Tim Tebow: Football and Christian Privilege

One consequence of my being home for the holidays is watching a lot of football with my dad. I’m currently watching Florida destroy Florida State, but the conversation at the McCreight house isn’t focused on football – it’s on Tim Tebow.

Tebow is the senior quarterback for Florida. He’s well known not only for his great football skills, but for his evangelical Christianity. He was home schooled by missionary parents and noticeably writes Bible verses across his face while playing. For example:Personally, I have no idea why he’s allowed to do this (and neither does my dad – yay ranting about religion with your family). I have a really hard time imagining a football player being able to write “Allahu akbar” across his face in Arabic, or even worse, “There is no God.” Even if the NCAA would legally allow these other sayings, the fallback from fellow players, coaches, and fans would be so great that a Muslim or atheist player probably wouldn’t even consider it. I don’t know about you, but I feel uneasy enough labeling myself as an atheist on the internet – I’m not going to do it when 300 pound men are actually supposed to come tackling me.

But it’s not just because of its religious. By writing anything distinctive on his face, he’s drawing attention to himself. Showboating after touch downs is explicitly forbidden in college football, yet drawing attention to yourself with Bible verses is okay? I guess the news network is partially to blame for this. CBS is currently using every chance to zoom in on Tebow’s face and use that as TV filler – would they be doing this without the Bible verse? No, at least no where near to this extent.

If that’s not enough, the CBS announcers took the time to read the actual verse that Tebow was referencing today. It was Heb 12: 1-2, though they only read the first line:

1Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us. 2Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Good call leaving off all the Jesus heavy part, at least. They claimed they should read it since it was obviously important enough for him to select and write on his face. So do I get to select passages I find meaningful and have them read on national television? Yes, if it’s a Bible verse.

This isn’t about censoring Christians so that they can never talk about their faith. There is a time and place for such discussions, and representing a public university in college football is not it. This is about illustrating that you’re rewarded for expressing your Christianity, but everyone who disagrees better keep it to themselves. Christians are a privileged group, and crying “Oppression!” as loudly as they can doesn’t change the facts.

Obama’s godless Thanksgiving proclamation

Every year once the President is done with the serious duty of pardoning a turkey, he addresses the country with a Thanksgiving proclamation. However, Obama’s speech was a tad bit different than those in the past – he left out references to God. Well, not completely. His single reference to God was tucked inside of a George Washington quote:

Today, we recall President George Washington, who proclaimed our first national day of public thanksgiving to be observed “by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God,” and President Abraham Lincoln, who established our annual Thanksgiving Day to help mend a fractured Nation in the midst of civil war.

But those were George Washington’s words, which were balanced with the practicality of Lincoln’s quote. Obama himself didn’t invoke a deity. When you compare this to some of the things Bush said during his last Thanksgiving proclamation, you can see the difference:

On this day, let us all give thanks to God who blessed our Nation’s first days and who blesses us today. May He continue to guide and watch over our families and our country always.

We recognize that all of these blessings, and life itself, come not from the hand of man but from Almighty God….

Having arrived in the New World, these early settlers gave thanks to the Author of Life….

And as noted by Jill Stanek, “President Bush called the 1st celebrants “Pilgrims,” Obama said they were “European settlers.”” A subtle but significant difference.

Some nonbelievers don’t care when Obama gives a shout to non-believers or simply leaves God out of his secular speeches, but I think it’s important. If our President invokes God like belief is normal, required, and patriotic, it alienates the “Nones” of America. By simply keeping his Thanksgiving proclamation secular, Obama is making baby steps toward a more inclusive environment. Yes, there is certainly more I think he could be doing, but I’ll take what I can get for now.

Theists completely miss the point of BHA’s new campaign

You may have heard of the new billboard campaign by the British Humanist Association against state funded faith schools. It takes a page from Richard Dawkins argument that small children are not yet intellectually or emotionally mature enough to make their own decisions about religion, and should not be labeled with the religion of their parents.Apparently the happy children pictured above came from a stock photo website, and are actually kids of famous evangelical Christian parents. What do people have to say about this?

[Their father] said: “It is quite funny, because obviously they were searching for images of children that looked happy and free. They happened to choose children who are Christian. It is ironic. The humanists obviously did not know the background of these children.”

function slideshowPopUp(url) { pictureGalleryPopupPic(url); return false; }

He said that the children’s Christianity had shone through. “Obviously there is something in their faces which is different. So they judged that they were happy and free without knowing that they are Christians. That is quite a compliment. I reckon it shows we have brought up our children in a good way and that they are happy.”

Gerald Coates, the leader of the Pioneer network of churches, which Mr Mason and his family used to attend before they moved to Dorset, said: “I think it is hilarious that the happy and liberated children on the atheist poster are in fact Christian.”

…

Are people really this daft? The whole point of the bloody campaign is to show we should stop labeling children, yet they go on to repeatedly call them not Christian children. They are not Christians. They are impressionable kids who are currently being raised in a Christian environment and do not yet have the skills to make informed decisions about religion. But with the level of critical thinking we’re seeing in the adults, I’m concerned that they’ll never reach that level of comprehension.

And the fact that they imply that these children are happy just because they’re raised by Christians annoys the hell out of me. Yep, atheists are completely unable to raise children in a healthy, loving environment. That’s why we didn’t use atheist kids, because they wouldn’t stop sobbing or cutting themselves long enough to take a good photograph. Oh wait, no, it’s because we don’t label children as “atheists” or “humanists.”

Good thing being the children of twits doesn’t automatically make you a twit yourself.

(Via RichardDawkins.net)

Why I’m not going to waste my time reading the Bible

I have not read the entire Bible.

In fact, the only full stories I have read were about Creation (Ch 1 and 2 in Genesis) and the Prodigal Son, and that was because they were required for my Ancient World Literature class in high school. I know most of the stories and famous quotes just from growing up in a predominantly Christian culture (hell, I first heard the story of Moses from Rugrats), but I have not read the original text.

I don’t think this is necessarily very surprising, since I was raised in a secular way. Even many Christians have not read the Bible in its entirety. But whenever I get in a discussion with a religious person and they find out I’m an atheist, the first words out of their mouth are “Well, have you read the Bible?” For some atheists, this is so annoying that they feel compelled to read the Bible just to debate better (and to blog about it):

I am told that reading the bible is a life changing experience that will fully and unequivocally convince me of the existence of God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and maybe unicorns. I am also told, when I quote some seemingly strange passages from the bible, that I am merely taking them out of context, and that I would understand the “true” meaning if only I would read the bible in it’s entirety. I also look forward to the day that when someone asks me disdainfully “well, have you actually read the bible?” my reply can be “yes, have you?”.

While I understand their tactics and find that question equally annoying, I have no plans to read the entire Bible.

“Oh Jen,” you say, “you’re just being close-minded and set in your beliefs.” But I disagree. To illustrate my point, here are my top four reasons why I’m not going to waste my time reading the Bible:

1. There’s a double standard. Christians* claim that you can’t make an educated argument against Christianity unless you have read the Bible. Yet at the same time, they have often never read any other holy book, let alone all holy books, and they feel like that’s perfectly fine. Maybe if they stopped the hypocrisy of their standards, I’d consider them.

2. I don’t need to completely master Christian theology before I can realize that it’s wrong. As a corollary of #1, this is exactly how most Christians treat other religions. They reject Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Satanism, and Scientology without reading the Tripitaka, Vedas, Qu’ran, Talmud, Satanic Bible, Dianetics. They don’t believe in ancient Egyptian, Greek, or Norse gods and goddesses, yet they haven’t read every mythological story. We don’t need to know every detail about how people draw astrological tables to recognize it as bullshit. One only needs to learn so much about a topic before their skeptical sensors go off.

3. Even if I did read the Bible, Christians will continue to claim that I’m taking it out of context, misinterpreting it, or just outright lying. I have seen this happen over and over again with Bible-savvy atheists who were in debates. These people are so made up in their mind that no amount of reason will work, even if you’re using their own tool against them. They see what they want to see in the Bible, and quoting contradictory passages at them is futile.

4. From a purely literary perspective, the parts of the Bible I’ve read have been incredibly boring and poorly written. For a book that’s supposedly God’s word, you think he could have done a bit better. I have a queue of excellent books waiting on my bookshelf, and I much rather spend my time reading those than some 2,000 year old mediocre tome that will likely annoy me with its inanity.

I’m sure there are more relevant points that I’m forgetting, but those are the major ones to me. Maybe one day I’ll read it, when I’ve completely exhausted my list of superior literature, or I’m trapped on a desert island with nothing but the Good Book. But until then, I don’t feel the need to. I know the stories for the cultural literacy aspect, and that’s enough for me.

What do you think? Am I being lazy or practical?

*Obviously not all Christians act in the way I describe in this post. I’m talking about the ones who claim you must read the Bible. I hate making these sorts of disclaimers, but I don’t want people trolling me on this little thing.

A version of the Bible that’s actually useful

My friend over at SuperFunAdventureTime! decided (probably out of boredom) to make some improvements to his copy of the Bible. That seems like a daunting task, but I like the final result:His reasoning?

“The SuperFunAdventureBible clears up and confusing or flowery passages and allows the reader to concentrate on the real crux of the Christian faith. Christians should be thanking me, as I carefully removed (with a utility knife) all of the times the Bible urges people to participate in:

  • murder (Ezekiel 9:5-6)
  • genocide (Deuteronomy 20:16-17; Exodus 17:13-16)
  • incest (Exodus 6:20; Genesis 19:30-38)
  • abortion (Hosea 13:16)
  • cannibalism (Jeremiah 19:9)
  • materialism (Proverbs 14:20)
  • domestic violence (Proverbs 20:30)
  • shit-eating (Ezekiel 4:12-15),
  • genital mutilation (Genesis 17:9-13)
  • …and Communist party membership (Acts 4:32-35)

Thanks to me, the Christian apologetics have less to apologize over. Now, Christians can concentrate on the central themes of intimidation and greed without the requisite cognitive dissonance.”

I approve.

Though I think I would be more creative in what I stored in my SuperFunAdventureBible. How about condoms? You’re in the moment, your partner asks you to grab some protection, you show them your Bible, they freak out (hopefully), you reveal its contents, you both have a good chuckle and then go at it like rabbits. Eh? Eh?

Pssh, fine then. What would you store in your Bible?

PZ Myers Speaks at Purdue: “A Few Things I’ve Learned from Creationists”

Yesterday night PZ Myers, who I’m sure you all know blogs over at Pharyngula, was nice enough to give a lecture at Purdue University. I found out through an ecology listserv that he would be speaking at an evo-devo meeting at Indiana University in Bloomington this weekend, and he was willing to fly in a day early to stop by West Lafayette first. We were all incredibly excited, and the atheists at IU were incredibly jealous.

Part of my duty at the President of the Society of Non-Theists was to safely retrieve PZ from the Indianapolis airport. Usually this would be a simple task – I’ve driven there a couple of times before and it’s about an hour and twenty away. The caveat was that PZ’s flight was supposed to arrive at 4pm, his talk started at 6pm, and flights are pretty much always late.

It seems the Flying Spaghetti Monster was not watching over us, because I soon got a phone call from PZ saying his flight was running a half hour late. No problem, plenty of time, I thought. I got to the airport and read American Gods in the parking lot for a while to waste time. But pretty soon it was getting later and later, and we both started to freak out on twitter. I unfortunately didn’t have internet access, so I had no clue what was going on (though it was apparently fairly amusing to our mutual followers).

I finally got a call at 4:50 that he had arrived, and we zoomed off toward West Lafayette, me trying to drive as quickly as possible without killing two atheist bloggers in one blow. I called my officers because I knew we’d be late, and that they should entertain the audience to prevent a riot – PZ suggested balloon animals, I suggested interpretive dance. We ended up being about 15 minutes late, but my awesome officers held down the fort by playing Mr. Diety videos (PZ: I have to follow Mr. Diety?! Oh no!). PZ then gave a great talk, “A Few Things I’ve Learned from Creationists” – which can pretty much be summed up by this photo:Thankfully PZ gave us permission to videotape it, so you can watch it yourself! (EDIT: So…apparently people think the sound quality sucks, but I think it sounds fine. Either my computer is awesome, or I’m just not that picky. Regardless, if you think it’s crappy, feel free to donate a high quality video camera to the Society of Non-Theists. EDIT 2: Thanks for all of the audio recording tips. If you hadn’t figured it out yet, we didn’t exactly know what we’re doing, and I feel really bad that it came out so badly, so I apologize. I’m still completely baffled by the people who say they can’t understand a thing, though. I can tell what he’s saying the entire talk…either listening through headphones is the trick, or I have super human hearing.)

I thought his talk was great, and so did everyone else (though I think some of the biology-heavy bits went over most people’s heads). He drew a big crowd – I wasn’t able to get an exact head count because there were so many people, but I’d estimate a little over 150 individuals were there. Just to give you an idea, here are a couple shots of the majority of the crowd (still leaving out about 30 or 40 people):Surprisingly, there weren’t many creationists there, or they were just keeping quiet. Only one question seemed to have a creationist bent, and no one looked especially furious.
We then relocated to Boiler Market, a local restaurant with great food and cheap pitchers of beer, a winning combination. About 35-40 people showed up, and we had a great time talking with our fellow non-theists. This event definitely brought some new faces out of the woodwork – hopefully they’ll stay, and we’ll see them at future meetings!The best part for me was definitely driving PZ from and to the airport. I was lucky to have him to myself for nearly three hours, and it was great fun talking to him. We talked about biology, grad school, blogging, silly religious topics, the book he’s writing, and all sorts of random things. I had a blast, and I hope he did too!

Catholic Church: You approve gay marriage, we stop social service programs

What happens when society progresses on human rights, but a 2,000 year old book is more important to you? Resort to childish strong-arm tactics:

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

What in the world could this bill be saying that has Catholics so upset? Will it force them to perform gay marriages? To watch Bravo TV marathons? To ordain gay priests? …Wait a second…

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

Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.

So, the bill says you just have to stop discrimination…and they’re against this? Do they have any idea how bad this makes them look? I guess they’re not worried about PR, though, since their response is to threaten to take away social service programs than benefit the community. That’s a pretty jerk move, if you ask me, since it’s hurting people not even involved with the issue at hand. Just how many people will they be affecting with their selfish temper tantrum?

Catholic Charities, the church’s social services arm, is one of dozens of nonprofit organizations that partner with the District. It serves 68,000 people in the city, including the one-third of Washington’s homeless people who go to city-owned shelters managed by the church. City leaders said the church is not the dominant provider of any particular social service, but the church pointed out that it supplements funding for city programs with $10 million from its own coffers.

“All of those services will be adversely impacted if the exemption language remains so narrow,” Jane G. Belford, chancellor of the Washington Archdiocese, wrote to the council this week.

Wow, just wow. Thankfully the council members seem to have more sense than the church:

The church’s influence seems limited. In separate interviews Wednesday, council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) referred to the church as “somewhat childish.” Another council member, David A. Catania (I-At Large), said he would rather end the city’s relationship with the church than give in to its demands.

You know all of those recent debates about if the Catholic church is an overall force of good in the world? I think your “goodness” suffers a bit if you’re only using it for political clout. Just a thought.

Gay tourists not welcome at the Vatican

Shocking, I know. It’s not a decree from the Pope himself, but it’s the attitude of Bishop Janusz Kaleta of Holy See, the Apostolic Administrator of Atyrau. When asked about gay and lesbian tourists visiting the Vatican, this is what he had to say:

“The church teachings are from the Bible. If we change this teaching, we will not be the Catholic Church. Don’t expect the Catholic church to change these issues, because it is our identity.” When asked if the Vatican is open to dialogue about welcoming such homosexual groups of tourists in the future, Bishop Kaleta responded that “such demonstrations are just not ethical.”

Yep, because religion is something that never changes, but homosexuality is totally a choice. Hmm, I feel like I heard that somewhere before… But anyway, so is the Bishop just against a gay pride parade going through St. Peter’s Square?

Publisher Steinmetz clarified that what was meant by gay travel was traveling for the purpose of a visit, not as a demonstration. To this the Bishop replied, “I consider if someone is homosexual, it is a provocation and an abuse of this place. Try to go to a mosque if you are not Muslim. It is abuse of our buildings and our religion because the church interprets our religion that it is not ethical. We expect respect of our church as we expect to respect that a person does not have to belong to the Catholic Church. If you have different ideas, go to a different location.”

Nope, simply being gay is provocative, abusive, and disrespectful. Not bears in assless chaps, not rainbow flags, not public make out sessions, not kisses, not holding hands – thought crimes of a homosexual nature are enough. You know how many gays probably go to the Vatican to stare in wonder at the Michelangelos and Berninis (who were probably gay)? Maybe the Vatican would be singing a different tune if they realized how much money they’d lose from banning everyone but upstanding, “moral” Catholics from visiting. Of course, I visited the Vatican when I was already calling myself an atheist, and I somehow didn’t manage to get kicked out (I was also 12 at the time…).

As CarnalNation pointed out, the Swiss Guard better start working on their gaydars.

Required Christmas Carols in Schools?

‘Tis the season for cries about the “War on Christmas,” and what better way to start off than attempting to pass a law requiring Christmas carols in school.

Ms. Hyatt, 61, a substitute schoolteacher, is the chief proponent of a proposed California ballot initiative that would require the state’s public schools to offer Christmas music during the holiday season.

Ms. Hyatt said she was inspired to start her ballot drive after working at a school where only nondenominational songs were allowed at holiday parties.

That struck her as unfair.

“We feel kids love Christmas,” she said. “And we’re not allowed to play Christmas carols. And we think that’s wrong.”

I’m one of those types of atheists who loves Christmas. I celebrate it with my family and I love singing the songs, regardless if they’re about Jesus or Frosty the Snowman. I grew up singing Christmas carols in concerts for public schools, and it didn’t traumatize me. My family was secular and I didn’t feel left out; I just saw singing about Jesus’s divinity the same as singing about Santa (aka, silly and fictional). I’m still an atheist now – the Noel didn’t convert me.

That being said, my experiences do not represent those of every child. Some children of atheists may see it as one big silly joke, but children raised in Jewish families must certainly feel like the odd man out. They get their one token dradle song, and that’s it. But at least they get one song – what about the children of Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Pagans, etc? Well, Ms. Hyatt has a solution for that:

As to whether people of other religious beliefs might take offense at having to carol, Ms. Hyatt, a Christian, said schools would be required to provide other rooms for other faiths, and students could opt out if offended. But she added that in her experience as a substitute teacher in schools in largely Latino, largely Christian neighborhoods in Southern California, she had not often encountered people who do not celebrate Christmas.

“I don’t think I’ve ever had a Jewish child in one of my classes,” she said. “If so they never said anything.”

Yes, because ostracizing small children even further by hiding them in a separate room and making them miss out on a fun party is an excellent idea. Way to show your tolerance and understanding.

There’s a point where I think secularization is unnecessary. I personally feel Christmas has pretty much lost it’s religious value; rather it represents having time off from school and work, being with family and friends, and spending a crapload of money on presents (yay capitalism). But to require all public schools to sing religious songs just isn’t right. Maybe let each school decide if it’s appropriate or not, but don’t force religion on all public students in California.

What do you guys think? Should there be no religious Christmas carols at all in public schools? Or have they lost their original meaning and it’s all for fun? I’d especially like to hear from those not raised in Christian families about their experiences and opinions.

(Hat tip to @jakiking)

Duke sex toy party study upsets Catholics on campus

I might have to start looking at Duke for grad school, after reading this article:

DURHAM, N.C. — A campus religious leader is unhappy about a study at Duke University that invites female students to attend parties where they can buy sex toys.

The News & Observer of Raleigh reported Friday that the director of the Duke Catholic Center has lodged a complaint with researchers. The Rev. Joe Vetter says the study doesn’t promote relationships.

Doesn’t promote relationships? What? Hey, maybe he uses his sex toys all alone, but I personally think sharing is caring. Anyway, what horrible things could this study be doing?! After purchase do they masturbate all over the desks of the classroom? Does it turn into a big lesbian orgy?!

The study asks female students over age 18 to attend the events that are similar to Tupperware parties but with erotic toys, lingerie and games. The women complete surveys about their sexual attitudes before and after the parties and get product discounts.

A spokesman for Duke said the sex-toy party project went through the peer review process.

Oh. Well. That’s considerably less exciting (though still awesome). Every year here at Purdue the Psychology department’s Human Sexuality class has a sex toy day, where people come in and talk about sex toys and give away free stuff. It was pretty awesome (though I didn’t get anything, sadness). I don’t remember the Catholic church exploding about that here, though that would have made it even more fun.

Oh, and one more gem:

Vetter says he plans to discuss the topic at Sunday mass.

Most interesting Sunday mass ever!

On a more serious note, are Catholics seriously against sex toys? Why the hell is it that religious people make sex so freaking impossible? Oh, abortion is evil, but you can’t use birth control to prevent abortion. Oh, sex before marriage is bad, but you can’t use a vibrator or masturbate to relieve those sexual pressures. Lovely.