In a civilised society, people have a right to to express and to hear ideas about religion even if other people find those ideas to be outrageous.

Publication of 25 blasphemous quotes

In this context we now publish a list of 25 blasphemous quotes, which have previously been published by or uttered by or attributed to Jesus Christ, Muhammad, Mark Twain, Tom Lehrer, Randy Newman, James Kirkup, Monty Python, Rev Ian Paisley, Conor Cruise O’Brien, Frank Zappa, Salman Rushdie, Bjork, Amanda Donohoe, George Carlin, Paul Woodfull, Jerry Springer the Opera, Tim Minchin, Richard Dawkins, Pope Benedict XVI, Christopher Hitchens, PZ Myers, Ian O’Doherty, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor and Dermot Ahern.

Despite these quotes being abusive and insulting in relation to matters held sacred by various religions, we unreservedly support the right of these people to have published or uttered them, and we unreservedly support the right of any Irish citizen to make comparable statements about matters held sacred by any religion without fear of being criminalised, and without having to prove to a court that a reasonable person would find any particular value in the statement.

Campaign begins to repeal the Irish blasphemy law

We ask Fianna Fail and the Green Party to repeal their anachronistic blasphemy law, as part of the revision of the Defamation Act that is included within the Act. We ask them to hold a referendum to remove the reference to blasphemy from the Irish Constitution.

We also ask all TDs and Senators to support a referendum to remove references to God from the Irish Constitution, including the clauses that prevent atheists from being appointed as President of Ireland or as a Judge without swearing a religious oath asking God to direct them in their work.

If you run a website, blog or other media publication, please feel free to republish this statement and the list of quotes yourself, in order to show your support for the campaign to repeal the Irish blasphemy law and to promote a rational, ethical, secular Ireland.

List of 25 Blasphemous Quotes Published by Atheist Ireland

1. Jesus Christ, when asked if he was the son of God, in Matthew 26:64: “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” According to the Christian Bible, the Jewish chief priests and elders and council deemed this statement by Jesus to be blasphemous, and they sentenced Jesus to death for saying it.

2. Jesus Christ, talking to Jews about their God, in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.” This is one of several chapters in the Christian Bible that can give a scriptural foundation to Christian anti-Semitism. The first part of John 8, the story of “whoever is without sin cast the first stone”, was not in the original version, but was added centuries later. The original John 8 is a debate between Jesus and some Jews. In brief, Jesus calls the Jews who disbelieve him sons of the Devil, the Jews try to stone him, and Jesus runs away and hides.

3. Muhammad, quoted in Hadith of Bukhari, Vol 1 Book 8 Hadith 427: “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” This quote is attributed to Muhammad on his death-bed as a warning to Muslims not to copy this practice of the Jews and Christians. It is one of several passages in the Koran and in Hadith that can give a scriptural foundation to Islamic anti-Semitism, including the assertion in Sura 5:60 that Allah cursed Jews and turned some of them into apes and swine.

4. Mark Twain, describing the Christian Bible in Letters from the Earth, 1909: “Also it has another name – The Word of God. For the Christian thinks every word of it was dictated by God. It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies… But you notice that when the Lord God of Heaven and Earth, adored Father of Man, goes to war, there is no limit. He is totally without mercy – he, who is called the Fountain of Mercy. He slays, slays, slays! All the men, all the beasts, all the boys, all the babies; also all the women and all the girls, except those that have not been deflowered. He makes no distinction between innocent and guilty… What the insane Father required was blood and misery; he was indifferent as to who furnished it.” Twain’s book was published posthumously in 1939. His daughter, Clara Clemens, at first objected to it being published, but later changed her mind in 1960 when she believed that public opinion had grown more tolerant of the expression of such ideas. That was half a century before Fianna Fail and the Green Party imposed a new blasphemy law on the people of Ireland.

5. Tom Lehrer, The Vatican Rag, 1963: “Get in line in that processional, step into that small confessional. There, the guy who’s got religion’ll tell you if your sin’s original. If it is, try playing it safer, drink the wine and chew the wafer. Two, four, six, eight, time to transubstantiate!”

6. Randy Newman, God’s Song, 1972: “And the Lord said: I burn down your cities – how blind you must be. I take from you your children, and you say how blessed are we. You all must be crazy to put your faith in me. That’s why I love mankind.”

7. James Kirkup, The Love That Dares to Speak its Name, 1976: “While they prepared the tomb I kept guard over him. His mother and the Magdalen had gone to fetch clean linen to shroud his nakedness. I was alone with him… I laid my lips around the tip of that great cock, the instrument of our salvation, our eternal joy. The shaft, still throbbed, anointed with death’s final ejaculation.” This extract is from a poem that led to the last successful blasphemy prosecution in Britain, when Denis Lemon was given a suspended prison sentence after he published it in the now-defunct magazine Gay News. In 2002, a public reading of the poem, on the steps of St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, failed to lead to any prosecution. In 2008, the British Parliament abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel.

8. Matthias, son of Deuteronomy of Gath, in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, 1979: “Look, I had a lovely supper, and all I said to my wife was that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah.”

9. Rev Ian Paisley MEP to the Pope in the European Parliament, 1988: “I denounce you as the Antichrist.” Paisley’s website describes the Antichrist as being “a liar, the true son of the father of lies, the original liar from the beginning… he will imitate Christ, a diabolical imitation, Satan transformed into an angel of light, which will deceive the world.”

10. Conor Cruise O’Brien, 1989: “In the last century the Arab thinker Jamal al-Afghani wrote: ‘Every Muslim is sick and his only remedy is in the Koran.’ Unfortunately the sickness gets worse the more the remedy is taken.”

11. Frank Zappa, 1989: “If you want to get together in any exclusive situation and have people love you, fine – but to hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of The Cloud-Guy who has The Big Book, who knows if you’ve been bad or good – and cares about any of it – to hang it all on that, folks, is the chimpanzee part of the brain working.”

12. Salman Rushdie, 1990: “The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas – uncertainty, progress, change – into crimes.” In 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie because of blasphemous passages in Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses.

13. Bjork, 1995: “I do not believe in religion, but if I had to choose one it would be Buddhism. It seems more livable, closer to men… I’ve been reading about reincarnation, and the Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fuck the Buddhists.”

14. Amanda Donohoe on her role in the Ken Russell movie Lair of the White Worm, 1995: “Spitting on Christ was a great deal of fun. I can’t embrace a male god who has persecuted female sexuality throughout the ages, and that persecution still goes on today all over the world.”

15. George Carlin, 1999: “Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!”

16. Paul Woodfull as Ding Dong Denny O’Reilly, The Ballad of Jaysus Christ, 2000: “He said me ma’s a virgin and sure no one disagreed, Cause they knew a lad who walks on water’s handy with his feet… Jaysus oh Jaysus, as cool as bleedin’ ice, With all the scrubbers in Israel he could not be enticed, Jaysus oh Jaysus, it’s funny you never rode, Cause it’s you I do be shoutin’ for each time I shoot me load.”

17. Jesus Christ, in Jerry Springer The Opera, 2003: “Actually, I’m a bit gay.” In 2005, the Christian Institute tried to bring a prosecution against the BBC for screening Jerry Springer the Opera, but the UK courts refused to issue a summons.

18. Tim Minchin, Ten-foot Cock and a Few Hundred Virgins, 2005: “So you’re gonna live in paradise, With a ten-foot cock and a few hundred virgins, So you’re gonna sacrifice your life, For a shot at the greener grass, And when the Lord comes down with his shiny rod of judgment, He’s gonna kick my heathen ass.”

19. Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion, 2006: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” In 2007 Turkish publisher Erol Karaaslan was charged with the crime of insulting believers for publishing a Turkish translation of The God Delusion. He was acquitted in 2008, but another charge was brought in 2009. Karaaslan told the court that “it is a right to criticise religions and beliefs as part of the freedom of thought and expression.”

20. Pope Benedict XVI quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor, 2006: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” This statement has already led to both outrage and condemnation of the outrage. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the world’s largest Muslim body, said it was a “character assassination of the prophet Muhammad”. The Malaysian Prime Minister said that “the Pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created.” Pakistan’s foreign Ministry spokesperson said that “anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence”. The European Commission said that “reactions which are disproportionate and which are tantamount to rejecting freedom of speech are unacceptable.”

21. Christopher Hitchens in God is not Great, 2007: “There is some question as to whether Islam is a separate religion at all… Islam when examined is not much more than a rather obvious and ill-arranged set of plagiarisms, helping itself from earlier books and traditions as occasion appeared to require… It makes immense claims for itself, invokes prostrate submission or ‘surrender’ as a maxim to its adherents, and demands deference and respect from nonbelievers into the bargain. There is nothing-absolutely nothing-in its teachings that can even begin to justify such arrogance and presumption.”

22. PZ Myers, on the Roman Catholic communion host, 2008: “You would not believe how many people are writing to me, insisting that these horrible little crackers (they look like flattened bits of styrofoam) are literally pieces of their god, and that this omnipotent being who created the universe can actually be seriously harmed by some third-rate liberal intellectual at a third-rate university… However, inspired by an old woodcut of Jews stabbing the host, I thought of a simple, quick thing to do: I pierced it with a rusty nail (I hope Jesus’s tetanus shots are up to date). And then I simply threw it in the trash, followed by the classic, decorative items of trash cans everywhere, old coffeegrounds and a banana peel.”

23. Ian O’Doherty, 2009: “(If defamation of religion was illegal) it would be a crime for me to say that the notion of transubstantiation is so ridiculous that even a small child should be able to see the insanity and utter physical impossibility of a piece of bread and some wine somehow taking on corporeal form. It would be a crime for me to say that Islam is a backward desert superstition that has no place in modern, enlightened Europe and it would be a crime to point out that Jewish settlers in Israel who believe they have a God given right to take the land are, frankly, mad. All the above assertions will, no doubt, offend someone or other.”

24. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, 2009: “Whether a person is atheist or any other, there is in fact in my view something not totally human if they leave out the transcendent… we call it God… I think that if you leave that out you are not fully human.” Because atheism is not a religion, the Irish blasphemy law does not protect atheists from abusive and insulting statements about their fundamental beliefs. While atheists are not seeking such protection, we include the statement here to point out that it is discriminatory that this law does not hold all citizens equal.

25. Dermot Ahern, Irish Minister for Justice, introducing his blasphemy law at an Oireachtas Justice Committee meeting, 2009, and referring to comments made about him personally: “They are blasphemous.” Deputy Pat Rabbitte replied: “Given the Minister’s self-image, it could very well be that we are blaspheming,” and Minister Ahern replied: “Deputy Rabbitte says that I am close to the baby Jesus, I am so pure.” So here we have an Irish Justice Minister joking about himself being blasphemed, at a parliamentary Justice Committee discussing his own blasphemy law, that could make his own jokes illegal.

Finally, as a bonus, Micheal Martin, Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs, opposing attempts by Islamic States to make defamation of religion a crime at UN level, 2009: “We believe that the concept of defamation of religion is not consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights. It can be used to justify arbitrary limitations on, or the denial of, freedom of expression. Indeed, Ireland considers that freedom of expression is a key and inherent element in the manifestation of freedom of thought and conscience and as such is complementary to freedom of religion or belief.” Just months after Minister Martin made this comment, his colleague Dermot Ahern introduced Ireland’s new blasphemy law.

Related posts

• The Law Of Attraction- And The Secret -Are Bullshit (75)
• islam: Religion of Misogynists, Pedophiles and Barbarians (76)
• Belief, Unbelief and The Scientific Method (19)
• A Rational Chain E-mail (4)
• Young Earth Invasion (6)

]]> http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2010/01/28/25-blasphemous-quotes-from-atheist-ireland/feed/ 4 http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/12/24/why-do-christians-hate-the-aclu/ http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/12/24/why-do-christians-hate-the-aclu/#comments Fri, 25 Dec 2009 00:06:47 +0000 Johnny http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/?p=2263 Because I’m sure many just see it as a title, or an acronym, and recall their mention in the news involving lawsuits, lets start by answering a basic: What is the ACLU?

American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 by Crystal Eastman, Roger Baldwin and Walter Nelles. It was founded to assist in defending the rights of citizens as granted by the United States Constitution. At the time, the three biggest concerns were freedom of speech (for anti-war protesters), civil rights for blacks (and other minority races), and equal rights for women. On their site, the ACLU proclaims themselves as a “guardian of liberty, working [...] to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.”

This is the group who has time-and-time again gone to bat for the ‘little guy’ to insure their Constitutional [...]]]> Because I’m sure many just see it as a title, or an acronym, and recall their mention in the news involving lawsuits, lets start by answering a basic: What is the ACLU?

American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 by Crystal Eastman, Roger Baldwin and Walter Nelles. It was founded to assist in defending the rights of citizens as granted by the United States Constitution. At the time, the three biggest concerns were freedom of speech (for anti-war protesters), civil rights for blacks (and other minority races), and equal rights for women. On their site, the ACLU proclaims themselves as a “guardian of liberty, working [...] to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.”

This is the group who has time-and-time again gone to bat for the ‘little guy’ to insure their Constitutional rights as a citizen and a human are upheld. The Christian’s very doctrine urges them to help the weak, the sick, the poor, the unfortunate, the ‘little guy’. So why do so many Christians harbor such vitriol and hate towards the ACLU?

Personally, I think it boils down to two things:

1. Christian think they are under attack; so they look for that attacker in every action.
2. It is a common human reaction to fear the unknown; and Christians fail to understand, even refuse to understand what the ACLU represents.

As for the attacks, Christians have read stories and prophesies in the bible about Christians being persecuted; and so they look for persecution and attack everywhere. They seek to self-fulfill prophesy; and they see a potential persecutor in anyone who does not have the same life philosophies as they do. Their need to see these prophesies fulfilled goes so far that they even see persecution from other branches of Christianity. I see no universal way to combat this, especially on a large scale; so I simply look for those opportunities to help an individual see the light.

Ignorance and lack of knowledge can by combated though. I think the root of this ignorance lies in lack of understand of the principle of Separation of Church and state. So many Christians strive to tear down that wall of separation, without a clue to how that wall protects them and their ability to practice their flavor of Christianity as they see fit.

The ACLU has done some great work defending civil liberties and the rights we are given by our Constitution; but all Christians seem to notice today is their involvement with lawsuits that relate to religion (and of that they are really only noticing one side). And without knowing an ounce of the facts, jump to the assumption that the lawsuits are an attack against Christians. Never once stopping to realize that in many of these cases the ACLU is actually defending the ‘little guy’ from Christianity.

Even when the ACLU is defending the ‘little guy’ from Christians, the ACLU is not against Christianity. The majority of their staff and membership are Christians; and they have repeatedly defended Christians when the rights of those Christians were not being upheld. One of the most recent examples, pentecostal minister Howard Thompson Jr. used to preach during worship services at the New Jersey State Prison, until a few years ago when prison officials stopped him. Multiple religious and Christian defense groups stood by and did nothing; it was the ACLU who went to bat for Mr. Thompson’s rights, and it was the ACLU who won the case for him.

This isn’t the only case that the ACLU has gone to bat for a Christian; here is a list of some of the more prominent cases where the ACLU defended the right of a Christian to speak as a Christian or to practice Christianity. Yet few Christians seem to realize this; most Christians have bought into the conservative media’s constant claim that the ACLU is out to bring down Christianity.

The ACLU fights for INDIVIDUAL free exercise of religion (just as the Constitution specifies). The ACLU also fights against GOVERNMENT endorsement, sponsorship, or establishment of religion (again just as the Constitution specifies).

Now to the heart of what brought on this rant. Someone sent me this email not long ago (warning: obnoxious chain email incoming):

Pass this on to your church, co-workers, family, and friends. What do you have to lose but 44 cents, what do you have to gain? More than you will ever know!

What a clever idea!

Yes, Christmas cards! This is coming early so that you can get ready to include an important address to your list.

Want to have some fun this CHRISTMAS? Send the ACLU a CHRISTMAS CARD this year.

As they are working so very hard to get rid of the CHRISTMAS part of this holiday, we should all send them a nice, CHRISTIAN card to brighten up their dark, sad, little world.

Make sure it says “Merry Christmas” on it.

Here’s the address, just don’t be rude or crude (it’s not the Christian way, you know):
ACLU
125 Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004

Two tons of Christmas cards would freeze their operations because they wouldn’t know if any were regular mail containing contributions. So spend 44 cents and tell the ACLU to leave Christmas alone. Also tell them that there is no such thing as a ” Holiday Tree”! It’s always been called a CHRISTMAS TREE!

Please pass this on to your email lists. We really want to communicate with the ACLU! They really DESERVE us!!

For those of you who aren’t aware of them, the ACLU, (the American Civil Liberties Union) is the one suing the U.S. Government to take God, Christmas or anything Christian away from us. They represent the atheists and others in this war.

Help put Christ back in Christmas!

I’ve already addressed most of the subtle hate and lies from this email; so I’ll let the Executive Director of the ACLU of Texas respond:

And just in case you need further fodder to throw at this spiteful and inaccurate email, Snopes has an article on it. In it they point out that some businesses replacing “Merry Christmas” with “Happy Holidays” or “Seasons Greetings” was NOT done under litigation or threat from the ACLU; but instead did so (proactively) to appeal to a broader customer base. They also point out the logically laughable idea of overwhelming the ACLU office with Christmas cards.

If you receive, or previously received the above letter, I encourage you to reply with a link to the above video. Whichever holiday you and yours celebrate, I wish you well and hope its enjoyable.

Happy Whatever Holiday You’re Weirdly Touchy About!

Sources: here, here, here, here, here,here, here, and here.

Related posts

• Kingsville: King of Ignorance (7)
• [UPDATED] Thousands of Tax Payer Dollars to Add Engraving to Capitol Visitor Center (5)
• JFK Had the Right Idea (0)
• Honor Killings are Illegal? Turkey Resorts To Honor Suicides For Women (12)
• Congress Goes to Recess – Secular Successes and Failures So Far This Year (7)

]]> http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/12/24/why-do-christians-hate-the-aclu/feed/ 5 http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/12/07/dont-give-up/ http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/12/07/dont-give-up/#comments Tue, 08 Dec 2009 03:10:28 +0000 Neece http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/?p=2307 To the Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia, don’t give up! Fight the good fight!

I just read an article by Staks Rosch in the Philadelphia Examiner about the FSGP and their Tree of Knowledge. It’s an evergreen tree decorated with book covers (how shocking, how impudent!) from books representing knowledge, education, science, philosophy, morality, diversity and curiosity. (I am so offended! What? No Twilight?! No Dan Brown?!) Here is a complete list of the books represented.

Staks makes some points that I really like: “[The Tree of Knowledge]  is not an attack on religion, but rather an expression of an alternative set of values (i.e. knowledge and reason).”

How horrific! Now I understand why the good christians of the area are so up in arms, vandalizing the tree and organizing call campaigns to get it removed. And why the [...]]]> To the Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia, don’t give up! Fight the good fight!

I just read an article by Staks Rosch in the Philadelphia Examiner about the FSGP and their Tree of Knowledge. It’s an evergreen tree decorated with book covers (how shocking, how impudent!) from books representing knowledge, education, science, philosophy, morality, diversity and curiosity. (I am so offended! What? No Twilight?! No Dan Brown?!) Here is a complete list of the books represented.

Staks makes some points that I really like: “[The Tree of Knowledge]  is not an attack on religion, but rather an expression of an alternative set of values (i.e. knowledge and reason).”

How horrific! Now I understand why the good christians of the area are so up in arms, vandalizing the tree and organizing call campaigns to get it removed. And why the county is bending to the will of one religion on government property. It’s just so hateful to have a tree decorated with thoughtful, intelligent books. What? Oh? It’s not threatening at all? EXACTLY! WTF!

Staks also says, “Many Christians have claimed that the inclusion of humanist values next to the Jesus Crèche is an attempt to “steal” Christmas. It seems that many Christians are of the opinion that Christians own the winter season. They do not.”

Later he says, “Atheists aren’t trying to “steal” Christmas any more than Christians stole Saturnalia… oh wait, never mind.” Again, I agree completely.

This kind of thing makes me so angry. Religious organizations bully their way into having their cake and eating it too. Politicians and the masses alike bend to that will for what reason? Why do they get to own most holidays? My sister in law is offended when I say happy holidays instead of merry christmas. It’s the classic bully at the pulpit who then cries and runs for the government to protect him when someone brings up that he’s breaking the law or that he’s being a bully.

christians and muslims don’t want to play fair. They want to win. Which is why I am an activist atheist. I don’t want to be forced to pray to a man in the sky that doesn’t exist. I am moral and ethical on my own without being forced into the barbaric false ethics of an iron aged society of goat herders from the Middle East.

I suppose here in Morgantown, if such inequities are occurring, we’ll put up an atheist/humanist display soon too. At this time, I am not aware of any. But I haven’t checked every government building lawn for crèches either.

Keep an eye out in your town. If you see religious displays on government property, take action, form a group. You can then turn it into a community of like-minded people like we’ve got here in our sleepy little town. It’s the most wonderful feeling to hang out with a bunch of freethinkers. But don’t just take things lying down. Don’t let the religious people bully us into giving up our freedoms and our constitutional rights just because we are too apathetic to make a stand for those rights.

EDIT: The Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia has helpful hints for setting up your own Tree of Knowledge.

Related posts

• Why I Am Not A Christian (0)
• What Other Deities Were Born On Jesus’ Birthday? (9)
• The Reason I Speak Out Against Religion (20)
• Morals, Ethics and Pope Benedict Evil (13)
• How To Talk To A True Believer About Atheism And Religion (32)

]]> http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/12/07/dont-give-up/feed/ 2 http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/11/10/jfk-had-the-right-idea/ http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/11/10/jfk-had-the-right-idea/#comments Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:19:31 +0000 Johnny http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/?p=2217 I stumbled upon a transcript on the National Public Radio site awhile-back. It was a speech made by John F. Kennedy in 1960, given to a group of Protestant ministers a few months before the election. JFK was a devout Catholic, but he was also had a solid understanding of the separation of church and state; this speech has some excellent excerpts that exemplify this. JFK was the first Catholic elected president, and during the elections other religious groups (primarily the Protestant group) were concerned about rumors that he would send an ambassador to the Vatican and be taking direction from the Pope. As it turned-out, it was Reagan who established the first ambassador to the Vatican in 1984.

So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again not what kind of church I believe in — for that should be important only to [...]]]> I stumbled upon a transcript on the National Public Radio site awhile-back. It was a speech made by John F. Kennedy in 1960, given to a group of Protestant ministers a few months before the election. JFK was a devout Catholic, but he was also had a solid understanding of the separation of church and state; this speech has some excellent excerpts that exemplify this. JFK was the first Catholic elected president, and during the elections other religious groups (primarily the Protestant group) were concerned about rumors that he would send an ambassador to the Vatican and be taking direction from the Pope. As it turned-out, it was Reagan who established the first ambassador to the Vatican in 1984.

So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again not what kind of church I believe in — for that should be important only to me — but what kind of America I believe in.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, where no Catholic prelate would tell the president (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote; where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference; and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the president who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish; where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on 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 treated as an act against all.

If only politicians today would take this view, instead of attacking that wall of separation.

That is the kind of America in which I believe. And it represents the kind of presidency in which I believe — a great office that must neither be humbled by making it the instrument of any one religious group, nor tarnished by arbitrarily withholding its occupancy from the members of any one religious group. I believe in a president whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation, or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.

Truly he was a politician who understood the founding of our county; for although beliefs of our founding fathers may have varied, they knew that the success of the nation depended upon religious freedom, and to have religious freedom you must have separation of church and state.

You can find the full speech transcript on NPR’s site.

Related posts

• [UPDATED] Thousands of Tax Payer Dollars to Add Engraving to Capitol Visitor Center (5)
• Your Two Cents About the Faith Based Initiative Program (0)
• Why Do Christians Hate The ACLU? (5)
• Separation of church and State Benefits Everyone (24)
• Kingsville: King of Ignorance (7)

]]> http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2009/11/10/jfk-had-the-right-idea/feed/ 0