American Atheist Magazine (Fourth Quarter 2015)

8/20/2019 American Atheist Magazine (Fourth Quarter 2015)

1/48

A JOURNAL OF ATHEIST NEWS AND THOUGHT

A MERICAN A THEIST

Display until Feb. 29Fall 1595

ATHEISTS.ORG FOURTH QUARTER 2015

Also in this issue:

Fighting God

Atheist Rock Band Monster On Sunday Te Moses Story for Nonbelievers

WHY AHEISSMUSVOTE


2/48

NOW PLAYING

T ’ TV A 24/7

Two ways to watch Atheist TV!

R Roku devices start at $50 and are available from Roku.comor the electronics departments of major stores. Te deviceplugs into any HDMI-equipped set and connects to your wifinetwork. A remote control is included, which allows you toaccess video on demand. You can also watch in real time, 24hours a day. Tere is no monthly fee or any additional cost for aRoku device, but you must have an active wifi connection.

I Watch Atheist V online for free at www.Atheists.tv.


3/48

www.atheists.org | AMERICAN ATHEIST | 34TH QUARTER 2015

“Most importantly, I brought my Bible,” said Donald Trump at the Values Voter Summit

in Washington, D.C., on September 25. Read about our new Atheist Voter initiative onpage 30. Al l photos by Nick Fish

In This Issue

AMERICAN ATHEISTA Journal of Atheist News and Thought

4th Quarter 2015

Vol. 53, No. 4

ISSN 0516-9623 (Print)

ISSN 1935-8369 (Online)

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Pamela [email protected]

AMERICAN ATHEIST PRESSMANAGING EDITOR

Frank R. [email protected]

LAYOUT and GRAPHICS EDITORRick Wingrove

[email protected]

Published byAmerican Atheists, Inc.

Mailing Address:P.O. Box 158

Cranford, NJ 07016Phone: 908.276.7300

FAX: 908.276.7402www.Atheists.org

©2015 American Atheists Inc.

r ig hts reser ved . R epro duc tio n i n w hole or in par thout wr itt en per mi ss ion is proh ibit ed. Ame ric anei st is indexed in the Alternative Press Index.

ric an Ath ei st magazine is given free of cost tombers of American Atheists as an incident of theirmbership.

e-year print subscription to Am er ica n Ath ei stazine: $20. Subscribe online at www.Atheists.

/subscribe. Annual Individual Membershiph A mer ica n At hei st s, wh ich inc ludes fre ene access to recent issues of Am er ica n Ath ei st azine: $35. Couple/Family Membership is $50.

n up for membership at www.Atheists.org/join.mbership dues are tax-deductible as charitable

. Subscriptions to Am er ica n Ath ei st magazine aretax-deductible.

PROOFREADERSGil Gaudia

Shelley Gaudia

4 Letter from the Editor | Pamela Whissel

5 How to Fight God | J.T. Eberhard

6 The Real Story from an Ex-Mormon Missionary

Lesson 4: The Commandments, Part 1 | Greg Hawkins12 The Nonbeliever’s Guide to Bible Stories | C.B. Brooks, M.D.

16 Interview: Monster On Sunday

18 The Three Wise Guys, Part One | Natasha Stoynoff

22 Minnesota Gets Atheist Marriage Celebrants | Randall Tigue

26 Esperanto and Humanism | Michael B. Paulkovich

28 Danthropology - Creationism Has No Business

in the White House | Dan Arel30 Why Atheists Must Vote | Nick Fish

46 Why I Am An Atheist | Dale DeBakcsy

COPY EDITORKaren Reilly


4/484 | AMERICAN ATHEIST | www.atheists.org 4TH QUARTER 2015

Pamela WhisselEditor-in-Chief [email protected]

LETTER FROM THE EDITOR

W hen Pope Francis visited the U.S. inSeptember, he made a lot of good-guygestures. Instead of being chauffeuredaround in a limo, he graced the back

seat of a Fiat. After his address to Congress (the wallof separation was in the shop that day), he lunched ata soup kitchen rather than break bread with senatorsand representatives. When he met up with a formerstudent from his teaching days in A rgentina, he warm lyembraced the openly gay man and his partner. But then,not even a week later in Rome, he made it clear thathomosexuals don’t have a hope in hell of marrying eachother in the Catholic Church.1

Atheists in America should care about this becausePope Francis is a very likeable public figure who gets alot of good press and has won the praise of non-CatholicChristians and even non-Christians. Likability, however,is an overrated virtue, just like religious faith. But what’s

not to like when a friendly pope says “who am I to judge”a gay person,2 or when he says Catholics are not obligedto breed like rabbits (his words, not mine, although birthcontrol is still off limits)3 or when he tells the world to getits collective act together and face the reality of global

warming?4 For what it’s worth, he’s also said that it’spossible for an Atheist to be a good person. 5

Here’s what’s not to like: In 2009, his predecessorsaid that condom use increases the spread of AIDS.This statement comes right from an official Vaticantranscript.6 Only religion is to blame for this deadlylie, and Francis is the only person in the world who caneradicate it from the minds of the millions of people

who bel ieve him.Many people are equipped to own fuel-efficient cars or

support soup kitchens, and many celebrities are equippedto be likeable. No one else on Earth, except for Francis, isequipped to spare millions of people from AI DS with one

lifesaving sentence. “Condoms are okay for everyone” is allit would take. Yes, his job would get even more stressful as Vatican officials and bishops scramble desperately to tr yto revive the condom condemnation. And the statement

would cause some fear and bring about conflict, and evena few divorces. But there would be children who won’thave to watch their parents die and parents who won’thave to watch their children die. And all kinds of otherpeople wouldn’t have to watch each other die either

And even more people wouldn’t have to go through life with HIV. Until that happens, there’s nothing to like andplenty to loathe.

1. “Pope Francis: Full Text of Remarks on Synod Opening,”October 5, 2015, En.RadioVaticana.va

2. “Press Conference of Pope Francis, July 28, 2013,” Vatican.va

3. “In-Flight Press Conference of His Holiness Pope Francis fromthe Philippines to Rome, January 19, 2015,” Vatican.va

4. “Address of the Holy Father, United Nations HeadquartersNew York, Friday, 25 September 2015,” Vatican.va

5. “Pope at Mass: Culture of Encounter is the Foundation ofPeace,” May 22, 2013, En.RadioVaticana.va

6. “Interview of the Holy Father Benedict XVI Du ring the Flightto Af rica, 17 March, 2009” Vatican.va

A Lifesaving Sentence


5/48


Iam a firebrand Atheist, just like American AtheistsPresident David Silverman. We both believeand have

believed for some timethat religion is bad for the world. I am the co-founder of the Skepticon conference, whichDave has spoken at, and I have spoken at many American

Atheists convent ions. I have know n Dave for years and havehad so many great conversations with him that I can’t evenremember them all.

My day job is to blog about Atheism and activism at Patheos.com/WWJTD. In this line of work, I come across many ideasand hear from different people all the time, but I still learned a lotfrom reading Dave’s new book, Fighting God.

Dave wrote this book for Atheists on the sidelines, the ones who are content to not make waves about their non-belief. Thisis what he has to say to these folks: “We need you, and you needto be in the ring with us.” Using clear, concise language, heconvincingly explains to these Atheists that although they maynot realize it, religion is negatively affecting their own livesnot

just the lives of some anonymous people they’ve never met.For instance, he uses George W. Bush’s opposition to stem-cell

research to show how religion can negatively affect the physicalhealth of anyone: “[Bush] delayed the most promising researchon Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and many kinds ofcancer. In one fell swoop, Bush prolonged delayed treatments forthese ailments, reducing the life expectancy and the quality of life

for all Americans, while giving a great competitive opportunityto scientists in other countries to catch up and possibly surpass America in its research (and jeopardizing our patent domination). Why? The pope said so, preachers joined in, and so PresidentBush jumped and obeyed. If you or someone you love has one ofthose diseases, someone else’s religion has reduced their chanceof being helped before it’s too late.”

While he is clearly, and overtly, trying to motivate sideline Atheists to join the greater movement, Dave also takes great careto list the actions that do not help our cause: violence, lies, orcoercion. In other words, it’s never okay to be the jerk he is oftenaccused of being. Throughout the book, Dave articulates hiscall for honesty better than most religions do, even when those

religions are at their loveliest. As many of us know, any criticism of religion is often viewedas impolite. This standard puts us at a disadvantage from the

beginning, even when we want to engage in civilized dialogue. While some tiptoe around the subject of religion in an effort tooffset this effect, he dives straight in, treating the frank discussionof religion as casual ly as if he were ordering a cheeseburger.

Admittedly, even I was initially uneasy with this approach,as Dave repeatedly asserts that all believers are victims of theirreligion. His swift defense of this method eventually won meover, but I admit that viewing religious people as victims of theirreligion still makes me feel uneasy, though I can’t explain why. Iguess societal expectations hit al l of us to an extent.

Atheists areoften accused ofhaving disdainfor religiouspeople, andsome of themdo. But Dave canrecognize a religious person as someone who might be lookingfor the truth but has had their efforts dampened by religion’sinsistence on faith, or as someone who could be exploring theirsexuality without guilt or pause if not for their religion’s rulesabout sex. Whi le not all believers are victims to the same extent

Dave makes it clear that, at minimum, they can continue doingeverything they’re already doing in their lives w ithout believingfalse things about the world.

Dave’s approach is direct, but it’s important to understandthat he adopts this tone out of respect for his audience. He speaksto you directly and leaves no ambiguity as to his position and whyhe holds it. I actually found his approach comforting. I liked thathe wasn’t trying to placate me or massage my thoughts. He wassimply sharing the honest reasons for doing what he does, whichhe argues, should compel the reader to follow suit.

Dave also makes it clear that the fight to minimize religion’simpact on the world is not a lost cause. Right out of the gate,he says, “We have no money compared to religion. We have no

power compared to religion. Yet our numbers are growing whiletheirs are shrinking, because it’s not just about money or power but about truth.”

Because of the provocative title, it’s possible that the very Atheists who need this book the most will be the least likely to readit. That’s why every one of us should read Fighting God. It equipsus to speak not just to religious people, but to other Atheists whomay not yet realize just how much better off the world would be

with no religionand how this isn’t an unrealist ic dream. Although I was already convinced that religion is bad for the

world, I came away from this book with some new ideas and arenewed optimism. Let’s face it: since we’re playing from behind,it’s easy to feel that losing is inevitable. Fighting God left meinvigorated and confident that if we buckle down, work togetherand have some fun while we’re at it, we can make a real differenceto people in it who, like so many of us once did, sublimate theircuriosity and desire because religion tells them to. That makesplaying catch-up damn near smile-inducing, even though religionhas had a head start of a few millennia.

J.T.’s blog, What Would J.T. Do?, is at Patheos.com/blogs/WWJTD. He

previously worked for the Secular Student Alliance, where he was

their first high-school organizer. He is the co-founder of the Skepticon

conference and served as the event’s lead organizer for its first three

years.

How to Fight Godby J.T. Eberhard



The Real Storyfrom an

Ex-Mormon Missionary Lesson 4: The Commandments, Part 1by Greg Hawkins

T his is is the fourth installment of our series by a former Mormon who was amissionary in the Philippines. In these articles, he describes what goes on whenmissionaries knock on your door, and you let them in. He’s also giving a side ofthe story that the missionaries may leave outor may not even be aware of in the first place. Amissionary’s training includes only whitewashed, disinfected talking-points. They are taught tostick to the script and are unprepared to deal with any meaningful or intelligent deviation.

For example, a Mormon has a lifelong requirement to tithe (give ten percent of their incometo the Church). This applies to everyone, even if you live in poverty or you are raising a largefamily or if you have enormous debt. It’s possible that by questioning a missionary in an amiable,non-confrontational way, you’ll give them a real opportunity to apply critical thinking to theirreligion’s harmful absurdities, like non-negotiable tithing. For many of them, it will be the firsttime they’ve ever done so.


7/48


Last time around, I talked about the third lesson you willreceive from a Mormon missionary if you decide to continue to

be an “ investigator,” which is the word used for someone whois interested in joining the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. It’s during Lesson Three, “The Gospel of JesusChrist,” that the missionaries will increase the pressure on aninvestigator to officially join the Mormon Church through

baptism. So, typically, an investigator wil l already be committedto becoming a member by the time they reach Lesson Four, “TheCommandments.”

The commandments here are not the Ten Commandmentsfound in the Old Testament. These are different commandments,one of which is, in fact, to keep the Ten Commandments.

The Mormon Commandments are:

• Obedience• Pray Often• Study the Scriptures• Keep the Sabbath Day Holy • Baptism and Confirmation• Follow the Prophet• Keep the Ten Commandments• Live the Law of Chastity • Obey the Word of Wisdom• Observe the Law of the Fast

• Keep the Law of Tithing (with a special, hassle-freeguide on how to pay)

Since each of these commandments has the potential tospark a discussion which could last for days, Lesson Fouris often spread out over several meetings. I’m going to dosomething similar here by tackling this lesson over the next fewinstallments of this series. In this art icle, I’ll talk about the firsttwo commandments: obedience and pray often.

ObedienceObedience is considered the first Law of Heaven. According

to the official missionary instruction book, Preach My Gospel ,“Obedience to the commandments brings us peace in this lifeand eternal life in the world to come. Obedience shows our lovefor God. Disobedience brings us sorrow.”

The level at which the Church stresses obedience,combined with the surveillance tactics the Church employsagainst members, missionaries, Brigham Young University

(BYU) students, and notable “apostates” creates a frighteningmixt ure of authoritarianism and submission. Missionaries areadmonished to be obedient and follow the mission rules, whichare listed in another publication, the missionary handbook.

One of the rules is for missionary partners to stay together And they mean it:

Never be alone. It is extremely important that you stay with your companion at all times. Staying togethermeans staying within sight and hearing of eachother. The only times you should be separated from your assigned companion are when you are in aninterview with the mission president, on a companionexchange, or in the bathroom.

Never make exceptions to this standard for activitiesthat seem innocent but take you away from eachother, including being in different rooms in the samebuilding or in a home. Situations that seem harmlessat the beginning can quickly lead to serious problems.

If you live in an apartment with more than one room,always sleep in the same room as your companion,but not in the same bed. Arise and retire at the sametime as your companion. Do not stay up late or getup early to be alone.

Obey the standards of missionary conduct and the

rules of the mission. If you notice any inappropriatesituation or behavior, discuss it with your companion.If the matter is not resolved, have the courage andlove for your companion to ask your mission presidentfor help. Violations of missionary standards maythreaten your companion’s effectiveness and evenhis or her salvation. Care enough for your companionto ask for help from your mission president beforea problem becomes serious. Your loyalty is first tothe Lord, then to your mission president, then to yourcompanion.

If your companion leaves you, inform your mission

president immediately.Be aware that you have a responsibility to protect your companion from physical and spiritual danger.If you do not fulfill this responsibility and yourcompanion engages in serious misconduct, you maybe subject to Church disciplinary action.

In this environment, missionaries oftenturn on each other in order to enhance

their own positions in the pecking order.

If your companion engages in serious misconduct,you may be subject to Church disciplinary action.



Missionaries are also encouraged to tell a church authorityif their companions or others are “struggling” with obedience:“Share with the mission president and with other leaders

(when appropriate) information on the progress and needs ofthe missionaries. Leaders are especially sensitive to needs andsituations that could present dangers to a missionary’s spiritualor physical well-being and make sure the mission presidentknows about these matters. Correct missionaries’ conduct

when needed.”The result is that emotional needs and conditions like

depression, anxiety, and bipolar disorder are often completelyignored and therefore not treated properly. Things likehomosexual desires or mere feelings of gender-dysphoria aretreated with contempt and fear. That’s because homosexual

behavior and activ ity is the second-worst sin possible, aftermurder. When it comes to disease and injury, you may or may

not receive proper medical attention. It all depends on thediscernment of your local mission president.

In this environment, missionaries often turn on each otherin order to enhance their own positions in the pecking order.

Waiting to find out what type of companion you’ll get is alwaysnerve-wracking for a missionary. What if he’s overzealous? Thengod help you if, for example, you use slang. The handbook says,“Avoid slang and inappropriately casual language, even in yourapartment with your companion or in letters to your family.” You

very realistically run the risk of being reported to the missionpresident and subsequently disciplined. For using slang.

BYU’s notorious Honor Code is another example. Here Ishould point out that not all students who attend BYU are attendingbecause they want to be there. Many attend as part of familytradition. Many attend as part of social or church pressures.Many attend because they received athletic scholarships.

On its face, the Honor Code can seem somewhat reasonable:Be honest; live a chaste and virtuous life; obey the law and allcampus policies; use clean language; respect others; abstainfrom alcoholic beverages, tobacco, tea, coffee, and substanceabuse; participate regularly in church services; observe thedress and grooming standards; and encourage others in theircommitment to comply with the Honor Code.

But because students are supposed to report anyone notabiding by the honor code, there’s an environment reminiscent

of George Orwell ’s 1984. The penalties for breaking these rulesinclude academic probation, suspension, and even expulsion. Iknow many former BYU students who came out as gay whilethey were enrolled, or it was discovered that they were involved

in homosexual relationships. The university expelled thesestudents and have refused to release their transcripts. Thesestudents were left with thousands of dollars of debt and no hope

of enrolling at a different university without starting all over.Students who rescind their membership in the LDS Churchalso automatically lose their eligibility to obtain an ecclesiasticalendorsement (a mandatory endorsement of the student’s moralstanding, which can only be provided by a Mormon religiousleader), and must either be re-baptized into the Church or risklosing their academic progress.

Pray OftenThis commandment sounds reasonable enough. After all

doesn’t nearly every religion encourage its members to pray/meditate/reflect often? Well…yes. There are some differences,however. According to Preach My Gospel , “Our Heavenly Father

hears and answers our prayers. Through daily prayer we receivedivine guidance and blessings. We should always pray sincerely

We should also pray with ‘real intent,’ which means we arecommitted to act on the answer that we receive.”

Unfortunately, “praying with real intent” is nothing morethan confirmation bias. I’ ll show you. Let’s play the “pray-withreal-intent” game right now. Missionaries play it all the timeand they often use it on their investigators. Here are the rules:

1. Read the Book of Mormon.2. Notice the passage in the Book of Moroni 10:3-5, where

the prophet Moroni states that the way to know if theBook of Mormon is true is by asking God, who will tell

you that you know the book is tr ue through the burning you feel in your bosom.

3. Pray “with real intent” (confirm what you just read inMoroni 10:3-5).

4. Chalk up any subsequent positiv ity in mood, demeanoror circumstance as confirmation from God that the

book is true.5. If you receive negative feelings or thoughts after

praying, you probably didn’t pray “with real intent,” and you should therefore pray agai n unti l you receive thecorrect confirmation.

This is the epistemic framework of Mormonism. Theultimate litmus test to determine whether something is true ornot in the LDS church is to pray about the bookas instructedin the bookand accept any false positives as confirmation

Staying together means staying withinsight and hearing of each other.

Missionaries are encouraged to tell achurch authority if their companions

are “struggling” with obedience.


9/48


of the book’s authenticity because the book said so. Thisincredibly arbitrary standard of determining “truth” allowschurch leaders and members to rationalize nearly anything

by means of apologetics, while simultaneously playing theinvisible trump card by saying, “Look! God is on our side. Andif you disagree, you mustn't have had enough faith to receive thecorrect answer.”

Mormons also pray to God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ by means of the Holy Ghost, and while theMormon church opposes memorized prayer, citing Matthew6:7, it certainly breaks its own rules by repeating any prayers

verbatim which are used for church ordinances, l ike sacrament(communion) prayers, baptism prayers, temple ordinanceprayers, and introductions to priesthood blessings.

Of course, all of this obedience and praying will benecessary to follow the rest of the Mormon commandments,

which we wi ll continue to explore next time. In the meantime, I would like to part w ith a quote from Mortality , by ChristopherHitchens: “The man who prays is the one who thinks that godhas arranged matters all wrong, but who also thinks that he caninstruct god how to put them right.”

In the next issue, Greg will continue with “Lesson Four:The Commandments.” He will explain the next threecommandments: study the scriptures, keep the Sabbath dayholy, andspoiler alertbaptism and confirmation.

Greg Hawkins is a political science major at the University of Utah.

His interviews, columns, and videos are online at BroadClarity.com/

GregHawkins.

Support American Atheists everytime you shop Amazon.com!

At no additional cost to you, American Atheists wil l receive a donation from

Amazon of .5% of your total purchase when you enroll in Amazon Smile.

Go to Atheists.org/Amazon andselect American Atheists, Inc., as the

charity of your choice. Thank you! American Atheists

Shop at AmazonSmileand Amazon will make

a donation to:



The Myth at the Heart of the Mysticalby Hank Fox

T he most basic understanding of Atheism tendsto focus only on religion and the non-belief

in whatever local god, holy book, or otheranointed authority our home culture presents

to us. But religion isn’t the only item worthy of skepticalscrutiny. Psychics, luck, fate, and all sorts of mystical or proto-mystical subjects seem to share a certain common ground

wit h rel igion. A nd yet I don’t th ink most of us actual ly definethe nature of that commonality.

I wrote a blog piece a few years back in which I presentedthe idea of “null words,” words with nothing palpable behindthem. In other words, we have a word for the thing, but nothing for the word. Angel. Ghost. Telekinesis. Fate. Warpdrive. Superhero. Karma. Spirit.

Some of these words are mere artsy expressions of fictionalcharacters or plot devices, and some of these things, like“superhero,” arguably can exist, depending on how fuzzily

you want to define them. But others have something else

associated with them, a “something behind” that moves theminto a category shared with religion. That “something behind”

is the concept of “agency.”I’m surely not the first to arrive at this idea, but in my

research I couldn’t find a complete definition of what I’mthinking about. This dual definition I found in a Wikipediaentry comes closest: “In sociology and philosophy, agency isthe capacity of an agent (a person or other entity, human, orany living being in general) … to act in a world. … Humanagency is the capacity for human beings to make choices. Itis normally contrasted to natural forces, which are causesinvolving only unthink ing deterministic processes.”

My definition strikes off in a new direction by combining bits of both; agency is a property of deliberate thought, feeling,

or action possessed by an immaterial agent. Far from being anunthinking, deterministic process, this immaterial agent has both consciousness and intent. Not only does it recognize that we human beings exist, but it also has feel ings and thoughts

Agency stands behind popular misconceptionsof evolution. Belief in agency is not religion, but

it’s the essence inside religion.


11/48


about us. Further, it has the ability to act on its thoughts andemotions in a way that has real effects on people. This actioncan be firmly goal-directed in relation to the targeted folks,and it takes punitive or rewarding action to shepherd a personin some direction, often according to unclear, supposedly“larger” goals. Or it can be teasingly capricious, actingsimply to amuse itself . . . while at the same time being whollyimaginary.

For the person who buys into agency, it works out to“There’s something out there, some sort of conscious beingthat has me in mind and acts in a deliberate way to affect mylife.” For most of us, this is more than simple belief. It is a

worldview, and one so intimately tied into ever yday thought

and language that we probably don’t even notice it.Of course, your own culture’s god is the most obvious

example of agency. God says this or that, god wants you to dothis thing, god will punish you, blah blah blah.

Believers see god-the-conscious-deliberate-agent ineverything. He’s out there somewhere, a holy telepath

watch ing you r ever y act a nd thought, arra nging the world in a way that rewards, punishes, or teaches.

Though we Atheists reject belief in god and all of itsmanifestations (ghosts, angels, demons, etc.), it’s all too easyto retain unexa mined beliefs in related conceptual fields thatlack temples and priesthoods but share many of the samecharacteristics.

Agenc y is the outward projection of personalit y itself , andI suspect the culprit to be the same brain activity that allowsus to see faces on burnt toast a nd in cloud formations. We lookfor consciousness and intent in the world around us in the same

way we look for facesand probably for the same prehistoric,survival-related reasons. Those ancestors who didn’t look outfor the consciousness and intent of neighborhood sabertoothcats, cave bears, and dire wolves … well, they didn’t live longenough to be ancestors.

The ability persists because it’s still useful. In moderntimes, the whole of every city and town, road and highway, isa showing of real agencyhuman agencyand some of it is

dangerous as hell. “W hat does this mean? What do they wantme to do?” are important questions for negotiating city streetsand construction zones.

The hazard is that you’ll look and see something thatisn’t actually there. The Jesus-face water stain on the freewayoverpass is only the beginning. Agency shows up as MotherNature. Something Out There. The Universe. Mystic Energy.Natural Balance. Even something like inevitability can hintsubtly at agency. In each of these concepts is an underpinningof some sort of conscious, deliberate thing , th inking about us,taking action in our l ives, affecting us in some way.

Think of the everyday example of luck. Some of us

define the word in purely rational terms as the workings ofprobability, but many of us see it as something more. Luckis a persona selfthat deliberately affects the roll of diceand the hidden numbers of a lottery ticket, often for its ownentertainment but sometimes to reward us for intense wishingor other compulsive capering.

The blind mechanisms of weatherwhich can profoundlyaffect everyone from coffee growers in Brazil to weddingplanners in Oklahomacan often smack of agency. Givea tropical storm a name, and you increase the effect. Whodoesn’t remember when Katrina hit New Orleans?

Language itself is filled with constructions based onideas of agency, making it sometimes difficult to speakor

even thinkwithout including it. If you want to say a child is“gifted ” but also want to exclude all nuances of a giver, how do

you say it? Just lament ing the loss of healthy, nat ura l functionafter an accident (“Thumbs aren’t supposed to bend that

way.”) can quietly freight in implications of a creator and itscreation.

Longer formulations of agency are expressed with somefrequency: Everything happens for a reason. Life finds a way

We were meant to be together. Two men as sex partners isnot what nature intended. There is a higher justice. When it’s

your time to go. Al l of these are pure expressions of agencySomething does the reasoning, the finding, the meaning, thesupposing, the choosing of the right time.

Agency stands behind popular misconceptions of evolutionToo many of us who don’t buy into creationism still imagineevolution as having some deliberate aim, working tirelessly toraise the “lower” animals until it arrives at something “higher,”such as we fabulously intelligent, sophisticated human beingsNow that we humans have appeared in all our inevitable glory,the work of evolution is done.

Belief in agency is not religion, but it’s the essence insidereligion. Even aside from religion, though, agency spawns offso many thematic children that it’s important to see it as aconceptual danger all its own. You have to recognize when it’shappening in your own head and then take thought to rooting

it out. After all, if you buy into the idea of conscious spirits outthere dwelling on you and directing your life in ways large orsmallhelping you (luck), punishing you (karma), observingand advising you (my higher power), guiding what happens to

you (destiny)you really might as well believe in god, don’t you think?

Formerly the Blue Collar Atheist on Freethought Blogs, Hank Fox now

writes as A Citizen of Earth on the Patheos network. He is also the

author of Red Neck, Blue Collar, Atheist: Simple Thoughts About Reason

Gods & Faith .

Your own culture’s god is the most obvious

example. The hazard is that you’ll look and

see something that isn’t actually there.



hroughout contemporary life, references fromthe Bible, its stories, and characters surroundus. As a result, nonbelievers may be at a loss when they encounter them in conversation,art, or literature. Modern-day controversies

such as separation of church and state, posting theTen Commandments in government buildings, nativitydisplays, and other issues may not be fully understood. Thisrepresents a gap in nonbelievers’ knowledge base.

My first book was written for my daughter as a guide

to successful living. Trust Your Radar: Honest Advice forTeens and Young Adults from a Surgeon, Firefighter, PoliceOfficer, Scuba Divemaster, Golfer, and Amateur Comedian combines life lessons with fun stories from my variedcareers. A second book, Trust Your Radar, Slackers’

Edition , is a streaml ined version. Both worksidentify organized religion as “jammers” of ourclear-thinking “brain radars.”

My new book, The Nonbeliever’s Guide to BibleStories , fills the information gap about the Bible formy daughter and lucky readers. It’s a secular sprint

The Nonbeliever’s Guide to Bible Storiesby C.B. Brooks, M.D.

Moses went ba


13/48


from Genesis to Revelation, hitting the characters, stories,occasional highl ights, numerous lowlights, and famous quotes(featured in italics). Nonbelievers should have some concept of

the religious fairy tales being foisted upon their believing peers. At a minimum, just to get all the jokes.

Here’s an excerpt from from Chapter 2, The Book of Exodus.

MosesOur story begins around 1200 B.C. in Egypt, where the

Hebrew people are slaves of the Egyptians. The Egyptian ruler,the Pharaoh, decided to exercise some population control andso decreed that all Hebrew newborn boys shall be thrown intothe Nile River. (The girls can live because nobody really caresabout girls anyway, which is a recurrent Bible theme.)

Instead of throwing her baby boy in the river, one Jewishmother decides to hide her son in a basket down by the river

bank. The Pharaoh’s daughter finds the baby, adopts him, andnames him Moses. When Moses grows up, he kills a n Egyptian

who was beating up a Hebrew. Word gets around, and Mosesflees Egypt and eventually marries into a good family withlivestock.

One day, Moses is out tending his flock when God appearsto him in t he form of a burning bush. They chat a litt le and Godsuggests Moses lead the oppressed Hebrews out of Egypt anddeliver them to a land flowing with milk and honey.

Moses was a litt le skeptical. He questioned, “In case anyoneasks, who should I say sent me?” And God said, “Just call me ‘Iam who am.’”

This riddle did not make Moses feel any more confident.So God gave him three miracle tricks to perform if needed, themost famous being turning a snake into a stick! This stick isthe rod of God or walking staff that Moses is usually pictured

holding in paintings.

Plagues of EgyptMoses, along with his brother Aaron, goes back to

Egypt and meets with the Pharaoh. They say,“Mr. Pharaoh, let my people go.” And the

Pharaoh responds, “Ahh, no.” Then heincreases the workload and beatings of theHebrews, just for asking.

Moses reports back to God, “Excuse me, I am who am,that did not go well.” God says, “Go do the tricks I showed youearlier.”

So Moses and his brother Aaron go back to the Pharaoh andthrow the stick down, and it turns into a snake! Ho-hum, theEgyptian magicians can do that too. Okay, Moses then turns the

water of the Nile River into blood. Shazam! Sti ll no movementfrom the Pharaoh, “Big deal, we can do that too.” Moses tells thePharaoh to think it over.

Seven days later and still nothing. So God gets serious andhas Moses unleash a series of plagues on Egypt. Frogs comeup out of the river and into people’s beds. Swarms of gnats andflies infest everybody’s houses. The Pharaoh is temporarilyimpressed. After each plague he says, “Okay, you can lead yourpeople away.” But when the plagues recede, he changes his mindand keeps the Hebrews enslaved.

So then come plagues of selective Egyptian livestockslaughter, hailstorms, locusts, and darkness. Every time thesame response from the Pharaoh: “Okay, you win, make it stop.”Followed by, “No, the Hebrews really have to stay.”

Passover

God has one more plague up his sleeve. He tells Moses toinstruct the Hebrews to get ready on the tenth day of a certa inmonth because there’s going to be a massive beatdown of theEgyptians. God’s going to show up at midnight and kill everyfirstborn son and animal, including the Pharaoh’s!

To protect the Jewish firstborns, each family is told toslaughter an unblemished lamb and smear some of its bloodabove their doorway. Then cook and eat the lamb along withsome unleavened bread and bitter herbs. Lots of specificinstructions follow.

At the appointed hour, God shows up and smites everyfirstborn in Egypt, but he passes over the Hebrew houses that

have the secret blood-smear sign over the doorways.This catastrophe works, the Pharaoh gives in, and Mosesand Aaron successful ly lead the Hebrews out of Egypt. Modern-day Jews commemorate this ritual every year with the feast ofPassover.

Parting the Red SeaGod helps lead the group along by a pillar of cloud during

the day and the pillar of fire by night. He brought them overthe scenic route to the Red Sea and had them camp there. Godand Moses schemed together because God stil l had some wrongsauce to lay on the Pharaoh.

Before long, the Pharaoh and Egyptians started to miss

having all those Hebrew slaves around. So they mobilized thearmy and 600 chariots to go reclaim their slaves.The Hebrews saw them coming and were terrified. God

put the pillar of cloud in the way to provide cover while Mosesraised his rod, and God sent a strong wind to actually separatethe waters of the Red Sea. Moses led the Hebrews through the

God and Moses schemed together because God still

had some wrong sauce to lay on the Pharaoh.

God and Moses were now on a hot streak. So God commanded

Moses to come up to the top of Mount Sinai to talk strategy.


14/48


15/48


melted down their gold jewelry, usedtheir graving tools, and formed a goldencalf to worship. Yes, a graven image!

Complete with sacrifices and dancing! When Moses saw this, he went

ball istic. He threw the stone tabletsdown, breaking them into smithereens;called Aaron an unprintable name;ordered 3,000 men killed, ground upthe calf, mixed it with water, and madeall the idiots drink it. Plus, the next dayhe had to tell God about it!

God reacted in his usual way andsent a plague. Then he summonedMoses back up Mount Sinai.

RewriteFor the next forty days and forty

nights, they went over every stinkingdetail again. They rewrote the covenantand Ten Commandments on two morestone tablets and Moses came downagain from the mountaintop.

This time, the people of Israelaccepted the deal and started buildingthe ark, tent, tabernacle, and all theuniforms and stuff, just how God

wanted it, in excruciating detail .

When everything was done, Godenjoyed hanging out in the tabernacle.He’d show his presence by coveringthe tabernacle with a cloud wheneverhe was in there during the day, and fire

by night. Then he’d li ft the cloud whenit was time to move the chosen people onward again, toward the promisedland.

And there you have it, the story ofMoses, Passover, the parting of the RedSea, and the Ten Commandments.

It’s mind-boggling to me that

such a bloody and brutal book is stillused, in the twenty-first century,to deny scientifically proven facts,condone discrimination, swear in ourgovernment leaders, and inform ourpolicies.

But yet it is.My guess is that most people who rely on its teachings

haven’t actually read the whole thing. And those who have,probably ignore vast sections and cherry-pick what they finduseful. And those who insist on its literal belief have seriousflaws in their mental functioning and judgment.

So, I hope you now have a perspective and backgroundknowledge of what all the fuss is about!

The Nonbeliever’s Guide to Bible Stories, Trust Your Radar , and Trus

Your Radar Slackers’ Edition are all available in paperback and ebook

through Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and other online outlets.

The ordinances give common-sense rules for all kinds

of things like, “You shall not permit a sorceress to live.”



T ally and Steve Cass front the Atheist rock band Monster On Sunday, which released its first

CD in August. Formed in 2012, with Tally as singer/lyricist and Steve as guitarist/composerthe band has performed to rave reviews on the San Diego music scene and in Portland,Oregon. Joining them this summer for their album release show in Ramona, California, wereAtheist folk singer Shelly Segal and comedian Steve Hill. They also appeared at the first annuaGodless Gala in June, hosted by the Humanist Fellowship of San Diego. Their first video, for theirsingle “Just Like You” is slated to premiere on Atheist TV. They sat down with American Atheist totalk about how the band got started and what’s in store for the future.

What’s the story behind the title Baby Eater ?

Tally: A lot of religious people try to pretend that they have some sort of monopoly on morality. Our whole album, especially

the title track by the same name, challenges that view. The title track is about how religious thinking can cause many immoral acts which ca n only be justified through indoctr ination.

What are your religious backgrounds?

Tally: I was raised Mennonite Christian, but belief in god never really took. I’ve called myself an Atheist since I was a teenager

We want our Atheist message to be loud and clear—with no apologies.

Atheism is music for an ex-Mennonite and an ex-Mormon


17/48


which caused me to have painful fa mily issues throughout my

life. Monster On Sunday is a place where I can freely speak outon these topics that affect so many of us. A lot of our songs deal with my personal experiences of being the only Atheist in a veryreligious family.

Steve: I was raised in a devoutly Mormon home, and I grewup really buying into the religion. I even went on a two-yearmission in Tucson when I was nineteen. Now, I’m an outspoken

Atheist. I think my story is similar to a lot of people who weredevout. Losing my religion was a slow process that took yearsas I realized more and more that there was no good evidence to

justify my religious beliefs.

What about your musical backgrounds?

Steve: Tally and I both fronted our own rock bands formany years. Our groups played shows togetherthat’s how we

met. I started going with Tally to Atheist meetings and events,and eventually we decided to join our passions for music and

Atheism to create Monster On Sunday. We consider ourselvesto be an Atheist-activist band. We want to use our music topromote freethought and a rational world view.

On your website, MonsterOnSunday.com, is the

quote from 1 Timothy 2:12: “I do not permit a woman

to teach or to have authority over a man; she must

be silent.” There are so many horrible passages

in the Bible. How did you arrive at the decision to

feature this one?

Steve: With a female-fronted, Atheist rock band, this quoteseemed an obvious choice. It shows how much stock people canput in the Bible and its proscriptions.

Tally: It takes a lot of courage to speak out on these topics,especially for a woman. I hope my lyrics become an inspirationto women everywhere to not be afraid to speak their minds.

Why did you choose “Just Like You” to be your first

single?

Steve: We wanted to release a song where there would beno confusion as to what side we’re on in the religious debate.

“Just Like You” makes it clear that we are f irebrand Atheists andanti-theists. We felt that if people had that context, there would be no way to misinterpret the lyrics in the rest of our songs onthe album. We want our Atheist message to be loud and clear

with no apologies.

“Stardust” is another great song. What was the

inspiration for it?

Tally: Many religions claim that divine inspiration isnecessary to feel awe and inspire true art, so we wanted to writea song that reflected something that is truly awe-inspiring andreal. As Lawrence Krauss, one of the inspirations for this song

put it, “Every atom in your body came from a star that explodedand the atoms in your left hand probably came from a differentstar than your right hand. It really is the most poetic thing Iknow about physics. You are all stardust.” In “Stardust,” we pitthe view of creationism against the scientific understanding ofhow the universe, our planet, and our species came to exist.

Steve: Science may be the poetry of reality, but with thissong we wanted to make poetry out of science.

What do you want the band to accomplish in the

long run?

Tally: Our mission is to let people know that they are not alone

in their non-belief, and to inspire change through meaningfullyrics. We want to encourage people to not be afraid to speak outagainst the harms of religion. Basical ly, we intend to use our rockto kick religion’s ass to make the world a better place!

Steve and Tally have also been interviewed on The Ardent Atheist and

The Scathing Atheist podcasts. Links to both are on MonsterOnSunday

com, where you can order the CD, t-shirts, and other merchandise

There you’ll also find the complete lyrics to all of their songs, along

with photos, reviews, concert announcements, and more!

Science may be the poetry of reality, but with “Stardust”we wanted to make poetry out of science.



The Three Wise GuysPart One

They’re funny, they’re fearless, and they’re skeptical...and they’re probably

preaching the virtue of non-belief in a church near you.

by Natasha Stoynoff

T hree unlikely buddies, one common goal, and a few death-defying talesthat’s what youget when you send Seth Andrews, Matt Dillahunty, and Aron Ra out on the road togetherto talk reason and rationality with the people.Raised in a Lutheran-Pentecostal household, Seth Andrews was a Christian radio broadcaster with

nagging doubts about his faith when a fervent lecture by Christopher Hitchens became the tippingpoint for his apostasy. He wrote about his road to Atheism in his 2012 memoir, Deconverted: A Journey

from Religion to Reason and hosts The Thinking Atheist radio show at TheThinkingAtheist.com. Hislatest book is Sacred Cows: A Lighthearted Look at Belief and Tradition around the World.

Former Southern Baptist Matt Dillahunty was a fundamentalist Christian for over twenty years. After eight years in the Navy, he was seminary-bound when his religious studies had a boomerangeffect, shattering his belief in god. Today, he co-hosts The Atheist Experience , produced by the AtheistCommunity of Austin. Archived episodes are at Atheist-Experience.com.

Aron Ra, American Atheists’ Texas Regional Director, grew up in a Mormon household and begandebating adults about creationism from the young age of eight. A one-time tattooist, he rides a 1500cc

Victory Vegas motorcycle and is the creator of the video series Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism ,available on YouTube.

They met one other at the 2011 Oklahoma Freethought Convention, where they “clicked immediately,”says Dillahunty. Three years later, they teamed up as The Unholy Trinity and toured the U.S. in 2014(hitting Amarillo, Albuquerque, and San Antonio). Then the Atheist Foundation of Australia broughtthem to Brisbane, Melbourne, and Sydney last March. The roving trio of freethinking storytellers spokein churches, college campuses, city halls, and theaters. When accommodations were tight in Sydney,they roughed it by camping in tents and using the “dunny” (outhouse)all for the good of the cause.

Over drinks on the eve of the first Gateway to Reason seminar in St. Louis, Missouri, in September,the activists talked snake-charming, sleeping habits, and the pseudo-religious experience of goingDown Under. They’re far from New-Agey, but its still “all about the journey,” says Andrews.

Matt, Seth, and Aron in Sydney. Photo by Andrew Skegg


19/48


Who christened you “The Unholy Trinity”?Matt: Seth was the mastermind. I just showed up and

talked.Seth: I thought the name was funny. It’s a declaration that

we’re no longer afraid of blaspheming. We’re no longer afraidto be sarcastically defiant in the face of sacred religious ideas.The Unholy Trinity summed it up.

In the footsteps of Richard Dawkins andChristopher Hitchens, you guys are seen asthe younger, hipper icons of the “New Atheist”movement. How does that feel?

Matt: I was standing next to Hitch once when someonecame up [to him] and said, “Oh, I’m a big fan!” He corrected

them. He told them about the origin of “fan” being “fanatic,”and he’s not looking for fa natics. I’m a big fan, to use the wordhe objected to, of not having heroes.

We click wit h audiences because we’re absolutelyapproachable. We’re the guys who tell you what we think, andthe stories we’ve heard, and the informat ion we’ve learned, but

we’re also the guy s you can tal k to afterwards, get a picture wit h, have a long or short discussion wit h, and have a drink. We’re not on some other tier, and we don’t want to be.

Seth: We’re tak ing the journey just like they are, ever y day. Aron: I’ve often said that the goal of Atheism is to eliminate

our own necessity [as activists], and to negate the value of the

word “Atheist” so that it’s not needed any more.

Your respective audiences have been watchingand listening to you from afar for years. Is it anemotional experience for them to meet you inperson?

Seth: When you’re in broadcasting, people know you.They know your personality, they know your character flaws,they know your family, what you did on your honeymoon, and

what your pets are up to. They have this window into your l ife .People who’ve listened to The Thinking Atheist radio show

for five years and two hundred thir ty episodes know all about

me. So by the time I get to them, they are eager to equal that bala nce and share all of the meaningf ul a nd important t hingsin their own lives.

They’ll of ten explode in a barrage of details and personalstories and feelings and questions and words of gratitude. It’salmost overwhelming. And it’s an honor.

Do you three agree on everything? Do you eachhave a “specialty” when you talk to audiences?Who’s best at reciting scripture?

Aron: We all have different backgrounds and differentperspectives. Matt was raised Trinitarian, I was raisedBinatarian. Matt corrects me on a lot of scriptural stuff. Icompletely respect that.

Matt: Aron would correct me on all the science stuff, if I bothered to go there. But I know better t han to do that whi lehe’s sitting there.

Seth: I always say...this is the rodeo and I’m the clown. I bring f lashy things and entertain people between the mainevents.

Aron: Seth’s the soul.

Do you bicker on the road about who gets the blueM&Ms and who gets the top bunk?

Seth: Well, imagine if you have two brothers and you love your brothers, but you’re in the same space wit h them fortwenty-one days...

Aron: I have a tendency to grate against both thesegentlemen, but I do what I can to repair the damage! Seth ismore conservative [than we are]. He’s not quite the partier.Compared to Seth, I’m some sort of weird hedonist.

Seth: Noooo [laughing]! But it’s true. I’m the guy who getsup at five a.m. because I like my coffee and quiet time. I’m just

that guy. Aron: I don’t go to bed until an hour or two after that.

Did you come up against any overly-zealousbelievers or harsh critics?

Seth: Well, there was this theist in the audience inMelbourne

Aron: He couldn’t figure out what Seth was talking aboutSeth: It was one of the more basic, rudimentary messages

The [church] tells us these must be the end times and we’re algoing to hell, the world’s going to hell, and things are worsethan they’ve ever been. I said the data shows that we are living

in perhaps the best time in human history, and we have manyreasons to be encouraged. This theist went back and wrote a blog about how I was clueless.

Aron: That so i rritated me. I’m going to do a speech basedon critiquing that asshole’s critique of Seth.

Matt: It was the weirdest review I’ve ever read. Aron was

We’re no longer afraid to be sarcasticallydefiant in the face of sacred religious ideas.

We want to tell people, “I can relate to your

struggle. I understand what you’re going through.”



Image courtesy of Katie Winchester


21/48


[the one] smacking the Bible and religion around like crazy ina way that would irritate someone like this guy...but it didn’t.I’m talking about what a miserable failure their god is as ahumanist, and if he existed, why would we want anything todo with him? He didn’t have a problem with t hat.

Seth: I think he’d bought so much into the end-of-timesnarrative that nothing would penetrate that building...he shutdown.

Did you guys at least learn some good Aussielingo while you were there?

Aron: Yeah, but I can’t remember it. We were drinkingconstantly.

Matt: I learned one that tur ned out to be not real. We werein New Zealand heading to Australia and one guy said, “If

anyone asks how you’re doing, tell them you’re better than a box of f luffy ducks.” W hen I got to Austra lia , they were like,“We don't know what the hel l you're talking about.”

Seth: I never attempted to pick it up. To me there are fewthings as pathetic as an American attempting the “g-day.”However, “no worries” is a term I fell in love with long before I

went to Austral ia. It just rolls off the tongue.Matt: I got that from Steve Irwin. When they said we

were going to go to Brisbane, one of the fi rst things I said was, “Can we go to Austra lia Zoo?” While I wouldn’t classifyit as a religious experience, it was very special for me. I havea picture of me holding a koala sitting above my bookshelf.

[That picture] will be there until it rots.

So you survived without any crocodile-thrashingor anything?

Matt: I had a snake fall out of a tree right in front of me. Aron: In a country where everything that is not a pyt hon

is deadly venomous.Seth: Almost every Australian you meet will try to get you to

fall for the Drop Bear story. Like Yeti and Sasquatch, it’s a fancifulcreature that will drop out of trees and land on your head.

Matt: Picture a koala bear mi xed with a Tasmanian devilmixed with Marily n Manson.

Aron: Wh ile we were camping in one of our host’s backyard, I saw bats wit h five-foot wingspanshundreds ofthem filling a tree! They were beautifu l.

Matt: Aron’s not afraid of any anima l. He’s been bittenmore times than anybody else I knowand always with asmile and a wonderful story. He’s been bitten by lizards, by

snakes Aron: A salvator water monitor and an anaconda. Who

gets to brag about that?

But you made it out alive. What about here in theU.S.? Are you booed out of your hometowns likeJesus was in Nazareth?

Seth: We did a presentation in my hometown of TulsaOklahoma, at the Oklahoma Freethought Convention,and several speakers were featured in an article in advanceSomeone [wrote to the paper in response] that we should be

blackbal led from Tulsa. Run them out of town!

Does that discourage you?Matt: The mission is way more important than any one of

us or the three of us. If I’m ever at a point where I’m convincedthat I ’m a hindrance to the movement…I’m out. I’m done.

Seth: We al l have one goalto speak to people in thereassuring and honest way we wished we had [been spokento] when we were going through our own journey s. We’re in amovement that needs storytellers.

We want to tell people, “I can relate to your str uggle. Iunderstand what you’re going through. I think you’re beautifuleven when many people say you are ugly. I think doubt can

be an amazing and wonderf ul thing. I t hink your cur iosit y i ssomething that should be celebrated. You are an individual,and you have a right to live your own life.

When you see the insanity of religion around you, justknow that you’re not alone.”

Aron: When we were in Sydney, it was the first time Iheard Seth’s presentation. I was tearing up. It really movedme. I’m serious.

Seth: If I can quote it as an Australian might, I would lookthem all in the eyes and simply say, “No worries.”

When this interview continues in our next issue, The WiseGuys discuss favorite Bible verses, cockatoos, and why there’sno such thing as an Atheist groupie. In the meantime, check outUnholyTrinityDownUnder.com for photos, videos, and Unholy

Trinity apparel .

Natasha Stoynoff is a New York Times best-selling author and feature

writer for People magazine. She lives in Manhattan, where she’s

working on her first Atheist-oriented screenplay.

We are living in perhaps the best time in human

history, and we have many reasons to be encouraged.

The mission is way more important thanany one of us or the three of us.



Minnesota Gets Atheist

Marriage Celebrantsby Randall Tigue

J ohn Dingley is a member of the Minnesota activistorganization Atheists for Human Rights (AFHR).In 2013, he was delighted when some friends asked

him to officiate at their wedding. The only problem wasthat he didn’t fit any of Minnesota’s descriptions of a person

authorized to perform civil marriages. Minnesota statuteallows civil marriages to be performed by some governmentofficials like a judge, a court commissioner, and certain schoolsuperintendents. Marriages can also be performed by anordained minister of any religious denomination. But becausenot all religions have ordination, Minnesota law makes anaccommodation for Quakers, Baha’i, Hindus, Muslims, and

Amer ican India ns. Marriages in these denominations can beperformed by anyone authorized by that group to do so.

For someone who doesn’t meet any of these criteria, thequickest and easiest solution is to be ordained by a church thatrequires nothing more than a written request for ordination.These churches range from longtime favorites like the Universal

Life Church and the American Life Church to more recentlyfounded churches, such as the Church of the Flying SpaghettiMonster, the Church of Spiritual Humanism, and the Churchof the Latter Day Dude, also known as the Church of the BigLebowski.

Even though this quick fix was available to him, Dingley,

as an Atheist, didn’t want to be ordained by a church. Besideshe already belonged to Atheists for Human Rights, so whynot get authorized by them? Marie Alena Castle, AFHR’scommunications director agreed. She created a document,

signed by AFHR board members, that recognizes Dingley as amarriage celebrant.Fully expecting to be turned away, Dingley took his

certificate to the Hennepin County recorder’s office, where it was accepted. He has since solemnized two marriages and isscheduled to perform another in the state of Iowa, where his

Even though this quick fix was available to him,Dingley, as an Atheist, didn’t want to be ordained.


23/48


credentials have also been accepted.This encouraged about a dozen more AFHR members to

request credentials and register in their respective countiesacross Minnesota. Those efforts were uniformly successfuluntil Rodney Rogers, a resident of Washington County,submitted his certificate to that recorder’s office. (Perhapsnot coincidentally, the U.S. Congressional District that wasrepresented by Michelle Bachman from 2007 to 2014 is in

Washington County.) Rogers was turned down on the spot by a county official who gave him a copy of the Minnesotastatute that defines what kind of organization can authorize itsmembers to off iciate marriages. For good measure, the helpfulofficial underlined the words “religious organization.”

And so our lawsuit was born. With AFHR and Rogers asplaintiffs, we sued Washington County in the United StatesDistrict Court in Minnesota in September 2014. The lawsuitchallenged the Minnesota statutory requirements for marriagecelebrants on three grounds:

1. The statute constitutes an establishment of religion,a violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendmentsto the U.S. Constitution, in that it gives preference toreligion over non-religion.

2. It further constitutes an establishment of religion inthat it gives preference to some religious denominations

over others.

3. It deprives AFHR and other Atheist organizationsof equal protection of the laws, which is a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to theU.S. Constitution. This argument was fortified bythe fact that Washington County, which rejected AFHR credentials, had in fact accepted credentialsfrom the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

In response, Washington County submitted a 29-pagememorandum defending the constitutionality of the statute.

In a lengthy article on the lawsuit, the Minneapolis StarTribune quoted Washington County Attorney Peter Orput assaying, “If you don’t want to believe in a higher power, that’sgreat, no problem. But [the Atheists’] argument is that beingan Atheist is a creed. I argue a creed is a belief in something,and their view is somewhat of a nihilist’s. You can’t call that

religion. Belief in nothing is not a religion” (“Atheists Fight Washington Count y over Marriage Registers,” Dec. 12, 2014StarTribune.com).

The article went on to point out that although WashingtonCounty revoked two applications from Atheist organizationsand one from the Church of Spiritual Humanism, it hadaccepted applications submitted by ordained clergy from theChurch of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Church of theLatter Day Dude. The article closed by quoting Marie AlenaCastle, who said, obviously tongue-in-cheek, “If we lose thiscase, we will set up the Church of Smoke and Mirrors.”

Orput’s comments drew a sharp rebuke from DavidBreeden, the senior minister at the First Unitarian Society ofMinneapolis, who wrote in a letter to the editor:

When county attorneys attempt to be theologians,everybody is in trouble. Many Christian denominationsdo not require creeds, including Quakers, Baptists,Disciples of Christ, and Jehovah’s Witnesses. Mostreligions don’t have creeds, including Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, Confucianism, and Taoism. Some ofthose don’t require gods either.

According to Orput’s logic, all these should be bannedfrom performing weddings in Washington County.

He says that Atheists are like nihilists. This is likesaying cats are like cows. If he is repeating the notionthat Atheists don’t believe in anything, that’s oldnonsensical prejudice. I suspect that Atheists believein far more things than does Orput, including scienceand reason.

I am a Unitarian Universalist minister and a humanist. The congregation I serve as senior minister, FirstUnitarian Society of Minneapolis, has been proudlyhumanist since 1916. Thousands of weddings andother life passages have been celebrated here, and

no gods are invoked.

I wonder about the requirements for countyattorney. Clearly, theologian is not among them(“County Attorney Has Narrow Logic,” Dec. 15,2014, StarTribune.com).

Washington County, which rejected AFHR credentialsaccepted credentials from the Church of

the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

For good measure, the helpful official underlinedthe words “religious organization.”



A few days later, I received a sett lement offer from theCounty. If our members reapplied with certificates issued

by t he Church of Smoke and Mirrors, t he applications wou ld be accepted. We immediately rejected the offer. Af ter al l, we brought this lawsuit because our members, as Atheists,shouldn’t be required to form a church in order to be quali fiedto solemnize a marriage.

Our case never went before a judge because less than a week before the motion for preliminar y injunction was scheduledfor a hearing, I received another letter which told me that theCounty had changed its collective mind and would now accept

credentials from AFHR, as well as other Atheist organizations.This led to the judge ultimately dismissing our lawsuitas moot. In commenting to the Star Tribune after the judge’sdecision, Orput had this to say: “What it came down to was arisk-benefit for the county in that when we were sued based onour plain reading of the statute, we realized there was a strong

likelihood that the courts may rule against us, causing us to paysignificant attorneys’ fees to the other side. So we said, ‘OK, wesurrender.’” (“Judge Tosses Lawsuit, but Atheists Sti ll Score Winover Washington County, May 15, 2105, StarTribune.com).

That “surrender” led a large group of AFHR officiants tostage a mass registration of AFHR credentials in WashingtonCounty, and further guarantees that, notwithstanding thediscriminatory language that remains on Minnesota’s statute

books, Atheists wil l be free to solemnize marriages anywhere inthe state of Minnesota.

Randall Tigue is American Atheists’ regional director for MinnesotaHe is also a board member of the Minnesota chapters of the Secular

Coalition for America and Americans United for Separation of Church

and State. He is a past national president of the First Amendmen

Lawyers Association and past president of the Minnesota affiliate

of the ACLU.

Atheists shouldn’t be required to form a church inorder to be qualified to solemnize a marriage.

Members of Atheists for Human Rights register as wedding celebrants in Washington County.

Back row, far left, is plaintiff Rodney Rogers. Standing next to him is attorney Randall Teague.


25/48


“Parenting Without God is not just aboutthe absence of religion—it’s about theglorious space that opens up for secularparents and their lucky kids once theclutter and smoke of religion is gone. DanArel’s voice is clear, smart, and a welcomeaddition to the growing chorus of parentstaking the hands of their children andrunning at full speed into the real world.”

~ Dale McGowan, author/editor, Parenting

Beyond Belief and Raising Freethinkers

Available everywhere books are sold.



CONTINUED ON PAGE 37

As history attests, religion has caused much moreharm tha n good across the ages. The Abrahamiccults, in par ticular, have an incalculable volumeof blood on their hands. Yet there are several religions thatare not all that harmfulalthough “not all that harmful” isan atrocious compliment. Faiths that first come to mind areBuddhism, Jainism, Quakerism, and Baha’i.

But there is another religion, and not only is it gentle,it’s also logical. It was the brainchild of nineteenth-centuryophthalmologist Ludwig Lazarus Zamenhof, who had a benttoward logophiliaand humanism. In the late 1880s, hepublished his invented language, Esperanto, under the nom deplume “Doktoro Esperanto.” Not the first artificial language,

but arguably the best.Zamenhof was born in 1859, the year Darwin published On

the Origin of Species. He was a dreamer, a passionate pacifist. Young Ludwig spent his boyhood in the city of Biał ystok,Poland, which was then a part of the Russian Empire, a placerife with social unrest and ethnic turmoil among Russians,Poles, Germans, and Jews. Inspired to resolve such conf licts, hestrove to synthesize a new and neutral discourse, not just for his

homeland but for the entire world.Zamenhof’s interest in creating an artificial language

began while the lad was in grammar school. After learningFrench, German, and English, he invented a language, basingits vocabulary on pan-European lexicons (to ensure he did notfavor any one nation or language), with rules of syntax andsemantics largely inf luenced by the simplicity of English. Overthe course of his relatively brief life, Zamenhof attained fluencyin at least ten languages.

Dozens of artificial languages were created in the nineteenthcentury. Although Esperanto necessarily dealt with hammer-

blows from rival languages such as Neo; Ido; Occidental;

Novial, and its predecessor, Volapük, it quickly became the mostsuccessful artificial language ever proposed. This is likely due tothe unique promissory note that potential followers had to signto prove they were serious about learning this proposed linguisticexpedient: “I, the undersigned, promise to learn the internationallanguage proposed by Dr. Esperanto, if it is shown that ten mill ionpeople will have publicly made the same promise.”

His goal was a “neutrally human basis” for communicationamong people of all nations. The number of Esperantospeakers grew rapidly after Zamenhof’s publications. It wasenthusiastically embraced by European scholars and logophilesand by 1921, there were over 1,500 Esperanto courses inGermany alone, taken by some 40,000 adult students. Today,the Esperanto version of Wikipedia (EO.Wikipedia.org) boastsover 170,000 articles written in the language. The UniversalEsperanto Association, which currently has national affiliateassociations in seventy countries, estimates the number ofpeople with some knowledge of the language to be in thehundreds of thousands, possibly even millions.

The first hint of Zamenhof’s underlying altruism is embeddedin the name of his new language; “Esperanto” means “one who

hopes.” Esperanto was an effort to foster humanist connectionsand mutual understanding. Zamenhof personified unselfish hopeas he envisioned his magnanimous dreams. Yet he dreamt not

just of synthesizing a universal language, but also of establishinga world religion that was beneficent and even logical.

France awarded Zamenhof the Légion d’honneur forEsperanto, and he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in1910. Zamenhof pursued humanist concepts throughout hislife with the fervor and passion of Captain Ahab.

Peace from the EastIf we were to poll any assembly of erudite expositors

Esperanto and

by Michael B. Paulkovich

Ludwig Zamenhof’s quest to establish a beneficent

and logical religion

DOGMA WATCH

Humanism

Religion has had an enormous impact on the world. In this series, MichaePaulkovich examines dogmas, myths, and religious notions past and pres

Ludwig Zamenhof


27/48


“Hang in there, Timmy. You only need 3,114

more ‘Likes’ on Facebook for me to save you.”



DanthropologyA Column by Dan Arel

Creationism Has No Business in the White House

e have a serious problem in this country: politicalcandidatesespecially those runn ing for president

of the United Stateswho openly criticize and rejectthe theory of evolution. Rick Santorum, a former U.S.

senator from Pennsylvania and a 2016 presidential candidate,actually believes that evolution is a tool used by Atheists topromote anti-theism: “I think there are a lot of problems withthe theory of evolution and do believe that it is used to promoteto [sic] a worldview that is Anti-theist, that is Atheist.”1

Now, we can arguably understand Santorum’s ignoranceto a very small degree. He has no scientific background. Hedid attend law school, but, given his fundamentalist religious

beliefs (he is Catholic, but his views go beyond mainstreamCatholicism), it’s possible that he could have avoided many

science classes in his earl ier education.But there are others who have no excuse. Rand Paul, theson of former Texas Congressman Ron Paul, is a U.S. senatorfrom Kentucky and also a physician. There is no way he madeit through his education without learning the ins and outs ofevolution and then having to apply that knowledge to his work.But Paul has refused to say how old he believes the earth is: “I’mgonna have to pass on the age of the earth. I think I’m just gonnahave to pass on that one.”2

Even more alarming than Paul, however, is Ben Carson,a retired neurosurgeon who attended both Yale and theUniversity of Michigan. H is contributions to medicine cannot

be exaggerated, and countless people are alive today because ofhim. Yet Carson is determined to ruin that whole reputation inhis run for president, and he has some very interesting thingsto say about science, climate change, and especially evolution.

Carson questions scientists’ understanding of the world

when they say “I don’t know,” but he does not questionthe myth of a global flood: “…there is abundant evidence,geological evidence, that there was a worldwide flood. Go upinto the Andes Mountains and see all those fossils on the topof those mountains. I mean, these things, when you talk to theevolutionists about them, they always say the same thing. ‘Well

we don’t understand everything.’ And I just say, ‘I’m not sure you understand any thing.’”3

For a neurosurgeon to criticize scientists for not knowingeverything is astounding. For the criticism to come from BenCarson is even more astounding. As a pioneer in his field, he wasconstantly venturing into uncharted territory. Like that time in1987 when he lead the surgical team that performed the world’sfirst successful separation of twins joined at the back of the

head. Did he have to understand everything about the human brain to do that? Apparently not. Even in 2015twenty-eight years laterthe amount of knowledge we don’t have about the brain is far greater than the aggregate of all the knowledge wedo have. Yet when a scientific fact disrupts Carson’s religious

beliefs, saying “I don’t know” is suddenly a bad thing.But it doesn’t stop there. Carson even went so far as to

say that Satan inspired Darwin to dream up evolution: “Ipersonally believe that this theory that Darwin came up with

was something that was encouraged by the adversary [Satan],and it has become what is scientifically politically correct.

Amazingly, there are a signi ficant number of scientists who do

not believe it, but they are afraid to say anything.”4

The critical thinking skills necessary for understanding

and accepting the process of evolution are the same criticalthinking skills necessary for running this country. But there ismore than a lack of critical thinking that is worrisome when it

Rick Santorum believes that evolution is a toolused by Atheists to promote anti-theism.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 34


29/48




I n a ballroom in a Washington, D.C., hotel, morethan 2,500 people sit anxiously. There is a palpabletension in the room while the attendees wait for thenext speakers to be introduced. They sit politely,applauding the few red-meat lines in Arizona

Senator John McCain’s speech, but they’re not here to hear fromthe 2008 GOP presidential nominee; McCain has never beenparticularly popular with this audience.

The two speakers following McCainSenators MarcoRubio and Ted Cruz, of Florida and Texas, respectively, bothrunning for president in 2016were much more in line withthe priorities of the conference attendees in the room.

For an Atheist like me, listening to the speakers at the 2015 Values Voter Summit (VVS)held in September by the FamilyResearch Council, Liberty Institute, and a host of other far-

right religious organizationscan only be described as surreal.The thousands in attendance, their excitement, and thenumber of politicians who addressed them should all cause graveconcern among voters who value secular government. This is notsome fringe event. The list of fifty-two speakers included mostof the GOP presidential candidates, as well as Rabbi JonathanCahn, who talked about the rainbow image that was projectedonto the White House following the U.S. Supreme Court’sdecision in June to strike down the ban on same-sex marriage.He received rapturous applause when he said that the multi-colored lights were a sign of the pending apocalypse.1

Rubio opened his remarks by reminding attendees that the

United States was “founded on a spiritual principle, on the ideathat every human being has rights that are given by God” andthen reassuring them of his own Christian upbringing.2

Cruz even more effectively appealed to the evangelicals inthe room when he talked about visiting K im Davis in jai l. Davisis the clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, who is refusing to issuemarriage licenses to same-sex couples. “Now, six months, a yearago, if I had come and said that a Christian woman was goingto be thrown in jail for living her faith, the media would havedismissed me as a nutcase. But that’s where we are today.” Hequoted from the Acts of the Apostles in the New Testament,comparing his audience to the ear thquake god caused in orderto break open the jail cell that imprisoned Paul and Silas. 3

Later that day, Davis herself walked on stage to a standing

Why

Atheists Must VoteIt’s time to stop elected officials frompandering to religious constituents

by Nick Fish

Sen. Ted Cruz


31/48


ovation that lasted almost a minute and a half. She tearfullyclutched an oversize bouquet of flowers as Family ResearchCouncil President Tony Perkins presented her with the Cost

of Discipleship Award.Rubio and Cruz were just two of the presidential candidatesand political-power players to address the gathering ofevangelicals. Rick Santorum, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee,Bobby Jindal, LindseyGraham, Donald Trump,and Rick Perry (who hassince withdrawn from the2016 presidential race) alltook turns at the podiumappealing to the faithful.

Donald Trump, in anattempt to show off his godly

bona f ides, proudly held uphis family Bible show-and-tell style. Ben Carson, afavorite of the VVS crowd,spoke against the threat of“allowing progressives todrive God out of our land.”4 Mike Huckabee proposed usingthe Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to completely outlawabortion in the United States.

Also appearing on that stage was radio-talk-show hostMark Levin. Levin, in his conversation with Tony Perkins, toldattendees that “secularism has become a religion.” He warnedthat the Supreme Court was “ imposing secular Sharia .”5

The simple fact that so many presidential candidates,members of Congress, and political power brokers choose toattend this event speaks to its inf luence and, more specifically,to the power of the voting bloc it represents.

By the Numbers According to the Pew Research Center, evangel ical

Christians made up 23% of the electorate in the 2012presidential electionhigher than their 20% representation inthe total population.6 Simply put, evangel icals show up to thepolls, and they show up to vote for Republicans.

It is clear why GOP presidential candidates come to VVS

to kiss the rings of the faithful. Look at Catholic voters. Approx imately 25% of the 2012 electorate was Catholic, yetCatholics make up only about 22% of the U.S. population.They have a modestly outsized impact on the election, buttheir voting is much more evenly split and reflective of thegeneral election. They went for Bush in both 2000 and 2004,and Obama in 2008 and 2012.

Now let’s look at Atheist voters. To be clear, Pew only collectsdata on religiously unaffiliated voters, who are often called the“nones” because they check the none-of-the-above box in religion

surveys. But for the purposes of political discourse, the nones aremore likely to be on our side than the side of evangelicals.In 2012, the nones represented about 20% of our nation’s

population, just like the evangelicals. But how many nonesshowed up to vote that year?Far fewer than we’d expectThe religiously unaffiliatedmade up just 12% of theelectorate in 2012. That’sroughly forty-five millioneligible voters, but just15.5 million of us went tothe polls that year. The

evangelical demographichad the same number ofeligible voters, but theyturned out almost thirtymillion votes. To put that inperspective: Barack Obama

won the 2012 popular vote by just under five mil lion votesNon-believers underperformed by a staggering 14.5 million

votes that day.So where do those extra evangelical votes go? The

overwhelming majority go to people like Ted Cruz, MikeHuckabee, and Rick Santorum. Their votes go to people who

believeas every candidate (except Lindsey Graham) whospoke at VVS believesthat public officials like Kim Davisshouldn’t have to do their jobs if there’s a religious objection.Their votes go to elected officials who court people who believethat a rainbow projected onto the side of a building is a sign ofthe impending apocalypse. They vote for candidates who use

words like “fa lse god” and “idol” when describing any faithother than their own. And they go to people like Ben Carson,the neurosurgeon who says that a person who accepts theconcept of evolution is a person who lacks the ability to have amoral code.7

Fighting Back

The religious right likes to frame the culture wars as a fight between good and evi l. They are “f ighting” against “secularSharia” that is trying to “drive God out of our land.” Theirpersecution complex is very real. They see their decades ofcultural dominance slipping away, and it terrifies them. Theirnumbers are shrinking, but their voters have never been moremobilized.

They see their decades of cultural dominanceslipping away, and it terrifies them.

It is time to force our way back into asystem that has all but pushed us out.

Take the Atheist Voter Pledge! Learn more at AtheistVoter.org:

• State-by-state voter registration info andi.d. requirements

• Candidates’ campaign stops near you

• AtheistVoter blog and news updates

•Ways to get involved



American Atheists has launched the AtheistVoter Project as a one-stop shop for Atheists to

get more involved in the political process.

Dr. Ben Carson

Rep. Louie Gohmert

Gary Bauer

Donald Trump

Lindsey Graham

Kim Davis

Gov. Mike Huckabee

Gov. Bobby Jindal

American Atheist Magazine (Fourth Quarter 2015)

Documents

Transcript of American Atheist Magazine (Fourth Quarter 2015)