The Secular Gazette 
Supporting Science, Reason and the Separation of Church and State
Welcome to the first issue of the Secular Gazette, a newsletter for agnostics, atheists,
skeptics, church-and-state separatists, rationalists and humanists. This new periodical
will inform and inspire you in your path to secular education and living. I’ve always
had the desire to combine non-religious points of view into one publication so the
freethinkers of our society can enjoy an intellectual bond between others of similar
views. Hopefully this newsletter will do just that.
There are many other publications which have their particular viewpoint on secular
issues, but few combine those issues which would seem to be of interest to the same
reader. With The Secular Gazette, you will be able to read the latest news from
different secular viewpoints – from strong atheism to religious insertion into our
political system, from skepticism to agnosticism. If you would like to write an article
for The Secular Gazette please contact the editor Bruce Gleason at
info@freethoughtalliance.org.
Your donation of only 99 cents will keep this new publication coming to your inbox
every month. You may subscribe at www.freethoughtalliance.org.
Contents:
Skeptics
Corner
Church &
State
Atheist News
Science News
Skeptoid.com
Legal News
From George
Bible Study
Skeptics Corner
Got throat cancer? You must not have been
breathing right!
Opinions
Links
Category: Kooks • Skepticism
Posted on: September 2, 2010 9:01 PM, by PZ Myers
Here's a swami with his magic breathing advice for coping with throat cancer. How
these guys can dispense bogus medical advice and not get lynched by angry cancer patients is a mystery.
At least he looks really goofy when he curls his tongue and breathes. Now if only there were some yogic
enchantment that could do something about his creepy squink eye…
See the Youtube clip at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3kzGb5L1h0&feature=player_embedded
Secular Gazette subscriptions can be made at freethoughtalliance.org.
The donation for your subscription is $10 a year for 12 monthly issues or a 99 cents monthly
payment to www.freethoughtalliance.org.
1
Church & State
from http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/beck-rallies-in-washington.html August 27, 2010
Fox Pundit And His Religious Right Allies Are Pushing A Divisive Message Of Extremism, Intolerance, Says
Americans United’s Lynn
Fox News Channel personality Glenn Beck’s rallies
in Washington, D.C., are an attack on religious
liberty and our nation’s rich religious diversity, says
Americans United for Separation of Church and
State.
Tonight’s event at the Kennedy Center, ―Divine
Destiny,‖ is billed by Beck as a way to ―reunite‖
Americans, ―heal your soul‖ and take a ―look at the
role faith played in the founding of America and the
role it will play again in its destiny.‖
Tomorrow’s rally, ―Restoring Honor,‖ will be held
near the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th anniversary
of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s ―I have a dream‖
speech. It has been advertised as a chance to honor
―our heroes, our heritage and our future.‖
In reality, a major goal of Beck’s rallies is to
undermine the Founding Fathers’ vision of a nation
where government and religion are kept separate.
Beck propagates a revisionist historical perspective
that says America is an officially religious state.
Mainline Christians, Muslims, non-believers and
other Americans who fail to meet Beck’s religious
test are often maligned.
Our nation’s destiny will be disastrous, not divine,
if Glenn Beck has his way,‖ said the Rev. Barry W.
Lynn, Americans United executive director. ―The
message Beck and his cronies want to send is clear:
if you don’t believe in a government based on his
religious vision, you should expect to be treated like
a second-class citizen. Beck has made it clear that
he has no respect for our Constitution’s promise of
religious liberty for all.‖
2
Over the past few months, Beck has teamed up with
David Barton, a Texas-based Religious Right
activist who has no credentials as a historian. Yet
Barton peddles books, videos and other materials
that spread his misguided belief that church-state
separation was never intended by the founders.
Said AU’s Lynn, ―Barton has lurked in the dark
corners of the Religious Right house of horrors for
years. But now he is playing on a national stage,
thanks to Beck. That’s a tragedy, not a comedy.‖
Barton is the founder of Wallbuilders, a Texasbased organization that exists to attack mainstream
history. He served as an adviser to the Texas State
Board of Education when the state’s social studies
curriculum was revised to downplay Thomas
Jefferson and the role of church-state separation.
Since March, Barton has appeared on Beck’s Fox
program at least 15 times as part an endeavor called
―Beck University.‖ The purpose of the ―university‖
– which exists only in cyberspace – is to teach
Americans about the true ―Christian‖ roots of the
country. (Read more in the September issue of AU’s
Church & State Magazine.)
Says AU’s Lynn, ―I am confident that Americans
will reject the Beck-Barton message of extremism
and intolerance. Our nation was built on a
foundation of diversity and equality, and we must
not let strident voices undercut those principles.‖
Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog group
based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the
organization educates Americans about the importance
of church-state separation in safeguarding religious
freedom.
Legal News
Virginia Attorney General’s Advisory On Religious Displays May Lead To
Lawsuits, Says Americans United
August 25, 2010
If Cuccinelli Wants To See A Nativity Scene, Let Him Put One In His Own Yard, Says AU’s Lynn
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s
advisory on Christmas Nativity scenes and other
religious displays on public property is deeply
misguided, says Americans United for Separation of
Church and State.
Cuccinelli, in an official opinion issued Aug. 20,
said local governments and government employees
may erect religious displays under certain
circumstances. The opinion downplayed churchstate separation and emphasized government
accommodation of religion.
Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United
executive director, ―This opinion reads more like an
op-ed than a legal advisory. Cuccinelli is
encouraging local governments to wade into a
deeply controversial arena of the law without
adequate guidance.
―This is almost certain to lead to bitter community
divisiveness,‖ Lynn continued. ―It is a green light to
Religious Right activists to cajole local officials
into erecting sectarian displays on public property.
Unless local officials are extremely careful, this is
likely to lead to lawsuits.‖
Lynn said it is particularly repugnant that the
attorney general is joining the Religious Right’s
annual campaign to impose religion on all
Americans at Christmas.
―Cuccinelli is turning Christmas, a holiday sacred to
many, into another front in the culture war,‖ said
3
Lynn. ―That’s deplorable and about as far from the
spirit of the season as you can get.
―If Cuccinelli wants to see a Nativity scene, why
doesn’t he put one in his front yard at home?‖ Lynn
asked. ―He should not try to impose his personal
religious beliefs on all Virginians through
government action.‖
Lynn also deplored Cuccinelli’s attempt to
downplay the importance of church-state separation
in the advisory.
The attorney general, a close ally of the Religious
Right, suggested that the First Amendment is only
intended to prevent government endorsement of a
national religion or preference among sects. He
quoted court decisions that diminish Thomas
Jefferson’s view that the American people through
the First Amendment have built a ―wall of
separation between church and state.‖
Said Lynn, ―When it comes to First Amendment
analysis, I’ll take Thomas Jefferson’s view over
Ken Cuccinnelli’s any day.The framers wanted to
keep government out of religion entirely;
Cuccinnelli clearly has the opposite opinion.‖
Americans United is a religious liberty watchdog
group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947,
the organization educates Americans about the
importance of church-state separation in
safeguarding religious freedom.
Legal News continued
Evolution education update: September 3, 2010
The Institute for Creation Research appears to concede defeat in its lawsuit over its graduate
school. Plus selected content from RNCSE 30:3 is now available on-line.
ICR CONCEDES DEFEAT OVER ITS GRADUATE SCHOOL
The Institute for Creation Research is apparently
conceding defeat in its lawsuit over the Texas
Higher Education Coordinating Board's 2008
decision to deny the ICR's request for a state
certificate of authority to offer a master's degree in
science education from its graduate school. The
United States District Court for the Western District
of Texas, finding that "ICRGS [the Institute for
Creation Research Graduate School] has not put
forth evidence sufficient to raise a genuine issue of
material fact with respect to any claim it brings,"
granted summary judgment to the defendants in a
June 18, 2010, ruling. It was not until the September
2010 issue of the ICR's Acts & Facts, however, that
the ICR seems to have publicly commented on the
decision, with Henry Morris III, the ICR's chief
executive officer, writing, "ICR's legal battle is
over."
4
Information about the graduate school vanished
from the ICR's website over the summer of 2010,
but writing in Creation Ministries International's
Journal of Creation (forthcoming 2010; 24 [3]: 5455), Chris Ashcraft reported, "On 25 June 2010 the
ICR board of directors voted to close the Grad
School," citing a June 30, 2010, e-mail from Henry
Morris III. Replacing it, apparently, is the ICR's
School of Biblical Apologetics, which offers a
Master of Christian Education degree; Creation
Research is one of four minors. The ICR explains,
"Due to the nature of ICR's School of Biblical
Apologetics -- a predominantly religious education
school -- it is exempt from licensing by the Texas
Higher Education Coordinating Board. Likewise,
ICR's School of Biblical Apologetics is legally
exempt from being required to be accredited by any
secular or ecumenical or other type of accrediting
association."
Science News
from http://richarddawkins.net/articles/510637-evolution-in-action-lizard-moving-from-eggs-to-live-birth
Evolution in Action: Lizard Moving From
Eggs to Live Birth
A yellow-bellied three-toed skink carrying embryos, visible as light orbs inside its body.
Evolution has been caught in the act, according to scientists who are decoding how a species of Australian lizard is abandoning egg-laying in
favor of live birth.
Along the warm coastal lowlands of New South
Wales (map), the yellow-bellied three-toed skink
lays eggs to reproduce. But individuals of the same
species living in the state's higher, colder mountains
are almost all giving birth to live young.
Only two other modern reptiles—another skink
species and a European lizard—use both types of
reproduction. (Related: "Virgin Birth Expected at
Christmas—By Komodo Dragon.")
Evolutionary records shows that nearly a hundred
reptile lineages have independently made the
transition from egg-laying to live birth in the past,
and today about 20 percent of all living snakes and
lizards give birth to live young only.
(See "Oldest Live-Birth Fossil Found; Fish Had
Umbilical Cord.")
But modern reptiles that have live young provide
only a single snapshot on a long evolutionary time
line, said study co-author James Stewart, a biologist
at East Tennessee State University. The dual
behavior of the yellow-bellied three-toed skink
therefore offers scientists a rare opportunity.
"By studying differences among populations that
are in different stages of this process, you can begin
to put together what looks like the transition from
one [birth style] to the other."
Eggs-to-Baby Switch Creates Nutrient Problem
One of the mysteries of how reptiles switch from
eggs to live babies is how the young get their
nourishment before birth.
In mammals a highly specialized placenta connects
the fetus to the ovary wall, allowing the baby to
take up oxygen and nutrients from the mother's
blood and pass back waste. (See related pictures of
"extreme" animals in the womb.)
In egg-laying species, the embryo gets nourishment
from the yolk, but calcium absorbed from the
porous shell is also an important nutrient source.
Some fish and reptiles, meanwhile, use a mix of
5
both birthing styles. The mother forms eggs, but
then retains them inside her body until the very last
stages of embryonic development.
(Related: "Dinosaur Eggs Discovered Inside Mother—A
First.")
The shells of these eggs thin dramatically so that the
embryos can breathe, until live babies are born
covered with only thin membranes—all that
remains of the shells. This adaptation presents a
potential nourishment problem: A thinner shell has
less calcium, which could cause deficiencies for the
young reptiles. Stewart and colleagues, who have
studied skinks for years, decided to look for clues to
the nutrient problem in the structure and chemistry
of the yellow-bellied three-toed skink's uterus.
"Now we can see that the uterus secretes calcium
that becomes incorporated into the embryo—it's
basically the early stages of the evolution of a
placenta in reptiles," Stewart explained.
Evolutionary Transition Surprisingly Simple
Both birthing styles come with evolutionary
tradeoffs: Eggs are more vulnerable to external
threats, such as extreme weather and predators, but
internal fetuses can be more taxing for the mother.
For the skinks, moms in balmier climates may opt
to conserve their own bodies' resources by
depositing eggs on the ground for the final week or
so of development. Moms in harsh mountain
climates, by contrast, might find that it's more
efficient to protect their young by keeping them
longer inside their bodies.
In general, the results suggest the move from egglaying to live birth in reptiles is fairly common—at
least in historic terms—because it's relatively easy
to make the switch, Stewart said. "We tend to think
of this as a very complex transition," he said, "but
it's looking like it might be much simpler in some
cases than we thought."
The skink-evolution research was published online August 16
by the Journal of Morphology.
Science News continued
God did not create the universe, says Hawking
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6816EI20100902
By Michael Holden
LONDON | Thu Sep 2, 2010 6:45pm EDT
LONDON (Reuters) - God did not create the universe and the "Big
Bang" was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics, the
eminent British theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a
new book.
In "The Grand Design," co-authored with U.S.
In his latest
physicist Leonard Mlodinow, Hawking says a
book, he said
new series of theories made a creator of the
the 1992
universe redundant, according to the Times
discovery of a
newspaper which published extracts Thursday.
planet orbiting
another star
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the
other than the
universe can and will create itself from nothing.
Sun helped
Spontaneous creation is the reason there is
deconstruct the view of the father of physics
something rather than nothing, why the universe
Isaac Newton that the universe could not have
exists, why we exist," Hawking writes.
arisen out of chaos but was created by God.
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the
"That makes the coincidences of our planetary
blue touch paper and set the universe going."
conditions -- the single Sun, the lucky
combination of Earth-Sun distance and solar
Hawking, 68, who won global recognition with
mass, far less remarkable, and far less
his 1988 book "A Brief History of Time," an
compelling evidence that the Earth was
account of the origins of the universe, is
carefully designed just to please us human
renowned for his work on black holes,
beings," he writes.
cosmology and quantum gravity.
Hawking, who is only able to speak through a
Since 1974, the scientist has worked on
computer-generated voice synthesizer, has a
marrying the two cornerstones of modern
neuro muscular dystrophy that has progressed
physics -- Albert Einstein's General Theory of
over the years and left him almost completely
Relativity, which concerns gravity and largeparalyzed.
scale phenomena, and quantum theory, which
covers subatomic particles.
He began suffering the disease in his early 20s
but went on to establish himself as one of the
His latest comments suggest he has broken
world's leading scientific authorities, and has
away from previous views he has expressed on
also made guest appearances in "Star Trek" and
religion. Previously, he wrote that the laws of
the cartoons "Futurama" and "The Simpsons."
physics meant it was simply not necessary to
believe that God had intervened in the Big
Last year he announced he was stepping down
Bang.
as Cambridge University's Lucasian Professor
of Mathematics, a position once held by
He wrote in A Brief History ... "If we discover a
Newton and one he had held since 1979.
complete theory, it would be the ultimate
triumph of human reason -- for then we should
know the mind of God."
"The Grand Design" is due to go on sale next week.
6
Skeptoid.com
(Printed with permission) by Brian Dunning
The Myers-Briggs Personality Test
A critical look at the world's most popular psychological metric, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
Today we're going to delve into the murky depths of Jungian psychology, and examine one of its most popular surviving
manifestations. The Myers-Briggs test is used all over the world, and is the single most popular psychometric system,
with the full formal version of the test given more than 2,000,000 times a year. But is it a valid psychological tool, is it
just another pop gimmick like astrology, or is the truth somewhere in between?
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, called MBTI for short, more properly owes the bulk of its credit to the great Swiss
analytical psychologist Carl Jung. In 1921, Jung published his book Psychological Types, in which he laid out all the
same concepts found in the MBTI, but he had them organized quite differently. Jung had everyone categorized as
either a "perceiver" or a" judger". Perceivers fell into one of two groups: sensation and intuition; while judgers also fall
into two groups: thinking and feeling. So everyone fits into one of those four buckets. Finally, each bucket is divided
into two attitude types: introversion and extraversion. Thus, the scale proposed by Jung divided us all into one of eight
basic psychological types.
An American woman, Katherine Briggs, bought Jung's book and was fascinated by it. She recommended it to her
married daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, who had a degree in political science. The two of them got hooked on the idea
of psychological metrics. Together they sat down and codified their own interpretation of Carl Jung, making a few
important changes of their own. Jung had everyone fitting into one of four basic buckets. Myers and Briggs decided
that each person probably combined elements, so they modified Jung's system and made it a little more complex,
ending up with four dichotomies, like binary switches. Any combination of the four switches is allowed, and Myers and
Briggs reasoned that just about every personality type could be well described by one of the sixteen possible ways for
those switches to be set. Basically, according to Myers and Briggs, we're all represented by a four-digit binary number.
The first dichotomy is called your Attitude, and according to the MBTI, you're either an E for Extravert or an I
for Introvert. Extraverts prefer action, frequent interaction, focus outward, and are most relaxed when
interacting with others. Introverts prefer thought, less frequent but more substantial interaction, and are most
relaxed spending time alone.
The second dichotomy is your Perceiving function, and you're either S for Sensing or N for Intuition. Sensing is
the scientific, tangible data-driven approach to gathering information, preferring to deal in concrete,
measurable information. The Intuition approach prefers theoretical, abstract, hunch-driven information,
finding more meaning in apparent patterns and context.
The third dichotomy is your Judging function, and you're either a T for Thinking or an F for Feeling. This is
basically how you make decisions. Thinking makes the logical decision, what's best for the situation, based on
rules and pragmatism. Feeling decides based on empathy for the people whom the decision affects, seeking
balance and harmony.
The fourth and final dichotomy is your Lifestyle, and you're either a J for Judgment or a P for Perception. This
one gets a little confusing. Judgment types prefer to use the third dichotomy, Judging, when relating to the
outside world, while Perception types prefer the second Perceiving dichotomy; but how that preference is
determined is based on whether you're an Introvert or an Extravert. Suffice it to say, for the purpose of this
light overview, that this last of the four dichotomies, Lifestyle, is the most complicated; and it's where Myers
and Briggs most creatively expanded upon Jung on their own.
The basic test, of which there are several variations and revisions, is called the MBTI Step I and it's a series of almost
100 questions, each with two possible answers. Each question consists of two short statements or word choices, and
you simply choose which of the two you prefer. When the results are tabulated, you should ideally have your
preference established for each of the four dichotomies; and congratulations, you are now identified by one of sixteen
possible personality types. Myers and Briggs gave names and descriptions to all sixteen, names such as the Executive,
the Caregiver, the Scientist, and the Idealist.
7
Perhaps the most common misconception about the MBTI is that it shows your aptitude, helping you determine what
kinds of things you'd be good at. This is not the case. Myers-Briggs is only about determining your preference, not your
ability. There might be things that you're good at that you don't enjoy, and there might be things you enjoy that you're
not good at. The MBTI helps your find your comfort zone, the types of activities you'll like and be most content with;
not necessarily those at which you'll be especially competent.
Even though neither had any background in psychology, Myers and Briggs enjoyed great success with their system. As
Mrs. Briggs was getting quite old, Isabel Myers was the main driving force. Her initial idea was that certain personality
types would more easily excel at different jobs, and the tool was intended to be used by women entering the
workforce during World War II. However, it was not published until 1962, but since that time, it's become the most
widely used basic psychology test. It's most often used outside of the psychological profession, and is employed in
career counseling, sports coaching, marriage counseling, dating, professional development, and almost every other
field where people hope to be fit with a role that would work best for them.
So the MBTI's practical use is overwhelmingly unscientific, and it's often criticized for this. Criticism ranges from the
pragmatic fact that neither Jung nor Myers and Briggs ever employed scientific studies to develop or test these
concepts, relying instead on their own observations, anecdotes, and intuitions; all the way to charges that your MBTI
score is hardly more meaningful than your zodiac sign.
One obvious trait that the MBTI has in common with horoscopes is its tendency to describe each personality type using
only positive words. Horoscopes are so popular, in part, because they virtually always tell people just what they want
to hear, using phrases that most people generally like to believe are true, like "You have a lot of unused potential."
They're also popular because they are presented as being personalized based on the person's sign. This has been called
the Forer Effect, after psychologist Bertram Forer who, in 1948, gave a personality test to his students and then gave
each one a supposedly personalized analysis. The impressed students gave the analyses an average accuracy rating of
85%, and only then did Forer reveal that each had received an identical, generic report. Belief that a report is
customized for us tends to improve our perception of the report's accuracy.
I notice this right away when I read Isabel Myers' description for my own personality type, ISTJ, the Duty
Fulfiller: "Practical, matter-of-fact, realistic, and responsible." Basically it's a nice way to say "Dry, boring, and
punctual," which hits my nail pretty squarely on the head. From that alone, I might conclude that the MBTI is
extraordinarily insightful. But if I look at her description of my opposite counterpart, an ENFP, the Inspirer, that person
is "Warmly enthusiastic and imaginative. Sees life as full of possibilities." Who wouldn't like to believe that about his or
her self? If I'd taken the test and been handed that result, I might be equally inclined to embrace it, probably thinking
something like "Wow, I'm even more awesome than I thought I was."
Due to these legitimate criticisms of the MBTI and its unscientific underpinnings, the test is rarely used in clinical
psychology. I did a literature search on PubMed and discovered that, interestingly, many of the published studies of its
practical utility come from nursing journals. Many of the other publications pertain to relationship counseling and
religious counseling. Normally, this is a red flag. When you see a topic that purports to be psychological being used in
practically every professional discipline except psychology, you have very good reason to be skeptical of its actual
value. Should we dismiss the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator as a psychometric?
The test does have some severe inherent problems. It's been found that 50% of test takers who retake it score
differently the second time. This is because nobody is strictly an E or an I, for example, but somewhere in between.
Many people are right on the border for some of the four dichotomies, and depending on their mood that day or other
factors, may answer enough questions differently to push them over. Yet the results inaccurately pigeonhole them all
the way over to one side or the other. This makes it possible for two people who are very similar to actually end up
with completely opposite scores. Isabel Myers was aware of this limitation, and did her best to eliminate questions that
did not push people away from the center when the results were studied in aggregate. It was a hack.
From the perspective of statistical analysis, the MBTI's fundamental premise is flawed. According to Myers & Briggs,
each person is either an introvert or an extravert. Within each group we would expect to see a bell curve showing the
distribution of extraversion within the extraverts group, and introversion within the introverts. If the MBTI approach is
valid, we should expect to see two separate bell curves along the introversion/extraversion spectrum, making it valid
for Myers & Briggs to decide there are two groups into which people fit. But data have shown that people do not clump
into two separately identifiable curves; they clump into a single bell curve, with extreme introverts and extreme
extraverts forming the long tails of the curve, and most people gathered somewhere in the middle. Jung himself said
"There is no such thing as a pure extravert or a pure introvert. Such a man would be in the lunatic asylum." This does
not support the MBTI assumption that people naturally separate into two groups. MBTI takes a knife and cuts the bell
8
curve right down the center, through the meatiest part, and right through most people's horizontal error bars.
Moreover, this forced error is compounded four times, with each of the four dichotomies. This statistical fumble helps
to explain why so many people score differently when retaking the test: There is no truly correct score for most
people, and no perfect fit for anyone.
And this has been borne out in observation. A number of studies have found that personality types said to be most
appropriate for certain professions, notably nursing or teaching, turn out to be no more prevalent among that
profession than among the general population. The Army Research Institute commissioned one such study to determine
if the MBTI or similar tests could be used to improve the placement of personnel in different duties, and firmly
concluded that the results of such tests did not justify their use in career counseling.
From reviewing the literature, I do find one common theme among mainstream psychotherapists where the use of the
MBTI is advised, and that's as a conversation starter. It's a fine way to give people a quick snapshot of what their
strengths and weaknesses might be, and of those with whom they interact. To get the dialog going, this is a perfectly
valid tool. But as a tool for making career decisions, relationship decisions, or psychiatric assessment, no. Although it
would be nice to have a magically easy self-analysis tool that can make your decisions for you and be your crystal ball,
the Myers-Briggs test is not it. It is interesting and it does have value as a starting point for meaningful dialog, but
that's where the line should be drawn
.
From George
4-22-08
Once one becomes conscious of the fact that what we heard
from our mother, that God is watching us and he remembers
everything we do or say or think, and that we'd better be good
"or else", and this absurdity is drummed home by otherwise
respectable and educated people who earn their living by
"selling" religion to the public, we find ourselves in a world
that believes something that, logically and scientifically,
makes no sense at all. So called "miracles" stopped happening
as human knowledge increased. Not only has "Eternal Life"
never been proven, but in the 1,000s of years this childish idea
has been around, there is not the slightest clue or evidence that
it is anything more than a fairy tale. Where could it exist?
What could be more perfect a "cover" for the impossible, than
"you have to die first to go there"? How would you go there?
As a child? As an adult? As a failing, aged person, as when
you might have passed away? How would you communicate
with the other "souls" who didn't speak your language? There
are so many unanswered questions that defy any explanation,
that a logical person would have to reject the entire idea as
being impossible to imagine. And if there were a God, why is
it that he doesn't answer prayers? Or step in and save the
innocent? Or teach us how to live better lives? Certainly the
bible is so flawed as to not be dependable; since it implores
you to murder your children; to keeping slaves; to selling your
daughter and so many other horrible acts that anyone who
9
really believes in the bible, probably hasn't read it. Many good
things are done in the name of religion, but the bad things very
much outweigh the good. Just the simple fact that every
religion thinks that only "their believers will go to heaven"
makes them intolerant of every other religion and the source
of endless wars and strife in the world.
Why do we need religion? What would happen to the world if
there was no religion? The Pope recently pointed his finger at
the atheists for having caused millions of deaths, which he
explained to mean the Communists. That doesn't nearly equal
the damage done to the world by Christianity and its fervent
adherents. The dark ages were Christianity's hey day and is
said to have pushed back scientific progress, 500 years. The
prohibitions against DNA studies alone, are estimated to have
caused untold damage to scientific knowledge that might have
substantially increased human life span, were it not for the
pro-occupation with the fantasy that fetuses have "souls"
imparted by God, at the instant of conception. Can anyone
imagine such an idea actually being accepted by intelligent
human beings?
What is a "soul"? Who puts it "there" and where is "there"?
Why haven't doctors ever located one? And if those ideas
aren't offensive to the intelligence we are supposed to have, I
offer you the argument that God does nothing to prevent crime
or injury, neither to individuals, nor to entire nations, because
he allows us the have "free will". Isn't that grand? So nothing,
not prayer, not compassion, not good will, not pity, not
anything will get God to do anything to stop or promote
anything, now, later or ever, because we supposedly have
"free will". If a criminal wants to murder children, he has the
free will to do so. If the Muslims want to fly passenger planes
into skyscrapers, they have the free will to do so. If the Nazis
want to murder 6 million Jews, God does nothing. So what
does God do that we pray for? What compassion does he show
for "his children"? After what amounts to a god-less life for all
of us, believers or not, where we are told that God does not
interfere in human events, thereby leaving us essentially "on
our own" from birth to death, now the religious people want to
believe that God will judge them at the time of their death and
let them enter something called heaven? Why would any
trusting person believe that? The only thing we can depend
10
upon is that God, if there is such a thing, will do what he has
done throughout our lives, absolutely nothing. Not a blessed
thing.
Oh yes, when the believers finally discover that death means
death and nothing else, they will come up with some other
malarky, like "God has free will also, to judge you or not
judge you, as he sees fit. Many people don't go to heaven or to
hell either. They wander around in limbo, because God has
decided, in his great knowledge, to do nothing. This is the "do
nothing" theory. It has not become known yet, as no one has
proven that God actually does that, since spirits can't be seen.
If spirits will ever be seen, you can bet your life that some
explanation will come forth as to God's lack of concern or
action and the religious people will continue to praise God for
what, we do not know, and continue to pledge their faith in his
righteous "nothingness" and his failure to do anything, ever .
Bible Study
From www.darkbible.com
This portion of Secular Gazette is a hard look at
some passages and contradictions of the Bible. If
one is to believe in a bronze-ages text then one must
study the narrative as a whole. Here are some
verses that most Christians avoid:
Kill All Unbelievers
"And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall
be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you
away from the LORD your God..." (Deuteronomy 13:
5)
"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or
thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy
friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee
secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods,
which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy
fathers;" (Deuteronomy 13: 6)
"Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto
him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt
thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou
shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon
him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of
all the people." (Deuteronomy 13:8-9)
"Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city
with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and
all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the
edge of the sword." (Deuteronomy 13:15)
Comment:
These severe laws commanded the members
of the Hebrew religion to murder even their
own children if they did not worship Yahweh
(God). These Bible words can justify, to a
fanatical fundamentalist believer, the killing
of friends or family simply because they may
fail to change their beliefs. Why anyone today
would accept these words, much less allow
them to exist in a sacred book goes against
the nature of any tolerant and loving people.
Kill Man, Woman, Infant
"Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that
which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for
him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now
go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that
11
they have, and spare them not; but slay both man
and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep,
camel and ass." (I Samuel 15:2-3)
Comment No matter how one can justify
possible crimes from adults, suckling infants
have no means of acting out crimes. And what
evil against God could the animals have
possibly performed? Only an evil entity could
kill innocent infants and animals, no matter
what their parents and owners may have
done.
Moses' Mass Murder
"Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through
the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against
the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a
plague among the congregation of the LORD. Now
therefore kill every male among the little ones, and
kill every woman that hath known man by lying
with him. But all the women children, that have not
known a man by lying with him, keep alive for
yourselves." (Numbers 31:16-18)
Comment
Moses commands the murder of
approximately 100,000 young males and,
roughly, 68,000 helpless women.
Consider women and children of your own family:
No matter how sick they may lay, or how they may
go against a religion, how would you feel if a man
named Moses, claiming to speak for God, sent men
into your house and hacked to pieces the women
and male children? Also, how would you react if
they spotted a female child, dragged her off with
them to do as they please with her? Note that these
innocent virgins served for their own sexual
pleasures.
Midian, the land of the Midianites, did not reside in
an area regarded as a natural enemy of Israel for
centuries, and in fact lay hundreds of miles away
from the Israelite encampment. Moses, himself, had
lived in Midian as fugitive after committing his first
murder. In short, Midian presented no threat to
God's "Chosen People."
Opinions
years later it didn't come, what would you have to
say about that religion?
The following is an on-line discussion between the
editor and a Christian.
I appreciate you studying other religions, but from
all of their superstitions you don't believe in, why
did you pick Christianity? It seems that the god you
believe in is an evil law-giver (killed over 300,000
people not to mention him telling other religious
leaders to kill 1.8 million more!
Bruce, my name is Jared and I have recently
watched your video with Ray Comfort. For some
reason, I have felt compelled all day to email you. I
am a strong Christian, but once was an Atheist as
well. My heart is touched deeply with you. I feel
that you are a great man. I also feel like God may
have put it on my heart to email you. The specific
verse that I was given is Acts 9:4-5. I feel very
strong about this. Please be open-minded and read
it. I think you are a lot like I was. I wanted to be
sure that I had the right religion too. I also studied
the Cur'an and Islam and many other religions. I
thought why are these people so passionate about
their beliefs. The answer I found was that their
death assured them paradise, if it was done for
Allah. Most religions around the world take our
own works to get us to heaven. However,
Christianity, is only what God did alone. Yeah, I
know you heard it all before. The only way you'll
understand and KNOW the truth is if you surrender
to God and let him come in your life. What have
you got to lose? If you don't feel completely
different or feel you need to go back to Atheism. ,
you can do just that. Judgment is coming soon.
Bruce, your an itelligent man, please look around at
creation and see the stunning proof of Gods
existence [sic]. You are in my prayers my friend.
Have a wonderful day. Also, read Job 38-39, this
alone got my heart. Good luck my friend.
Jared
Jared - thanks for the email - surprisingly not too
many Christians email me. (Bruce’s responses in
blue)
You said: The only way you'll understand and
KNOW the truth is if you surrender to God and let
him come in your life. Using this logic, any
religious person can ask anyone the same question.
What have you got to lose? Lots of time and
wasted mental anguish. Just imagine if all the
people, instead of praying, they actually DID
something to improve their world?
Judgment is coming soon. If any other religion
promised that judgment is coming and two thousand
12
The Good Atheist Bruce Gleason
Bruce, your right about more people needing to get
involved with making a difference in the world.
However, praying is huge. It's an important part of
everything. Most true Christians are involved with
or support the people who are. I believe that for a
true Christian, not being involved is next to
impossible.
There has been 52 prayer studies in 49 years and all
prove praying does nothing. And if one particular
religious sect (not yours) did have better outcomes
than everyone else, wouldn't even you be concerned
that your particular sect was the wrong one?
You asked what I would think about the time frame
of 2,000 years and judgment. I'll agree with you,
that's quite a long time. God is giving enough time
for all prophecies to be fulfilled and also people like
yourself who don't believe yet to come to know
him. His word is now (with technology) being
preached to the four corners of the world. God said
in the end times that knowledge will increase. It's
surely done that. Ezekiel 38-39 describe a war that
will come to pass very soon. Russia and Iran are
some of the key players. Turns out Iran just got
nuclear power fueled by Russia. So many signs are
happening and have been happening.
Come on now! You can say this about any time in
history! There have always been wars.
Why Christianity? Well logically, it's the only
religion out there that makes sense from the
beginning to the end. The way god speaks in Job
really freaked me out one day. The way he
described things and how he worded his questions
was different than anything or anybody.
Again, you can use this analogy for any religion.
Your is not special and there’s over 1 billion
Muslims to prove it.
Also, this world is full of hate, - isn't that being a
little pessimistic? I don't see it that way at all.
Most people are goods most of the time. What I do
see is people with absolutist ideologies like your
own are those who hate - An example - Prop 8.
yet everything with God is so gentle and kind.
When your saved/ been born again, and you praise
and worship him, his presence rains down on you.
It's truly amazing! The feeling he gives you is like
no other. He has healed different things in my life
and some experiences I've had could have only
come from God.
Sorry but all the other religions have experienced
this same self-induced feeling of wellness. Don’t
you think that since all religions feel the same way
about their God, that it's probably a natural selfinduced phenomena? Similar
to transcendental meditation?
He bore all our sins on the cross,
Jared - this is one of the superstitions Christians
must buy into to believe. How exactly did a man
from the past bore sins (and what is a sin?) from
those in the future? There is no physical
explanation of this – it’s something you must
believe for your mind to be shackled
and anyone who believes, repents, and trusts in
Jesus, can and will be saved. It doesn't matter what
you've done or how guiltily you feel. Confess it to
God, repent, ask for forgiveness, and trust in our
savior.
13
Sorry - this is not a good sell. If you saw what I
have seen on how religion is the real EVIL in the
world and has course (and continues to cause)
more suffering you would probably take a step back
and re-evaluate your position. Just look at what
happened this week about the Christians stopping
stem cell research - now THAT is harmful to
society at large.
The people that were killed in the bible were sinners
that brought it on themselves. Their Own sins
killed them.
Not so fast - you first have to believe in sin and
original sin. Exactly why are we sinful form the
get-go? And here's the big question - why kill them
on earth if they're going to eternal damnation? The
time on earth is so tiny compared with eternity!
Your God killed innocent children and infants many
times in your ancient text. You cannot have a
omnibenevolent God that does such insidious
things.
Bruce, I'm 32 now and in Texas. I used to live in
orange county (Tustin.) Huntington beach is
beautiful. Next time your starring at rubys on the
pier, look beyond at the sunset and know how big
our God is.
Nature is grand. Nature is majestic. Nature is just
that - nature - NOT SUPER-natural
Have a wonderful day my friend! I could be your
friend, but I won't be seeing you in any afterlife!
There is no afterlife Jared, even if you believe there
is one. Don’t belittle this life by thinking it’s a
practice session for some mythical world beyond.
Secular Links
Here are some good secular links to other organizations supporting secularism around the world:
Americans United for Church and State Separation, National
American Humanist Assoc. americanhumanist.org/
Atheist Alliance International atheistalliance.org/
American Atheists atheists.org/
Military Assoc. of Atheists and Freethinkers atheists.org/
Backyard Skeptics.com
au.org
aclu.org/
THE BERTRAND RUSSELL SOCIETY
www.users.drew.edu/~jlenz/brs.html
camp-quest.org
Freedom From Religion Foundation
ffrf.org
National Center for Science Education ncse.com
CFI centerforinquiry.net
People for the American Way
pfaw.org
richarddawkinsfoundation.org/
James Randi Educational Foundation
.randi.org/site
Copy and paste these links to your browser.
Secular Gazette subscriptions can be made at freethoughtalliance.org.
14
The donation for your subscription is $10 a year for 12 monthly issues or a 99 cents monthly
payment to www.freethoughtalliance.org.