Predictable Reaction To “Atheist Monument”

A Decalogue carved out of granite began it;
Jehovah’s commandments on six tons of stone
An atheist group then complained; they maintained
The establishment clause says it can’t sit alone
The lawyers advised “don’t take chances; your stance is
‘If one is allowed, well then, so are the rest’.”
So, while maybe it wasn’t their druthers, now others
Can join them, with multiple viewpoints expressed.

The atheists’ bench is the first one, the cursed one,
Reminding the county that godless exist—
That Florida’s not monolithically mythic;
That Christians don’t make up the whole of the list.
I’m hoping the Hindus will bring ‘em a lingam,
A huge granite phallus to add to the mix
So when councilmen pass, they will find a reminder
That some think the council are acting like dicks.

I read about the monument a couple of days ago, but of course the monument itself isn’t anything exciting to write about. It’s the reaction to the monument that gets fun. Mano predicted this yesterday, as reactions started to trickle in. Today, my aggregator is full of various Christian reactions to the bench.

“Good for them. I think it’s a perfect monument for atheists. It says it all. Atheism – it’s where asses go.“

(don’t skip the comments there. You will know they are Christians by their love. Oh! One of the comments makes the point that “Every public square without a Christmas Crib at Christmas is a monument to atheism.” which reminded me of this one from a while ago.)

“It’s absolutely ridiculous to have opposing viewpoints like this,” [Mat Staver of Liberty Council] says. “Certainly, Thomas Jefferson and Madelyn Murray O’Hair need not be opposing the 10 Commandments. In fact, Thomas Jefferson would be appalled that his writings would be used to oppose the 10 Commandments, which are the very basis of the rule of law.”

Which is why the first 4 commandments are explicitly overruled by the first amendment.

And while Fox News’s Tucker Carlson predicts (or urges) vandalism:

“I have a feeling that bench will be a magnet for graffiti,” Carlson said on this past weekend’s “Fox & Friends,” when discussing the planned atheist memorial.
“Just a guess,” Carlson added.

…at the same site, at least some see what “public free-speech forum” actually means:

Ken Weaver, a member of the Starke, Fla.-based group Community Men’s Fellowship, which originally erected the Ten Commandments monument at Bradford County Courthouse, previously told CP that he believes the American Atheists “has the same freedoms of expression as those of any other citizen or group.”

Of course, as of this writing, the only comment at that particular site is a simple “I concur Tucker”.

At the risk of repeating myself, you will know they are Christians by their love.

Angel’s Devils; or, If You Can’t Believe A Demon, Who Can You Believe?

The man’s name was Angel; for fourteen long years
He’s been home to some demons, or so it appears;
The exorcists tried to remove them, but nope—
And they even (the demons) resisted the pope.

They must have some purpose, or something to say;
For so many years, treating Angel this way
The Vatican exorcist (yes, that’s a thing)
Has deciphered the message he’s claiming they bring:

The devils inhabiting poor Angel’s bod
Are delivering—really—a message from God
The last fourteen years are a warning from heaven
Regarding a law passed in 2007.

When Mexico City made legal abortion
God’s go-to response is a form of extortion
Possession, of course, is a cruel thing to do
But the exorcist told us—it has to be true

So please, heed the demons, they’re really God’s voice,
The message is clear—deprive women of choice!
(If you’re looking for meaning, continue your search:
They don’t have to make sense—they’re the catholic church)

I was wrong about the pope’s exorcism business. The kid was clearly not mentally ill, and not a kid. He’s a 43 year old father of 2, and he’s been possessed by demons since 1999. No, really. (Hey, that’s the Christian Post, so you can trust it.) 30 exorcism attempts, by 10 different exorcists (and to think, before that Linda Blair movie came out, the last exorcist school was about to close!), and Angel V. was still possessed.

Must be a reason. Something important enough that the God team loses 30 matches in a row. Well, the Vatican chief exorcist figured it out:

Chief Vatican exorcist, Amorth, argues that Angel is undoubtedly possessed but his possession comes with a message from God on Mexico’s abortion laws.
“Not only is he possessed, but the devil who lives in him finds himself obliged by God to transmit a message,” said Amorth.
“Angel is a good man. He has been chosen by the Lord to give a message to the Mexican clergy and to tell the bishops that they have to do an act of reparation for the law on abortion that was approved in Mexico City in 2007, which was an insult to the Virgin,” said Amorth. “Until they . . . do this, Angel will not be liberated.”

Extortion. Or, more charitably, incompetence.

“It’s Not A Hate Thing”

They say, “It’s not a hate thing, it’s a moral stance we take”
But the things they do betray their lie with every move they make
When your words don’t match your actions, it will come as no surprise
That the people who observe you will conclude you’re telling lies.

It’s a simple observation; you may label it a fact
When your words and actions disagree, the truth is how you act
When you say you love the sinner, but you still discriminate
We conclude that you’re a liar; we conclude that this is hate.

So the Baptists plan their exodus, while still proclaiming love
It’s their duty to be honest, yes, but push has come to shove
Many Christian groups are staying; Baptist groups are running scared
And they’re going to have to tell some lies, for which they’ll be prepared

You can trust them to be bigots; they are loyal to their church;
They are helpful, friendly, courteous, and kind of in a lurch;
They’re obedient and cheerful; they are thrifty, brave, and clean,
But the problem is, they’re reverent, and that’s what makes them mean.

They say, “It’s not a hate thing, it’s a moral stance we take”
But the things they do betray their lie with every move they make
When your words don’t match your actions, it will come as no surprise
That the people who observe you will conclude you’re telling lies.

With the inclusion of openly gay scouts, the Boy Scouts of America can expect a mass exodus of Southern Baptist affiliated groups. I know, win-win, right? Oh, wait, it’s a bad thing because reasons. Or probably, because money. But for the Baptists, it’s a simple matter of doing the [far]right thing:

“God’s word explicitly says homosexuality is a choice, a sin,” said Reed, pastor of First Baptist Church of Gravel Ridge in Jacksonville, Arkansas.

So when the Boy Scouts of America voted to lift its ban on openly gay youths on May 24, Reed said the church had no choice but to cut its charter with Troop 542.

“It’s not a hate thing here,” Reed told CNN affiliate Fox 16. “It’s a moral stance we must take as a Southern Baptist church.”

and God’s will is crystal clear on this matter. The Baptist groups (making up approximately 5% of total BSA units–it is unclear if only Southern Baptists are leaving, and it is unclear what percentage of Baptist groups in the BSA are Southern Baptist) oppose the national changes because God says to.

The National Jewish Committee on Scouting, the United Church of Christ, the Episcopal Church, the Unitarian Universalist Association and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which sponsors more Scout units than any other faith, all endorsed the change.

The National Catholic Committee on Scouting, which is run with oversight from a bishop, said Thursday that allowing gay youths in the Scouts does not conflict with church teaching. Each bishop will decide whether or not to allow churches in his diocese to charter Scout units, the committee added.

So maybe God is a little iffy on the subject. (as an aside, I did read in the comments to the linked article, the old chestnut about how science has had to change its stance so many times over the centuries, while the church has remained a rock. If the church ever was a rock, it has fragmented into tens of thousands of fragments over time, each one claiming to be the original and unchanging rock. One church may oppose and protest, say, same sex marriage, while the church across the street happily embraces and conducts such marriages.) God’s fickle like that.

But hey, the Scout Law requires scouts to be “trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent”… not necessarily honest. Honesty is implied in “morally straight” (part of the scout oath); so long as the Baptists are interpreting that as “not morally gay”, they are free to lie about their motives.

Cos the truth is, it’s a hate thing.

Belief In Satan Leads To Terrible Things… In Priests.

It isn’t just God that believers believe in—
There are angels and demons as well;
But I don’t really think there’s a Devil at all
So I guess I’ll be heading for Hell

There’s a priest who believes that he’s figured us out;
Though his logic’s a little bit odd;
Not believing in Satan (he thinks) is the key
More than just not believing in God

Cos Satan’s a gateway, it seems, to belief
Or a gatekeeper, keeping folks in
Instead of ourselves, it’s the Devil to blame—
The personification of sin

But if there’s no Devil, no angels, no God,
No leprechauns, pixies, or elves,
No witches or wizards with magic to use
Then we’ll have to get by… by ourselves.

Yeah, so, this verse was just an excuse. The part of the story that amused me is what the verse covers–a curious bit of logic from a father Gabriele Amorth:

…one of the main causes of today’s atheism is that people don’t believe in the Devil any more. But Jesus said: ‘Who is not with me is with Satan.’ If you don’t believe in Satan, Satan has got you in his pocket.

So, yeah. Not believing in Satan is a gateway drug to not believing in God. Which, given how many times I’ve heard that atheists worship Satan by definition, kinda makes me think they aren’t reading the same playbook.

But you might have noticed the ellipsis at the beginning of that quote. Yup, I cut off something important, just a few words, but the devil (heh) is in the details, as always. See, the beginning of that sentence goes “The Pope’s exorcism is a splendid sign because…” Amorth is making the claim that the pope actually performed an exorcism (there is a video of the encounter at the link). Francis was giving blessings after a pentecost mass, and can be seen laying hands on the head of a boy in a wheelchair.

So…. kid in a wheelchair. Obviously time for prayer. Cos A) the kid might be possessed, rather than, say, suffer from epilepsy, or B) even if that’s not the case, his condition is likely a punishment from God for some sinful nature. Either way, the kid needs prayer. And yes, epilepsy and demonic possession go hand in hand. Here, from the point of view of someone with epilepsy… and here, from a slightly different perspective.

But the problem is not ignorance among priests, eager to have a practical purpose in life–no, the problem is too many possessed people. Not medical conditions, not stigmatization, not misunderstanding, not marginalization, not some mundane problem like that, that people need to do the work of fixing… no, it’s 2013–clearly the cause is demons in your soul. Priests need the proper education! Not in science, medicine, skepticism, and inclusiveness, but in casting out demons.

What could go wrong?

Bye Bye, Bachmann

She fought for our dear Constitution
Though on further inspection, we find
That Michele’s Bill of Rights
That’s for which she led fights,
Was a fantasy version that’s all in her mind

She would lecture her listeners on history
And a few finer points of the law
But her facts were all fictions
And odd contradictions
Reflecting a vision that only she saw

With muskets and pitchforks and torches
You could see she appealed to her base
She protected our right
To a more wasteful light
A conservative stance, when Michele made the case

Oh, Congress was clearly the problem
Or it was, when Michele came to call
She did her bit ending
Big government spending
By passing no new legislation at all

And now, as she rides to the sunset,
With her brief fifteen minutes long spent
Her history speaks
Of the strangest of streaks…
And we’ll all disagree about what Michele meant

I’m a bit late to this one–Ed and PZ have already noted that Michele Bachmann will not run for re-election. What’s utterly bizarre, though, is the analysis and commentary on what will be her legacy. For instance, NPR’s story (subtitled “A Trailblazer, For Better And For Worse“), seems remarkably free of anything really positive. It’s as if Bachmann is famous for being famous, not for any accomplishment. But (of course) that does not stop the handful of right-wing commenters that now call npr.org their territory from trolling the comment section singing her praises.

I don’t have any idea what her place in history will be. What I’m hoping is that this post marks the last time I will ever type her name.

Stephen King On God

“You’re missing the sunrises, sunsets, and stars;
You’re missing the crops, and the bees.”
You’re missing the point, Stephen King, if you think
That we’re missing the moments like these
The natural world is a beautiful place
And I find it a little bit odd
That the thing that you see when you look at the world
Is the thing you can’t see at all—God.

“I choose to believe, because everything works
In a way that suggests it’s designed.”
But the thing is that science knows better than this;
The suggestion is all in your mind.
Once the gods moved the heavens, the moon and the stars
And to some, maybe that’s how it looks
It’s fun to pretend that such forces exist
But life isn’t one of your books

“God’s plan is peculiar; there’s stuff that seems strange;
And you know, I’m beginning to doubt.”
Keep thinking; keep doubting; keep reading; keep on,
And you’ll probably figure it out.
There’s much that we know; there’s much you can read
(Though most of it isn’t in rhyme)
And maybe… a sunrise, a sunset, a star,
You could see for the very first time.

The quotes aren’t exact, but they’re actually pretty close. Stephen King has yet another book out, and NPR has an interview with him. At one point, they discussed his belief in god:

“I choose to believe it. … I mean, there’s no downside to that. If you say, ‘Well, OK, I don’t believe in God. There’s no evidence of God,’ then you’re missing the stars in the sky and you’re missing the sunrises and sunsets and you’re missing the fact that bees pollinate all these crops and keep us alive and the way that everything seems to work together. Everything is sort of built in a way that to me suggests intelligent design. But, at the same time, there’s a lot of things in life where you say to yourself, ‘Well, if this is God’s plan, it’s very peculiar,’ and you have to wonder about that guy’s personality — the big guy’s personality. And the thing is — I may have told you last time that I believe in God — what I’m saying now is I choose to believe in God, but I have serious doubts and I refuse to be pinned down to something that I said 10 or 12 years ago. I’m totally inconsistent.”

Intelligent design seems to make more sense to those whose job is designing. Engineers are more likely to be ID proponents than biologists, for instance. I suppose it only makes sense that a man who creates fictitious worlds might be prepared to believe that our own world has likewise been created.

Battle Of The Prayers In Arizona Legislature

“I will not ask you bow your head
But look around the room instead”
The state rep, Johnny Mendez said,
In giving invocation.
“This is a time for us to share
With people here, and everywhere,
The fact that we’re alive, aware—
This is our dedication.”

His words, of course, were not a prayer;
He doesn’t think a god is there,
To answer, hear, or even care,
But people do exist.
It was his choice; it was his right,
But one man didn’t see it, quite—
He took it as a sinful slight
Steve Smith was truly pissed.

And this is where it should have ended;
Sometimes, Smith, one gets offended.
Church and state must not be blended
You’ve bowed your head too long.
But Christian privilege has its way
So Smith took time the very next day
To say the things he had to say—
That Mendez had it wrong.

“When given time to pray to God,
Don’t stain this room with mere façade—
A godless prayer? That’s more than odd;
This chamber must repent!
I’ll say one prayer, then one prayer more
And all must join me, I implore!
Give God his due! We must restore
Each godless minute spent!

Some thirty people—half the house—
Then prayed with Smith, the lordly louse,
Though many there do not espouse
The Christian point of view.
But Smith believes the right is his
And though he’d fail a civics quiz
I must admit, it seems it is
The Christian thing to do.

Ed reported on the initial atheist invocation delivered by Juan “Johnny” Mendez, calling it “pitch perfect”. But it seems there’s no accounting for taste; Mendez’s fellow legislator Steve Smith didn’t like Mendez’s tune, and what’s more, took offense on behalf of God, who declined to give His own opinion.

Smith then offered not one but two prayers–an invocation, and then a prayer of “repentance of yesterday” [the day of the godless invocation], and urged representatives to pray with him. About half did. Some of the others, though, were not shy to denounce the second prayer (why not the first?) as inappropriate. Representative Jamescita Peshlakai, a traditional Navajo, reminded Smith that she herself is “not Christianized”, and that his god is no more powerful than hers. She has been respectfully participating in house prayers, despite the fact that they did not represent her beliefs. I wonder if that will continue. (I suspect that it will, though I hope it will not.)

I wonder if rep. Peshlakai took any offense at Mendez’s invocation. I would have thought it was something pretty much everyone could agree with.

Guess I was wrong.

[]ough

We ought, I thought (and thought I knew),
With some diseases, be all through—
There’s no excuse, I used to scoff,
To deal today with Whooping Cough.
We’ve got vaccines! And people know
It doesn’t cost a lot of dough
Compare the cost to other stuff
And really, now, it isn’t tough
To gain the health vaccines allow,
To run a shop, or push a plough…
Let’s hope vaccines again will pick-up,
And these few cases are just a hiccough.

Actually, I had a student who had had whooping cough. No excuse for it; it’s vaccine preventable, and it’s just horrible. In a classroom of students at the height of the vaccine paranoia (thanks, Wakefield), this student was a staunch advocate of vaccines. It is only a culture that is too unfamiliar with disease that has the luxury of vaccine denial.

Anyway, I also want to give a plug for my pal Kylie, who emailed me the following:

The documentary Jabbed: Love, Fear and Vaccines <http://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/decoding_immortality_and_jabbed_love_fear_and_vaccines>  will be airing this Sunday on Australia’s SBS and I’ll be live-blogging it for overseas interested people (I think it will be online for all eventually). In the documentary, Sonya Pemberton interviewed people world-wide on what she has said is the “conversation, not debate, we need to have”.

The new Token Skeptic podcast is a live-radio show I did with Assoc. Professor Peter Richmond, from the Vaccines Trial Group here in Perth <http://tokenskeptic.org/2013/05/25/episode-one-hundred-and-sixty-one-on-vaccinations-interview-with-associate-professor-peter-richmond/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter>  on what people can do to get the facts and even help contribute to the Meningococcal B vaccine, by taking part in trials.

More information on the Token Skeptic blog at On Vaccinations – Australia Continues To Take A Stand For Health – Token Skeptic Podcast <http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tokenskeptic/2013/05/on-vaccinations-australia-continues-to-take-a-stand-for-health-token-skeptic-podcast/> .

Call Me Crazy, But…

It’s difficult, looking for just the right word,
So it’s tempting to get a bit lazy;
And critics of someone’s behavior might claim
The behavior they’re seeing is crazy.

Unless there is reason (most often, there’s not)
To suspect that the cause is insanity,
You’re dissing the mentally ill with your slight,
But the group that’s at fault is humanity

Now, why should I bother? It’s only a word—
No reason to make such a fuss—
But it matters, which people you label as them
And which ones you label as us.

Hey, maybe I’m over-reacting a bit;
Your intentions were perfectly nice
And maybe you think there’s no need to complain…
But maybe you need to think twice.

And no, I’m not telling you what prompted this.

Poisoned Baits Drive Cockroach Evolution

Evolution is cleverer than you are. Orgel’s Second Rule

A little bit of tempting treat
That smells and tastes so glucose-sweet
Is what a cockroach loves to eat
And so it will, perhaps.
But human beings, as of late,
Present the bugs a different fate
By sweetening the poisoned bait
They’re using in their traps

Appetitive behavior means
There’s coding somewhere in the genes
That link sensilla (small machines
For chemical detection)
With action—bugs approach or flee
If foods are sweet or bitter, see?
Our mixing poison now is key:
A pressure for selection!

But insect populations vary;
Roaches may or may not carry
Genes that make them glucose-wary,
Acting on their brains
If, in our anti-cockroach war
We use these sweetened poisons more,
Such genes will be selected for
Creating different strains

And so, although the people’s goal
Was ultimately pest control
It seems that nature found a hole
And made its own solution
The roaches that we tried to kill
By poisoning their sweetened swill
Outsmarted us—and always will,
Cos such is evolution!

In Science, just out today (yes, I am just that good), a story on rapid evolution of behavioral aversion to glucose in cockroaches, as a response to a strong selection pressure of sweetened poison baits. Behaviorally, these roaches are now avoiding foods with glucose. Physiologically, their gustatory response neurons have changed–sugar-GRN and bitter-GRN respond differentially to glucose and to caffeine in wild-type cockroaches, but in roach population with a history of exposure to sweetened poison baits, glucose stimulates the bitter-GRN response.

Mind you, selection takes place at the level of behavior, so this may or may not be the only proximal mechanism behind the change in behavior. Any change that selectively gets roaches to avoid poisoned baits will be strongly selected for.

We’ve seen this before–our best efforts to eliminate a pest are seen by evolution as just another selection pressure among many. And in the long run, we see time and time again… evolution is cleverer than we are.

And isn’t it beautiful?