Is Home Schooling a Form of Child Abuse?

When does freedom of religion turn into child abuse? When do parents' rights to raise a child according to their religious beliefs become a violation of the child's civil rights? When does the state's need to have an educated electorate override religious parents' belief in ignorance?

Atheists love to blog about child abuse when it's in the form of medical neglect that becomes manslaughter and Jesus-inspired whippings that kill children. These are horrible and deserve our condemnation.

But there's a much more insidious, widespread and far-reaching form of abuse going on across America: religion-fueled, anti-science, anti-homosexual, anti-truth home schooling. It's far more important than any one whipping or medical-abuse case, however horrifying, because the ignorance fostered by these home-school programs is the very foundation that allows whippings and faith-based medical neglect to continue.

Home schooling is an old tradition in America. In some cases

Mix Government and Religion, Women Lose

There's a great article in the New York Times that once again illustrates why government and religion should never mix.

In Pakistan, anyone who advocates equal rights for women can be, and often is, accused of blasphemy. And that, my friends, is a capital crime! Gloria Steinem, watch out! You'd get the death penalty if you tried your feminism stuff in Pakistan!

Women's rights are almost nonexistent in this religion-dominated country, just as they were in America and Europe when religion was in charge. But Pakistan seems to be even worse: a woman who is raped can't go to the police because she'll be accused and convicted of infidelity.

In most countries, civil rights violations spawn citizen protests. India threw off British rule, Martin Luther King inspired America's Blacks to demand their civil rights,

Are Americans Any Better Than Terrorists?

The ultimate test of a civilized people is not how they act when things go well. It's easy to be kind, fair, charitable and forgiving when there's no war, the economy is strong, and the weather is great.

No, the real test of a civilized people is how they behave when the chips are down. Do they turn mean when attacked? Do they forget about forgiveness when someone they love is hurt? Are Constitutional rights forgotten when vengeance is needed?

The other day I saw this posted on a Facebook page. WARNING: This is graphic and shows a man dying.



The video itself is shocking enough. I don't care who it is, watching a man die should never be funny. Even our enemies are human beings, and at the least we should mourn the tragedy that made this man want to kill us.

But what's really disturbing are the comments, both on the YouTube page and on the Facebook page where I saw it. People think this video is funny. There are comments like, "Hahahaha" or "LOL!" or "He deserves it the f---er!".

Judge Backs Atheist Parolee who Refused God-Based Treatment

Here is some great news on the legal front for atheists. A judge in Northern California sided with an atheist who was forced, as part of his parole from prison, to attend the heavily religious Alcoholics Anonymous program. Barry Hazle kept complaining to his parole officer that he wanted a non-religious drug-rehab program, but the parole officer ignored his requests.

But Hazle was persistent, though consistently polite and non-confrontational. He continued to go to AA, but also continued to bug his parole officer. In frustration his parole officer finally arrested him and sent him back to prison for three more months.

The judge's ruling was perfect, saying the parole officer's behavior ran "afoul of the prohibition against the state's favoring religion in general over non-religion." Hazle is now suing the state for damages related to the extra three months of incarceration he had to server merely for being an atheist.

Let's All Wear "God Sucks" Buttons to Work

I have an idea – let's get a bunch of big, red "God Sucks" buttons, pin them on our chests, and go to work! If you work in a grocery store, or a bank, or at the welfare office, or maybe even as a Justice of the Peace ... no problem! I'm sure your employer won't fire you. Offend shoppers? Piss off welfare recipients? Horrify the couple you're marrying? It's your right!
Don't believe me? Just listen to this attorney about an identical case, defending her client:

"There are federal and state laws that protect against religious discrimination. It's not like he was out in the aisles preaching to people." – Kara Skorupa, attorney.

But you know, I have a pretty good feeling Skorupa wouldn't take my case if I got fired for wearing a "God Sucks" button. Like many conservative religious people, Skorupa and her client,Trevor Keezor, probably think the law should protect Christians (I'm guessing he's a Christian) who violate their employers' policies, but if an atheist or Muslim did the same thing, I'd be willing to bet they'd sing a different song.

Keezor was fired for violating Home Depot's dress code, which prohibits any and all buttons and badges, except those issued by Home Depot. He took the job knowing full well what was expected of him, and Home Depot's dress code is 100% legal under the US Constitution, yet he thinks that he should be exempt, just because, "I support my country and God."

This is another great example of a "proselyzation meme," a technique that religions have developed down through the centuries as they evolved and mutated in the "survival of the fittest" battle we call cultural evolution, or memetics. Cultural evolution treats ideas as evolutionary raw material, and uses Darwinistic principles to predict how they'll reproduces, mutate and evolve.

It's a lot like sex, in fact, it's exactly parallel. In biological systems, each creature has to have a way of making copies of itself in order to carry on. Whether it's a bacterium splitting, or two whales mating, we all gotta do it! Otherwise our species goes extinct.

And the cool thing about sex is that we like it, because all of our ancestors, every single one of them, liked sex too. If even one of them didn't, well, we'd have never been born.

Religions are like that too. Any religion that doesn't have a way to spread itself, both across society and down through time, will quickly become extinct. More importantly, the religions that have the strongest proselytizing efforts (i.e. the memes that tell members to "spread God's word") are the ones that steal members from other churches and thereby gain memberships.

With sex, the ones who like it the most are the ones who have the most babies, and generation after generation, their descendants will inexorably grow at the expense of those who like sex less.

It's identical with churches. The ones with the strongest proselytizing memes are the ones that grow. Think about the Mormons, for example: They're the fastest growing church around. When was the last time a Catholic knocked on your door? The Catholic church is losing ground as a percentage of our population, and most other Christian churches are shrinking even faster than the Catholic Church.

So it's no surprise that most religions have a strong meme that says their members should actively spread God's word. And Mr. Keezor was just helping his Church with the memetic version of sex: spreading the memes, helping them reproduce, making sure that his particular branch of religion will survive in the endless Darwinian struggle of my-God-versus-yours.

Amish Civil Disobedience Leads to Drugs, Polygamy and Murder?

When does religion exempt you from secular law? The Amish apparently think they're exempt from building codes:

Attorneys acting on behalf of the Amish argue they have a constitutional right to religious freedom. They don't have to conform to building regulations that require them to use architectural drawings, smoke detectors, quality-graded lumber and inspections, Steve Ballan, an assistant public defender assigned to the Amish in Morristown wrote in court documents. "They should be allowed to practice their religion and their religious traditions without interference from the government," he said in an interview.

On the one hand, I do empathize somewhat with the Amish – I think their beliefs are misguided, but they're sincere and honest, and I respect that.

But where does it end? If you make this exception, how can you refuse the next group of religious fanatics?

• Should we allow hallucinogens for anyone who claims them as part of their religion?
• Should parents be allowed to withhold lifesaving medical treatment for their young children?
• Should we allow polygamy?
• Should we allow 60 year old men to "marry" 12 year old girls?
• Should we allow human sacrifice?
• Should we allow mass suicide?

It's the classic "slippery slope." Once you decide that the Amish are exempt from the rule of law, you can't make any rational argument to ban any of the other activities in the list above. And these aren't hypothetical, as we all know!

We're either a nation of laws, or we're not.

Tags: amish law rights building-codes christian atheist atheism

I'm an Athiest, So Help Me God

America's Courts have a fundamental flaw that virtually guarantees bias against Atheists.

Not long ago, I was swindled by a thief who was selling stuff and not delivering. My wife is quite the internet sleuth, and managed to track the guy down, and we hauled his ass into Small Claims Court.

When you get to the courtroom, the first thing the bailiff does is to ask all the parties to sit down and see if they can reach an agreement without the judge. A lot of times people know they're in the wrong and will settle rather than face the judge. In our case, it was instantly apparent that our opponent was a total snake, one of those guys who lies even when there's no reason to. He said things to me that he knew were false, and I knew were false, and that he knew that I knew were false! And he did it with a straight face.

The worst-case scenario for a judge is when there is no concrete evidence – no contract, no receipt, no emails, just a handshake, and the two parties with the opposite version of what that handshake meant. Plainly one or the other is lying, but which one? The judge has to simply guess, based on intuition, reputation, looks, and whether one of the parties' story has the "ring of truth." I didn't envy the judge.

As I watched the judge settle a couple of cases, my hopes rose. He was pretty good. He found sensible compromises, he spotted holes on peoples' stories, and he seemed to have a good sense of fairness and justice. But when my turn came, I suddenly realized I had a big problem.

The bailiff called our case. We walked forward, and the judge said, "Raise your right hands. Do you swear that the evidence you are going to present this Court is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" I was like a deer caught in the headlights. In an instant, a hundred stories and statistics were spinning through my head. Atheists are America's least-trusted group according to many surveys. Atheists don't deserve the rights of citizenship according to President Bush (the elder). Separation of Church and State was invented by the Devil according to Rev. Jerry Falwell and his flock.

Unfortunately, I have this flaw that may kill me some day: I'm honest. "Your honor, I'm an Atheist." This pretty much stopped everything. The Court's clerk, who had been chatting quietly with the bailiff, stopped mid-sentence and looked up. Various other plaintiffs and defendants, who had been reading, whispering amongst themselves, or dozing, were suddenly paying attention. Even the judge's normal composed, scholarly demeanor was momentarily lost.

The defendant, my lying opponent, quickly jumped in, and in a very loud voice, said, "I swear, so help me God." The Judge regained his composure, and turned to me. "Do you swear that the evidence you are going to present this Court is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" And he sort of stopped with an awkward pause, the sentence seemingly incomplete. I could only fill in the silence with a firm, "I do."

I lost the case. The liar lied to the judge, and I told the truth, and the liar got away with my money. Was it because I'm an Atheist? I'll never know. I believe that the Judge, a man who has dedicated his life to the study of law, and to the principles of fairness and justice, was able to put aside his prejudices. I believe that his decision was wrong simply because my opponent was such a good liar. But ... sometimes I wonder.

And I also wonder why, over two hundred years after this country established a wall of separation between church and state, a citizen who happens to be an atheist has to be "outed," to declare his/her religious beliefs, before being heard by the Court.