It has been many months since the last update of Secular Discrimination Report.  I have had to focus on other things in my life and SDR fell by the wayside.  Most recently, I was going through New Jersey Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) school and riding as a first aider on my local first aid squad.  EMT school is now finished and I am soon taking the test for state certification.  The end of class leaves me more time for other things, such as this.  Bigotry and discrimination against the nonreligious certainly has not gone away, and I have continued to monitor it as best I can.

To tell you the truth, it’s getting harder to deal with the horrible things said about us, though.  This is especially true as the attacks against us have been growing steadily in the past few years.  It’s frankly infuriating, but I will do my best to continue to monitor religious bigotry, especially against the nonreligious, and present it to you.  There is a bright side: the bigots are more vocal against us because we are being more vocal.  That is bound to happen.  Many nonreligious are no longer scared to speak out, nor are we scared to simply acknowledge that we exist.  In that sense, we are continuing to gain ground.

To those of you who have written to me during this absence, I have not ignored you.  Expect responses soon.

Now on to the promised links:

Christian Bus Ads Fire Back (KCCI.com)

Christian ministry “Covenant of Love” is has their own pro-Christian ads on buses on Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority buses this month.  It is reportedly in response to the recent atheist ads that have been on buses throughout the country.  From what I have seen, the article title seems misleading.  The ads don’t appear confrontational in any way; I would hardly say that they “fire back.”  They simply express their own positive view of Christianity, and that’s a great thing.  This is what we need, dialogue, which we have been essentially excluded from for too long.  We get our say and the religious get theirs.  Religious ads have existed since long before the atheist ads, though.  One could argue the religious already more than had their chance, and in fact dominated the discussion.  This is more confirmation that we are making headway.  We are a threat.  Despite the long history of unopposed religiosity, they feel that they need to respond to us.

Atheist group takes message to Lakeland via billboard (Tampa Bay Online – TBO.com)

Talking about ads, another atheist group has put up a billboard, this time by the Atheists of Florida.  As with the rest, there is nothing offensive unless one chooses to be offended.  It’s a message to other like-minded people that they are not alone, just as with other billboards that have gone up: “Don’t Believe in God?  You are not alone.”

Of course, the website’s comments display the same bigotry and irrational thought we have come to expect from bigots whenever atheists dare even display that we exist.  For example:

Posted by ( zgolf1 ) on 11/02/2009 at 01:53 pm.

I think that the people behind this billboard should stand on a street corner in Polk county and spread their word directly to the people. I am fairly certain that before the day was out that their beliefs would change once that were loaded onto bayflight.

Threatening members of the Atheists of Florida with physical violence because they state that atheists exist?  That’s not very Christian.

Amanda Donaldson is no longer an employee of Dr. Scott Dawson at El Dorado Chiropractic in McKinney, Texas.  She claims that she was fired because Dawson found out that she is an atheist.  To add insult to injury, the firing came shortly after she returned to work from cancer surgery.  Although it’s hard to prove exactly why someone was fired – the employer can always lie – based on Dawson’s comments it seems clear that his religious bigotry was the reason for the firing.

Religious discrimination in the workplace is wrong and illegal, whether it is due to the employee having a different religion or no religion at all.  Unfortunately, as I have often reported on, many fervently religious people don’t understand that these rights extend to atheists also, and see nothing wrong with discriminating against them in the workplace or elsewhere.

The Good Atheist has more details and commentary on this story.  Austin Cline at About.com does also, and quotes an interview with Ms. Donaldson from the Dallas Atheism Examiner.

If you’re going to criticize atheism, keep secularism out of it.

Bigots have a problem with reality: they tend to not care so much about facts or even understanding the basics of the terminology they use in their attacks on those they hate.  An example that I see regularly in my surveillance of anti-atheist bigots is that they don’t know or don’t care about the difference between secularism and atheism.  This is not to say that definitions of secularism that include rejection of religious beliefs are wrong, many dictionary examples give such a definition as the first option, but dictionary definitions, although used by people who don’t know how to participate in good debate, are by no means evidence of what a word means in common practice.  In most cases a more correct definition is:

the view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted without the introduction of a religious element.¹

Secularism is religion being kept out of/not being an issue in government and culture where it is not needed.  It is keeping religion out of things it has nothing to do with.  Secularism is an integral part of American culture and government.  People of all faiths and none enjoy the benefits of secular society.  It is not by nature anti-religion (a secular society says nothing about whether religion is “good” or “bad”), and it is definitely not atheist (it does not assert the existence or nonexistence of any deity or supernaturalism of any kind).

Many Americans, including those with religious affiliation, appreciate secularism in this form and understand why it is important.  Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU), a group at the forefront of protecting our constitutionally mandated secular government, is led by Barry W. Lynn, an ordained reverent in the United Church of Christ.  Clearly secularism, especially as it pertains to Church/State separation, is not something promoted only by atheists; it is promoted by Americans from all walks of life.

Here’s a hint for the critics, if you are going to criticize or bash something at least do it right.  If you are going to criticize secularism then criticize secularism, don’t say you are talking about secularism and then go into a diatribe bashing atheists. If you want to justify your hate for atheists then that’s fine too, but be honest about it.  Don’t invoke the concept of secularism as if it has anything to do with atheism.  Don’t try to push your religion onto the rest of society by invoking the irrelevant boogieman of atheism. That just makes you sound silly to the religious and nonreligious who enjoy secular society together.

Jessica Ice, president of “Individuals for Freethought,” responded (”Free thinkers speak out: We need no dogma“) yesterday in the K-State Collegian to Levi Russell’s article (”Freethought group contradicts own principles“).  In his article, Mr. Russell attempts (badly) to contradict the tenants of freethought, including an implied criticism of the right of the group to exist.  Criticizing the freethought movement, even if the criticisms are false, is at least acceptable discourse.  When criticizing the group’s existence in a free marketplace of ideas, that crosses over into bigotry.  Would Mr. Russell write an article criticizing a different religious faith’s student group’s premise as “hopelessly illogical?”  This is doubtful, because unlike the religious in the United States, bigotry against atheists is still tacitly accepted and in some cases openly encouraged.  Rightfully, Ms. Ice doesn’t let him get away with this:

To say the premise of a freethinking group is “hopelessly illogical” is to undermine its importance in a democratic state, especially on a campus that has more than 30 religious groups. Individuals for Freethought is the only organized voice for non-theists on the K-State campus. I think students should value diversity and acceptance of new ideas that question dogma, and do not harm others. We should not have to live in fear of losing our free speech as we saw with the desecration of our chalking.

I’ve been a part of the nonreligious movement for a long time, and I have never seen anyone in our movement criticize a group in which like-minded theists congregate in such a way.  We criticize the beliefs and ideas, as the writer of the attack article can do with our views, but he goes too far, attacking the group for supposedly contradicting its own principals, principals of which Mr. Russell clearly doesn’t even understand.  We would never tell others that they are illogical for forming a group based around shared viewpoints.  That is an important part of an open society.

Ms. Ice’s continued response shows exactly why the article is bunk, and explains why we have every right to be open about our ideas, and will no longer be silence by religious bigots.  As is to be expected in such articles, Mr. Russell’s contains the same tired, flawed, and downright ridiculous arguments that tend to be so logically inconsistent as to need no opposition.

It is true that calling arguments “tired” can be a fallacy.  Theists use that argument against atheist’s arguments all the time.  The difference is that the arguments they target are repeated because they are supported by the facts.  Mr. Russell’s arguments are not just patently false, but ridiculous altogether.  They show themselves to be untrue on their face.  These are the type of arguments that I – even when I was a believer – would have been embarrassed to see another believer use.  Now, as a nonbeliever, I see it as another example of the fact that we are ultimately on our way to winning both the culture war, and winning our right to exist as opposition to the prevalent unsubstantiated superstitious beliefs.
Read the rest of this entry »

I write a lot here about the troubles the nonreligious have in American and Canada mostly, but sometimes it’s important to remember that compared to many places we have it easy.  We can expect reasonable protection under the law, and that our lives will not be in imminent danger simply for our lack of religion or religious beliefs.  Others, especially in Muslim majority countries, are not so lucky.

I recently received an email from an atheist writer in Sudan who claims to be in fear of imminent death for being open about his atheism.  He told me that his situation was so dire that to save his life he was looking to get out of the country as soon as possible.  Unfortunately, I couldn’t help in that respect.  I haven’t heard from him since, but I hope everything worked out well.  He did give me permission to publish the email he sent me to get the word out about the dangers to atheists in Sudan.  Due to language issues, it was not clear whether he wanted me to remove identifying details or not (he has been writing on atheism publicly), but to be safe I have edited out specific identifying information.

Dear Sir/Madam

I’m 31 years old Sudanese civil engineer, live in [removed] – Sudan.

My problem start years ago, but now it reached dangerous point, because my life is truly in danger.

I’m atheist, and I have nothing to hide, my family and my closed friends knowing that for years and accept it hardly as a fact. Since 2003 – my last year in collage – I start to write a wall newspaper in university a bout atheism and Islam, the news paper name is “[removed]” in Arabic.

Three years ago I start to write articles in several web sites, like [removed], [removed].

My articles almost are about atheism, Islam, Liberalism, the civil state and all of them in Arabic.

After I start writing in [removed] using my real name on 2007. Threats start by any communication tool you know, email, phone calls, sms and directly face to face.

For the first time I did not take those threats seriously, but now I have to.

On Dec. 2008 someone call me and tell me that I have to stop writing on [removed] or thy have to kill me because God is ordering them to kill any one left Islam. After that I wrote article about Hajj the most Muslim holy activity. The same person call me again and tell me this is my last chance, and give me accurate information about me and my family to impress me. I go to police and gave them the number of the phone, after two days I go back to the police station to know who is trying to terrorize me and thy tell me that my case is refused by the higher officer because it is nonsense, can you believe? Killing threat and nonsense?

On Jan 2009 I fired from my job because some on call the manager and tell him that I’m atheist and I did not pray. The manager ask me to pray with him one day in strange way, I refused then after two days fired me and tell me he is sorry but he have to fired me.

On 8 Mar 2009 the women day, after I comment in seminar talking about women rights and my opinion is the Islam constitution lies to women and the truth is women have no rights in Islam, I give my girl friend a ride to her home far from [removed], when I go back I followed by two cars, thy tried to stop me in empty place near [removed]. But I scabbed by miracle.

I live in terror, and I can’t continue my live here in Sudan, unless I hide my believes and live a life of someone else not me, witch it is not one of my choices even if it leading me to lost my life.

I need help to immigrate to any country in Europe or America or Australia. I wont only to be safe.

Thanks for reading my email

Best Regards

[removed]

[removed]

Kathleen M. Goodman and John A. Mueller published a great article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, “Atheist Students on Campus: From Misconceptions to Inclusion.”  The authors discuss the need for colleges to help atheist students break away from misconceptions about atheists and to have access to the same personal resources as religious students.  One of the best points they bring up supporting the need for such resources is that although atheism is not a religion, atheists are concerned with many of the same issues as religious students.

[...] many students who identify as atheist – or related designations, such as humanist or free thinker – are, in fact, quite thoughtful about their purpose, morals, and values.

In fact, as a marginalized group, atheists need these resources more than those in the religious majority.

Atheist students, however, tend to be cautious about whom they share their perspective with because they do not want to offend others or make them uncomfortable. Nor do they want to be put in the position of having to defend their worldview. To avoid being thought of as people with no morals or life purpose who are destined for hell, they choose to remain invisible.

Along with the general recommendation that colleges “create an environment that encourages atheist students to come forward and share their views,” the authors recommend five main actions:

• “Create a welcoming environment for atheist students.”
• “Include atheism in student programming.”
• “Ensure that atheists can, like other students, explore their inner development.”
• “Create safe spaces that are “atheist only” for student.”
• “Look to other institutions for best practices.”

There is a lot of great discussion about the marginalization of campus atheists, misconceptions about them, as well as more on actions colleges should take.  A lot of what is discussed is just as valid for American culture in general. The misconceptions and bigotry mirrors that in the outside world.  Unfortunately, it is likely that any institutionalized attempts at making atheists feel the least bit welcome on campus will be fought tooth and nail by those with an irrational hatred and fear of those who do not share their beliefs, or any belief – that is, if any colleges take their advice.

I almost forgot about Blog Against Theocracy!  This is the last day of it, so at least I noticed before it was too late.  From my earlier post announcing my participation:

“Blog Against Theocracy” is an event happening on blogs of those who understand the importance of defending our constitutionally required separation of church and state.  From April 10-12, look out for posts all over the blogosphere, including here on SDR, concerning varied issues relating to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.  This is not an atheist blogswarm, per se, but is open all who support Thomas Jefferson’s “wall of separation.”

The Establishment Clause: It Applies to the Nonreligious Too!

There is a bigoted and invalid criticism some religious bigots levy against the nonreligious.  It isn’t a criticism of the lack of religion or belief in a god, which is, true or false, a completely valid intellectual argument to make in good faith.  No idea is beyond criticism.   This specific claim is different; it is not in good faith.  Some claim that the nonreligious are not protected under the United States Constitution’s freedom of religion as religious citizens are!  This is so unbelievably disgusting I must repeat it: they claim that atheists and others with no religion do not have one of the most basic rights that our country was founded upon.

Read the rest of this entry »

Just when you think the anti-atheist bigots have blamed atheists for everything under the sun, they manage to outdo themselves.  Star Tribune columnist David Lebedoff is claiming that, get this, atheists are responsible for the economic downturn.  Here we see one of the numerous examples of bigots making claims against atheists that are so ridiculous they make themselves look foolish.  Sure, his commentary is a bigoted and hateful screed against a significant population of people of which I am a member, but it’s so ludicrous I can’t even bring myself to feel the least bit peeved about it.

As for the actual content, the article is based around the same basic tired old attack bigots always levy against the nonreligious: there is no other basis for morality than religious belief, and therefore those without religion are immoral, being able to do whatever they like without any conscience.  That’s news to me and the many others like me who have no religious faith, yet have quite a strong sense of right and wrong.

From the article:

If you only go around once, then the main thing is to have fun. If you start by admitting that from cradle to tomb it isn’t that long of a stay, then life is a cabaret, old chum, and so, by the way, is Wall Street. There is a bumper sticker favored by some of the recently rich that proclaims “he who dies with the most toys wins.” This is indeed the moral philosophy of those who believe that death is the final closing bell. Materialism, hedonism and Stairmasters are what people do until the clock stops ticking.

I’m not going to go through a whole debunking of this claim.  The entire history of the fields of ethical studies, philosophy, and reality show this claim to be untrue on its face – morality is not the exclusive domain of religion by any means.  To then take this argument and use it to claim we are therefore responsible for the economic collapse – without one shred of evidence to show that a large percentage of those in economic fields who are responsible are actually atheist – is ignorant, hateful, ridiculous, but also quite sad.
Read the rest of this entry »

TheChronicleHerald.ca is reporting that a recent Harris-Decima survey from The Canadian Press is showing that Canadians are “indifferent” to the atheist bus ads.  This is as opposed to the strong negative reactions to the ads in America and also Britain, which is more surprising than the American reaction considering that Britain is commonly considered much more secular.  There has been opposition from religious groups, such as the United Church of Canada, who have run their own counter bus ads.  There has not been outrage in the same way as in America and Britain, though.

From the article:

The poll found 32 per cent of respondents opposed the ads, 20 per cent supported them and 43 per cent didn’t care one way or the other.

Support for the ads was strongest among respondents in British Columbia and Ontario, with the highest opposition in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Support also varied by age and income, with younger respondents and those making more than $60,000 a year more likely to favour running the ads.

Some nonreligious activists might see this as a failure.  This is understandable; the more controversy they create the more visible they are and the further their message spreads.  I don’t see it this way.  From the beginning, organizers of the various bus ads have asserted that they are not meant to be insulting to the religious (although many do see  anything contrary to their beliefs as an insult), nor are they specifically geared towards creating controversy, although they certainly do want attention drawn to them so that people know they exist.  They ads were created mostly to let the nonreligious know they are not alone in a world dominated by the religious, and to let others know that we exist and we will demand our place in the public discourse, no matter how forcefully the bigots try to quiet our voices.
Read the rest of this entry »

It is almost a given in our society that kids should be raised with religion, because if they aren’t they will grow up to be juvenile delinquents, right? Wrong. Wronger than wrong. Not even wrong. The assumption is so bigoted and breathtakingly inane that it doesn’t deserve a debunking, but it gets one nonetheless in this volume, from nonbelievers of all stripes, who show how and why raising children without religion is not only a loving and ethical approach to parenthood, it is an honorable one.
– Michael Shermer

The preceding quote is from the forward to Dale McGowan’s Parenting Beyond Belief: On Raising Ethical, Caring Kids Without Religion, a collection of essays on raising children with a nonreligious, skeptical worldview.  Reasonable, honest atheists would never claim that raising a child with religious belief would by nature cause the child to grow up as a bad person (although some might argue that such belief can lead toward some unfortunate intellectual consequences), as no honest religious person would likewise claim about us.

The dishonest anti-atheist bigots, though, have no such scruples.  They ignore the fact that morals come from many sources, and that religion in practice has no historically valid claim to moral perfection.  That is, considering that the majority of people on our planet are religious to some degree, crime and acts that would be considered “immoral” by the religion’s own standards are still common by those who follow such faiths.  Clearly, being raised with religious belief does not in any way guarantee that one will be a “good person,” however that is defined.
Read the rest of this entry »