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.

This video is going around the atheist blogosphere, and it’s so good I have to jump on the bandwagon.  Enjoy:

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.

A message sent to members of the Secular Coalition for America email list:

June 1, 2009

A Message from President Herb Silverman

[...]

Last Thursday, the nontheist movement achieved a new milestone when the Secular Coalition for America had its first individual meeting with White House officials. The Secular Coalition has met with White House officials before, but Thursday’s meeting was unique. It was not a coalition meeting with other organizations, but a special meeting between White House staff and representatives of the Secular Coalition. We had the opportunity to tell the White House who you are, what your policy interests are, and what concerns you.

We have made clear to White House officials that our coalition of nine national nontheistic organizations represents a full spectrum of nontheists. As the broadest, most diverse advocacy group for nontheists in Washington, D.C., we have the credibility to explain our political and cultural interests to our nation’s leaders and provide them with a window into what nontheists across America are thinking and doing in their communities. More importantly we are becoming an influential and increasingly organized constituency, and elected officials want to take our concerns into account.

The goal of the Secular Coalition has always been to increase the visibility of and respect for nontheists in America. Thursday’s meeting was one small step for the Secular Coalition, but an even more significant leap for nontheists everywhere.

My deepest thanks for all you do to support the work of the Secular Coalition for America,

Herb Silverman

President & Founder
Secular Coalition for America

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 »

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 »

I have to post this because it made me laugh.  I was going through the logs and saw this gem.  Someone got here through a Google search of the term “aethists are ignorant.”  I don’t know what an “aethist” is, but if they are ignorant I’m glad not to be one!  To be fair, atheist can be a tricky word to spell.  You rarely see an “i” after an “e” when not after c or making the sound “ay” (I’m sure you remember the old rhyme we all learned in elementary school, “i before e, except after c….”).  This is just not even trying or caring.  Even then, I could see accidentally putting the “e” before the “th” if typing fast.  Pointing out the irony, though, of such a misspelling in a search term decrying atheists as ignorant is too good to pass up.

Hemant Mehta pointed me to an article from The Dallas Morning News, “Dallas-area atheists discuss their outlook, relationships.”  It discusses the lives of atheists in the area, their growing socialization with each other, and socialization with their fellow citizens who are religious.  There is a lot that is interesting in the article, but I will focus on the example of discrimination – this is Secular Discrimination Report after all.

From the article:

Clark Vinson, a Baptist-turned-atheist who grew up in Irving, said he believes he has been discriminated against in the Bible Belt because of his lack of religion.

“I was on the verge of sealing a contract for $105,000 a year for a school district in the area for counseling services,” said Vinson, who was a therapist at the time. “I lost the contract suddenly.”

He said a friend who worked for the district told him a school official was disturbed after seeing a Darwin fish on his car.

This type of discrimination is exactly what atheists and others who lack religion or religious supernatural belief deal with throughout the United States, from the East to the West to the North to the South.  The dominance of religion and expectation that everyone at least believes in some deity leads to some level of innate distrust of the nonreligious in even the most liberal of areas. We don’t always see examples such as this because it is avoided by atheists hiding or at the least not being open about our lack of faith.  If not, discrimination such as this would happen much too often.  If we look at history, as the nonreligious civil right movement is growing and there are more open atheists, we are already and will undoubtedly see more of this in the future.
Read the rest of this entry »