OVO

Trevor Blake on Books: The Boy-Man by Tim Jeal [LINK-ZUM]

A biography of Lord Baden-Powell (22 February 1857 - 8 January 1941) and a history of his greatest achievement, the Boy Scouts.

In most of the world you can be a girl Boy Scout (see FAQ at Scouting for All). You can be in prison for robbery, rape, or murder and still be a Boy Scout. But heaven help you if you try to be an atheist Boy Scout. The Boy Scouts of America aren't vague about this ban either - they expressly state that no atheist can be a Boy Scout. The Boy Scouts is a private organization, and I think it is reasonable to allow them to exclude whoever they want. I think it is a private affair that the Boy Scouts - the British original - allows atheists to join while the Boy Scouts of America does not. But in doing so, the BSA should not have access to tax-funded schools or tax-funded public lands, as our taxes are not supposed to support private organizations that discriminate.

But is the Boy Scouts of America is a private organization or is it a recruiting arm of the Mormons? Nearly 10% of the members of the Boy Scouts Advisory Council live in Salt Lake City; Mormons are less than 2% of the U.S. population but make up 21% of the Boy Scouts. The Salt Lake Tribune reports: "If the Boy Scouts of America is forced to accept gays as scoutmasters, the LDS Church will withdraw from the organization and take more than 400,000 Scouts with it." As late as 1974, Mormon BSA troops reserved leadership positions for white men only.

All of this nonsense is at a distance from what Lord Baden-Powell set out to do with his Boy Scouts. Read The Boy-Man and find out for yourself.

Labels: atheist, books, mormon, religion, sex, theocracy

Randi Kaye: Atheist soldier sues Army for 'unconstitutional' discrimination [LINK-ZUM]

[Army Spc. Jeremy] Hall said he met some atheists who suggested he read the Bible again. After doing so, he said he had so many unanswered questions that he decided to become an atheist. His sudden lack of faith, he said, cost him his military career and put his life at risk. Hall said his life was threatened by other troops and the military assigned a full-time bodyguard to protect him out of fear for his safety. [...] Two years ago on Thanksgiving Day, after refusing to pray at his table, Hall said he was told to go sit somewhere else. In another incident, when he was nearly killed during an attack on his Humvee, he said another soldier asked him, "Do you believe in Jesus now?" [...] He also said he missed out on promotions because he is an atheist. "I was told because I can't put my personal beliefs aside and pray with troops I wouldn't make a good leader," Hall said.

[Article continues at link. I have a strong personal interest in soldier cults such as Sol Invictus, the Mithraic mysteries and (most recently and especially) the Tatenokai. But it should go without saying that what I am interested in and knowledgeable about are not necessarily what I consider good. I am dead against a Christian military in the United States (or anywhere else). Atheists should not need bodyguards. The military has much more important uses for its men and materials than providing bodyguards for atheists. Any religious discrimination in the military should be dealt with swiftly and harshly, including discrimination against the non-superstitious. And to the soldier who says surviving an attack is proof of Jesus I ask why Jesus caused / allowed that attack to occur in the first place. If Jesus can use Muslims practicing Islam to serve His purposes then there is no particular reason to value being a Christian over being a Muslim as they are working toward the same end. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, fight, islam, theocracy

Lisa Sandberg: Court reverses judgment against church in exorcisms [LINK-ZUM]

A North Texas Pentecostal church should not be held liable for emotional trauma a former parishioner suffered as a youth when church members physically restrained and touched her during two exorcism attempts in 1996, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday. [Laura] Schubert was 17 at the time when fellow parishioners at the Pleasant Glade Assembly of God Church in Colleyville, in an attempt to rid her of evil spirits, held her down and "laid hands" on her body as she struggled to break free. [...] In her original suit against the church, Laura Schubert said she suffered lasting emotional trauma in 1996 when, on two separate occasions in one week, church members held her down and "laid hands" on her while she cried, kicked, clenched her fists, gritted her teeth and made guttural noises. She said the ordeal left her deeply depressed and suicidal and needing psychiatric help. She dropped out of high school.

[...] "The key point of this ruling is that we don't have a right to have our standards of reasonableness foisted upon some other religion," Dallas attorney David Pruessner said. "None of our religious beliefs can be examined when they are emotionally disturbing to other people."

[Article continues at link. So there you have it. See a teenage girl you want to 'lay hands' on? Maybe hold her down against her will while she struggles to escape? And do it a few times, you and your buddies? Just do it in the name of religion and down Texas way you won't even have to pay the legal fees. Any loathesome behavior can be excused when committed in the name of an invisible monster that lives in the sky. If you falsely imprison and abuse a teenage girl in the name of an invisible monster that lives in the sky then no one has a right to have their standards of reasonableness foisted on the act. No superstition can be examined when it is emotionally disturbing to other people - not in Texas, anyhow. Can you think of any activity other than superstition that exempts one from the rule of law so thoroughly? When was the last time - if ever - that you read a similar story about those can't-be-moral atheists? - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, theocracy

Virginia Bridges: Judge dismisses woman's religious drug-use argument [LINK-ZUM]

For years Brenda Williams Shoop struggled in a journey to get closer to God, she told a judge Thursday. And then she found a textbook that discussed a marijuana side effect, and later discovered a church that classifies the illegal drug as a key ingredient to a sacrament essential to becoming a Christian, she said. "It opens up someone's mind and helps apply (Christian) missions," Shoop said of marijuana's effects. [...] The Shoops were charged with drug trafficking in December 2006 after authorities found about 28 marijuana plants growing in their backyard, according to Baldwin County Sheriff's Office Lt. Neil Holcombe. [...]

Brenda Shoop said Thursday that she grew up in a Southern Baptist church. In recent years, she has struggled to find the spiritual fulfillment she has been looking for while exploring other denominations. Her religious belief and understanding, however, hit a turning point in nursing school when she read about marijuana's disassociation side effect, she said. That side effect, she said, helped her get closer to God as it quieted all the voices in her head and helped her "rise above the mundane and see that you are part of a bigger picture."

The Shoops argued that since their arrest they have started a ministry in their Robertsdale home and serve as missionaries for Universal Orthodox Church, which is based in Atlanta. The Christian denomination believes marijuana has biblical origins and was a key ingredient in holy anointing oil of Moses and the christening oil of Jesus Christ, according to testimony and court documents.

[Article continues at link. My preference would be for the government to get out of both the religion business and the drug business. Let competent adults believe whatever they want, providing they do not harm others who may not share that belief. Sometimes what they will believe will be in error, but the freedom to be in error cannot be divorced from the freedom to innovate (which sometimes results in error). Let competent adults entertain themselves as they want, providing they do not harm others who may not wish to be so entertained. Sometimes the way they will entertain themselves will be counterproductive, but the freedom to be counterproductive cannot be divorced from the freedom to own (which sometimes results in wasted resources). My preference would be for an end to theocracy and prohibition. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, prohibition, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Rand Abdel-Qader and Leila Hussein [LINK-ZUM]

Sadie Gray - Girl, 17, killed in Iraq for loving a British soldier: A 17-year-old Iraqi girl was murdered by her father in an honour killing after falling in love with a British soldier she met while working on an aid programme in Basra [...] Rand Abdel-Qader was stamped upon, suffocated and stabbed by her father, then given an unceremonious burial to emphasise her disgrace. Police released her father without charge two hours after his arrest. 'Not much can be done when we have an honour killing case,' said Sergeant Ali Jabbar of Basra police. 'You are in a Muslim society and women should live under religious laws. The father has very good contacts inside the Basra government and it wasn't hard for him to be released and what he did to be forgotten.'"

Afif Sarhan and Caroline Davies - 'My daughter deserved to die for falling in love': "For Abdel-Qader Ali there is only one regret: that he did not kill his daughter at birth. 'If I had realised then what she would become, I would have killed her the instant her mother delivered her,' he said with no trace of remorse. Two weeks after The Observer revealed the shocking story of Rand Abdel-Qader, 17, murdered because of her infatuation with a British soldier in Basra, southern Iraq, her father is defiant. Sitting in the front garden of his well-kept home in the city's Al-Fursi district, he remains a free man, despite having stamped on, suffocated and then stabbed his student daughter to death. Abdel-Qader, 46, a government employee, was initially arrested but released after two hours. Astonishingly, he said, police congratulated him on what he had done. 'They are men and know what honour is,' he said. [...] Though her horrified mother, Leila Hussein, called Rand's two brothers, Hassan, 23, and Haydar, 21, to restrain Abdel-Qader as he choked her with his foot on her throat, they joined in. Her shrouded corpse was then tossed into a makeshift grave without ceremony as her uncles spat on it in disgust. 'Death was the least she deserved,' said Abdel-Qader. 'I don't regret it. I had the support of all my friends who are fathers, like me, and know what she did was unacceptable to any Muslim that honours his religion,' he said."

Afif Sarhan and Caroline Davies - Mother who defied the killers is gunned down: "Leila Hussein lived her last few weeks in terror. Moving constantly from safe house to safe house, she dared to stay no longer than four days at each. It was the price she was forced to pay after denouncing and divorcing her husband [...] Though she feared reprisals for speaking out, she really believed that she would soon be safe. Arrangements were well under way to smuggle her to the Jordanian capital, Amman. In fact, she was on her way to meet the person who would help her escape when a car drew up alongside her and two other women who were walking her to a taxi. Five bullets were fired: three of them hit Leila, 41. She died in hospital after futile attempts to save her. [...] It was two weeks after Rand's death on 16 March that a grief-stricken Leila, unable to bear living under the same roof as her husband, found the strength to leave him. She had been beaten and had had her arm broken. It was a courageous move. Few women in Iraq would contemplate such a step. Leila told The Observer in April: 'No man can accept being left by a woman in Iraq. But I would prefer to be killed than sleep in the same bed as a man who was able to do what he did to his own daughter.' [...] Mariam [a woman who had been helping Leila escape] has moved out of her home. But within hours of speaking to The Observer a close friend went to her new address to deliver a message that had been left for her at her front door. It read: 'Death to betrayers of Islam who don't deserve God's forgiveness. Speaking less you will live more.' She believes it was sent by Leila's killers. 'They want this story to be buried with Leila,' she said. 'But I cannot close my eyes to all this.'"

[Much of the Muslim world is skilled at closing its eyes to these stories. Muslims around the world will riot in the streets for weeks if a newspaper prints the wrong sort of cartoon, but laugh and shrug if an outsider is shocked at how they brutalize real live human beings. Whatever Islam may have been, it has lost its way. Islam must be secularized or abandoned. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, sex, theocracy

Craig Gustafson: San Diego County workers may be excused from gay weddings [LINK-ZUM]

San Diego County plans to comply with a state Supreme Court ruling that allows same-sex marriages but will not force employees to perform the ceremonies if they cite religious or moral objections. County Assessor-Recorder-Clerk Greg Smith, whose office issues marriage licenses, said he has informed the roughly 115 employees deputized to conduct ceremonies to tell him if they object to same-sex marriages. Smith said he needs to know if he'll have to juggle employees around or train more to handle what could be thousands of gay couples arriving at his office after the court's ruling takes effect next month. [...] County Counsel John Sansone has advised Smith to wait until the state gives direction before issuing licenses. He said the county will comply with the court ruling, it's just a matter of when it can start. Sansone also said employees cannot simply object to performing same-sex ceremonies. They must give a legitimate religious or moral reason for refusing, he said.

[Article continues at link. The state of Oregon has banned, offered, and rescinded same-sex marriage licenses. I have spoken with opponents of same-sex marriage as they campaigned. When I asked them what legal rights available only to married couples they want same-sex couples not to have, they have been either at a complete loss or state clearly that they do not want to deny any of those rights to same-sex couples. A few more questions reveal their genuine concern. They believe that their place of worship will be legally required to conduct same-sex marriages. No place of worship has ever been required to conduct any marriages. Clergy are free to decide who they will or will not conduct a wedding ceremony for. Legal recognition of same-sex marriage will not change this fact. As has always been the case, there is a difference between weddings (what happens among friends and family) and marriage (a legal contract sanctioned with the State). Should legal recognition of same-sex marriage occur, clergy will remain free to refuse to conduct their weddings. Getting that through the head of those who oppose legal recognition of same-sex marriage would likely cause their efforts to evaporate. The compliment to the freedom clergy have in being free to decide who they will wed is that the State is not free in the same way. The rule of law applies to all. State workers should not be free to refuse to issue marriage licenses. If they object to doing so strongly enough, they are free to find a new job. I cannot imagine what criteria County Counsel Sansone will use to determine what "a legitimate religious or moral reason for refusing" might be. County Counsel Sansone perhaps might benefit from reading the Constitution of the United States of America in which it is clearly stated that the State is not fit to establish religion, not fit to judge which religions are legitimate or not. Should State employees be free to refuse to issue marriage licenses for religious or moral reasons, you can be sure it won't stop with same-sex marriages. State workers would then be free to refuse to issue marriage licenses for multi-ethnic marriages, as commanded by Numbers 12:1. State workers would then be free to refuse to issue fishing licenses for clams, oysters, crabs, lobsters, and shrimp, as commanded by Leviticus 11:10-12. State workers would then be free to refuse to issue teaching licenses to women at some schools, as commanded by 1 Corinthians 14:34-35. There's a very good reason why the United States government was advised from the very start to keep out of the religion business. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, sex, theocracy

AP: Afghan teacher killed after speech condemning suicide bombings [LINK-ZUM]

A teacher was shot to death in northern Afghanistan after he gave a speech condemning suicide bombings, officials said Wednesday. Abdul Hadi criticized such attacks as un-Islamic and un-Afghan during a speech Tuesday in the Archi district of Kunduz province, said Khair Mohammad Subat [...] Hadi spoke at a gathering of about 700 people, including the Kunduz governor and was on his way home when he was killed [...] According to UNICEF, there were 236 school-related attacks last year. In central Logar province, meanwhile, education department director Kamaluddin Zadran said three girls schools have been set ablaze in the past three weeks. Girls were barred from schools under the Taliban regime.

[Article continues at link. Exactly where are the tens of thousands of Muslims marching in the streets to demand that such atrocities end, and that they are not carried out in their name? Perhaps they are busy instead protesting editorial cartoons. But setting little girls on fire for going to school, shooting a man dead because he said in public that killing people was wrong... we have to celebrate the diversity of those murderers by not talking about it (much less doing more than talk), right? I predict that the silence will be deafening from most Muslims. Is Islam capable of reform? Not if they keep killing the reformers and the children. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, theocracy

BBC: Saudi women 'kept in childhood' [LINK-ZUM]

Saudi women are being kept in perpetual childhood so male relatives can exercise "guardianship" over them, the Human Rights Watch group has said. The New York-based group says Saudi women have to obtain permission from male relatives to work, travel, study, marry or even receive health care. Their access to justice is also severely constrained, it says.

The group says the Saudi establishment sacrifices basic human rights to maintain male control over women. Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world where women are not allowed to drive. Saudi clerics see the guardianship of women's honour as a key to the country's social and moral order.

[Article continues at link. When the author(s) of this article mention 'Saudi clerics' they of course are referring to Seventh Day Adventists. Or perhaps Theravada Buddhists. Maybe they are Asatru Free Assembly. Well, whatever sort of clerics they are, the BBC doesn't say. Maybe because they don't say what sort of clerics run a country such that women are kept as perpetual children then that sort of cleric won't feel victimized and targeted and disrespected. Because they are the real victims, oh yes, those poor clerics need our understanding. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, theocracy

Laurie Goodstein: Vatican Hints at Changes in Church Laws on Abuse [LINK-ZUM]

The New York Times reports: "After three days in which Pope Benedict XVI has persistently addressed the scandal of child sexual abuse by priests, a top Vatican official said on Friday that the church was considering changes to the canon laws that govern how it handles such cases. The official, Cardinal William J. Levada, would not specify which canons were under reconsideration."

Perhaps the canon law under consideration here is the Crimine Solicitaciones [google] [BBC] [OVO]. The Crimine Solicitaciones was initiated by Pope John XXIII in 1962 and confirmed as canon law by Pope Benedict (then Cardinal Ratzinger) in 2001. The Crimine Solicitaciones orders children abused by clergy to be quiet about it under threat of excommunication. The Crimine Solicitaciones also orders abusive clergy to be moved to a new parish. The Crimine Solicitaciones is why it appears that the Roman Catholic Church has operated a child abuse ring. At times, when abusive clergy have been caught, they have escaped prosecution due to diplomatic immunity (as representatives of Holy See of Vatican City, a sovereign nation). The reason it appears as such is because it is true.

Perhaps it is the Crimine Solicitaciones that is under consideration for review. If so, that would be beneficial to exposing and breaking this child abuse ring. And it would call into question the moral infallibility of the Pope. I support both of these possibilities.

Labels: christianity, theocracy

Yemen Times Staff: Yemen's MPs debate female circumcision, pre-marriage tests [LINK-ZUM]

Preventing female circumcision and pre-marriage medical tests evoked turmoil and disagreement among Parliament members (MPs) in last week's session. The session ended with a unanimous agreement to cancel the term 3, which would prevent female circumcision, and delay the discussion of pre-marriage tests. [...]

"I suggested canceling term number three, about preventing female circumcision, for many reasons. First, the term, which was written in the draft, included inappropriate and shameful sentences. Second, female circumcision exists in few regions in Yemen, like in Hodeidah and Hadramout, so it not common practice. And finally, there is still religious debate regarding the issue, so as we have no directives by the heads of religion to forbid female circumcision, we do not have the right to ban it," [MP Zid Al-Shami] explained.

[Article continues at link. Emphasis added. The next time you read that female genital mutilation is not an Islamic practice, remember that Yemen had the chance to outlaw fgm, and did not do so, and why they did not do so. Remember that tens of thousands of Muslims have rioted in the streets all over the world for years (these riots have included many deaths) to protest a few cartoons, and compare that to how many Muslims are having peaceful demonstrations anywhere at any time against fgm. These are the priorities of Islam. This is what the West is expected to 'respect.' NON SERVIAM! LAN ASTASLEM! - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, theocracy

Victor L. Simpson: Pope says he is 'deeply ashamed' of clergy abuse scandal [LINK-ZUM]

Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday he was "deeply ashamed" of the clergy sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church and will work to keep pedophiles out of the priesthood, addressing the toughest issue facing the American church as he began his first papal trip to the United States. Benedict spoke in English on a special Alitalia flight from Rome to Washington, answering questions submitted by reporters in advance.

"It is a great suffering for the Church in the United States and for the church in general and for me personally that this could happen," Benedict said. "It is difficult for me to understand how it was possible that priests betray in this way their mission ... to these children. I am deeply ashamed and we will do what is possible so this cannot happen again in the future," the pope said.

Benedict pledged that pedophiles would not be priests in the Catholic Church. "We will absolutely exclude pedophiles from the sacred ministry," Benedict said. "It is more important to have good priests than many priests. We will do everything possible to heal this wound."

[Article continues at link. As recently as 2001, Pope Benedict (then Cardinal Ratzinger) said that the Crimine Solicitaciones was still in effect. What is the Crimine Solicitaciones? It is a document ordered by Pope John XXIII in 1961 and sent to every Bishop in the Roman Catholic Church. On direct orders of the Pope, clergy who abused children were to be moved to a new parish and the crime was to be kept secret. Should any victim speak out against clergy, they were to be threatened with excommunication. And when victims have spoken out against clergy, clergy have been excused from prosecution due to diplomatic immunity (as representatives of the Vatican Holy See, a sovereign nation). If you want to know why abusive clergy were protected from prosecution for decades, you have no further to look. Pope Benedict has the means to start healing this wound. Healing won't come only through blaming the individual abusive clergy, as damnable as they are. Healing will come through admitting that The Most Holy Father has actively been sheltering abusive clergy from prosecution. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Fitna and the United Nations [LINK-ZUM]

From Wikipedia: "Fitna is a film by Dutch politician Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV) in the Dutch parliament. The movie offers his views on Islam and the Qur'an." The film is available online from Wikileaks, Google Video, and via bittorrent.

Jorge Sampaio is the UN High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations. Mr. Sampiao issues a call for respect and calm:

The recent release of an insulting film on the Holy Qur'an seems to serve no other purpose than to cause offence. The film may provoke and prompt social unrest, and encourage extremist groups within European societies whose agenda is to discriminate against and marginalize Muslim immigrants. Similarly, this offensive film may add to tensions between different cultures and may give rise to the idea that Europe or the West as a whole are hostile to Islam. So let us always remember that misrepresentation fuels extremism and extremism appears to validate misrepresentation. That is the vicious circle we have to firmly oppose and avoid. We will all be the losers if we fail to immediately defuse this potential crisis, which will only serve to entrench already polarized opinions and to feed stereotypes and misconceptions that deepen patterns of hostility and mistrust among peoples and societies.

At the core of this situation is a trend towards extremism in many of our societies. We should indeed beware of overemphasizing it, because extremism anywhere is extremism everywhere, thanks to new media technologies. Few people think of themselves as extremists, but many can be pushed towards an extreme point of view, almost without noticing it, when they feel that the behavior or language of others is extreme. We therefore deeply regret this offensive film.

Mr. Sampaio's statement continues and may be read in full here. Fitna presents the words of the Qur'an as text, then shows Muslims and Muslim leaders reading that text and explaining what it means, then shows Muslims and Muslim leaders acting on that explanation. If the words, explanation and acts are murderous, it is not the fault of a film that reports such murders that is to blame.

The tension between different cultures presented in the film are as follows. In the West there is a pluralism in which filmmakers can make films and cartoonists can make cartoons without the threat of State-sanctioned death; a pluralism in which homosexuals can be homosexuals without the threat of State-sanctioned death; a pluralism in which women can be women without the threat of genitals mutilation. In the Muslim world, there is a monoculture in which filmmakers and cartoonists and authors and people in buildings and people on buses and people on trains and people just about anywhere can be put to death; a monoculture in which homosexuals can be put to death; a monoculture in which women can have their genitals mutilated. The pluralism of the West tries to include the monoculture of the Muslim world, tries to greet as friends those who are murdering them. The Muslim world contains no such contradiction. Mr. Sampaio uses ideas of culture, race and religion interchangeably. To condemn Islam is to be racist, he seems to say. It is not the case that culture, race and religion are so interchangeable, and to make that claim is deceptive.

This film may cause offense. The ten thousand men, women and children killed by Muslims since 11 September 2001 causes me more offense. How can it be that murder is a matter of culture while art is a criminal offense? The pluralism of the West has been perverted into cultural relativism.

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has made the following statement about Fitna:

I condemn, in the strongest terms, the airing of Geert Wilders' offensively anti-Islamic film. There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence. The right of free expression is not at stake here. I acknowledge the efforts of the Government of the Netherlands to stop the broadcast of this film, and appeal for calm to those understandably offended by it. Freedom must always be accompanied by social responsibility.

The United Nations is the centre of the world's efforts to advance mutual respect, understanding and dialogue. We must also recognize that the real fault line is not between Muslim and Western societies, as some would have us believe, but between small minorities of extremists on different sides with a vested interest in stirring hostility and conflict.

This reads to me like nothing so much as a man encouraging his neighbors to continue paying 'protection money' to the gang that controls his neighborhood. The plain words of the Qur'an, the recorded speeches of Muslims and Muslim leaders, the video of Muslims using a hand knife to saw off the head of kidnap victims... somehow these are worthy of mutual respect, understanding and dialogue. It is a film that accurately portrays these that is hateful, not the acts themselves. It is a film that is to blame for inciting violence, not what the film portrays. This film should be banned by law, but somehow that is not a violation of the right of free expression. And once again we are offered the claim that the pluralism of the West is to be found in the Muslim world if the West will only keep quiet about the Muslim world's vested interest in stirring hostility and conflict. Once again we are told that the extremists are to found on both sides. But from where I'm sitting one side made films and cartoons and books, the other side kills people.

I am disappointed by these two statements by United Nations representatives regarding the film Fitna and regarding Islam.

Labels: art, books, comics, film, islam, theocracy, video

Klintron: Tragic story of the malign effects of religious ignorance [LINK-ZUM]

Believe it or not, I'm not much of one for atheist evangelism (for lack of a better word). I'm just not that concerned with changing other people's personal beliefs (but of course I'm always willing to offer my opinions, and always trying to promote accurate information). I think there's a case to be made for religion as mental illness idea (and have pushed that idea myself), but when it really comes down to it most religious people (at least in the US) are mostly harmless. My friend and colleague Trevor Blake often points to a correlation between religious belief and committing violent acts. To paraphrase him, you never hear about atheists burning down Christian stores for sex, but you frequently hear about Christians burning down sex stores for Jesus. However, correlation and causation are not the same thing. We can learn from this that religion is not a necessary or sufficient source for morality, but little else.

So my main concern, with regards to religion, is theocracy: when one group's superstitions become law. So I've stopped taking much note when an individual Buddhist priest is found guilty of molesting a woman, or someone commits a murder in the name of their religion. There are laws against these sorts of things, and I'm not sure someone commits these sorts of acts because they’re religious, or if their attraction to religion stems from the same source as their attraction to rape and violence. In other words, I'm not sure religion is a symptom or a disease. I'm more concerned with sovereign nations that organize child-rape syndicates and the institutional oppression and murder of women and homosexuals in countries like Saudi Arabia.

Sometimes it's not so cut and dry, though. One kicker is parents and their children. I was raised Christian, and I think I turned out ok. I could have done without the paranoia inspired by the notion of an invisible monster watching everything I did, but I don't hold it against my parents. So I'm generally inclined to believe that parents should be free to teach their kids whatever sort of nonsense they want, and that if the kids are smart they'll grow out of it eventually.

But what happens when parents take it too far? Recently, an 11 year old girl died of a treatable form of diabetes because her parents choose to pray instead of seek medical help (via Pharyngula). This obviously crosses the line between believing something crazy and behaving in a malicious way. What is the response of the local police?

The girl has three siblings, ranging in age from 13 to 16, the police chief said. "They are still in the home," he said. "There is no reason to remove them. There is no abuse or signs of abuse that we can see." The girl's death remains under investigation and the findings will be forwarded to the district attorney to review for possible charges, the chief said.

At least the case is being investigated, but how can the police chief say there is no abuse? I know people who have had their kids taken away from them temporarily for far less. Sadly, this is not without precedent. Trevor wrote last year about parents who withhold medical treatment for religious reasons. None of the parents of children who died preventable deaths were charged with a crime.

This is not a case of religious freedom, or of individual belief. It's theocracy. If the parents had let their children die for any reason other than religion, they would be charged with crimes and their other children would be taken into state care.

Labels: buddhism, christianity, islam, libertarian, theocracy

Ashbel S. Green: Appeals court dismisses sex abuse suit [LINK-ZUM]

The Portland Archdiocese won a rare legal victory Wednesday when the Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit against two priests accused of sexually abusing a boy in the 1950s. The suit named the Rev. Clement Frank and the Rev. Louis Charvet, Mount Angel Abbey priests who are now dead.

The plaintiff claimed that after he fell down while roller-skating in Mount Angel in the early 1950s Frank happened to walk up, took him to a church and sexually assaulted him. The Court of Appeals ruled that the church cannot be held responsible because Frank did not use his position as a priest to gain access to the boy.

[Article continues at link. The plaintiff was abused by a priest in a church, but because 'helping boys who fall off bicycles' is not specifically named as a duty of the clergy, this is considered an off-the-clock rape and the Roman Catholic Church is not responsible. Fair enough. Let's remove the Catholic's tax exempt status for all those activities not specifically named as a duty of the clergy. And for heaven's sake, don't bring up the fact that the Roman Catholic Church hid child abusers for decades on direct orders of the Pope. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, theocracy

Rukmini Callamachi: Defame Islam, get sued? [LINK-ZUM]

The Muslim world has created a battle plan to defend its religion from political cartoonists and bigots. Concerned about what they see as a rise in the defamation of Islam, leaders of the world's Muslim nations are considering taking legal action against those that slight their religion or its sacred symbols. It was a key issue during a two-day summit that ended Friday in [Dakar, Senegal]. The Muslim leaders are attempting to demand redress from nations like Denmark, which allowed the publication of cartoons portraying the Prophet Muhammad in 2006 and again last month, to the fury of the Muslim world.

[Article continues at link. It is tempting to chide the leaders of the world's Muslim nations for their skewed priorities. Rather than express concern and make plans of action to prevent further murders in the name of Allah, they express concern and make plans of action to prevent further political cartoons. It is tempting to note the contradiction of these leaders seeking to limit other's ability to criticise them while maintaining their ability to criticise others. Or to point out the shameful contradiction found in some Muslims citing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a reason to ban art while not citing the same as a reason to stop killing people. But the more important comment to be made is that this is a step toward the secularization of Islam, and this is a step that I support. Their religion states quite clearly that they are compelled to kill those who blaspheme. This is what the Muslim world has always done, and what it does in many quarters even today. These leaders, as confused as their priorities are, have made a step towards the rule of secular law rather than theocracy. They have made a step toward resolving conflicts by debate and money rather than murder. Where Muslims submit to the secular, I greet them as a friend. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: comics, islam, theocracy

Robert Verkaik: Now Iranian lesbian who fled to Britain faces deportation [LINK-ZUM]

[Pegah Emambakhsh,] an Iranian lesbian who fled to Britain after her girlfriend was arrested and sentenced to death faces being forcibly returned after losing the latest round in her battle to be granted asylum. [...] Ms Emambakhsh came to the UK in 2005 fearing for her life after her partner had been arrested by Tehran police. Iranian gay rights groups have reported that that partner is in custody under sentence of death by stoning. Speaking through her asylum representative in Sheffield yesterday, Ms Emambakhsh said: "I will never, never go back. If I do I know I will die." Under the Iranian Islamic Punishment Act, lesbians found guilty of sexual relations can be sentenced to 100 lashes. But, for a third offence, the punishment is execution. [...] In turning down Ms Emambakhsh and Mr Kazemi's asylum applications, the Home Office has said that, provided Iranians are discreet about their homosexuality, they will not be persecuted.

[Article continues at link. It is wrong to consider homosexual discretion to be the solution to threats against Ms. Emambakhsh. The problem is not homosexual indiscretion. The problem is Islam. Britain and the West should not join or accommodate this cruel and foolish superstition nor its apologists. Where are the tens of thousands of moderate Muslims marching in the streets to say such acts of barbarism are not done in their name? As Irshad Manji points out, those the West calls extremists are the majority in Islam. The reasons you see tens of thousands rioting and murdering against cartoons but remaining silent about real human lives in peril is because that's what Muslims do, that's who they are, and that's who we need to confront. In plain and direct terms. Islam must be secularized or abandoned. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, theocracy

Proud Parenting: Mother and kids denied visitation with dying partner in Florida hospital [LINK-ZUM]

While on a family cruise leaving from Miami - Lisa [Pond] , a healthy 39 year-old, suddenly collapsed [with a brain aneurysm]. She was rushed to Miami's Jackson Memorial Hospital with her partner [of nearly 18 years] Janice [Langbehn] and three children following close behind. There, the hospital refused to accept information from Janice about her partner's medical history. Janice was informed that she was in an antigay city and state, and she could expect to receive no information or acknowledgment as family.

A doctor finally spoke with Janice telling her that there was no chance of recovery. Other than one five minute visit, which was orchestrated by a Catholic priest at Janice's request to perform last rites, and despite the doctor's acknowledgement that no medical reason existed to prevent visitation, neither Janice nor her children were allowed to see Lisa until nearly eight hours after their arrival.

Soon after Lisa's death, Janice tried to get her death certificate in order to get life insurance and Social Security benefits for their children. She was denied both by the State of Florida and the Dade County Medical Examiner.

[Article continues at link. This couple was from Oregon, which recently granted legal recognition to same sex partners. As long as same sex marriage is an issue of state's rights, there are some states that same sex couples should avoid. Florida seems to be one of them. Is there any force under the sun other than mean-spirited superstition enfranchised into law that kept this couple apart in their last possible moments together? - Trevor Blake]

Labels: theocracy

Trevor Blake: Marriage [LINK-ZUM]

The Salt Lake Tribune reports: " The LDS Church has joined with several California religious groups to file a friend-of-the-court brief in defense of Proposition 22, a law passed in 1999 that defined marriage as between a man and a woman."

The Church of Jesus Christ, Later-Day Saints (The Mormons) has tried for decades to play down the most obviously strange or cruel or foolish aspects of their superstition and build up a new reputation of being just like any other cult in town. The above is another example of this public image campaign. While the Mormons will forever be associated with polygamy, they are now also advocating traditional limit-one-per-customer marriage.

I do not think the increased number of men and women who want same-sex marriages has ever or will ever constitute a threat to marriage. What has caused harm to this institution (disclosure: I have presided over several marriages and will do so again next month) are easy access to divorce, easy access to safe and effective birth control and less social opprobrium for having children out of wedlock. Easier access to divorce and birth control were good changes, and if the institution of marriage suffered for them then individual human beings prospered for them. Having children out of wedlock seems to generally co-occur with poverty and crime, but of course any generalized claim breaks down for individual human beings.

The cause of changes to the institution of marriage are clear. Bt many would prefer to keep what has caused harm to marriage, shifting the blame for that harm to homosexuals and simultaneously keeping homosexuals from the rights and responsibilities found in marriage. Superstition is, of course, to be found in nearly every example of this hypocrisy.

Several times I have asked religionists what legal rights they specifically do not want same-sex couples to have. They have never been able to answer that question. Every legal right of marriage (inheritance, making medical decisions, etc.) that I mention to them, they think same-sex couples should have. Over time I realized that what they are imagining about same-sex marriage is that the sheriff will show up at their church and force their pastor to conduct a homo wedding at gunpoint. I think if we disabuse them of that fantasy then progress can be made. Disabusing the superstitious of fantasies (or, at least, mean spirited and stupid fantasies) is part of what OVO is all about.

Labels: christianity, mormon, ovo, religion, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Islam in the News [LINK-ZUM]

Danish Caricaturist of Muhammad Fame Now Homeless: He was booted from his police-protected hotel room on Feb. 15 for being "too much of a security risk." And now the 73-year-old cartoonist and his wife are without a place to live.

Danish police arrest almost 30 people in 8th night of youth violence: Some observers say the youth are frustrated over police harassment and the reprinting of a cartoon lampooning the Prophet Muhammad.

Man burnt alive in Thailand: A 46-year-old Buddhist man was shot and then set ablaze as he tried to escape an attack by suspected Islamic separatists on Tuesday in Thailand's Muslim-majority south, police said.

Father stones 14-year-old daughter to death: "I suspected that my daughter had a relationship with a man and I had to stone her to death as she had besmirched my honour. I had no other choice."

Secret papers reveal threats from Saudi prince: Saudi Arabia's rulers threatened to make it easier for terrorists to attack London unless corruption investigations into their arms deals were halted.

Violations of 'Islamic teachings' take deadly toll on Iraqi women: As many as 133 women were killed in Basra last year - 79 for violation of "Islamic teachings" and 47 for so-called honor killings.

Briton jailed for four years in [Islamic] Dubai after customs find cannabis weighing less than a grain of sugar under his shoe: A father-of-three who was found with a microscopic speck of cannabis stuck to the bottom of one of his shoes has been sentenced to four years in a Dubai prison.

Religious police in Saudi Arabia arrest mother for sitting with a man: a day in prison after she was strip-searched, threatened and forced to sign false confessions by the Kingdom's 'Mutaween' police.

Two Women Stoned, Feminists Mum: The Islamic Republic of Iran is an oppressor of women. So far American feminists have failed to support their Muslim sisters.

Female Muslim medics 'disobey hygiene rules': Muslim medical students are refusing to obey hygiene rules brought in to stop the spread of deadly superbugs, because they say it is against their religion.

Muslim Woman In Bangladesh Planning Conversion Burned By Unknown Attackers: 70-year old woman is in critical condition with burns over 70% of her body after unknown Muslim extremists set fire to her house to prevent her from being baptized in February as a Christian.

Honor killings - When the ancient and the modern collide: Not once have I heard these upstanding Muslims say that whatever the 'family dynamics,' killing is not a solution. Ever. How's that for basic morality?

Muslim Prayer at Iowa Statehouse: The prayer asked of "Victory over those who disbelieve," and "Protection from the great Satan" among other things.

Afghan Journalist Sentenced to Death: An Afghan court on Tuesday sentenced a 23-year-old journalism student to death for distributing a paper he printed off the Internet that three judges said violated the tenets of Islam, an official said.

Labels: islam, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Baljinder Badesha of Brampton [LINK-ZUM]

In September 2005, Baljinder Badesha was charged with the crime of riding a motorcycle without a helmet. Mr. Badesha countered by saying that as a Sikh he is required to wear a turban whenever he leaves his home and that nothing can touch his turban, therefore he is unable to comply with the law in this matter. The State hired a professional engineer to simulate wearing a turban while riding a motorcycle. This was done by placing a turban on a mannequin head and subjecting the mannequin head to 300 kph winds in a wind tunnel. The turban in a turbine unwound, which the State used as evidence that it was a danger to Mr. Badesha and to other riders. Mr. Badesha then rode his motorcycle on a close speedway at 110 kph to demonstrate that his turban would not unwind. The State has further claimed that since it will pay the medical bills of Mr. Badesha should he be injured in a motorcycle accident, the State has a reason to insist on his safe use of a motorcycle. The case continues to make its way through the courts.

Many of my favorite topics are woven into this story. Ancient superstition is trumping common sense and personal safety. The State is demonstrating it can't demonstrate justification for its laws. No simple answer appears in accomodating public safety versus individual choice, or superstition versus the secular state, or socialized medicine versus un-asked-for 'care' from the State. My view counts for nothing here, but perhaps a suitable compromise might be that Mr. Badesha should be allowed to ride without a helmet and the State should be relieved of providing him medical care should be be injured while riding without a helmet.

Labels: islam, theocracy, transportation

Bill Billeter: Religious symbols to be removed from chapel [LINK-ZUM]

The Beckley Veterans Affairs Medical Center has taken steps to remove faith-specific symbols from its chapel, said Debbie Voloski, the hospital's public affairs director. Similar actions are being taken at VA hospitals nationwide as the VA attempts to enforce its own policy enacted in July 1953 that states, "Chapels will be appointed and maintained as places for meditation and prayer for members of any faith group or denomination." The policy also states that "the labeling of chapel buildings or the erection of chapels for the exclusive use of a particular faith group is contrary to policy."

Voloski explained that VA chapels must remain neutral when not hosting the services of a particular denomination. For example, following a Baptist service on Sunday morning, Bibles and other Christian symbols must be removed from sight. Voloski said, "Veterans of all faiths will feel comfortable reflecting, meditating and praying in the chapel."

[Article continues at link. This is a confused step in the right direction. Meeting the needs of the various superstitions does require neutral ground. But neutral ground is exactly the opposite of 'sacred' ground, and sacred ground is the whole point of having a chapel in the first place. What makes the most sense, what serves everyone fairly, is to get the United States military out of the superstition business. If people have a need to worship, let them do it on their own time in their own way. No tax dollars need be involved. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, theocracy

BBC: Work starts on Hindu cow centre [LINK-ZUM]

Building work is to start on a cow and working oxen protection centre at a Hertfordshire Hindu temple. The unit at the Bhaktivedanta Manor temple near Watford will be dedicated to Gangotri, a 13-year-old cow put down by lethal injection by RSPCA officers. This act sparked outrage and a campaign to change the UK law on animal cruelty.

A temple spokesman said Hindus regard cows as sacred and should be exempted from cruelty laws, but the RSPCA challenges the campaign for change. The RSPCA said the cow had been sick and was suffering. The spokesman for the Hare Krishna temple said that some suffering was part of life and it was a outrage to kill the animal on ground the Hindus regarded as sacred. "Followers of religions such as Islam and Judaism have immunity from the laws because their animals are killed for religious food. Hindus try to preserve life and are vegetarian. We want the same treatment to allow our cows and oxen to die naturally. Our new protection centre is designed to care for the animals from birth to death."

[Article continues at link. In order to maintain the cow's sacred status, the temple was willing to let it suffer. In order to maintain the cow's quality of life, the RSPCA put it to death. In the real world nothing is sacred, every thing is just what it is. We can remember that if we consider some things more special than other things then it is we, now, who are considering it such. Keeping a sacred cow in a temple is one more way religion does the unthinkable in a socially acceptable way. No one can keep a sacred cow because they really like Dr. Who, or pre-raphaelite paintings, or prime numbers. But if you do it in the name of religion, you can get away with almost anything. You can even petition to have your superstition enfranchised into law. The RSPCA doesn't seem to be as kook-riddled as PETA, but of course the strange contradiction of killing an animal to save it remains. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: B12, hindu, theocracy

Ian Demsky: McNeil Island prison chaplain struggles with new multiple-faith rule [LINK-ZUM]

Tom Suss loves his job. A chaplain at McNeil Island prison, he's been with the state Department of Corrections for more than 15 years. "It's really a privilege to work there," the 63-year-old Catholic priest said in a recent interview. "When there's the opportunity to facilitate someone's realization of living differently, of making better choices, there's just no better high than that."

But Suss took a voluntary leave of absence at the beginning of the year because a new Corrections Department policy allowing inmates to profess multiple religions has put his faith into conflict with his duties as a state employee. He can take up to six weeks off and after that he's not sure what's going to happen. Though his bosses and peers speak highly of his work, he feels he might have to leave his profession behind.

"I'm thinking my days as a state chaplain might be finished," he said. At issue is whether in the state's efforts to protect inmates' freedom to worship, Suss should have to compromise his own religious convictions.

Article continues at link. Thanks as always to the excellent Religion Clause blog for the initial link . Prison chaplains are employees of the State. Their wages, insurance, mileage compensation, etc. are paid for by tax dollars. Is this not a case of the establishment of religion by the State? Can any other corrections employee - janitors, therapists, guards, secretaries - refuse to serve a prisoner based on their perceived religion?

There is no legal definition of religion. The benefit of this lack of a legal definition of religion is that it is made clear the State has no religious function. The State does not approve who is an is not clergy, who is and is not a member of any particular religion, and so on. These matters are left up to individuals. This also leaves the choice of being non-religious, even anti-religious, up to individuals.

The cost of this lack of a legal definition of religion is that at times religious individuals will overstep their domain of choice and attempt to make religious choices for others. Should an adult be able to decide the medical options available to their adult neighbor based on their religion? What if the medical option is abortion or euthanasia? Should an adult be able to decide the medical options available to their child based on their religion? The State is a poor judge in such matters, and that is why many of these choices are left up to individual states in the US and not decided at the Federal level.

In the case of prisoners, who cannot elect to move to a new state in the US if the state they are in does not accommodate their religion, the State has two choices. The first choice is to accommodate every expression of every religion by every prisoner. Prison clergy trained in every religion in human history must be available to anyone who summons them at any time, along with all the appropriate physical materials necessary to practice their religion. The second choice is to continue to consider religion a matter of individual choice, as is the case outside of prison, and not a service the State is obliged to provide.

Most religions include some influence from other religions. Judaism, Christianity and Islam all contain elements of earlier religions as well as shared elements. It is not the business of the State to define what is allowed within a single religion, and single religions contain elements of other religions. Just the same, it is not the business of the State to limit an individual to a single religion throughout their lifetime or concurrently.

Those who wish to offer religious services to prisoners should fund such services themselves. Prisoners should accept that the loss of some aspects of their religion are part of what is lost by being in prison. Prison clergy (if such a job should exist at all) must be prepared and willing to accommodate any religious expression from prisoners. The State should refrain from establishing religion. - Trevor Blake

Labels: christianity, magick, religion, theocracy

BBC: US network faces $1m nudity fine [LINK-ZUM]

US television network ABC may have to pay a fine of $1.4m (707,000 UK Pounds) for airing an episode of NYPD Blue which depicted female nudity. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) said the 2003 show had "multiple, close-up views" of a woman's buttocks before the US watershed. The FCC deems "sexual or excretory activities" shown in an "offensive" way before 2200 as indecent.

[Article continues at link. Here is the scene in question (video). What really happened in the less-than-40-seconds which the FCC fined? A woman took off her bath robe and stepped into a shower. The actress in question was not forced to do this and was likely paid handsomely, as was everyone on the set. No one, anywhere, was forced to watch that episode of that television show. No one, anywhere, was harmed in any way by watching that episode of that television show. Truth be told, most people do take of their clothes before stepping into the shower. This was not a sexual act nor was it an excretory activity. I can imagine some people being surprised, or embarrased, or confused by what they saw. But if their discomfort eats away at them for more than a short while, they have problems unrelated to this episode of this television show. One of them is watching television, and there's an easy answer for that problem. Preventing people from being surprised, embarrassed or confused is not the role of government. Neither is preventing people from being naked as part of their job, or in expression of their political views. The actress in question also appears nude in a protest against the use of animal fur in fashion. Should the government fine someone for that as well? A much more damning solution was available to the prudes who brought about this fine in the form of a boycott against advertisers of the television show. In that solution, everyone remains free to make the choices they want yet they are also accountable for them. We don't need the government to tell us what is bad on television. The answer is 'most of it.' Television is called a medium because it's seldom well done, as Ernie Kovacs said. But bad art isn't a crime, it's just bad art. What a shame that mainstream media companies are being punished for brief scenes of non-sexual nudity while not being shaken to their foundations for their uncritical support of George W. Bush's war of conquest and Jesus in the Middle East. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, fascism, sex, television, theocracy

Sara Corbett: A Cutting Tradition [LINK-ZUM]

When a girl is taken - usually by her mother - to a free circumcision event held each spring in Bandung, Indonesia, she is handed over to a small group of women who, swiftly and yet with apparent affection, cut off a small piece of her genitals. Sponsored by the Assalaam Foundation, an Islamic educational and social-services organization, circumcisions take place in a prayer center or an emptied-out elementary-school classroom where desks are pushed together and covered with sheets and a pillow to serve as makeshift beds. The procedure takes several minutes. There is little blood involved. Afterward, the girl's genital area is swabbed with the antiseptic Betadine. She is then helped back into her underwear and returned to a waiting area, where she's given a small, celebratory gift - some fruit or a donated piece of clothing - and offered a cup of milk for refreshment. [...] These photos were taken in April 2006, at the foundation's annual mass circumcision, which is free and open to the public and held during the lunar month marking the birth of the prophet Muhammad. [...] According to Lukman Hakim, the foundation's chairman of social services, there are three "benefits" to circumcising girls. "One, it will stabilize her libido," he said through an interpreter. "Two, it will make a woman look more beautiful in the eyes of her husband. And three, it will balance her psychology."

[...] As Western awareness of female genital cutting has grown, anthropologists, policy makers and health officials have warned against blindly judging those who practice it, saying that progress is best made by working with local leaders and opinion-makers to gradually shift the public discussion of female circumcision from what it's believed to bestow upon a girl toward what it takes away. "These mothers believe they are doing something good for their children," [Laura Guarenti, an obstetrician and WHO's medical officer for child and maternal health in Jakarta] told me. "For our culture that is not easily understandable. To judge them harshly is to isolate them. You cannot make change that way."

[Article continues at link. Ihave three comments on this article. First, female genital mutilation is an Islamic practice. To attack FGM is to attack Islam. I am in favor of attacking Islam. This practice should be outlawed in every nation and those who practice it should be punished to the full extent of the law. That doing so will tred an ancient sacred traditional Islamic practice underfoot does not matter, at all. These women should be judged most harshly, isolated (to keep them from continuing the practice), and no regard whatsoever should be given to the practice because it is part of a culture. Second, it is (as far as I know) always adult women who practice female genital mutilation on girls. What does this mean for the Western notion of feminism and its idea of who oppresses who? Third, let me propose a thought experiment. This is something to think about, not to actually do. Really, don't do this. Get a large piece of wood and strike as many Muslim women in the face with it as you can. This will break their noses. There will be a little blood. Very, very few will die from the process. It will change how they look and breathe, but they will survive. Say that you needed to do it as part of an ancient, sacred tradition. Muslim women do not need to volunteer to have their faces smashed in, any more than girls need to volunteer to have their genitals mutilated before they can understand the consequences of that proceedure. If you object to my thought experiment, you must object to female genital mutilation. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: islam, sex, theocracy

Trevor Blake: Animal Sacrifice, Texas Style [LINK-ZUM]

Jose Merced is an Obe in the Santeria religion. City officials in Euless, Texas (near Dallas) told Mr. Merced he could not kill animals in a Santeria religious ceremony. He filed a federal discrimination lawsuit to prevent the establishment of religion by the State, and to freely exercise his own religion. This lawsuit seems to have failed. At the same time, in the nearby city of Dallas, animals are killed in a Jewish religious ceremony [PDF explaining these "strict rules of Biblical origin"]. It appears that animal sacrifice is acceptable in Texas, but only if it is the correct religion. Unknown at this time is how the Texas courts would rule regarding the animal sacrifices mandated by Church of Later Day Saint (Strangites) or Muslims celebrating Eid al-Adha.

Texas law regarding child sacrifice is equally mixed. If as part of your Christian faith you beat your child to death or suffocate them, you will probably go to prison. But if as part of your Christian faith you deny your child a vaccine and they die from easily preventable disease, that's okay.

Texas courts seem to prefer animal or child sacrifice that occurs slowly and behind closed doors rather than quickly and in public.

Labels: theocracy

Christine Clarridge: Phony psychic sentenced for bilking woman of savings [LINK-ZUM]

A phony psychic who fled prosecution in Seattle and ended up on a wanted-fugitive list in Canada was sentenced Friday to 1 1/2 years in prison nearly nine years after tricking a lovesick woman into turning over her life savings to win back her boyfriend.

[Article continues at link... but the first sentence alone fills me with questions. If 79-year-old Sophie Evon was a 'phony psychic,' does that mean there are non-phony psychics? What law did Sophie Evon break in accepting money to cast magic spells? Is that law being equally applied to the leaders of every Christian church, Jewish temple, Muslim mosque, and every other spook house in town? The mainstream superstitions also accept money to cast magic spells. Sometimes the spells are supposed to work 'after death,' but sometimes they are supposed to work right here and right now. These are the kinds of court cases that the megachurches should be pouring their millions into winning, because if the state can decide that one brand of hokus-pokus is a crime, the state can decide another brand of hokus-pokus is also a crime. Theirs may be next. And while all my sympathies lie with the victim, who seems to have learned her lesson the hard way, I think the state has no business sanctioning superstitions. If people want to throw their money into the magic hat, that's their concern. When the state makes some superstitions illegal and allows others to remain legal, it establishes a state religion. The foundation documents of this country rightly forbid this. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, islam, judaism, magick, theocracy

Shawn F. Peters: Abusing Children in the Name of God [LINK-ZUM]

A hemophilic boy in Pennsylvania bleeds to death over a period of two days from a small cut on his foot. An Indiana girl dies after a malignant tumor sprouts from her skull and grows so enormous that it's nearly the size of her head. A boy in Massachusetts succumbs to a bowel obstruction. (His cries of pain are so loud that neighbors are forced to shut their windows to block out the sound.) None of these children benefit from the readily-available medical treatments that might save their lives, or at least mitigate their suffering. Because the tenets of their parents' religious faiths mandate it, their ailments are treated by prayer rather than medical science. The results are tragic.

It is difficult to determine precisely how many children in the United States lose their lives every year as the result of the phenomenon that has come to be known as religion-based medical neglect. A landmark study published in the journal Pediatrics uncovered more than 150 reported fatalities over a 10-year period - a tally that one of the study's authors later said represented only "the tip of the iceberg" of a surprisingly pervasive problem. Assessing whether forms of religion-related child abuse pose a greater risk to children than more widely publicized threats, such as ritual satanic abuse, a wide-ranging study funded by the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect concluded that "there are more children actually being abused in the name of God than in the name of Satan."

Since the late nineteenth century, hundreds of such instances of abuse have resulted in tangled criminal litigation. The parents charged in these cases - many of them Christian Scientists or members of small Christian churches that ground their doctrines in narrowly literal interpretations of the Bible - often have argued that the First Amendment safeguards their decision to adhere to their faiths' religious traditions and treat their ailing children solely by spiritual means. Prosecutors, meanwhile, have balked at the notion that constitutional protections for religious liberty provide an absolute bar to state regulation of religious conduct, particularly when that behavior puts the safety of children at risk. Their task often has been complicated, however, by murky state manslaughter and abuse statutes that appear to provide exemptions for religious healing practices.

[Article continues at link. Congratulations to the author for addressing this topic. I do have a few corrections and amplifications to make, though. I am in agreement that 150 child sacrifices (let's call it by it's proper name) is a low estimate, as I can identify eighty at a single Church. Christian Scientists and the like do not have a narrowly literal interpretation of the Bible; they have the Bible, and what the Bible says to do is exactly what they do. What separates these Churches from other Churches is that in this regard they are less secular and more religious, just as some Churches are more secular and less religious about homosexuality although the Bible clearly states that homosexuals are to be killed by Christian hands. Modern Christianity is largely secular and most Christians know how to be Christians on Sundays or holidays and physicists, educators, or just decent people the rest of the time. Islam has yet to catch the secular bug. State laws do not appear to provide exemptions for religious healing practices [ie child sacrifice to an invisible monster that lives in the sky], they do provide exemptions for religious healing practices. As strongly worded as this article is, it doesn't deliver both barrels to a monster deserving to be put down forever. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, theocracy

Maged Thabet Al-Kholidy: There must be violence against women [LINK-ZUM]

This title may sound strange, but it's actually not just a way to attract readers to the topic because I really do mean what it indicates. Violence is a broad term, especially when used regarding women. In this piece, I want to shed light on those instances where violence against women is a must. [...] In some cases, violence is necessary, but there must be limits. Those "good human rights organizations" don't make any exceptions in their solutions because their aim is to serve society. Will it be a better society once we see wives, mothers, sisters and daughters going from one police station and one court to another, complaining against their husbands, fathers, brothers and even sons?

As the proverb goes, "If the speaker is mad, the listener should be mindful." This proverb is good advice for every man and woman not only to keep their ears open, but also to avoid the misleading propaganda of such organizations, whose surface aims hide other destructive ones to destroy society's religious, social and moral norms. This matter requires consideration.

[Article continues at link. Excellent commentary on this article here. 'Cultural sensitivity' and 'honoring diversity' toward Islam can start when Islam stops beating, mutilating and killing women. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: fight, islam, theocracy

Howard Friedman: Child Custody Shift OK'd For Failure To Follow Religious Upbinging Agreement [LINK-ZUM]

In Herschfus v. Herschfus, (MI Ct. App., Dec. 27, 2007), a Michigan appellate court upheld a lower court's modification of a custody award. The court gave sole legal and physical custody of a divorced couple's child, Jacob, to the father, based in significant part on the mother's failure to comply with the agreement entered at the time of the divorce to raise Jacob in the Orthodox Jewish religion. It rejected the mother's First Amendment challenge, finding that "the trial court's ruling was constitutionally appropriate because it was based on Jacob's needs and not on a value judgment regarding the parties' practice of religion."

[From the highly recommended blog Religion Clause. In the United States of America, a child can be legally separated from his mother because she failed to get him to present as believing a specific state-mandated superstition. Compare this with the case of Edgardo Mortara, in which a child was legally separated from his mother because she failed to get him to present as believing a specific state-mandated superstition. Of course these are totally different cases, because Jacob lives in the secular United States and wasn't Jewish enough, while Edgardo lived in the theocracy of the Vatican See and was too Jewish. It's all a matter of presenting as believing the right superstition in the right nation. - Trevor Blake]

Labels: christianity, judaism, theocracy

Jeff Jacoby: The Islamist war on Muslim women [LINK-ZUM]

The "Qatif girl" won a reprieve last week. On Dec. 17, Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah pardoned the young woman, who was sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in prison after she pressed charges against seven men who had raped her and a male acquaintance in 2006. Two weeks earlier, Sudan's president extended a similar reprieve to Gillian Gibbons, the British teacher convicted of insulting Islam because her 7-year-old students named a teddy bear Muhammad. Gibbons had been sentenced to prison, but government-organized street demonstrators were loudly demanding her execution. [...]

No international furor saved Aqsa Parvez, a Toronto teenager, whose father was charged on Dec. 11 with strangling her to death because she refused to wear a hijab. "She just wanted to look like everyone else," one of Aqsa's friends told the National Post, "and I guess her dad had a problem with that." No reprieve came for Banaz Mahmod, either. She was 20, a Kurdish immigrant to Britain, whose father and uncle had her killed last year after she left an abusive arranged marriage and fell in love with a man not from the family's village in Kurdistan. Banaz was choked to death with a bootlace, stuffed into a suitcase, and buried in a garden 70 miles away. More than 25 such "honor killings" have been confirmed in Britain's Muslim community in recent years. Many more are suspected. [...]

By Western standards, the subjugation of women by Muslim fanatics, and the sometimes pathological Islamist obsession with female sexuality, are unthinkable. Time and again they lead to shocking acts of violence and depravity: [...] In San Francisco, a young Muslim woman was shot dead after she uncovered her hair and put on makeup in order to be a maid of honor at a friend's wedding. [...]

All these are only examples - the tip of a dreadful iceberg that will never be demolished until Muslims by the millions rise up against it. As for the rest of us, we too have an obligation to raise our voices. It took a worldwide outcry to spare "Qatif girl" and Nazanin. But there are countless others like them, and our silence may seal their fate.

[Article continues at link. The West is largely a Christian culture, but a secular Christian culture. Christianity is still tied to the Bible and all its support for slavery, all its oppression of women, all its scientific nonsense. But secular Christianity can simply ignore these cruel and foolish practices, picking out the good stuff from the Bible and getting on with things. The Muslim world has so far rejected the secular and has no intention of getting rid of its support for slavery