I <3 Amanda Peet

The very first blog post I wrote (on MySpace of all places) was inspired by Jenny McCarthy and her idiocy regarding vaccination. The driver, as I recall, was a story I read regarding the increased incidence of measles outbreaks. Now another public figure has stepped up to take the counterpoint. Amanda Peet has offered her visage to help educate the public on the importance of vaccination.



This may be old news for some, but I think it's important to keep it out there because Jenny McCarthy just keeps pumping out the stupidity. Also, NPR did a nice segment last week talking about this very subject. What I took away from the NPR story was this:

But Peet says parents shouldn't look to her as a scientific expert. She defers scientific questions to Offit, who directs the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital.

Wow. Deferring to experts on the subject. Maybe Jenny should take a few lessons.

Be well

S

I feel special today

It's been quite a week.  First, someone flagged my blog (I'm so proud).  And now, Ray Comfort deep-sixed one of my comments. 

This calls for a drink...

A sincere mea culpa

I think when you are wrong, the direct approach is the best.  So to that end, I want to apologize for my last post on the FFRF sign in the Washington State Capitol.  After reviewing that post, it clearly has a whiney, "look at how mean the christians are" tone.  When I wrote it, it seemed justifiable; but after reading Martin's post over at the Atheist Experience, I realize that it is FFRF's sign that is the issue.  It reads in part, "Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds."  Whatever my belief regarding the accuracy of that message, this the wrong venue and the wrong time to deliver it.  At a time when the prevailing opinion is that christmas is under attack, to put up a sign that aggressively denigrates the opposing position is counterproductive and mean spirited.

So I say to my christian friends, celebrate the birth of your saviour; and to everyone regardless of your faith, enjoy your families, be good to each other, practice charity and kindness, and have a very merry christmas.

Be Well,

S

FFRF Sign Stolen

FFRF seems to be getting a lot of push back lately.  First the billboard in Rancho Cucamonga, now it appears someone has taken issue with atheists having equal time in the Washington State Capitol.  The placard that was placed in the Capitol Building as equal representation to a nativity scene vanished, only to be turned in later to a local radio station.  Apparently, a passerby found the large, heavy placard laying in a ditch.  There is no clear explanation as to how someone could have spirited it out of the building unnoticed, but the police are said to be reviewing surveillance videos.

I'm not surprised.  There is a trend here.  

Christians, though, seem to be surprised when we point out that:

• People were celebrating the winter solstice as a natural holiday for millennia before christmas came along
  
• Jews, you know those "pre-christians," were celebrating Chanukah, the festival of lights too.
  
• There is no evidence to suggest that Jesus was born anywhere near the winter solstice. Celebrating his birthday at that time was a clever way to co-opt what was already a celebratory time for early pagans.
  
• Christmas is a relatively recent invention and the christmas tree was once a forbidden symbol by early christians due to its pagan roots.
  

So when we demand equal time, please don't tell us we're taking the christ out of christmas.  We're just reminding people that "the reason for the season" is a quirky combination of the earth's revolution on its axis, its elliptical orbit around the sun, and a slight tilt of the axis with respect to that orbit.  That's it.  

Be Well

S

It's funny what some people find offensive.

I am a member of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, the country's largest group of freethinkers.  One stated purpose of this organization is as watchdog over church/state separation issues.  So I find the following story quite ironic.  FFRF.org is reporting that it's first billboard to go up in California was taken down after less that one week despite the fact that they had pre-paid for 2 months of time.  You can see the billboard above at its short-lived location in Rancho Cucamonga, located in Southern California's lovely Inland Empire.  Details are sketchy as to exactly the sequence of events, but apparently the city received complaints about the billboard and decided to contact the billboard company owner to see how it could be taken down.  It may be that a single city employee was the driver behind the effort.  Either way, FFRF has filed suit against the city for unlawfully interfering with free expression.  I can't express the basic sentiment of the suit any better than what is written in the filing.

"The principal function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute, and such speech may best serve its purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions are (sic) they are, or even stirs people to anger.

"The bedrock principle underlying the scope of the free speech protection of the First Amendment is that government officials may not interfere with the expression of an idea simply because some persons allegedly consider the idea offensive or disagreeable to their views."

Of course, the local news stations covered the "controversial" billboard and interviewed with local residents.  One common theme heard in some of the interviews was the idea that the billboard should be taken down because it is offensive.  

First of all, I'm not sure why someone would be offended by this billboard.  It is simply suggesting that maybe without the petty sectarian differences incited by religious beliefs, there might be more common ground for dialogue.  Personally I believe that without religion people would find some other criteria for creating in-group and out-group thinking.  Irrespective of my opinion, this is not a particularly offensive message.  What is offensive are the billboards I see throughout the country that tell me that I, regardless of how good a person I might be, will be immersed in fire to suffer eternally for not bowing down the favored sky fairy of this particular country.  How rude.

Secondly, why would anyone think that they are entitled to be shielded from speech that they disagree with?  The very fundamental founding principles of this country ensure that they will be exposed.  As difficult as it is to hear someone deny that evolution is one of the most solidly established scientific theories that exists, I would never deny anyone the right to make such a claim and to pronounce it from the highest mountain (edit: as long as that mountain isn't in a science classroom).  

Ultimately, I think Rancho Cucamonga may have bitten off more than they can chew.  In essence they have challenged the one group in the US that has the most experience litigating state/church issues (all the way to SCOTUS).  I look forward to the resolution and will let you know as things develop.

Be Well

S

Rock and Roll Means Well

 I went to see The Hold Steady and Drive By Truckers at the Wiltern on Tuesday night.  I've been a fan of DBT for quite a while now, but I wasn't expecting a tremendous show from them.  The Truckers are a band for whom the crowd is extremely important.  Unfortunately, LA just doesn't have the fan base that they need to really get the ball rolling (damned LA posers).  I've seen them in LA twice now, and both times they were technically excellent but the magic wasn't there.  I enjoyed every minute, nonetheless.  Now when I saw them in July at the Belly Up Tavern in Solana Beach...well, that was a special show.  It cost me a $150 pair of Ecco's, but was well worth it (and is another story altogether).

For The Hold Steady however, LA is filled with fans, and they came out in force for this concert.  I've only recently really started listening to their music, and I like it; but for me the live show clenched their place in my playlist.  What a powerful performance.  The music was performed perfectly, the energy was high, and the crowd was pumped up.  I highly recommend seeing them live.

The highlight for me was the finale where both bands came out on stage.  Now, DBT rocks no less than three guitars, The Hold Steady adds two more, plus Shonna Tucker picked up a six-string for a change for a total of six guitars.  (BTW, Shonna if you read this, I have a huge crush on you.  Just so's ya know.)  Not once, though, did the six guitar thing get out of control.  The combined bands performed a version of DBT's Let There Be Rock and covered Robbie Robertson's Look Out, Cleveland.  But for me the highlight was the cover of AC/DC's Ride on, which was spectacular.

All in all, a fantastic show.  If you get a chance to see either band, take it - great musicians and great music.

We'll see y'all at the rock show.

S 

Daniel Henninger and the War on Christmas

 I normally find the Wall Street Journal to be an enjoyable read.  I'm fiscally conservative and WSJ really has some great writers.  However, Daniel Henninger, deputy editor of the editorial page, has written a piece of absolute tripe that I hope WSJ at least regrets publishing.  In this piece, Mr. Henninger (can I call you Danny? Thanks) makes two completely unsubstantiated claims.  First, that there is a wholesale movement away from the use of "Merry Christmas" as a midwinter greeting (ostensibly to "Happy Holidays" since he doesn't actually state what he thinks people are saying), and this trend is due to actions by the atheist community. Second, there is a connection between this and the current financial crisis.

It has been my view that the steady secularizing and insistent effort at dereligioning America has been dangerous. That danger flashed red in the fall into subprime personal behavior by borrowers and bankers, who after all are just people. Northerners and atheists who vilify Southern evangelicals are throwing out nurturers of useful virtue with the bathwater of obnoxious political opinions.

The point for a healthy society of commerce and politics is not that religion saves, but that it keeps most of the players inside the chalk lines. We are erasing the chalk lines.

The stupid, it burns.

Seriously?  I don't know very many people who avoid saying merry christmas.  I still say merry christmas and I'm an atheist.  So do most of my non-religious and jewish friends.  The truth is, Danny, most atheist don't give a rat's ass whether you say merry christmas, happy holidays, happy chanukah, merry solstice or happy kwanza.  It just doesn't make a huge difference in our lives. (Now, if you want to put a nativity scene up at your local city hall we might take issue, but for other reasons entirely.)  Businesses might choose to use happy holidays in their advertisements because, well, they're run by businesspeople who realize that they probably have both christian and jewish patrons.  For example,

 

"We also use the word 'holiday' in our outreach to customers, as many of our store displays and other marketing efforts cover more than one holiday from Thanksgiving to New Year's and stay in place throughout the entire holiday season from November through January," Home Depot spokesman Ron DeFeo wrote in a statement to AFA.  (source)

It’s just easier to say one thing than to try and address all winter holidays separately.  Note that Mr. DeFeo didn't mention any concern for the atheist opinion, because the vast majority of companies don't even consider what we want when crafting marketing strategies.  

So I think the first point is weak at best.  Sure my conclusion is based on a small sampling, but you can do a little research for yourself and see how many of your friends and colleagues still say merry christmas.  Christmas is not under attack.    Feel free to use whatever phrase you like.  We promise not to pay any attention.

That leaves the second point. In order for the argument to stand, point one must be valid.  So let me grant point one as true.  Where to begin regarding point two then?  To say that this is a strawman is to insult scarecrows around the globe.  It is completely unsupported by any data or evidence in the article.  If Danny had bothered to look, there is plenty of evidence that the more secular of the developed democracies exhibit substantial “moral” behavior.  In fact, there have been entire books written on that very subject.  Take Phil Zuckerman’s “Society Without God: What the least Religious Nations Can Tell Us About Contentment for example.  In this book, Zuckerman explores morality in the Scandinavian nations of Norway and Sweden where the vast majority of the population exhibit at most a “gentle agnosticism”.  The last time I checked, these countries were not the ones who allowed the construction of a financial house of cards based on poor management by powerful mortgage and insurance firms.  That was the US, the most christian nation on the planet.  Some of these countries did jump on the bandwagon (Iceland being a prime example), but they didn’t start this mess.  We did.

If you want to examine a worldview that might lead one to taking on a mortgage that one knows is too large, let’s look at “prosperity theology.”  The wiki entry for this topic lists more than 25 tele-evangelists who espouse this morally bankrupt concept, including Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, and Joel Osteen.  These charlatans have followings in the tens of thousands, many in the economic brackets that are most affected by the current crisis.  I’m not going to describe this theology in any detail, but I think anyone who believes that their piety entitles them to a big house or a fancy car is a poor moral example.  And don’t get me started on The Secret.  What a barrel of bollocks.  Oprah, baby, what the fuck are you thinking?

So I think it’s safe to say that being more rational and educated isn’t the cause for making poor financial choices.  Those who believe that god will take care of them regardless of their poor choices will continue to get exactly what they deserve.

Be well,

S