• About

    I’m Daniel Florien—blogger, writer and designer. I was an evangelical Christian for over a decade but am now an atheist & skeptic.

    Read more about my journey.

    New Community Forum

    Unreasonable Faith Forum

    Check out the new UF forum and experience our community in a whole new way.

Depressingly Accurate Satire in The Onion

By Jesse Galef on November 15, 2009 in Humor, Politics.

by Jesse Galef

Satire, constitutional law, and religion… is it my birthday already? (For the record: no, that’s in April. Send gifts.) This recent Onion article is perfect: Area Man Passionate Defender of What He Imagines Constitution to Be

ESCONDIDO, CA—Spurred by an administration he believes to be guilty of numerous transgressions, self-described American patriot Kyle Mortensen, 47, is a vehement defender of ideas he seems to think are enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and principles that brave men have fought and died for solely in his head.

“Our very way of life is under siege,” said Mortensen, whose understanding of the Constitution derives not from a close reading of the document but from talk-show pundits, books by television personalities, and the limitless expanse of his own colorful imagination. “It’s time for true Americans to stand up and protect the values that make us who we are.”
According to Mortensen—an otherwise mild-mannered husband, father, and small-business owner—the most serious threat to his fanciful version of the 222-year-old Constitution is the attempt by far-left “traitors” to strip it of its religious foundation.

“Right there in the preamble, the authors make their priorities clear: ‘one nation under God,’” said Mortensen, attributing to the Constitution a line from the Pledge of Allegiance, which itself did not include any reference to a deity until 1954. “Well, there’s a reason they put that right at the top.”

I find this hilarious, but partly because it’s so close to real life – as good satire must be. So many of the people vehemently opinionated on the separation of church and state don’t have any sense of what the constitution says on the subject or the history is. They often get our patriotic documents mixed up – even House Minority Leader John Boehner gets it wrong (check out my friend Paul Fidalgo’s article at Examiner.com).

Is there any way we can politely tell citizens “Here’s a copy of the Constitution for you to read, please don’t vote until you finish it”?

Comments (20)

Yet More Vandalism

By Jesse Galef on November 15, 2009 in Atheism.

by Jesse Galef

Just in case you wanted another opportunity to discuss the vandalism of atheist ads, there’s another incident in Boston:

Vandalized Boston CoR Ad

It… kind of makes sense? Not completely sure what they were going for.

My friend Hemant over at FriendlyAtheist pointed out a hilarious coincidence that the vandals could have exploited: If they put a single period in the web address, instead of going to the Boston Coalition of Reason, visitors find themselves at the Church of Resurrection website. Almost as funny as when people make a mistake trying to get to Whitehouse.gov…

Comments (21)

Rep Woolsey Stands up for Secular Government

By Jesse Galef on November 14, 2009 in Abortion, Catholicism, Current Events, Politics.

by Jesse Galef

It was a good week for separation of church and state. The “I Believe” license plate was ruled unconstitutional, the DC Council might have the courage to stand up to the Archdiocese threats, and here’s one from earlier in the week I missed – Representative Lynn Woolsey, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, wrote an op-ed in Politico calling for greater IRS scrutiny on the way the United States Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) influenced the healthcare bill.

The role the bishops played in the pushing the Stupak amendment, which unfairly restricts access for low-income women to insurance coverage for abortions, was more than mere advocacy.

They seemed to dictate the finer points of the amendment, and managed to bully members of Congress to vote for added restrictions on a perfectly legal surgical procedure.
…
The IRS is less restrictive about church involvement in efforts to influence legislation than it is about involvement in campaigns and elections.

Given the political behavior of USCCB in this case, maybe it shouldn’t be.

What does it say about me that I was immensely cheered up by this?

Woolsey is absolutely right on this point – trying to affect legislation through lobbying is getting into sketchy territory for a 501(c)3 like the USCCB. Such nonprofits get their tax-exempt status and are not allowed to devote significant time lobbying. That’s what a 501(c)4 designation is for.

At the Secular Coalition for America, we were a 501(c)4 because we had the express purpose of lobbying congress and the administration. As a result, donations we received were not tax-deductible. Them’s the breaks. The ACLU, by the way, is in the same boat. My monthly donations are not tax-deductible (not that it makes a difference on the scale that I donate).

I don’t know if what the USCCB did was too much lobbying for a 501(c)3 – but that’s just the point, we don’t know if the IRS doesn’t investigate, and we have reason to be suspicious:

The influence the USCCB showed in the debate was considerable, the Wall Street Journal reports, calling the group “a major political force with the potential to upend a key piece of President Barack Obama’s agenda.”

The Journal reports that the USCCB swayed Congress with “behind-the-scenes lobbying, coupled with a grassroots mobilization of Catholic churches across the country.” Along with conducting private meetings with lawmakers like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the group circulated to churches a prayer supporting health care reform that included the phrase, “We will raise our voices to protect the unborn.”

Of course, we can count on other elected officials to completely miss the validity and nuance of the problem:

Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), who is Catholic, took to his Twitter account today to defend the USCCB, the Hill reports.

“The nerve of some citizens to petition their government,” he wrote. “In Woolsey-land, free speech is cause for retribution.”

Wow, is McHenry really calling for a complete overhaul of the non-profit system? Is he saying that even organizations getting special tax privileges should be allowed to influence government in any way they choose?

Or is he just clueless on separation of church and state?

Comments (14)

Indianapolis Schools Ban Atheism Websites

By Jesse Galef on November 14, 2009 in Atheism, Current Events, Religion.

by Jesse Galef

The Indianapolis Public School system has a policy to ban certain websites from being viewed at school.  I certainly hated it when I was in high school (we found ways to bypass it if course) but it’s a reasonable idea.  And the list of subjects banned is pretty straightforward: Pornography, Social Networking, Atheism and “Alternative Spirituality”, Games –

Wait, what?  Sites on ‘alternative spirituality’ are banned?  From the policy (pdf hosted on FFRF website):

“Sites that promote and provide information on religions such as Wicca, Witchcraft or Satanism.  Occult Practices, atheistic views, voodoo rituals or other forms of mysticism are represented here…  This category includes sites which discuss or deal with paranormal or unexplained events.”  [emphasis mine]

Any site addressing LGBT issues or sexual identity is also banned – great idea for the kids going through confusing times, right?

Ok, first of all, I don’t know why “atheistic views” are in the same category as Satanism.  But ignoring that idiocy, this is hugely discriminatory.  “Normal” religious sites are allowed, but not the “scary minority” religious views.  I could understand if all religious sites were banned but there’s no way to justify banning only some.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation is on the case, writing a letter to the superintendent and urging people to voice their concerns.

Comments (84)

How Observant Are You?

By Jesse Galef on November 14, 2009 in Evidence, Psychology, Science, Videos.

by Jesse Galef

I’m always astounded at how poor data-gathering devices we humans are.  Forget all the hallucinations and misinterpretations, we simply don’t notice or retain most of what happens around us.  Here’s a great demonstration (via Richard Wiseman’s blog)

I was pretty pathetic. How did you all do?

This is one of the reasons we developed the scientific method. Trusting our senses and powers of observation failed us too many times. We recognize our own shortcomings and try to overcome them.

Comments (21)

Neil deGrasse Tyson’s Contagious Enthusiasm

By Jesse Galef on November 13, 2009 in Science, Technology, Videos.

by Jesse Galef

Those of you who also follow my posts at FriendlyAtheist know I’m a huge fan of Neil deGrasse Tyson. I think he’s an excellent science communicator and role model. He’s so enthusiastic about science and he makes others interested through his exuberance.

Back story (taken from the youtube info):

TIME recently went to interview Neil deGrasse Tyson and we noticed a huge crate had been delivered to his office. He was then kind enough to open it on-camera. The back story of this gift is that Neil was adamant that ABC News include the Saturn V Rocket on its list of The 7 Wonders of America. The folks at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama were so grateful, they sent Neil a replica.


I’ve watched this several times and I still find myself compelled to smile each time.  Learning things is fun, but Tyson manages to have fun while inspiring a sense of awe and wonder.

[Holding his new model of the Saturn V] This and only this is the only piece of hardware to ever take humans to another world.   The space shuttle… is cool, but it goes into Earth orbit -- you’re still attached to the earth.  This thing gets you off of Earth into space… to another world.

…

I submit to you that this is the crowning achievement of human ingenuity and the fulfillment of dreams in the history of what it is to be human.

Wonderful.

Comments (9)

Aliens vs Demons

By Jesse Galef on November 13, 2009 in Myth, Paranormal, Psychology, Science.

by Jesse Galef

Can you tell the difference between Aliens and Demons?  If you were visited in the night by an intelligent, non-human entity, could you really distinguish between them?  (In a sidenote I’m not addressing right now, how would you know the voice in your head is God and not a tricky demon?  How do you know devils can’t impersonate voices?)

Although nobody would know it in an age with laptops and cell phones, I’m in New York City right now. I hopped on a bus to go see my sister Julia Galef give a presentation on rationality – my first post was written while on the BoltBus, actually. The talk was entitled “Aliens, Psychics and Ghosts, Oh My! Or, How Our Brains Fool Us Into Believing Strange Things.” I thoroughly enjoyed it.

NightmareJohn Henry Fuseli’s 1781 painting “The Nightmare” is now seen as a classic account of sleep paralysis accredited to a demon

One interesting point was that while reports of alien abductions are a relatively new phenomenon, the psychological reasons behind such hallucinations are not.  However, instead of blaming aliens, people used to blame the bad boys of the supernatural world: Demons.

In “alien abductions”, people tend to report waking up, feeling pinned down and unable to move, seeing visions of visitors, and often experiencing sexual stimulation. These are the familiar symptoms of sleep paralysis and hypnopompic hallucinations.

During sleep, the brain stops controlling the muscles – that’s why we don’t flail around in our sleep as we act out our dreams. Sometimes when woken from a deep sleep, the brain doesn’t immediately retake control, leaving the poor person both awake and unable to move (This has happened to me, and I was lucid enough to recognize what was happening.  It was a fascinating experience.)   It can be particularly difficult to breathe.   When woken up from a deep sleep, a person is also prone to vivid hallucinations. This combination explains the commonly heard reports of alien abductions.

But before aliens, people interpreted those perceptions as demons – same symptoms, different supernatural explanation.  Online Etymology says the term “Nightmare” originally meant “an evil female spirit afflicting sleepers with a feeling of suffocation”.  Sound familiar?

John Henry Fuseli’s painting “The Nightmare” shows an evil-looking imp sitting on a woman’s chest while she lies in bed. Psychologists now believe it to be an early representation of sleep paralysis.  It’s telling that the same evidence can fit seamlessly into countless supernatural  theories.

How cool is it that we can look at ancient experiences people thought were supernatural and explain them in scientific ways?  Epilepsy, schizophrenia, sleep paralysis, oxygen/sensory/nutritional deprivation… The gaps keep getting smaller and there’s less and less room for God.

Comments (28)

Archdiocese of DC Makes Strange Threat

By Jesse Galef on November 13, 2009 in Current Events, Humanitarianism, Politics.

by Jesse Galef

The poor Vatican

The Catholic Church tries to foster a reputation for their good works with the poor (unless of course the poor want to use condoms, the naughty boys). Given their desired public image, I was rather surprised to read that they’re threatening to stop providing care unless they’re allowed to discriminate against homosexuals:

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn’t change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Yeah, that just screams “charity” and “compassion” to me.

When I worked at the Secular Coalition for America, we did a lot of lobbying on the Faith-Based Initiatives. It was our position that, at the least, any organization receiving federal money should abide by the reasonable secular federal anti-discrimination laws.

And Catholic Charities – the 501(c)3 nonprofit arm of the Church – IS receiving federal dollars. Millions of federal dollars. Do they expect that money to come completely without any conditions?  It is not a fundamental right to receive $8.2 million in federal contracts.

Council member David Catania has the right idea, saying “If they find living under our laws so oppressive that they can no longer take city resources, the city will have to find an alternative partner to step in to fill the shoes.”

I think my friend Rob Boston at Americans United for Separation of Church and State put it best on the AU blog:

Let me get this straight: The church is saying, “Unless you bow to our demands, we’ll stop taking your money”?

Church leaders really need to come up with some better threats.

Decisions, decisions…

Comments (23)