h/t: Planet Atheism
Category Archives: Secularism
HOMESCHOOLING: PZ Myers / “The Ducks Are Gonna Get You”
I’ve transcribed it below. I couldn’t help myself, though, and had to, um, annotate it a bit.
Homosexuality, including same sex marriage, is not an enlightened idea [But tolerance and acceptance of diversity are]. The Romans practiced homosexuality [Every culture has had homosexual individuals; they differ only in the degree of suppression. The Romans actually regarded homosexuals as effete and inferior, and used accusations of gayness as expressions of contempt, just like modern middle schoolers]. Surely, after 2000 years, our level of intelligence should have evolved somewhat, so that we can truly pride ourselves of being cleverer than our forebears [Two millennia is actually a short span of time for biological evolution. Also, have you ever heard of the Dark Ages? Progress is not inevitable].
If homosexuality spreads, it can cause human evolution to come to a standstill [Nope. Homosexuals reproduce. Homosexuality refers to behavior and social preferences, not to biological limitations. Also, many heterosexuals choose to not reproduce as well, and it does not stop evolution in its tracks — in complex social organisms like ours, there are many ways to contribute to the species that don’t involve breeding directly]. It could threaten the human position on the evolutionary ladder [There is no evolutionary “ladder”. You have some serious misconceptions about biology, young lady!], and say, ducks, could take over the world [Evolution is not about taking over the world. There is no pinnacle. Every species has a different niche, not a different spot in a hierarchy of dominance]. Ducks always nest in pairs [This is called the naturalistic fallacy. You cannot draw conclusions from how one species behaves and declare that it justifies one specific kind of behavior in another species. I could point to gorillas, and announce that we should live in polygamous harems; I could point to bonobos and say that public homosexual acts ought to be accepted as a matter of course, and that we ought to have casual sex as often as we say hello. If you’d like, I could give you a long list of very kinky sexual behaviors practiced by various species on the planet; shall we decide that because ducks rape, so should we, lest we fall behind evolutionarily?] and if we allow same-sex marriage, then the ducks will have evolved further than we have [Ducks are just as “evolved” as we are, and we’re not more evolved than any other species on the planet. Evolution is about branching trees, not climbing ladders]. We will be in danger of all being equal, with ducks more equal than us [That makes no sense].
We should learn from history and not be stuck with copying ancient behavior [Are you, by any chance, a follower of Jesus or Mohammed? Because you know, those faiths are all about imposing ancient rules for behavior on modern society]. The government has no right to bring us back to the stone age [But the Middle Ages are OK, I suppose?]. I don’t want my children to have to compete with ducks [Wait. I’m trying to puzzle this out. Because you think ducks are all heterosexual, and your children will all be heterosexual (brace yourself, you might get a few surprises in 10 or 20 years there), and a policy of tolerance will turn every other human being homosexual, you’re afraid your kids will be competing for mates with ducks? Or is it that duck heterosexuality is the only criterion that makes them acceptable for positions of power, so years from now, your children will find themselves in a workplace dominated by duck bosses, who have overcome the handicap of lack of manipulatory appendages and very small brains to be in charge of everything? I don’t get it]. I want them to evolve further than I have [But you don’t believe in evolution!]. Any self-respecting human would aim for that, too. [Are you aware that the Abrahamic faiths all preach that humanity is in a state of ineluctable decay since the Fall and that human sin corrupts us? I don’t think any self-respecting human should be a Christian or a Jew or Muslim, for the same reason]
None of this really bears any weight for be, because I do not believe in evolution [You don’t understand it, either]. However, the powers that be believe in evolution, and have made many decisions based on it. They should be consistent: if you believe in evolution, then you can’t be in favour of homosexuality [If you accept evolution, then you recognize that there are diverse successful sexual strategies in the world, and you also have a deeper appreciation of the complexity of biology, so no, you should be much more accepting of reality], or the ducks will get you in the end [You can live your life in fear of ducks, or you can love your fellow human beings and encourage more love in the world. Your choice].
Jasmin H, aged 14 [You have time to grow up!]
Homeschooled [Obviously], Scargill
MORALITY: Christopher Hitchens / “Hitchens on Morality”
MORALITY: Pat Condell / “Your Moral Guide”
h/t: Planet Atheism
h/t: Friendly Atheist
ANTITHEISM: “Evolution for the win!”
CHRISTIAN PRIVILEGE: Rev. Emily C. Heath / “How to Determine If Your Religious Liberty Is Being Threatened in Just 10 Quick Questions”
It seems like this election season “religious liberty” is a hot topic. Rumors of its demise are all around, as are politicians who want to make sure that you know they will never do anything to intrude upon it.
[…]
Quick Questions.” Just pick “A” or “B” for each question.
1. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to go to a religious service of my own choosing.
B) Others are allowed to go to religious services of their own choosing.2. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to marry the person I love legally, even though my religious community blesses my marriage.
B) Some states refuse to enforce my own particular religious beliefs on marriage on those two guys in line down at the courthouse.3. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am being forced to use birth control.
B) I am unable to force others to not use birth control.[…]
10. My religious liberty is at risk because:
A) I am not allowed to teach my children the creation stories of our faith at home.
B) Public school science classes are teaching science.
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE: FFRF / “God Fixation Won’t Fix This Nation”
“This is an equal-opportunity message to both political parties and all public officials. Essentially, we secularists, who comprise nearly a fifth of the U.S. population, are telling government officials that it’s time to get off your knees and get to work!” said FFRF Co-President Dan Barker.
“God fixation won’t fix our nation, or any nation. A preoccupation with religion in government and a political fear of offending religious lobbies is holding back our nation scientifically, intellectually and morally,” added Annie Laurie Gaylor, who co-directs FFRF.
[…]
Related articles
- FFRF Puts ‘God Fixation Won’t Fix This Nation’ Billboards at Sites of DNC and RNC Conventions (patheos.com)
- Nearly One in Five Americans Have No Religious Affiliation (patheos.com)
- “Nones” climb to 19% (secularnewsdaily.com)
- Nearly One in Five Americans Have No Religious Affiliation (patheos.com)
- “Nones” climb to 19% (secularnewsdaily.com)
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE: Andrea Stone / “R. Martin Umbarger, [Indiana] National Guard General, Accused of Ethics Violation for Endorsing Christian Group”
The head of the Indiana National Guard recorded a fundraising video for an evangelical Christian organization — an act that violates the constitutional separation of church and state, a watchdog group argues, and that is grounds for dismissal, one of the nation’s leading military law experts says.
In the video, Maj. Gen. R. Martin Umbarger, adjutant general of the Indiana National Guard, endorses Centurion’s Watch, an Indianapolis-based sectarian Christian nonprofit that offers marriage counseling to military families. The video was first noted by freethoughtblogs.com.
EXPOSITORY ESSAY: John Kelly / “Robert Ingersoll, the ‘Great Agnostic’”
Photo credit: LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Robert G. Ingersoll, shown between 1865 and 1880.
What was Robert Ingersoll’s address? Answer Man is confident many readers are wondering, “Who the heck was Robert Ingersoll?”
Well, he is the most famous American you never heard of.
Col. Ingersoll — he fought for the Union in the Civil War after raising a cavalry regiment from Illinois — was a lawyer who counted the wealthy and powerful among his clients. He was a committed Republican who stumped for GOP candidates. He was a silver-tongued orator whose lectures drew thousands — and earned him thousands of dollars a pop. He was also, by all accounts, a really nice guy.
And Ingersoll accomplished all of this without believing in God.
Ingersoll’s disbelief was the quality that most fascinated the 19th-century audiences that packed theaters to hear him speak. He was known as the Great Agnostic. Some called him blasphemer or infidel.
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE: Father Bernard Lynch / “Secular Europe Campaign”




