Double dose of dumbness

If anybody still doubts that the Christian right wing is filled with more than its share of haters, here are a couple of fresh examples:

Mike Huckabee, who ran for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and is likely to seek it again two years from now, says that support of gay marriage is akin to legalizing incest, polygamy and drug use. I could argue that comparing Mike Huckabee to a decent human being is like comparing monkey dung to New York strip steak, but I digress. I'm guessing that Huckabee is not a stupid man, though he hasn't gone out of his way to answer whether he believes the Earth is only a few thousand years old. So, I'm left with the explanation that Huckabee is deliberately acting like an idiot. Huckabee recently told The Perspective, a news magazine at the College of New Jersey, that the country shouldn’t try to accommodate every group’s interests. Then he offered this bit of genius: “That would be like saying, well, there’s lots of people who like to use drugs, so let’s go ahead and accommodate those who want to use drugs. There are some people who believe in incest, so we should accommodate them. There are people who believe in polygamy, should we accommodate them?” The big point that Huckabee misses here – no doubt on purpose – is that people choose to engage in incest, polygamy and drug-taking. But gay people are born gay. Anyone who doesn't believe that is clearly delusional, and there's really no point trying to argue with them. Stupid is stupid. And I don’t expect anything less from Huckabee, who once came out in favor of isolating AIDS sufferers from the rest of the population. Detention camps, anyone? When it comes to gay marriage, I don't think the terminology is really all that important. Don't want to call it marriage? Well then, how about just giving gay couples each and every right now enjoyed by heterosexual couples, with the provision that churches that aren’t interested in taking part won’t be forced to handle the weddings or civil union ceremonies, or whatever you want to call them. I'm still waiting for a good answer on why this shouldn’t happen, immediately.

•••

Just when I thought that Huckabee's remarks would be the dopiest thing I saw this week, a friend passed on to me an item from the Huffington Post about a statement made by Bryan Fischer, who is described as the “director of issues analysis” for the American Family Association. Fischer is saying that Muslims now living in the United States should be shipped back to Muslim lands, “where they can live in a culture that shares their values, a place where they can once again be at home, surrounded by people who cherish their deeply held ideals.“ Wowzers. This guy makes Huckabee sound like Desmond Tutu. Has Fischer somehow blocked from his mind that we are a nation of immigrants, made up of people who came here with different beliefs and cultures? Has he forgotten that we are a nation that prides itself on freedom of religion? But it gets worse. Fischer goes on to say that Muslims living here who have not yet become citizens should be automatically denied naturalization, and that our country can “use the money we would otherwise spend on their welfare, their education, their medical care and their incarceration to graciously assist them in returning to their countries of origin.“ Fischer does, however, make an exception. He says Muslims who accept Christianity and renounce their faith, Allah, Mohammed and the Koran could be welcomed as “good Christians“ and “true Americans.” If Fischer is an example of a good Christian and a true American, then I feel sorry for the Christian faith and America in general. Fortunately, that's not the case. I typically don't revel in others’ misfortune, but in this instance, it wouldn’t sadden me greatly if I learned that someone “graciously assisted” Fischer, a raging bigot, in falling down a long flight of stairs. And perhaps the American Indians should pick up on Fischer’s idea and boot out all the descendants of the violent immigrants who brought their strange religions with them and terrorized the Indians centuries ago. Granted, that’s a bit unwieldy. Let's start with a smaller plan, one that calls for Huckabee and Fischer to find another place to live. America would instantly become a better country.

Shooting the messenger

Is the pope beyond criticism? It's a question that bears asking after the virulent attacks by those associated with the Vatican against media and others who questioned the actions by the church and, particularly, Pope Benedict XVI in handling past incidents of child molestation by Catholic priests. Recent news reports might not provide the absolute "smoking gun" to show that Benedict was personally involved in a coverup of the sexual abuse cases, or at the very least of incompetence through inattention, but some of those guns seem very, very, very hot to the touch. The responses by those connected with the Vatican and Benedict paint a picture of some sort of anti-Catholic plot that really doesn't exist. And some of the statements defending them are ridiculous. On Tuesday, Italian Cardinal Giovanni Lajolo, an official of the Holy See, claimed Benedict and the church are targets of a hate campaign, and Spanish Cardinal Julian Herranz, leader of a Vatican discipline commission, says Benedict has become a target because of his opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage. The most unhinged remarks came from Benedict’s personal preacher, who likened criticism of the pope to the historic suffering of the Jewish people. All of these defenses seem to have the same goal: to launch a potentially chilling attack aimed at quieting those who would do no more than seek the truth in these cases while pointing out that the man holding the most powerful religious position in the world, during his years before assuming that post, might not have done all he could or, worse, deliberately looked the other way when rapes and other sex crimes were being committed against children. One would think that rank-and-file Catholics, as well as church leaders, would want answers. But very often, the response seems to be to blame those who raise the questions.

He is not here ...

Wishing a happy Easter to my Christian friends. May you have a blessed, glorious day.

Really, was this necessary?

Those who know me recognize that I'm not a religious person. In fact, I often point out the failures and hypocrisy of religious organizations. But it really rubbed me the wrong way when I read in Rob Owen’s “Tuned In” column in the Post-Gazette that WPXI television in Pittsburgh is booting from Channel 11 a Catholic Mass that has been broadcast on that station for decades on Sunday mornings. Owen reported that the program will be shifted to the over-the-air RTV channel and WPXI’s cable station, PCNC. But anyone who gets their television signals via a satellite dish won’t be able to see the Mass. The reason for the change, according to WPXI, is that it will allow the station to begin its Sunday morning newscast at 5:30 a.m. rather than 7 a.m., in order to directly compete with WTAE’s morning news program. Here was the explanation offered by WPXI program director Mark Barash: “We were feeling like there was an audience looking for news on Sunday mornings, and our viewers were kind of saying, ‘Where’s your newscast?’ and we didn’t have one.” Yes, Mr. Barash, you did have one. It started at 7 a.m. Does he really expect us to believe that the station was being inundated with calls from people saying, “Dammit, I got up at 5:30 a.m., and you people didn’t have a rehash of yesterday’s news and video from a couple of overnight car crashes!” I'm not buying it. I don't know this for a fact, but I'm willing to entertain the notion that ratings and money somehow enter into this equation. And the needs of shut-ins and others who faithfully watched the broadcasts of the Masses? Hmmm, maybe not so much.

How much fuzz is too much fuzz?

Some people are easily offended. I'm not one of the them, but I understand that some folks have different sensibilities than I. That said, I think it's a bit much that Lamar Advertising in Colorado Springs, Colo., has rejected proposed bus stop advertising posters for a production of the Tony-winning musical “Avenue Q” because a puppet was showing a bit too much, um, skin. That's right. Excessive puppet cleavage is the given reason why the posters cannot be used. Jeff Moore, a Lamar account executive, says his company takes a conservative approach in politically conservative Colorado Springs, which is home base for some conservative Christian groups, including Jim Dobson’s gay-hating Focus on the Family. I saw “Avenue Q” in Pittsburgh a few years back. It’s a highly entertaining show, but it is definitely not for those who are against swearing, gay people and sex in general. However, it boggles the mind to think that anyone could get the vapors over a puppet wearing a revealing dress. Remind me to cross Colorado Springs off my potential vacation spots.

The holy hotline

There's an old saying that a fool and his money are soon parted. Now, I'm not claiming that those who avail themselves of a new telephone service are fools, but they'll definitely be parting with some of their money. A group of businessmen has created what it calls the Bless Me Network, which it describes in a press release as a "service that allows people of the Christian faith to call a toll-free number and speak with members of the clergy. Just one catch. Once you call the toll-free number, if you want to actually talk with a priest or a preacher, you'll have to ante up $1.99 for the first minute and 99 cents for each additional minute. John Adams, the chief operating officer of the outfit, says the Bless Me Network provides "affordable faith-based counseling with a level of convenience and confidentiality that has never existed before.” The network says it will give more than 50 percent of its earnings to clergy, church, charity and humanitarian aid over the next five years. Anyone want to bet that it'll be 50.1 percent? And do they pocket all of the money after five years? I don't know. But here's the interesting part: the network expects those charitable donations to exceed $200 million dollars over the five-year period. So that suggests to me that their take will also be pretty close to $200 million. Not a bad little business venture. I suppose that if you're having some crisis of faith or other spiritual emergency at 4 a.m., this might be helpful. But if your problem is such that you need to call a man or woman of the cloth in the wee hours, it's probably pretty darned serious, and it might take quite a while to work it out. If we're talking a half hour, that's $30.70 on your next phone bill. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like there's a risk that some really troubled people who aren't the sharpest tools in the shed might get taken advantage of. And there are plenty of people who can talk with folks about these kinds of spiritual and personal problems. They're the ministers and priests who live right here in our own communities. I'm not a religious person, but I know several pastors in our area who would be very helpful to talk with if I needed their input, and they wouldn't send me a bill. And I'm sure there are many more very caring, effective members of the clergy with whom I am not personally acquainted. I do want to thank the Bless Me Network for indirectly leading me to a business idea. While doing a little research before posting this item, I ran across a Wikipedia entry on religion in the United States. It cited a study that found the number of people in this country claiming no religious identification (atheists, agnostics, humanists, deists, etc.) rose from an estimated 14.3 million in 1990 to 34.2 million in 2008, which translates to a jump from 8 percent of the population in 1990 to 15 percent in 2008. So, coming soon to a phone near you: "Talk to a Heathen." I'm telling you, it's catching on.

Haven't the Haitians suffered enough?

To his credit, actor John Travolta used his own Boeing 707 jetliner to take relief supplies and doctors to earthquake-ravaged Haiti. Unfortunately, he also "gifted" the Haitian people with "ministers" from the Church of Scientology. If those ministers are hauling rubble and tending to the injured, that's one thing. But I've got a problem with it if their intention is to proselytize for their "religion" during this terrible time for the island nation. What are they going to do, hook up devastated Haitian people to their little auditing meters – which I'm convinced are just repurposed Milton Bradley "Operation" games – and make their troubles float away? Again, the supplies and doctors were a great gesture. The ministers? Not so much.

That old-time extremism

In this country, we often hear about "Muslim extremists," but I don't hear anyone complaining about the Christian extremists in our midst. One such bunch appears to be operating in Westmoreland County. It seems the pastor of Christian Fellowship Center of Greensburg has gone to county court to seek an order upholding a vote by the church board to expel two church elders. One of the elders reportedly was argumentative and had a poor attendance record at church functions. OK, that's understandable. The second, however, was voted out because he, um, failed to speak in tongues. For the uninitiated, speaking in tongues involves spewing made-up gibberish, supposedly through the power of the Holy Spirit, and, according to an AP story, it displays what some churches consider to be “necessary evidence of one’s faith.” I don't know if you’ve ever seen anyone speaking in tongues, but it makes the Jodie Foster character in the movie “Nell” sound like Sir Laurence Olivier. Hearing about this legal action brought to mind something even scarier, the hellishly frightening 2006 documentary “Jesus Camp,” in which children essentially were tortured into buying into the charms of Pentacostal/charismatic Christianity. To get an idea of the film’s contents, take a look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LACyLTsH4ac. Involving young children in this sort of twisted indoctrination amounts to mental crucifixion and child abuse. If Muslim parents gathered their children together at such a camp and treated them in this fashion, badgering them to fight for the views of their God, there are a lot of folks in this country – selling a different brand of faith – who would accuse them of sowing the seeds of jihad and probably attempt to have the kids taken from them. This is just a reminder that extremism is bad, no matter who or what is being worshipped. And if you’re not sickened by what you saw in the video clip, there’s really something wrong with you.

Just shut up

For anyone who isn't aware, televangelist Pat Robertson is a dumbass of the lowest order. His latest pronouncement from Mt. Dunderhead is that the earthquake in Haiti was somehow linked to activities by local residents a couple of hundred years ago. Here's what dipstick said on his “700 Club” program Wednesday: "(The Haitians) were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, ‘We will serve you if you will get us free from the French.’ True story. And so, the devil said, ‘OK, it’s a deal.’” I'm not sure where old Pat is getting his info on this so-called deal. Maybe the Port-au-Prince Examiner had a reporter on the scene. Robertson has a long history of making stupid statements after disasters, natural or otherwise. He has linked everything from Hurricane Katrina to 9/11 to the near-deadly stroke suffered by Israeli leader Ariel Sharon on activities that hacked off God - like people being gay and such. I'm not sure how long the Big Guy has been unleashing wrath on innocent folks because of the supposed misdeeds of small groups of people within the population or, in Haiti's case, their forefathers. Maybe the 1974 tornado that leveled Xenia, Ohio, and killed about three dozen people was retribution for some guy skipping church to play golf. Or maybe God only recently returned to Old Testament-style smiting. We'll have to ask Pat about that. I have a few other questions. When a child dies of cancer, is that punishment for something that somebody did somewhere? Why does God allow people like Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts and Jerry Falwell to bring ridicule upon the Christian faith? And why does Pat Robertson think his religion is any more valid or grounded in reality than Haitian voodoo? There's certainly no evidence to back that up. Falwell and Roberts are dead. It's not going to be a great loss to humanity when Robertson joins them.

The not-good-enough book

I'm an atheist, but I'm fairly well-versed on the Bible, and it just never occurred to me that the most popular versions of the book are nothing but socialist tracts. Boy was I wrong. So says the Conservative Bible Project, which is heading up an online effort by "regular folks" to rewrite the Bible in order to get out all that liberal stuff. The effort is being led by Andy Schlafly, who founded Conservapedia,com, where the butchering, I mean rewriting, of the Bible is taking place. And if his last name rings a bell, yes, he’s the son of the old conservative warhorse Phyllis Schlafly, who is perhaps best known for fighting against equal rights for women. Andy Schlafly, shown above left, tells the AP, “Professors are the most liberal group of people in the world, and it’s professors who are doing the popular modern translations of the Bible." Of course, people who actually know a lot about the Bible and biblical translations think he's full of frankincense and myrrh, among other things. Timothy Paul Jones, a self-described theological conservative who is a professor at Southern Baptist (those damn liberals) Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., had this to say about Schlafly’s crusade: "This is not making scripture understandable to people today, it’s reworking scripture to support a particular political or social agenda.” But Schlafly isn’t fooled by those theological conservatives. He says that's not the same thing as being "politically conservative." So, by his own words, Schlafly is making it clear that this is all about politics. For one thing, conservatives don't apologize, even if they’re responsible for a really big boner like the Iraq war. And to reflect the might-makes-right-and-we're-never-wrong approach, the Conservative Bible Project is rewriting the Gospel of Luke to excise the part where Jesus says of his killers: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." The lesson here: Forgiveness is for pansies. Here, courtesy of the AP, are a few other passages that are getting a raping, I mean makeover:

LUKE 10:21

King James version: In that hour, Jesus rejoiced in spirit and said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes; even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.

Conservative Bible Project: With that, Jesus rejoiced, "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for withholding Truth from the intellectuals while revealing it to common man, as this pleased You."

In other words, don’t give information to smart people who might want to think for themselves. Reveal it only to mindless sheep.

PHILEMON 3

King James: Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Conservative Bible Project: God’s grace to you, and peace of mind, from our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

We certainly wouldn’t want to encourage a concept like peace, but peace of mind comes in really handy if you want to sleep well after trying to screw over people who aren’t like you.

JUDE 7

King James: Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Conservative Bible Project: Furthermore, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them whose people also gave themselves over to sensuality, and homosexuality and bestiality, were made examples of, and suffered the vengeance of eternal fire.

Yes, let’s make sure that the verse clearly bashes gay people and equates them with folks who hump goats.

ACTS 2:44

King James: And all that believed were together, and had all things common.

Conservative Bible Project: Everyone who believed was together and shared values, faith and the truth.

Because only this particular group of mouth-breathing dimwits could possibly know the truth, and they want to make sure that their Christian soldiers remember to uphold important values such as divisiveness, celebrating stupidity and hatred.

Schlafly's defense of this dumbing down and bastardization of the Bible is that “the best of the public is better than a group of experts.” Really? Really??? Because I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Schlafly’s band of merry men (don't know if women are allowed to participate) probably aren't the cream of the crop when it comes to things like rational thought. And I'm also guessing that the Jesus portrayed in the "regular" Bible would be sickened by these jackasses. I'm not sure what this group will turn its attention to next. However, I'm hearing rumors that they’re working on eyeglasses that will be soothing to ultra-conservatives by allowing them to look at President Obama and see a rich white guy.

Are some "good books" better than others?

It's always been my belief that people should be free to believe in whatever they like, but that doesn’t mean I can’t think they're jackasses. Speaking of which, a small church down in North Carolina has announced its plans for a Halloween event that will include the burning of “Satan’s music” and “Satan’s popular books.” Now, you might be thinking that they’ll be torching some old AC/DC and Ozzie Osbourne records, along with some nasty scientific journals, but no, these fishers of men are casting a much wider net. The Web site of Amazing Grace Baptist Church in Canton, N.C., says music to be tossed on the bonfire includes country, rap, rock, pop, heavy metal, Western, soft and easy, Southern gospel, contemporary Christian, jazz, soul and oldies.” It appears that Beethoven and Rachmaninoff are OK. The church also is targeting such infidel authors as James Dobson, Rick Warren, Robert Schuller, the Pope and Mother Teresa. Oh, they'll also be torching a bunch of Bibles. You see, this church believes that only the 1611 King James Version of the Bible is acceptable, so all others will be tossed to the flames. Never mind that each and every version of the Bible was pieced together by some bunch of guys. Pastor Marc Grizzard, the dapper fellow shown above, also is offering participants barbecued fried chicken and "all the sides.” Who could resist eating fried chicken by the glow of the flames from a stack of New American Standard Bibles? And these are just rumors, but I hear the ladies of the church are going to have a tobacco-juice-spitting contest, and there will be a rattlesnake toss for the youngsters. You know, if a bunch of atheists announced plans to burn Bibles, I'm guessing that a flood of good Christians would rise up to stop them. I'm wondering whether any will take action when it's one of their own who is spritzing on the lighter fluid. There is a bit of good news in all this. At last check, Pastor Grizzard’s church had 14 members.

Is the trend irreversible?

A new study has taken a closer look at data reported earlier this year by Trinity College in its American Religious Identification Survey 2008, and it shows that Americans who claim no religious affiliation are, on average, more likely to be male, younger, living in the West and politically independent. The new report also finds that most of those who claim no religion don’t have antagonism toward religion but “embrace philosophical and theological beliefs that reflect skepticism.” Only 7 percent of those in the no-religion camp identify themselves as atheists, and 27 percent say they believe in a personal God. However, the numbers do not bode well for organized religion. The initial survey estimates that as of 2008, there were 34 million adult "nones” in this country, a huge increase from 1990, when the figure was 14 million. The people who have no religious ties now account for 15 percent of the American population. I'm not sure when the last time was that the country saw an increase in the percentage of the population with links to organized religion, but I'm guessing it’s been a long, long time. And I have to wonder whether we are amid a slow, inexorable shift to a point at which there will be more non-religious folks than church folks in this country. In fact, the Trinity College study projects that about one-quarter of the U.S. population could be unaffiliated with religion within two decades. I have two questions: Why has the desire to embrace organized religion dropped so precipitously over the past 20 years? And, what can the major religions do, if anything, to reverse the trend?

Did a limb fall on their heads?

I swear this is true. An Associated Press story out of Ireland says thousands of Irish Catholics are flocking to a rural church to pray and create a shrine at the stump of a recently felled willow tree that some people say resembles the Virgin Mary. No, really. Noel White, who is overseeing the removal of trees from the churchyard at St. Mary's in Rathkeale, said a "funny shape" was created when a major limb cracked off one of the trees that was being cut down. Then a worker cut through the stump vertically to create the supposed Virgin Mary outline. If you ask me, it looks just as much like an emperor penguin chick. The local priest, the Rev. Willie Russell, stopped just short of calling the tree pilgrims nut cases. Even the guy who cut into the tree stump to create its current shape isn't buying it. "I see it as the grain of a tree, myself," said Anthony Reddin. And the County Limerick diocese of the church says it views the stump hoopla with "great skepticism." I know the Irish have the reputation of being a drinking people, but it must take a lot of whiskey to make this hunk of wood look like the Queen of Heaven.

Government greed, or just plain stupidity

A San Diego area preacher has been told by county officials that he could face fines of as much as $1,000 unless he gets a government permit for the weekly Bible-study sessions he hosts in his home. Officials are demanding that David Jones comply with county codes that prohibit the holding of religious assemblies without a "major-use permit." This sure doesn't sound like a "major use." Jones says as few as five and at most 27 people attend the Bible studies. His attorney says the county is infringing on Jones' right to exercise his religion, and that the county regulations are aimed only at synagogues, churches and temples. If county officials are smart (and that really seems unlikely at this point), they'll drop this ridiculous persecution of Jones and his parishioners. They'll get that chance next Tuesday, when the two sides are supposed to sit down for a discussion of the case. Unless Jones and members of his church are causing a disturbance or creating traffic hazards in his neighborhood, the government has no business telling him what he can do inside his home. Would they try to levy fines on someone who invited 30 people to a backyard cookout, or to watch the Super Bowl? Of course not. So what difference does it make that these people just happen to be reading their Bibles?

These people should be behind bars

Leilani Neumann, above, and Colleen Hauser might not look like criminals, but Neumann is already up on homicide charges, and Hauser is on her way to the same fate. The reason? Their refusal to get medical attention for terminally ill children. Neumann is on trial right now for allowing her 11-year-old daughter, Madeline, to die of untreated diabetes in March 2008. At this writing, Hauser is on the lam with her 13-year-old son, Daniel, in an attempt to avoid a court order that the boy receive chemotherapy to prevent his death from Hodgkin's lymphoma. In both cases, the mothers believe the only medical treatment that is acceptable is healing from above. And they're nuts. It's not wrong for parents, or anyone, to believe in the healing power of prayer. It's not wrong for them to make decisions about medical care for their children based on the best available medical advice and testing. It's not wrong for adults to make whatever decisions they see fit about their own medical care. But it is criminally wrong - first-degree murder, in fact - for them to refuse medical treatment that could save their children from death and instead wait for divine intervention. These people do not represent the vast majority of religious folks. They are the lunatic fringe, and any normal person, even the most devout among them, would be embarrassed to be associated with the likes of Neumann and Hauser. Really, does any sane person believe that it's OK to kill a child this way?

Time for a change of habit?

A story out of Florida provides a good stepping-off point for a discussion on a longstanding, and controversial, practice of the Catholic Church. The Rev. Alberto Cutie, a popular Miami priest known as "Father Oprah" for the relationship advice he dispenses on his archdiocese's radio broadcasts heard throughout the Americas and Spain, told the CBS "This Morning" show today that while he still thinks priests should be celibate, he's thinking about leaving the Catholic Church because he's been romantically involved with a woman for two years. The Puerto Rican-born Cutie made the announcement after a Spanish-language magazine published photos of Cutie and his lady friend kissing and hugging at a bar and on a beach. While there is some merit in a church or any other organization building and nurturing its traditions, there also is benefit on adapting to changing times and circumstances. And it would seem to be time for the Catholic Church to allow priests to marry, at least in the Western Church where such a move has broad support among rank-and-file Catholics and the church is scrambling to find candidates for the priesthood. The celibacy rule does not eliminate sexual urges, but it might cause priests to try to relieve those urges in secretive, harmful ways that have devastating effects on victims. There are child molesters in all walks of life (media people included), but no singular profession seems to have had such a concentration of molesters as the priesthood. And for a religion that goes well out of its way to prevent gay people from securing equal rights, the priesthood certainly seems to attract a lot of homosexuals. One would think that priests also are expected to avoid masturbation and sexual fantasies. It's all just ridiculously unrealistic, just as it seems odd to me that priests counsel people about their marriages. It's like someone coming to me for diet tips. I'm sure people will make the argument that being celibate allows priests to devote themselves to the church, but married clergy in other denominations seem to be able to balance family life and their religious duties. Others don't want to break with tradition, but the Catholic Church also has had traditions of mandatory Latin Mass, not eating meat on Friday and conducting bloody Crusades, but those have fallen by the wayside. The church has survived English-language Masses, Friday frankfurters and no longer gaining converts at the point of a sword. It probably can continue as a viable religion with married priests. And hey, while we're at it, why not ordain women? It seems like a no-brainer to double your pool of potential clergy.

Trickle-down stupidity?

OK, boys and girls, listen carefully. Unwed mother Bristol Palin has some advice for you on how to avoid getting in the "family way." Of course, it's abstinence, which worked so well for her. Bristol gave an interview to ABC's "Good Morning America" in which she said that she wishes she had waited to have sex. I'll bet she does. She also offered this startling bit of information: "I just think that abstinence is the only way you can effectively, 100 percent foolproof way you can prevent pregnancy." Hold the presses. Do you mean that if you don't do the horizontal hokey-pokey, you can't get pregnant? This should solve everything in the area of teen pregnancy, right? Wrong! Even Bristol's baby daddy, who looked like a deer in the headlights when he was paraded around the Republican National Convention and learned that he would be getting married, knows better than that. Levi Johnston, now estranged from Bristol, said abstinence is "not realistic." Smart boy, at least in that regard. "Abstinence is a great idea," Johnston said in an interview with "CBS This Morning. "But I also think you need to enforce, you know, condoms and birth control and other things like that to have safe sex. I don't just think telling young kids, ‘You can’t have sex,’ it's not going to work." Perhaps he didn't say it eloquently, but Johnston is right on the money. We can talk all we want about abstinence being the best bet for our children. It is. There's really no denying that. But the reality, which some find to be an inconvenient truth, is that unmarried young people have been having sex with one another since the dawn of time, and they will continue to do so in large numbers as long as humans walk the Earth. What we have to do, as responsible people, is find the best ways of helping these children protect themselves from pregnancy and disease, and if they foul up, we should make sure that they have access to the morning-after pill. No, it shouldn't be used as a routine birth-control measure, but if a couple of kids screw up, no pun intended, the rest of their lives should not be ruined (and many are undeniably altered for the worse by an unintended pregnancy) when a simple trip to the drugstore could prevent it. Telling kids to just say no to sex is about as effective as telling the ground not to get wet when it rains. If Bristol Palin, a girl from a stable, well-to-do, loving, two-parent family who no doubt had her mother in her ear preaching abstinence for years, goes ahead and has unprotected sex, what are the odds that a girl from a poor, single-parent home with little hope for the future is going to buck the odds and keep her drawers on? We need to help our kids, and ourselves, by offering them more than empty words.

The latest on the same-sex marriage front

This just in from Maine:

AUGUSTA, Maine – Maine's governor signed a freshly passed bill Wednesday approving gay marriage, making it the fifth state to approve the practice and moving New England closer to allowing it throughout the region.
New Hampshire legislators were also poised to send a gay marriage bill to their governor, who hasn't indicated whether he'll sign it. If he does, Rhode Island would be the region's sole holdout.
The Maine Senate voted 21-13, with one absent, for a bill that authorizes marriage between any two people rather than between one man and one woman, as state law currently allows. The House had passed the bill Tuesday.
Democratic Gov. John Baldacci, who hadn't previously indicated how he would handle the bill, signed it shortly afterward. In the past, he said he opposed gay marriage but supported civil unions, which provide many benefits of marriage.
Debate was brief. Senate President Elizabeth Mitchell, D-Vassalboro, turned the gavel over to an openly gay member, Sen. Lawrence Bliss, D-South Portland, to preside over the final vote.
Republican Sen. Debra Plowman of Hampden argued that the bill was being passed “at the expense of the people of faith.”
“You are making a decision that is not well-founded,” warned Plowman.
But Senate Majority Leader Philip Bartlett II said the bill does not compel religious institutions to recognize gay marriage.
“We respect religious liberties. ... This is long overdue,” said Bartlett, D-Gorham.
Maine is now the fourth state in New England, to allow same-sex marriages. Connecticut enacted a bill after being ordered to allow gay marriages by the courts, and Vermont passed a bill over the governor’s veto.
New Hampshire’s House was also expected to vote on a bill Wednesday and send it to Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat.
Massachusetts’ high court has ordered the state to recognize gay marriages. In Rhode Island, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage has been introduced but is not expected to pass this year.
Outside New England, Iowa is recognizing gay marriages on court orders. The practice was briefly legal in California before voters banned it.

The interesting quote here, for me, is from Sen. Plowman, who said the bill was being passed "at the expense of the people of faith." However, the new law does not require churches to perform gay marriages or to recognize them, and it doesn't require Sen. Plowman to like it. The two statements most often offered in opposition to gay marriage are: 1. It's wrong (under some religious belief system) or 2. How do I explain to my children why their friend has two mothers? To the first objection, I would say, we should not be basing our laws on any particular religious belief system. Who is to say that one church's beliefs are better than another's? And there are some churches that are very welcoming and accepting of gay people. As to the second objection, try something like this: "Honey, God created many different kinds of people. It's not for us to judge them just because they are different from us." Or maybe, "The main thing is that Bobby's parents love one another." Trying to shield a child from the fact that gay people exist or that they are married is just idiotic, and it's going to prove fruitless, because someday all people, whatever their sexual orientation, will have equal access to marriage rights. And if you're still convinced that being gay is a choice, you're either in deep denial of reality or you need help matching socks. I'm still waiting for a good explanation from a gay-marriage opponent as to how allowing gay folks to marry hurts them or their own marriage. I'm all ears.

"He is not here, but is risen"

Best wishes to my Christian friends for a happy and glorious Easter Sunday.

A changed man?

I was flipping around the dial on the car radio today when something on a Christian station caught my ear. It was an interview with none other than David Berkowitz, the infamous Son of Sam serial killer from the 1970s. Berkowitz was pretty much Public Enemy No. 1 at the time of the killings, and he was sentenced to 365 years in prison for his heinous crimes. But a funny thing happened while Berkowitz was behind bars. The man who was an admitted member of a Satanic cult, and most likely also insane, found Jesus. Berkowitz became a born-again Christian in 1987. According to an Internet biography, Berkowitz has been very active in prison ministries and counsels troubled inmates. We can't see inside Berkowitz's brain – or his soul, if you prefer – but in the radio interview he sounded like a very intelligent, remorseful and sincere person - a totally different person from the one who pumped bullets into innocent people 30-some years ago. Which brings me to this question: If Berkowitz is, indeed, rehabilitated, if he is no longer a threat to society, should he be released from prison? According to the mainline Christian denominations with which I'm familiar, I believe Berkowitz became a new person in Christ when he was born again. The old David Berkowitz is no longer with us. And that points to a certain disconnect between the Biblical take on forgiveness and the human one. Can we forgive David Berkowitz for what he did? Should we?

Angel of death?

People have accused me, often, of being anti-religion. In reality, I'm against hypocrisy, stupidity, bigotry and blind adherence that ignores reality. That sometimes leads me to the religions of the world. Today, it's the Catholic Church and, specifically, its leader, Pope Benedict XVI. The pope was questioned Tuesday, as he flew to Africa, about the continent's horrifying AIDS epidemic. The Vatican, of course, hangs its hat on abstinence, which is an approach that has shown a consistent failure to work since the dawn of man. Benedict told reporters, "You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms. On the contrary, it increases the problem." I don't think Benedict is a stupid man, but he sure sounds like one when he makes statements like this. Either that, or he thinks the people he's preaching to are stupid. As we speak, 22 million people in sub-Saharan Africa are infected with HIV. Two years ago, that region was responsible for three-quarters of the world's AIDS deaths. Certainly, the use of condoms cannot wipe clean the scourge of AIDS from Africa, but just as certain is the fact that it can help, and a strong statement by the leader of the Catholic Church in favor of condom use to prevent the spread of AIDS would be of great value. Instead of adapting church policies to the realities of the world as it exists today, Benedict and his ilk cling to some ancient, man-written code supporting the idea of being fruitful and multiplying. What we really see multiplying today are the suffering and deaths caused by AIDS. It would be one thing if the church had held fast to all of its teachings through the centuries, but the Catholic Church has altered many other rules and concepts through the years. There's also the fact that the Catholic prohibition on condoms and other birth control methods is ignored by millions in this country alone. And even some clergy who work with AIDS patients want to see a change. Pope Benedict has an opportunity to stand up, be a true leader and remove the ban on condom use in the interest of fighting a deadly epidemic and saving the lives of his people. To do otherwise leaves him with their blood on his hands.

Ooooooh! Aaaaaaah!

It's a little early for most of us to start picking out Christmas gifts, but if you're looking to stash something away early for a special someone, Thomas Kinkade is coming to the rescue. Through the good folks at Hawthorne Village (?), Kinkade, who has trademarked the term "Painter of Light" to describe himself, has "presented" a "three-dimensional masterpiece" known as Faith Mountain. For those not familiar with Kinkade's work, which until now has been directed more toward paintings, all I can say from a point of personal taste is that if you do an Internet search for "kitschy" and "bad taste," you'll eventually run across some of his "masterpieces." The ad I saw for Faith Mountain, shown above, describes it as illustrating the story of Jesus, "from His riding into Jerusalem to His betrayal and trial to His dying on the cross and ultimately His triumph over the grave." Kinkade and Hawthorne trumpet Faith Mountain, which carries a price tag of $135, plus $19.99 shipping and handling, as "a true testament to Jesus’ love, faith and strength." My guess is that Jesus, had he not departed from the tomb, would be rolling in it after getting a load of this thing. But if this is your cup of tea, I suggest you hurry. They're limiting it to one per customer.

Just what we've come to expect

A Catholic bishop in northeastern Pennsylvania got his panties in a twist because of last night’s scheduled appearance of Keith Boykin at Misericordia University. You see, Boykin is a gay-rights advocate, and Scranton Bishop Joseph Martino says Boykin’s beliefs are “disturbingly opposed to Catholic moral teaching.” Boykin was scheduled to discuss Proposition 8, the ballot measure that banned gay marriages in California, at least temporarily. He was brought to the college by the Misericordia Diversity Institute, which, according to the Associated Press, is “dedicated to promoting multicultural understanding and eliminating discrimination.” The school issued a statement saying it is committed to its Catholic mission, but also to its academic mission of exploring ideas “critically and freely.” Good for Misericordia. I have a couple of questions for Bishop Martino: Are the church’s teachings so weak that the church fears students will abandon them solely because they are exposed to an opposing viewpoint? Do you advocate not even trying to gain a better understanding of those who are different from you, or do you favor ignoring those people and hoping they go away? For your sake, bishop, I hope it’s not the latter, because pretty much as long as there have been humans on Earth, there have been gay humans. You say that Boykin’s beliefs are “disturbingly opposed to Catholic moral teaching.” I would say that the church's "teachings" are disturbingly opposed to reality and equality, and that they’re not the least bit moral. Gays and lesbians aren’t going anywhere, Bishop Martino, but your church’s shameful "teachings" certainly should.

Do church on your own time

A federal judge, on constitutional grounds, has smacked down a state law that requires a moment of silence in all Illinois public schools. I applaud U.S. District Judge Robert W. Gettleman for recognizing a clear violation of the separation of church and state. Proponents of the law say, of course, that it doesn’t require prayer, but the intent is clear as day in the title of the measure: It’s the Illinois Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act. In his ruling on the case, which was filed by talk show host and atheist Rob Sherman and his high school-age daughter, Gettleman noted that under the law, the “teacher is required to instruct her pupils, especially in the lower grades, about prayer and its meaning.” I would have no problem with schools offering elective courses on world religions or using religious texts in conjunction with studies of literature, but the Student Prayer Act goes too far. Schools should not be recruiting grounds for religions. Proponents of school prayer may say that’s not their goal, but if they’re not looking to indoctrinate or proselytize, then what’s the purpose of this continuing effort to get prayer, in the guise of silent reflection, into our public schools? A student can pray at any time during his or her school day. It does not have to be, nor should it be, an organized activity.

He thinks; therefore, he's out

The Associated Press describes the Rev. Richard Cizik, above, as a Washington, D.C., fixture who "played a key role in bringing evangelical Christian concerns to the political table" over the past 30 years. But now, Cizik has been forced out of his post as vice president of governmental affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals. It seems that Cizik has been doing a little too much thinking and soul-searching to suit some of the folks in the NAE. Cizik drew some consternation for wanting to add concern for the environment to the NAE's two-pronged menu of hating abortion and gay people. The calls for his head increased when he suggested that he supported Barack Obama for president. But the straw that broke the camel's back was his statement on National Public Radio's "Fresh Air" program that he was "shifting" on the gay marriage issue and "would willingly say I believe in civil unions." You can't blame the NAE for wanting a lobbyist/spokesman who actually represents the organization's views, but I have to commend the Rev. Cizik for being a thinking person who, rather than spend the rest of his life repeating the same narrow mantra, decided to reflect on his views and change things about himself and his beliefs where he felt it was right to do so. Another factor leading me to respect the Rev. Cizik is the fact that one of his fiercest detractors is James Dobson of Focus on the Family. That's the same James Dobson who recently spent upwards of $600,000 to block gay marriage in California, then almost immediately announced plans to lay off more than 200 of his employees because of financial reasons. Have a Merry Christmas, folks. But back to the Rev. Cizik. It was Socrates who said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." I think the Rev. Cizik realized that. Dobson never will.

Who's minding the Homeland Security store?

Kentucky state Rep. Tom Riner is miffed that the state's Homeland Security office isn't giving God enough props for keeping the fine people of the Bluegrass State safe from terrorists. Riner, also a Southern Baptist minister, secured legislative approval of an amendment in 2006 requiring that God get his due in that regard. The law was passed during the administration of then-Gov. Ernie Fletcher, who was known for giving God credit in his reports to state leaders. But the AP is reporting that new Gov. Steve Beshear's administration didn't follow suit with a shout-out to God in its 2008 Homeland Security report. "We certainly expected it to be there, of course," said Riner. Here's a little more from the AP report:

The law that organized the Homeland Security office first lists Homeland Security's duty to recognize that government itself can't secure the state without God, even before mentioning other duties, which include distribution of millions of dollars in federal grants and analyzing possible threats.
Included in (Riner's) law is a requirement that the office must post a plaque at the entrance to the state Emergency Operations Center with an 88-word statement that begins, "The safety and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart from reliance on Almighty God."

Said Riner, "Government itself, apart from God, cannot close the security gap. The job is too big for government."
Um, Rev. Riner, I don't mean to be impolite, but where, exactly, was your God on Sept. 11, 2001? I mean, if we're going to entrust him with the whole Homeland Security thing, don't you thing we should expect a better job than that? Or was your God trumped by the Muslim God that day. Boy, that's embarrassing. And if your God is all-powerful, why spend these millions of dollars on Homeland Security, both in your state and nationally? Why not just rely on the "Big Guy" to handle everything. Surely, after 9/11, he'd be a bit more diligent. But really, we should have a backup plan in case He has another lapse and falls asleep at the switch. Perhaps we also should seek the help of Allah, Buddha, the Flying Spaghetti Monster (shown above), Vishnu, Krishna, Haile Selassie and the Legion of Super Heroes. There, that should do it. Sleep tight.

If you voted for Obama, prepare for Hell

A Catholic priest in South Carolina is advising his parishioners that they should not take Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because Obama supports abortion rights, and their backing of the Democrat for president "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil." The Rev. Jay Scott Newman (no relation) of St. Mary's Catholic Church in Greenville says those people are putting their souls at risk, according to an AP report, if they take Holy Communion before doing penance for their vote. Of course, in the Catholic world, a few Our Fathers and Hail Marys later, and it's as if their vote never happened. Sweet. Said Newman, "Persons in this condition (those who voted for Obama) should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation." I hope I haven't ingested my own condemnation. That sounds serious. According to polls, more than half of Catholic voters supported Obama, so plenty of people have a lot of 'splainin' to do. I'm curious as to whether the Rev. Newman issued a similar warning about those who voted for President Bush and Vice President Cheney in 2004. I seem to remember something about "Thou shalt not kill," and the war in Iraq that Bush and Cheney led has killed a whole lot of people, not just enemy forces but perhaps hundreds of thousands of civilians. Was there a "but" or "unless" after the "Thou shalt not kill" edict? Also, will the Rev. Newman be issuing the same warning to those members of his congregation who have used condoms, pills or other birth-control methods? Nationwide, that would affect millions of Catholics. In the eyes of the church, haven't they also killed a living entity? While we're on the subject of churches, isn't it about time that churches, especially but not limited to those who engage in political activities, lose their tax-exempt status? And I don't mean just the Catholic Church, but also those "black churches" that went to bat for Obama. Really, I don't think any church should be exempt from paying their fair share to help cover the costs of the communities in which they are based. Surely, it would be a burden for some small churches, but others can easily afford to chip in. An example: In 2002, the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago had assets of more than $2 billion - yes, billion. And the churches aren't the only ones who are taking advantage of the public good. Why in the world are wealthy, private higher-education institutions exempt from helping to pay the bills for the communities in which they're located? Washington & Jefferson College just keeps buying more and more properties in Washington and taking them off the tax rolls. The school has an endowment of more than $100 million, yet it pays no property taxes, at least on the vast majority of its holdings, and won't even consider imposing a nominal student fee to help the City of Washington, which is on the brink of bankruptcy, meet its obligations. With more than $100 million in the bank, is that too much to ask? Buying the occasional police cruiser just doesn't cut it.

Get naked for Jesus!

The pastor of one of those nondenominational (Christian Lite) megachurches says his married congregants need to get down to business more often. The Rev. Ed Young of Fellowship Church in Dallas is challenging the sheep of his flock to have sex for seven straight days, and he plans to join in - not with them; with his own wife. You have to be specific, what with some of the preachers we have running around these days. Says Young, "God says sex should be between a married man and a woman. I think it's one of the greatest things you can do for your kids, because so goes the marriage, so goes the family." The AP reports that earlier this year, a Florida preacher, apparently confident in the stamina of his congregants, issued a 30-day sex challenge. Now, I like sex as much as the next guy, but 30 straight days? I'm guessing that by about Day 22, the idea of getting nekkid with your significant other would be about as sexy as dental work. And, I hesitate to point this out, but there might be some points in that 30 days where, um, the ground might not be so great for planting, if you know what I mean. Hmmm.

Those darned monks

I've always contended that a lot of the horrors and violence down through the history of the world can be directly tied to religion, and the times, they're not a'changin'. An AP story over the weekend started off this way: "Israeli police rushed into one of Christianity's holiest churches Sunday and arrested two clergymen after an argument between monks erupted into a brawl next to the site of Jesus' tomb. The clash between Armenian and Greek Orthodox monks broke out in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, revered as the site of Jesus' crucifixion, burial and resurrection." You can't make this stuff up. The AP said the mayhem ensued when Armenian clergymen carried out a procession to mark what they believe to be the 4th-century discovery of the cross used to crucify Jesus. The Greeks objected, saying the procession could not occur without one of their own monks present, because to do otherwise might give the Armenians some sort of claim to the site. Oh boy. Am I the only one who gets a mental picture of a Greek monk standing beside a velvet rope, deciding who gets in and who doesn't? Free drinks for the hot chicks. Anyway, police responded, and one monk from each side went to the hoosegow. The AP said "a bearded Armenian monk in a red-and-pink robe and a black-clad Greek Orthodox monk with a bloody gash on his forehead were both taken away in handcuffs after scuffling with dozens of riot police." The report said six Christian sects divide control of the ancient church, and Israeli police sometimes get a call when they fight over turf and control of the site. Some other strange stuff: The Israeli government has been trying for some time to build a fire exit there, in the interest of the safety of the thousands of pilgrims who visit regularly, but the sects can't agree on where it should be built. Also, back in the 1800s, somebody put a ladder on a ledge over the church entrance, and it has remained there ever since because the various monks dispute who has the authority to go up and bring it down. You know what I think would be really funny? What if they found out that the real site of Jesus' tomb is Shlomo's Bagel Shop across the street? Look out, Shlomo!

Need money? Call 1-800-GOD-CASH

I flipped on the TV last night when I got home from work, and my first thought was, "Who's that weaselly-looking guy who blinks his eyes a lot?" Then I figured out it was one of those TV superpreachers. This guy's name is Joel Osteen. You might remember his wife, who got into a lawsuit over a scrape with an airline stewardess a while back. Question: Why does anybody in their right mind send money to a TV preacher? Isn't there a church or charity in your own town that could put that money to good use? I knew a lady who lived outside Claysville and left her farm to Oral Roberts. We've seen in the last year or so what a good job that outfit was doing with its donors' hard-earned cash. But I digress. Preacher Osteen (I'd call him Reverend, but I don't think he's ever really had any religious training to speak of) was talking to his flock about getting their finances in order. He suggested they need to work really hard to pay down their credit card debt. Duh. But he said they don't have to do it alone. Direct quote: "When God sees you making that effort, he will step in, and his blessing will overtake you." So I guess if you start putting a little more in that check to Visa each month, the Lord will start kicking some extra cash your way. I'm a little confused. Every time I ask someone why their God would allow the suffering in Darfur or cancer in little children or some such thing, I am usually told that while God created the Earth and everything on it, he's not a micro-manager who oversees every detail of our daily lives. Unless we need some cash, apparently. But, hey, who am I to question? It's clearly worked for Preacher Osteen, who bought the old Houston Rockets arena and turned it into a 16,000-seat church. And I understand he lives in a million-dollar home and rakes in huge amounts of cash through book sales. So you can't say God hasn't shown him the money.

This is where I have a problem

If a church wants to have a spaghetti dinner and use the proceeds to buy a spiffy 10-foot-tall statue of Jesus for its front lawn, more power to them. There was a beautiful sculpture like that in front of the Catholic church near my old home in Bridgeville. But when a city tries to spend thousands in tax dollars on a Jesus statue, that's just wrong. According to the AP, a "conservative Oklahoma City suburb with a history of trying to incorporate religious art into public spaces" is at it again. The Edmond Visual Arts Commission recently approved spending $3,900 to help pay for a 2-foot-tall bronze statue entitled "Come Unto Me." It's supposed to be placed in front of a downtown business called Sacred Heart Catholic Gifts. This is the same bunch that had to retreat just last year from spending $17,500 to help erect a statue of Moses at a local Christian church. About 10 years ago, the city had to pay $200,000 in legal fees after losing a court fight to retain a cross on its city seal. Clearly, they're slow learners, and they can expect another court fight on this most recent statue plan. "This is the third major unconstitutional effort they've engaged in recent years," said Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "It's a little surprising, because normally people pause to take a breath before they violate the Constitution again." June Cartwright, who chairs the so-called arts commission, denied that the proposed statue represented a religious endorsement. "It doesn't state that it is specifically Jesus. It is whatever you perceive it to be." There's one of your good Christians, lying out her, um, backside. I might point out to Ms. Cartwright that the statue is called "COME UNTO ME"! I believe that's a pretty well known Jesus quote. I've got a proposal for Ms. Cartwright and her cronies. I'll contribute $20 to their Jesus statue if they allow me to commission a companion sculpture of my personal "plumbing." They can just "perceive it to be" two prunes and a zucchini.

This stupidity makes my head hurt

Some religious "leaders" and parents in the upstate New York town of Massena are trying to force the removal of yoga classes from public schools, alleging that the instruction violates the separation of church and state. According to the AP, two high school teachers in the district started the yoga classes last year to help students relax before tests. They were in the process of developing a districtwide program when the controversy broke out. "We are not opposed to the benefits. ... We are opposed to the philosophy behind it and that it has ties in Hinduism and the way they are presenting it," said the inappropriately named Rev. Colin Lucid of Calvary Baptist Church in Massena. Replied Julie Reagan, president of the local school board, "If the school board felt there was any hidden religious activity behind the motives of our two instructors, we certainly wouldn't allow that. There is absolutely none of that. The teachers are well intended and trying to offer an aspect of fitness ... that relaxes and readies the children for learning." She noted that 100 schools in 26 states use yoga in the classroom to relieve stress, and that federal funding is available to educators who are seeking yoga certification. I'm just an old hick, so maybe I've been out of the loop, but until Rev. Lucid enlightened me, I had no idea that yoga was a gateway to Hinduism. Rev. Lucid is suggesting that yoga be offered as an after-school activity because it is causing stress for the students. Reverend, the only people causing these children stress are you and your merry band of nincompoops. And aren't you the same people who want to ignore the separation of church and state when you're trying to get prayers back into public schools? Of course, that's different, right?

An incredible waste of time and money

If you had $17.3 million and couldn't spend it on yourself, what might you do with the money? Build a youth center for your community? Help people who are losing their homes to foreclosure? If you're the religious right, you use that money in an effort to prevent gay people in California from having the same rights as heterosexuals. A coalition of the usual suspects - the Mormons, the Roman Catholics, the Baptists, Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, etc. - has thus far raised that ungodly amount for a group called Yes on 8, which is trying to win passage of Proposition 8, a ballot issue that would rescind California's approval of gay marriage. A recent AP story said hundreds of pastors in California are calling on their congregants to fast and pray in support of the proposition. Some preachers are suggesting that people go without solid food for as long as 40 days "in the biblical tradition." Hey, if you're really serious, why not go for 100? The gallant Knights of Columbus have led the fundraising charge, piling up $1.3 million for the effort. And individual Mormons, at the strong urging of the central church, reportedly have anted up $6.4 million of the total. Bill May, who leads a group known as Catholics for Protection of Marriage, said, "The sense is that this is the last chance to restore the definition of marriage, and if unsuccessful, it is going to have serious ramifications for California and across the country." Really, Bill? Would it mean that people who love one another would be allowed to exchange vows? No wonder you see Armageddon right around the corner. At Mormon church services, they've been trying to rally the troops with a 1995 proclamation that warns: "The disintegration of the family will bring ... the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets." Do you mean charlatan prophets like Joseph Smith? Just wondering. Here's the crux of the matter: These people are trying to impose their version of morality on all of us. Gay marriages have no effect on their marriages. Gay marriages have no effect on them in ANY way. Nobody is going to "join the gay team" just because a fabulous wedding reception might be in the offing. Yet these folks want to stick their noses into other people's business and relegate them to second-class citizenship. It's not like gay people, if they are denied the right to marry, are suddenly going to turn heterosexual and start marrying people of the opposite sex. And I'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to give me a single, tangible negative effect that gay marriage would have, or provide a reasoning for their opposition that goes beyond "It's just not right" or "It's in the Bible." There are talking snakes and bushes in the Bible, too, and I have yet to see one of those in modern life. The supporters of this proposition are, in a nutshell, trying to deny the rights of gays and lesbians to equal rights. They are bigots. Let me repeat that: BIGOTS! There is some good news here. The latest poll shows the "Vote for Hate" proposition is opposed by 55 percent of likely voters.

Bad news for Father Nelson

The above headline references a rather tasteless joke involving wrestling and Catholicism. Speaking of which ... The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cincinnati has developed a list of actions that it finds inappropriate for priests, who are just now on notice that they should not kiss, tickle or wrestle children. Also on the no-no list: bear hugs, lap-sitting and piggyback rides. I don't remember those activities being part of the traditional service, but what the heck. You have to change with the times, and after the whole scandal involving a bunch of priests having their way with kids, I guess it's better to be safe than sorry, even if it's agreed that everybody loves a good piggyback ride. The archdiocese says these rules are updated every five years. Do you think, considering that messy little sex scandal, that some sort of interim action might have been in order? But, hey, this isn't an all-bad-news story. The archdiocese says priests can still shake kids' hands, pat them on the back and give them high-fives. Well, thank God for that.

Murdering kids

For the second time in the last few months, a child from a faith-healing family in Oregon has died of an illness that could easily have been treated. The Associated Press reports that 16-year-old Neil Beagley died Tuesday of heart failure resulting from a urinary tract blockage that could have removed by a urologist. Even the simple insertion of a catheter could have saved his life. A medical examiner said the boy most likely had a congenital condition that constricted his urinary tract, and there were signs that this wasn't the first blockage he suffered. And suffered is the operative word here. Gladstone, Ore., police Sgt. Lynne Benton said the boy had been sick for a week, and church members had gathered with his family to pray on Sunday when the youngster's condition worsened. Lot of good that did. Maybe God was busy listening to the prayers of pro athletes. They're always thanking Him for their victories. A few months ago, Beagley's 15-month-old cousin, Ava Worthington, died in her home of pneumonia and a blood infection. Her parents, Carl and Raylene Worthington, shown above, face charges of manslaughter and criminal mistreatment. Their lawyers plan a "religious freedom" defense. As in, we have the freedom to condemn our own children to death? Oregon passed a law in 1999 removing a religious shield for parents who rely solely on prayer to treat sick children, and the Worthingtons are the first to be prosecuted under it. Unfortunately, Beagley's parents will probably avoid prosecution, because the law allows kids 14 and older to make their own decisions on accepting medical care, and Benton said the boy apparently refused treatment. Of course he did. The poor kid had been brainwashed by lunatics since he was a toddler. The 1999 law, which clearly is too weak, came about after KATU-TV in Portland, Ore., reported on a medical examiner's estimate that 20 children of people affiliated with Followers of Christ church, the outfit the Worthingtons and Beagleys belong to, had died of curable illnesses that went untreated. I'm guessing that the penalty for violating the law is not as severe as it should be. These people should be charged with first-degree, premeditated murder and spend the rest of their lives in prison. Heck, I'd even favor the death penalty, because children should not die just because their parents are crazy.

A little Hell insurance

If you're like me and haven't signed up with one of the major organized religions, and it turns out you are really, really wrong, it's apparently not a sure thing that you'll be consigned to the depths of hell when the "Rapture" rolls around. I'm no Biblical scholar, but I was led to understand that, according to the Christian faith, when it gets down to nut-cutting time, those who believe in the Lord will be headed to heaven, and those who don't can expect to get the mother of all sunburns. But a Web business called "You've Been Left Behind" (www.youvebeenleftbehind.com) suggests there may be a grace period of sorts for those who have royally screwed up to make amends. For an initial annual fee of $40 (future annual charges yet to be determined), the "Left Behind" folks will help the faithful create personalized messages to be sent via e-mail to non-believing friends and loved ones after the Rapture. This outfit says there will be "a small window of time where they might be reached for the Kingdom of God." Guess what? If you're sitting at work, and suddenly a bunch of your co-workers are spirited through the ceiling, it's not going to require an e-mail from Aunt Mabel to get you to jump on the Jesus bandwagon. As the old saying goes, there are no atheists in foxholes. And if there is this wide-open window of opportunity, it kind of eliminates the need to get with the program in advance, doesn't it? So I guess I can continue to sleep in on Sundays. Just so there are no false alarms, the organization has designated five team members around the United States who report in regularly to let the folks at the home office know they're still on terra firma. The e-mails are triggered when at least three of those five people don't check in for six days. It would be kind of embarrassing if three or four of them got together for a Bible study or something and then went on a weeklong bender, but, hey, nothing is foolproof. I'm still skeptical about this whole Rapture deal, but just to be safe, I'm turning off my spam-blocker.

Here they go again

I've said many times that people should be allowed to practice whatever sort of religion makes them happy and fulfilled. Worship Jesus? Great. The Prophet Muhammad? Good for you. Create a cult around William Shatner? Why not? But when religious entities want to shove their beliefs in my face or, worse, get the government to help them in that effort, I'm inclined to resist. Such is the case in Florida, where some Christians are pressing the Legislature to approve a specialty license plate that includes a Christian cross, a stained-glass window and the words "I Believe." The plates would require a $25 annual fee, with the proceeds going to a nonprofit group called Faith in Teaching Inc., which supports "faith-based" school activities. It seems obvious that this is a violation of the separation of church and state, in that the state of Florida would seem to be endorsing a particular religion. One of the legislative supporters of the plate, Republican Sen. Ronda Storms, said the state, by offering a variety of specialty license plates, had created a "public forum," and that blocking access to that forum is also unconstitutional. I find it hard to equate a license plate touting a religious belief system with one reading, "Save the Manatee," but that's just me. According to the Associated Press, the plate appears unlikely to win approval during the current legislative session, and its backers, of course, are threatening legal action. I have a couple of options for the "believers" that don't involve relying on the government to help promote their religion or deliver their "message" to schoolchildren. If you want to say "Look at me! I love Jesus!" you could buy a couple of bumper stickers for your car. I've seen ones that say "Jesus is My Co-Pilot" or "My Boss is a Jewish Carpenter." Catchy. Heck, buy hundreds of them and cover your car. Buy a cross for use as a hood ornament. Put stained glass in your taillights. Or, come back to the Legislature next year with a proposal for not only your "I Believe" license plate, but license plates touting Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Animism, Taoism, Wicca, Baha'i and many more. And, just to be fair, how about a license plate for the atheists saying, "The Bible is a Fairy Tale"? I'm guessing that's a longshot.

Yearning for children?

As hard as it may be to believe, there are some people who are crying "religious persecution" after authorities raided the Texas compound of a fundamentalist Mormom sect in which girls as young as 13 allegedly were married off to and sexually abused by middle-aged men. Child welfare officials say that as soon as girls in the sect were physically capable of bearing children, they were "spiritually married" to much older men. The 16-year-old girl whose phone call prompted the recent raid already had a child and claimed she was sexually assaulted and beaten by her husband, who had six other wives. Texas authorities have taken custody of more than 400 children who lived at the site, which went by the name of Yearning for Zion Ranch. If the allegations are true, it might better have been called "Yearning to Get Naked with 13-year-olds and Get Away With It Ranch." One wonders what sort of sick mind is involved when a parent would allow his or her underage daughter to be victimized in such a way. America has a long history of religious freedom, even extending protections to groups whose origins and tenets most people find fantastic or even laughable (Do yourself a favor and watch the applicable South Park episodes.), but I think it's high time for a major crackdown on those kooks who think it's proper to prey on children. Religious freedom be damned.

Gay's OK - As long as you mean "happy" gay

Another Western Pennsylvania Presbyterian church voted recently to break from Presbyterian Church (USA) and join a more conservative outfit. These churches, including Peters Creek Presbyterian in Washington County, cite a number of reasons for the changes in affiliation, but anyone with the slightest ability to read between the lines knows the main reason: the national church just isn’t doing enough to keep gays at bay. A couple of years ago, the PCUSA’s General Assembly approved a measure that essentially allows individual churches to overlook the fact that a person is a practicing homosexual (or non-chaste heterosexual, for that matter) when considering them for leadership positions in the church (elder, deacon, etc.). And according to their interpretation of the Bible, the conservatives can’t be party to that. Perhaps we should remember that the Bible was written by folks who weren’t exactly living in days of great enlightenment. Stoning people to death was the punishment of choice for serious offenses. Also, it’s pretty easy to see that people of most religions today pick and choose which parts of their “good books” they want to follow. (Try this link - www.humanistsofutah.org/2002/WhyCantIOwnACanadian_10-02.html - if you want a good laugh.) Bottom line: Should churches be discriminating against people because of their sexual orientation? Let’s discuss.