The BBC tells us that the story was buried deep within the pages of Indian newspapers

Two star-crossed lovers committed suicide after the local village council, or panchayat, ordered them to annul their marriage or face death.
Amreen was Muslim and her husband, Lokesh, a Hindu. Their match was simply unacceptable to their communities. The couple poisoned themselves.

The only really surprising part, to my thinking, was this:

Now police have charged the entire panchayat with abetting suicide.

Damn, I hope it sticks.

Read the whole BBC story (the link above); this young couple should not die without the world knowing.

Two households, alike save for belief
In fair Phaphunda, where our scene is set,
Where Hindu-Muslim tensions lead to grief
And faiths, in conflict, evil will abet.
Amreen, a Muslim, and her love Lokesh,
A Hindu man who loved her more than life;
Two faiths the village elders would not mesh,
Though legally the two were man and wife.
They fell in love because the two would meet
Where Amreen’s father sold the family’s milk;
The panchayat—the governing elite—
Decreed they could not sully ilk with ilk.
The Hindu man and lovely Muslim bride
Chose poison over panchayat… and died.

But hey, religion is a good thing, and it’s important that people believe, isn’t it? Seriously, what could go wrong?

a2a_linkname=document.title;a2a_linkurl=”http://digitalcuttlefish.blogspot.com/2009/06/romeo-and-juliet-2009.html”;

Applause! Applause! It’s in the laws!
The matter’s been decided!
Hooray! Hooray! As of today,
No more a state divided!

It should have happened years ago,
But, better late than never—
There are some couples here I know,
For whom it’s seemed forever!

My neighbors can get married now
If they should so decide—
Exchanging rings and solemn vows,
A lovely Bride and Bride.

Union Leader story

I’ll add links as they become available–looks like I am ahead of the news organizations this time.

adding…
Governor Lynch’s signing statement.
Union Leader’s updated story
Text of House Bill 73
Text of House Bill 436
Text of House Bill 310

NY Times article

In the latest Telemundo Soap Opera, Father Alberto Cutie (KOO’-tee-ay, the papers helpfully add) has left the Catholic Church, choosing the brunette on the beach over the one on the cross. Sadly, although he clearly sees that the arbitrary rules are… well, arbitrary, and is in a position to see through the whole charade, he has instead simply chosen to join the Episcopal Church. (I am reminded of a friend who thought switching to filtered cigarettes from unfiltered was pretty much the same thing as quitting smoking altogether.)

The tale of Padre Cutie—
Who found himself a beauty, a
Brunette with whom he frolicked and cavorted on the beach—
Pitted god against temptation,
And the latest revelation?
As in Eden with the apple, God now loses to a peach.

It’s rarely for the hell of it
You choose a path that’s celibate—
We must assume the Padre was committed to his life—
But to love and serve God only
Leaves a man a little lonely
And Alberto can’t be faulted if he wants to take a wife.

But the men in hats and dresses,
Those who judge what he confesses,
Say the rules are very clear against the marrying of priests
If the good Miami Padre
Is to join their little cadre
He must hold himself to standards much, much higher than the beasts’.

So he thought, and asked, and prayed:
“Should I serve God? Or else get laid?”
(From the atheist perspective, what a silly thing to ask!)
And he said “Oh, God who made me,
If I cannot play, then trade me!
I’ll no longer hide my feelings, with my vestments as my mask!”

Having looked behind the curtain
He, of all men, should be certain
Any organized religion is, at best, a silly scheme;
To the Catholics, he’s alien,
He’s now Episcopalian
He knows the game is silly, he just chose another team.

Oh–I added a poll (over there, on the right), to test whether PZ’s pavlovian conditioning is complete. The poll is utterly without point (it is, after all, about intelligent design), but will he be able to resist? It is an empirical question…

Oh, Oh! I forgot… I got an email a day or so ago, informing me that my book is now available from Amazon.com! The email said that my book had “been selected”–I suspect the same sort of selection that gets sweepstakes entries sent to my house, but what do I know? Anyway, take a look on Amazon for it, and if you are moved to, write something nice, or whatever it is that people do on Amazon. At least in theory, this opens me up to a much wider audience, although I am not exactly sure how.

So last night on ABC’s “Nightline”–ostensibly a news program–the debate was fiery, and on a devil of a topic! Does Satan Exist? ABC apparently found the question important enough to organize their third national “face-off”. (Video and icky story at the link)

But not important enough to actually address the question. Though they say that “[t]he question of whether Satan exists is one of the most contentious theological debates possible”, ABC then chooses the equivalent of going after the most dangerous killer with a cork-gun and two water-pistols. It should not be terribly surprising, but the debate participants were chosen for their ratings-boosting personal quirkiness than for any evidence or insight they could add. There are brilliant theologians (even I admit), there are anthropologists and experimental psychologists, there are philosophers, who could have spoken with authority and data… but how could they compete with the founder of “Hookers For Jesus”? And Deepak Chopra? I once got kicked out of a bookstore because I picked up one of his books and started leafing through it… which led to my trying to retract the stupidity by banging the book against my forehead.

And every panel participant believed in a god! (I say “a”, because only three of the four were explicitly christian.) So it was a debate over somebody else’s invisible friend, hobbled by the requirement not to accidentally disprove one’s own invisible friend! Sure, the audience (at a church) would have shouted down an atheist, but it might have made for decent ratings…

It was a bit like watching a debate over the healthiness of McDonald’s hamburgers, where the expert panel consists of two fry cooks from Burger King, someone who once ate 17 burgers at a sitting and got sick, and a representative for the fast food industry. No nutritionist, no vegetarian (let alone vegan) view, no environmental impact data, no nothing.

This “debate” was junk food. It was fluff. It was a tale told by four idiots and a network full of enablers, full of sound and fury, signifying the depths to which ABC News has dipped.

Tonight, two sides begin debatin’
Whether there’s such thing as Satan,
Whether he is merely some imaginary friend
Like the playmate of a child
Whose imagination’s wild
Or a real and present danger, against which we must defend

ABC’s own Nightline newsies
Says there’s data for these doozies—
That Americans believe that such an entity exists
It’s a very weighty question
That deserves a good digestion,
From the expert theologians that they’ve plucked from off their lists

There’s the fundamental preacher,
Quite a wild and wooly creature
Whose collection plate depends upon his congregation’s fear
And the born-again ex-hooker,
Doesn’t hurt that she’s a looker,
Cos the network lives on ratings and the news must persevere

Next, a bishop, former minister,
Who came to think the sinister
Portrayal of the devil wasn’t bringing folks to God,
And then Dr. Deepak Chopra,
A celebrity, like Oprah,
Whose beliefs are slightly different, and sometimes downright odd.

Not an atheist among them,
One whose questions might have stung them,
Not a single theologian with authority to lend
Anthropologist? Psychologist?
Biologist? Cosmologist?
No solitary skeptic was admitted to attend.

If it really is a question
Worth debating, one suggestion:
Give the sides some ammunition—as it is, they’re shooting blanks.
If it’s worth examination
There’s a certain expectation
That some experts, and some evidence, are welcome in the ranks.

But if all this fun debating’s
Not for knowledge, but for ratings,
Go ahead and pack the panel with some entertaining fluff
If the overall desire
Is to push the ratings higher
Then the hooker/preacher freakshow is authority enough.

Once again, PZ gets credit for ruining my morning. Sadly, my ruined morning is nothing at all compared to the story he shares. The deaths of 14 people–7 children, 7 adults–are being used to promote a sick agenda. God was punishing them, you see. Because the father of two and grandfather of five of the victims (just think about that loss for a moment. Two daughters, five grandchildren, dead in a plane crash) is the owner of a chain of clinics that, among other services, perform abortions. So, of course, the whole family deserved to die.

Of course, it would be horrible to phrase it that way, so the much more polite phrase “I don’t want to turn this tragic event into some creepy spiritual ‘I told you so’ moment…” Hey, guess what? You just did.

There is no tragic loss of life so great
That someone, somewhere, who has a book to sell
Or vile view to promote, cannot create
A circus, a spectacle, a forum for their hate,
A soapbox platform, from which they can tell
The world–these sinful victims are in Hell.
This crash–with seven kids among the dead;
Whole families lost–is cause for countless tears,
A time to comfort victims’ families. Instead,
The horrid claim the families’ actions led
To this. Their sinful lifestyle, it appears,
Angered God. Now Gingi Edmonds cheers
“Stack the coffins; I’ll use them for my stage!”
And all my sadness turns itself to rage.

If you want the details, read PZ’s post. I will not link to the Christian Newswire source.

PZ reports on a trial verdict just out. It stands in stark opposition to the efficient actions of the pilot and crew in the Hudson River emergency landing; today’s ruling finds pilot and several crew members guilty of actions which contributed to the deaths of 16 in a crash-landing in the Mediterranean in 2005.

The fuel gauge had just been replaced with an improper gauge that showed the plane as having more fuel than it actually did; the pilot then ordered insufficient fuel to make the return trip from Sicily. Both engines died within moments of one another; the plane could have been glided to a nearby airport, or procedures could have been initiated to have a safe water landing, but the pilot chose instead to pray. Yup. Loudly enough for the passengers to hear. It must have been quite comforting to know he was praying instead of piloting. See, normally, prayer is the responsibility of the passengers, whose other main job is to sit and do nothing… so they are clearly qualified.

Flying along on a wing and a prayer
Works better for songs than for planes;
Trusting in God, when the fuel isn’t there,
Is a poor way of using your brains!

Turns out that the phrase “a wing and a prayer” originates from a 1943 song and a 1944 movie. Not a true story, a work of fiction. A good one, too. But not a substitute for pilot training. [Correction!!! A knowledgeable reader, Howard, has corrected me–the song is based on a real incident. Read his comment below for more info.]

Flying along on a wing and a prayer
Works better in fiction than fact
When engines conk out and it gives you a scare
It’s time not to pray, but to act!

Anyway, I thought I’d revise the lyrics of the original song, to better suit the 2005 incident. Feel free to sing along.

One of our planes was flying
Over water, just south of Rome
The fuel gauge, sadly, was lying
There was not enough gas to get home
The engines were skipping and stalling
The plane started tossing about
And the passengers found it appalling
When they all heard the pilot shout out:

Comin in on a wing and a prayer
Listen up, god, I know that you’re there
Though we’ve run out of gas
I know god loves my ass
Comin’ in on a wing and a prayer.

What a show, what a flight, boys
We’re gonna hit some whitecaps here tonight
How we pray as we limp through the air
Look below, there’s just waves everywhere
With all our fuel gone
We can still carry on
Comin in on a wing and a prayer

Comin in on a wing and a prayer
Listen up, god, I know that you’re there
Though we’ve run out of gas
I know god loves my ass
Comin’ in on a wing and a [splash].

Pee-Zed reports on a brilliant scheme–a company that, for a nominal fee, will take over that exhausting task of praying. That’s right, they will fold their hands and do nothing at all, so you don’t have to! $3.95 a month for the basic service, or $9.95 for 5 prayers a day! All the awesome power of prayer, harnessed for about the price of your cup of designer coffee. For those people too lazy to sit quietly and murmur.

This service saves your precious time
It might be right for you–
If sitting, doing nothing
Is a bit too much to do.

It used to be that what we did
To make believe we care
Is clasp our hands together,
Doing nothing (call it “prayer”)

But if your life is hectic, and
You want more time alone
We’ll do the nothing for you,
If you’ll just pick up the phone!

When sitting on your ass is getting
Boring, dull, or hard–
It’s just three-ninety-five a month
Come on–pull out that card!

If you think it’s still too much for you
We know just how you feel–
Too lazy to pick up the phone?
We’ve got another deal!

We’re sending people door to door
So you can stay in bed–
No need to find your credit card
They’ll take your cash instead.

We know you wouldn’t call the cops
Or use some pepper spray–
Hell, if you believed in action,
You’d do more than fucking pray!

Over on Pharyngula, PZ has posted a viddy of Michael Shermer at the Creation Science museum, interviewing one of their research scientists. I won’t link the actual video here, because it is just so annoying. The scientist is utterly blinkered, and stays on her points despite Shermer’s rather tepid prodding. She studies bacteria, and the changes that turn symbiotic bacteria into pathogens–that is, the non-evolutionary changes, since they are still bacteria.

Bacteria will always be
Bacteria; we’ll never see
Another organism come
From just a changed bacterium.
We won’t see an amoeba grow
A pair of fins, and so we know
That evolution’s tale is wrong.
We’ve known it, really, all along.

Until a lump of lifeless mud
Transforms itself to flesh and blood
And starts to dance and sing a song,
We’ll know that evolution’s wrong.
The logic’s clear, and all it took
Was looking at our holy book;
The truth about our planet’s age is
Written there within its pages.

If evolution’s true, then god
Deceives us with a false façade,
A tale of time’s expanse so vast,
Which stretches back into the past,
With fossils, footprints, DNA,
To disbelieve and throw away
As “just a test”; and this, we know
Because the Bible tells us so.

Because we fear the pit of fire
We trust this demonstrated liar;
He made his Adam and his Eve
Along with fossils to deceive;
The fossil footprints? Ancient mud
Set down in the Noachian flood
A mere few thousand years ago—
But any older? God says “no!”

If God created all the earth,
Was there for every creature’s birth,
Created Sun, and Moon, and tide,
Then who are we to say he lied?
The words god wrote in bio-data,
Fossils, geologic strata,
Are these words merely so much libel
Because they do not match the bible?

It seems to me that either way—
No matter which you choose to say—
In Earth or Book, it’s no surprise,
You’re telling us that Yahweh lies!

I hope that Dr. Purdom’s work
Includes a decent healthcare perk;
It wouldn’t seem quite right to me
To charge for her lobotomy.

I turned on the radio yesterday, and caught just the tail end of “Speaking Of Faith” on public radio. The host, Krista Tippett, was asking for listeners’ stories, specifically regarding the recent Wall Street turmoil—“the moral and spiritual aspects of an economic downturn”. The show has produced a series called “Repossessing Virtue”, in which “voices of wisdom and insight” have commented on various aspects of the economic crisis. I was a bit shocked to see, for instance, a piece reporting on homeowners choosing to foreclose on their mortgages rather than give up tithing. Other reports ask of the effects of the market on moral character, or explore the poetry of depression (both economic and psychological).

I suppose it is too much to ask for a regular atheist voice on the program; there are more religious views than can be accommodated on a weekly show already, and sufficient diversity among non-believers that no one voice could possibly speak for us all (but I would love to be one of those voices). For instance, the very notion that there would be a moral or spiritual aspect to the downturn was taken as a given, whereas it really threw me for a loop—at least, initially. But it does make sense. If you believe there is, in this universe, not just order but divine guidance, if you believe that there is a benevolent and just hand at the helm, then you have to wonder, when things go horribly wrong, what you did to deserve it.

An uncaring universe does not promise good things to good people and bad things to bad people. A world that is blind to our beliefs, responsive only to our actions, requires us not to have faith, but to act. Blind faith, whether in god or in Bernie Madoff, leaves us vulnerable to exploitation, and is no virtue. There is no higher morality to be found in clinging to a belief system that actively harms.

If god is great, and god is good, and god is kind and just
As theologians everywhere believe that they have shown,
The losses of my family’s jobs and of our house, then, must
Be well-deserved, appropriate, and yes, our fault alone.

We’ll put some money in the plate, with less and less to give;
We’ll say our prayers, and sing our hymns, with praises to his name,
Each week we find it harder, but that’s just the life we live;
It’s all our fault—the one thing god won’t ever take is blame.

It’s a crisis of morality, a spiritual malaise,
It’s time to kneel and bow our heads and double up on prayer!
I’ll never doubt that god deserves our everlasting praise;
The alternative’s unthinkable—that god just doesn’t care.

So… to answer the questions on the contact site:
» Are you experiencing this economic moment as a moral or spiritual crisis as well?
No. My morality does not depend on being blessed, or cursed, by god or fate or karma. Good times are not a moral reward, nor bad times a punishment. As for “spiritual”, the word is the remnant of a vocabulary of ignorance; this economic crisis is here in the real world.
» Do concepts of trust, of living in community, of what sustains you have relevance in new tangible ways as you face changed economic realities?
I have always lived within a human community. We are all we have, and have always been this. I rely on my fellow creatures, and try always to act such that they may rely on me. This has always been important; perhaps if more people were living for this world instead of passing time through this one while waiting for another, we would not have so many people in such dire need.
» What qualities of human nature do you want to cultivate in yourself or your children?
Skepticism and reliance on evidence. Helping one another is in our best interest; science has been our most powerful tool in all of human history. We are at a point when we need our most powerful tool applied to our common social interest. Religious solutions have divided us and put us at war with one another; if religion has had good effects, it has been only for the winners.
» Who will we be for each other?
Everything. We are all we have. If, as the saying goes, two hands working do more than a thousand clasped in prayer, just imagine the increased potential for good in the world if we actually did realize that we are all we have.