I just received the Action Alert below from the Secular Coalition for America.  I doubt they would mind me reproducing it here – it brings this important plea to a wider audience.

Last week, the House of Representatives included $100 million for the Compassion Capital Fund in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, also known as the economic stimulus package. The Compassion Capital Fund was a key component of George W. Bush’s controversial faith-based funding program and has been singled out by watchdog groups for its inability to ensure that religious groups receiving tax dollars are not breaching the constitutional separation of church and state.

On Monday, the Senate is expected to begin voting on the passage of the economic stimulus package; their version currently does not contain money for this faith-based initiative and it’s important you make sure it stays that way.

Take action now!

The Religious Right is lobbying hard for this back door funding, and it’s time for us to fight back. It is imperative that you send a strong message to your Senators today asking them to take a stand now and in the future against funding a highly criticized program that violates the separation of church and state.

Take action now!

Best wishes,
Secular Coalition for America

I try not to make purely political statements, which is why I will not list all the problems Bush has given us.  There is one thing, though, that has been damaging to people of all faiths and those who have none.  It is absolutely an issue at the heart of all religious and nonreligious rights (I wish I didn’t have to make it so clear that it include us too, but that’s another post): bringing religion into government, where it doesn’t belong.

Does this mean religious people have no place in government?  Clearly, it does not.  Does it mean religious citizens have no right to petition the government based on their beliefs?  Of course not; the Constitution gives us all the same rights, including those with life philosophies that are not by nature religious.  We all have the right to freedom of conscience, and to lobby the government based on what we find important.

Bush went too far, violating the clear intent of the founding fathers¹.  By creating the Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives², an office specifically dedicated to predominantly religious organizations, he smashed Jefferson’s “wall of separation between Church & State.”  The office gave taxpayer money to religious organizations without any real attempt to ensure that this money would be used for charity and community programs only, and not used for religious purposes such as proselytizing.
Read the rest of this entry »

I am driven to write these posts by the common criticisms against our movement.  I will focus specifically on two:

1. Atheists do not experience major prejudice and discrimination in the United States.
2. Although atheists may experience some measure of prejudice and discrimination, it is not as extreme or openly codified into our government and culture, as it was against blacks, and therefore we have no right to call their fight a “civil rights movement” (a mostly emotional argument made by many African Americans, especially those who experienced the civil rights movement first hand).

The first argument, which this first of two posts is concerned with, has no truth whatsoever.  It is simply an attempt to whitewash the entire issue.  There have, throughout American history, and are still today many examples of discrimination, and most certainly bigotry against atheists.  Although it is not my purpose in this post to give a ton of examples (that’s this entire blog’s mission, isn’t it?), only one is needed to show that claim is patently false – that there is, in fact discrimination against the nonreligious codified into government.  Many states still technically require a religious test for public office, which is blatantly unconstitutional.  They don’t require any specific religious beliefs, only that one asserts a belief in some supernatural deity.  This clearly singles out only the nonreligious, barring them from state public office¹.  These states are:
Read the rest of this entry »

Jason Leopold from The Public Record thinks so.  The basis of Leopold’s argument is the fact that Obama has decided to have Robert Gates stay on as Secretary of Defense.  He explains exactly why this is a threat to nonreligious service members.

Despite being named in several lawsuits filed against the Pentagon for allowing military chaplains to proselytize to soldiers fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the numerous letters he has received  from civil rights organizations and government watchdog groups since he was tapped as Defense Secretary two years ago, letters demanding that he launch investigations into widespread proselytizing, Gates has failed  to issue a response of any kind to these groups and has refused to take steps to address the matter. Meanwhile, soldiers continue to have fundamentalist Christianity shoved down their throats.

Secretary gates has given no indication that he will do anything about the clear systematic First Amendment violations.  As far as our rights are concerned, I don’t see the “change” that President-elect Obama continues to trump.  Obama is a Constitutional scholar; I’m sure he understands the First Amendment and that it protects all of us, not just the religious.  Furthermore, this is not simply a violation of nonreligious service members’ rights,  but a violation of the rights of all service members: Christian, Jew, Hindu, Muslim, atheist, etc.  No one should have to be a captive audience to religious proselytizing.

This is still a democracy (although the previous administration would make you think otherwise).  All is not lost.  Make sure Obama is aware of the bigotry and proselytizing in the armed forces.  Let him know that business as usual will not be acceptable.   Especially if you are in the military and have experienced this firsthand, definitely let Obama know your story.

change.gov

Don’t forget to read the rest of the article I quoted.  There is important background information.