Thursday, August 2, 2012


Yes. I'm going to write about the recent uproar surrounding Dan Cathy and his restaurant "Chick-fil-a."

When I lived in Texas, I used to see these restaurants often. I'm now thankful I can say that I've never eaten at one. Their logo and marketing is (or at least was - I haven't seen an advertisement for them since I left Texas) really cute; a cow holding up a sign asking you to eat more chicken in some adorable misspelled manner. While I still find that add brings a sliver of a smile to my face, I find it now also reminds me of all of the evangelical religious views the company has taken.

A chicken restaurant has an evangelical stance?! They sure do! Dan Cathy, the "head honcho," has said that he is a proponent of "traditional marriage." Well, what the hell does that really mean? I've tried asking a few people who say they agree with Mr. Cathy and I get answers like, "He means Biblical marriage," or "Marriage between a man and a woman."

Let's explore this a little:

"Biblical marriage." What does this mean, anyway? First, in the Bible, men had MANY wives, not just one. Is this what they were talking about? Or were they referring to when your god sends down a plethora of helpmeets until you find one that suits you? (Thank goodness none of the animals God sent to Adam before he sent Eve worked out; we could be in a munch worse place had he taken interest in a squirrel instead of a woman.)

"Marriage is between a man and a woman." Why? Just because that's what's familiar? Because it keeps a certain group of socially repressed people from having to face the fact that there are others out there who live differently than they do? Not too long ago it was illegal for interracial couples to marry.  Thankfully, that was thrown out. But what changed when interracial marriage became legal? Nothing, except now more people can be legally wed. If we, as a nation, can get past the fear of couples of mixed race marrying, why can't we acknowledge that same sex couples aren't going to cause a rift either?

Same race marriages didn't feel a rift and their life went on the same as before. Allowing mixed race couples didn't bring about beastiality (something I hear is "next" if same sex couples become legal to wed) or tear down the moral fabric of our society.

"You can't compare the Civil Rights Movement with gay couples wanting to marry." This is one I hear often. Far too often. Both of those aforementioned things can definitely be compared. The only difference is that one is here already, and one is proposed and could perhaps remain banned. The ban on same sex marriage does take a blow at human rights. Everyone deserves to marry who they are in love with, regardless of sex, gender or ethnicity

I've always told my kids that I don't care who they choose to love, my only concern is that they find someone who treats them well. I don't care if that person is a boy, a girl, transgender, gender queer, etc. I believe parents should spend more time worrying about the quality of the person that's chosen, and less time focusing on what's going to be going on in their child's bedroom in the evenings.

I cannot find a credible source in the Bible that speaks out against homosexuality. One verse tells men to not have gay sex in their wife's bed, and a other one speaks out against effeminate men. Neither of those things says homosexuality is wrong. And beside,  not all gay men are effeminate, so what was that verse trying to get at?

Banning Chick-fil-a? I don't agree with that. The boycotts, yes. Absolutely and peacefully.

If a chicken restaurant doesn't like "the gays" and wants their money to go toward hate groups, then I absolutely believe in a boycott. But I do not agree with some officials wanting to block the restaurant from coming to their area. Let it come and protest it. Have a blast in costume with this one, too.

Friday, April 22, 2011

Your prayers have been answered! (Ok, not really. But I AM back!)

I've been meaning to blog for quite a while now, but between having the baby and having a surgery and life in general, I haven't been able to sit down and find the time to dedicate to a composed post.

So, here it goes! (I apologize if I'm a little rusty!)

A few months back, my husband, children and I attended a conference sponsored by CFI (Center for Inquiry -- The conference was dedicated to Dale McGowan and "Parenting Beyond Belief." ( The conference was fantastic and extremely informative. While some of the details have fled my memory, the basic message remains; you can most certainly raise freethinking children without causing them irreparable harm, making them immoral, or any of the other horrendous 'damages' the more fundamental religious people out there would like you to believe.

One important thing that I had never really given much thought to (though I was never opposed to it whatsoever) was that children should be actively exposed to different religions. By "actively" I don't mean that they should be made to go to a new church every week, or that they are forced to attend Bible readings on a regular basis, but it is suggested that you not make religion(s) a taboo subject in the home. One thing McGowan suggested is letting a trusted (read: someone who will be open and respectful who will NOT try to indoctrinate your children) person bring them to church with them. I think this is a fantastic idea.

Interestingly enough, in my experience it's been the atheist/agnostic/freethinking/secular humanist families who have had more consistent, honest, open conversations about religion and religions in their homes. It's in these homes that I find children asking important questions and those same children receiving honest and thoughtful answers from their parents. For example: when a child asks, "Is there a God?" most people would expect to hear a simple 'yes' or 'no.' On the contrary, more often than not the answer I hear these freethinking parents offer to their kids is, "Well, some people believe there is, and some believe there isn't. Some people believe there is one God, and some believe there are many." From there, the questions and answers continue and remain on an investigative track, rather than on a definite track. The kids are taught and encouraged to ask more questions and think for themselves, rather than take the parents' word as law and put a damper on their line of questioning.

McGowan goes on to explain that exposure to religion and religions when the child is younger will help stave off the "Teenage Epiphany." He explains that this is the time a child finds themselves vulnerable in their teenage years, wanting to find themselves fitting in somewhere. Anywhere. Children who are simply told there is no God and that's that tend to find themselves vulnerable to their religious friends. These friends will tell them how fantastic their deity is, how fantastic their church is, how much religion has given to them. Children with no exposure to such things find themselves believing the fantasy being told to them by their peers. That child is then more likely to find themselves delving deep into this fantasy land as a rebellion against their parents.

While I've always believed it is important that children know about the many religions around the globe, I never really thought of the importance in those terms. It makes sense, though. I've been in those shoes (although much later in life -- thankfully I found Buddhism and not Xtianity!). Thankfully my children always ask questions and then always question the answer they were given. They are aware of the beliefs (or lack thereof) of my husband and myself, but they are also aware that they are free to explore and believe what they wish. Yes, even if they grow up to become a Xtian. They know that we love them no matter what; we just may not agree with a choice, but that their choice is always theirs.

So, to sum it up, the conference was a wonderful experience and I encourage everyone to try to bring one to their city/town/village/etc. The cost is fair, the information is invaluable, and Dale is a fantastic presenter.

Now, moving on . . .

"How can you have morality without religion?"

This is a question that I really dislike. I mean I really, really dislike it. Why do religion and morality have to go hand in hand?

Well, I'm happy to say that they don't!

In fact, I have seen more lapses in moral values from the religious right (read: religious WRONG) than I have in secular society. In fact, if you read through the Bible, you'll find more horrendous acts of violence than you'll ever experience in your entire lifetime on this planet.

So where do morals come from?

Well, I don't know. I don't believe that anyone does. I believe that morals are simply 'there' based on our concepts of right and wrong. I know that killing someone just because I feel like it is wrong. How do I know it's wrong? I just do. Religion never told me so, it's something I can just feel.

How do you know it's wrong?

How do you know that blue is blue? How do you know that up is up? You're taught. Religion doesn't teach you these things, though these things are absolutes. Are these people who will argue the semantics of these things with you? Of course. There are also people who will kill others and not think anything of it. That fault lies with the person. Many infamous killers have committed their crimes in the name of religion. If the religious moral compass was so distinct and encompassing, how could this have happened?

Basically, to the 'morality' argument I simply offer:

If I could prove, without a doubt that your religion is false, would you go out and just start killing people?

Monday, April 19, 2010

How the Christianity stole Christmas.

Pre-Christian Christmas Stories with Other Gods

By Edwin Kagin

Deities "born" on December 25:

Horus c. 3000 BCE

--born of the virgin Isis-Merion December 25 in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.
--his earthly father was named “Seb” (“Joseph”).
--was of royal descent.
--at 12, he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was baptized having disappeared for 18 years.
--baptized in the river Eridanus or Iarutana (Jordan) by “Anup the Baptizer” (“John the Baptist”), who was decapitated.
--had 12 disciples, two of who were his “witnesses” and were named “Anup” and “Aan” (the two “Johns”).
--performed miracles, exorcised demons and raised El-Azarus (“El-Osiris”), from the dead.
--walked on water.
--his personal epithet was “Iusa,” the “ever-becoming son” of “Ptah,” the “Father.” He was thus called “Holy Child.”
--delivered a “Sermon on the Mount” and his followers recounted the “Sayings of Iusa.”
--was transfigured on the Mount.
--crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, and resurrected.
--he was also the “Way, the Truth, the Light,” “Messiah,” “God’s Anointed Son,” “the “Son of Man,” the “Good Shepherd,” the “Lamb of God,” the “Word made flesh,” the “Word of Truth,” etc.
--he was “the Fisher” and was associated with the Fish (“Ichthys”), Lamb and Lion.
--came to fulfill the Law.
--called “the KRST,” or “Anointed One.”
--was supposed to reign one thousand years.

Inscribed about 3,500 years ago on the walls of the Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, Birth and Adoration of Horus, with Thoth announcing to the Virgin Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kneph the “Holy Ghost,” impregnating the virgin; and with the infant being attended by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts. In addition, in the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the virgin mother Isis—the original “Madonna and Child.”

Osiris c. 3000 BCE

--Father of Horus, considered to be part of a triune godhead -- Osiris, Horus and Isis.
--Osiris was identified with nearly every other Egyptian god and was on the way to absorbing them all. He had well over 200 divine names.
--He was called the Lord of Lords, King of Kings, God of Gods.
--He was the Resurrection and the Life, the Good Shepherd, Eternity and Everlastingness, the god who “made men and women to be born again.” --From first to last, Osiris was to the Egyptians the god-man who suffered, an died, and rose again, and reigned eternally in heaven. They believed that they would inherit eternal life, just as he had done .
--Osiris’s coming was announced by Three Wise Men: the three stars Mintaka, Anilam, and Alnitak in the belt of Orion, which point directly to Osiris’s star in the east, Sirius (Sothis), significator of his birth . . .
--Osiris was a prototypical Messiah, as well as a devoured Host. His flesh was eaten in the form of communion cakes of wheat, the “plant of Truth.” . . .
--The cult of Osiris contributed a number of ideas and phrases to the Bible. The 23rd Psalm copied an Egyptian text appealing to Osiris the Good Shepherd to lead the deceased to the “green pastures” and “still waters” of the nefer-nefer land, to restore the soul to the body, and to give protection in the valley of the shadow of death (the Tuat).
--The Lord’s Prayer was prefigured by an Egyptian hymn to Osiris-Amen beginning, “O Amen, O Amen, who are in heaven.” Amen was also invoked at the end of every prayer.

Attis of Phrygia c.1400 BCE

-- born on December 25 of the Virgin Nana (or sometimes Cybelem).
-- considered the savior who was slain for the salvation of mankind.
-- his body as bread was eaten by his worshippers
-- his priests were “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven.”
-- he was both the Divine Son and the Father.
-- he was crucified on a tree on “Black Friday,” from which his holy blood ran down to redeem the earth.
-- descended into the underworld for three days.
-- was resurrected on March 25 (as tradition held of Jesus) as the Most High God. -- reborn as the evergreen pine.

Krishna c. 1400 BCE (possibly as early as 5771 BCE)

-- born of the Virgin Devaki (“Divine One”) on December 25.
--his earthly father was a carpenter, off in the city paying tax when K. was born.
--birth was signaled by a star in the east and attended by angels and shepherds, at which time he was presented with spices.
--heavenly hosts danced and sang at his birth.
--persecuted by a tyrant who ordered the slaughter of thousands of infants.
--anointed on the head with oil by a woman whom he healed.
--depicted as having his foot on the head of a serpent.
--worked miracles and wonders, raising the dead and healing lepers, the deaf and the blind.
--used parables to teach the people about charity and love, and he “lived poor and he loved the poor.”
--castigated the clergy, charging them with “ambition and hypocrisy . . . Tradition says he fell victim to their vengeance.”
--his “beloved disciple” was Arjuina or Ar-jouan (Jouhn).
--transfigured in front of his disciples.
--gave his twelve disciples the ability to work miracles.
--his path was “strewn with branches.”
--died on a tree or was crucified between two thieves.
--killed around the age of 30, and the sun darkened at his death.
--rose from the dead and ascended to heaven “in the sight of all men.”
--depicted on a cross with nail-holes in his feet, as well as having a heart emblem on his clothing.
--the “lion of the tribe of Saki.”
--called the “Shepherd of God” and considered the “Redeemer,” “Firstborn,” “Sin-Bearer,” “Liberator,” “Universal Word.”
--deemed the “Son of God” and “our Lord and Savior,” who came to earth to die for man’s salvation.
--the second person of the Trinity.
--his disciples purportedly bestowed upon him the title “Jezeus,” or “Jeseus,” meaning “pure essence.”

Zoroaster/Zarathustra c. 1000 BCE or earlier

--born of a 15-year-old virgin, Dughdhava and “immaculate conception by a ray of divine reason.”
--he was baptized in a river.
--in his youth he astounded wise men with his wisdom.
--was tempted in the wilderness by the devil.
--began his ministry at age 30 wandered around with twelve followers.
--baptized with water, fire and “holy wind.”
--cast out demons and restored the sight to a blind man.
--taught about heaven and hell, and revealed mysteries, including resurrection, judgment, salvation and the apocalypse.
--had a sacred cup or grail.
--was slain.
--his religion had a eucharist.
--he was the “Word made flesh.”
--followers expected a “second coming” in the virgin-born Saoshynt or Savior, who is to come in 2341 CE and begin his ministry at age 30, ushering in a golden age.

Mithra of Persia c. 600 BCE

--born of a virgin on December 25 in a cave, and his birth was attended by shepherds bearing gifts.
--considered a great traveling teacher and master.
--had 12 companions or disciples.
--his followers were promised immortality.
--performed miracles.
--the “great bull of the Sun,” Mithra sacrificed himself for world peace.
-- buried in a tomb and after three days rose again.
--resurrection was celebrated every year.
--called “the Good Shepherd” and identified with both the Lamb and the Lion.
--considered the “Way, the Truth and the Light,” and the “Logos,” [Word] “Redeemer,” “Savior” and “Messiah.”
--sacred day was Sunday, the “Lord’s Day,” hundreds of years before the appearance of Christ.
--had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter.
--his religion had a eucharist or “Lord’s Supper,” at which Mithra said, “He who shall not eat of my body nor drink of my blood so that he may be one with me and I with him, shall not be saved.”
--his annual sacrifice is the Passover of the Magi, a symbolical atonement of pledge of moral and physical regeneration.

ALSO, the Vatican is built upon the papacy of Mithra, and the Christian hierarchy is nearly identical to the Mithraic version it replaced . . . Virtually all of the elements of the Catholic ritual, from miter to wafer to altar to doxology, are directly taken from earlier Pagan mystery religions.

Buddha (Siddartha Gautama) c. 563 BCE

--born on December 25
--born of the Virgin Maya (“the Queen of Heaven”)
-- announced by a star and attended by wise men presenting costly gifts.
--at his birth Brahma angels sang hymns.
--tempted by Mara, the Evil One, while fasting, but overcame the temptation, putting the Evil One to flight.
--taught in temple at age 12 and was able to match the wise religious scholars in their understanding.
-- He healed the sick; fed 500 from a small basket of cakes.
--walked on water.
--Buddha's disciple wanted to hear his lord preach so he started to cross a stream – he doubted and started to sink but he built up his faith and continued to walk across the water.
--came to fulfill the law and preached the establishment of a kingdom of righteousness.
--He obliged followers to live in poverty and to renounce the world.
--In his final years, Buddha was said to have 'crushed a serpent's head' and to have been transfigured on a mount ...'
--It was Buddha, not Christ, who first said: 'If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also'

Heracles c. 800 BCE

--born on December 25 to a virgin who refrained from sex with her until her God-begotten child was born.
--sacrificed at the spring equinox.

Dionysus c. 186 BCE

--born of a virgin on December 25 and, as the Holy Child, was placed in a manger.
--a traveling teacher who performed miracles.
--rode in a triumphal procession on an ass.
-- a sacred king killed and eaten in an eucharistic ritual for fecundity and purification.
--rose from the dead on March 25.
--the God of the Vine, and turned water into wine.
--called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.”
--considered the “Only Begotten Son,” Savior,” “Redeemer,” “Sin Bearer,” Anointed One,” and the “Alpha and Omega.”
--identified with the Ram or Lamb.
--His sacrificial title of “Dendrites” or “Young Man of the Tree” indicates he was hung on a tree or crucified.

Tammuz c. 400 BCE

--born to a virgin, named Mylitta, on December 25

Adonis c. 200 BCE

--born on December 25 was son of the virgin Myrha. (Almost certainly based on Tammuz).


--born on December 25 was the son of the virgin Maia,
--member of a holy trinity Hermes Tris-Megistus.


--born on December 25, was crucified in 200 BCE.


--born on December 25, descended from heaven as a god incarnate as man, to save mankind, and was crucified, suffered, and was redeemed from death.

(Source: )

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

"I'm a rough rider, fillin' up with Christ's love!"

This is a video my husband showed to me months ago, after he received it from one of his co-hosts. (In case you don't know, my husband is 1/3 of Reasonable Doubts podcast. I suggest you check it out!) I found it entirely ridiculous at the time, and still do to this day. I wanted to share this with anyone who may not have seen it yet.

Monday, April 12, 2010

Scopes vs The State of Tennessee (and all common sense).

I'm doing a blog on a very well known and widely referenced trial that took place in Tennessee in 1925. During this time, the teaching of evolution in public schools was illegal. This blog came to be because my oldest daughter was just cast in the play Inherit the Wind, which focuses on the Scopes trial. I just thought it would be fun to educate myself about the real trial (besides the basics I've heard referenced in passing) and to help my daughter do her research. So, here goes:

Here is a time line I found on

1914 – George William Hunter's A Civic Biology, the book that is later used in biology courses in Dayton, Tenn., is published. A Civic Biology describes evolution as "the belief that simple forms of life on the earth slowly and gradually gave rise to those more complex and that thus ultimately the most complex forms came into existence."

1921 – Former congressman and ex-Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan becomes a leader in the anti-evolution movement, delivering speeches entitled "The Menace of Darwinism" and "The Bible and its Enemies." Bryan declares in one address that "[i]t is better to trust in the Rock of Ages, than to know the age of the rocks; it is better for one to know that he is close to the Heavenly Father, than to know how far the stars in the heavens are apart."

1924 – Bryan delivers a lecture in Nashville entitled "Is the Bible true?" Copies of the speech are delivered to members of the Tennessee legislature, including Rep. John Washington Butler.

Jan. 21, 1925 – Rep. Butler introduces legislation in the Tennessee House of Representatives calling for a ban on the teaching of evolution. The proposed law, known as the Butler bill, would prohibit the teaching of "any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals."

Jan. 27, 1925 – The Tennessee House of Representatives approves the Butler bill on a 71-to-5 vote.

March 13, 1925 – After several hours of heated debate, the Tennessee Senate approves the Butler bill 24 to 6.

March 21, 1925 – Tennessee Gov. Austin Peay signs the Butler bill into law. The new law is the first in the United States to ban the teaching of evolution.

May 4, 1925 – A Chattanooga newspaper runs an item noting that the American Civil Liberties Union is seeking teachers willing to challenge the Butler law. The item says that the ACLU is "looking for a Tennessee teacher who is willing to accept our services in testing this law in the courts. Our lawyers think a friendly test case can be arranged without costing a teacher his or her job... All we need now is a willing client."

May 5, 1925 – A group of town leaders in Dayton, Tenn., read the news item about the ACLU's search. They quickly hatch a plan to bring the case to Dayton, a scheme that they hope will generate publicity and jump-start the town's economy. They ask 24-year-old science teacher and football coach John Thomas Scopes if he'd be willing to be indicted to bring the case to trial. Scopes agrees, even though he has only taught biology as a substitute teacher and later says he isn't sure he covered evolution in his classes.

May 12, 1925 – Bryan agrees to participate in the trial on the side of the prosecution, ensuring that the case will receive significant national interest. Several days later, well-known attorneys Clarence Darrow and Dudley Field Malone announce their interest in representing Scopes.

May 25, 1925 – Scopes is indicted by a grand jury for violating Tennessee's anti-evolution law.

May-July, 1925 – Preparations begin in Dayton for an expected onslaught of trial-related publicity. Six blocks of Dayton's main road are transformed into a pedestrian mall; a speaker's platform is built on the lawn of the courthouse; and a tourist camp is constructed. The courtroom is outfitted with the latest technology to transmit the story to the world: telegraph and telephone wiring, movie-newsreel camera platforms and radio microphones. WGN Radio broadcasts the trial live at a cost of more than $1,000 a day just for telephone lines -- the first such broadcast of its kind.

July 10, 1925 – The trial begins with jury selection. Judge John Raulston asks the Rev. Lemuel M. Cartright to open the proceedings with a prayer.

July 13, 1925 – In an effort to have the Butler law declared unconstitutional, defense attorney Clarence Darrow delivers a long, fiery speech arguing that the law violates freedom of religion. Darrow argues that "we find today as brazen and as bold an attempt to destroy learning as was ever made in the Middle Ages."

July 14, 1925 – In the third day of the trial, Darrow objects to the practice of opening the trial with a prayer. Judge Raulston overrules the objection, noting that he has instructed the ministers who offer the prayer to "make no reference to the issues involved in this case."

July 15, 1925 – Judge Raulston overrules the defense's motion to have the Butler law declared unconstitutional. Raulston says in his ruling that the law "gives no preference to any particular religion or mode of worship. Our public schools are not maintained as places of worship, but, on the contrary, were designed, instituted, and are maintained for the purpose of mental and moral development and discipline."

In an afternoon session that day, a not guilty plea is entered on Scopes' behalf. Each side presents its opening statements. The prosecution questions the superintendent of schools and two of Scopes' students, who testify that Scopes taught his class about evolution. The defense questions zoologist Maynard Metcalf, who testifies that evolution is a widely embraced theory in the scientific community.

July 17, 1925 – Judge Raulston rules in favor of a motion by prosecutors to bar expert testimony by scientists. Raulston argues that the experts' opinions on evolutionary theory would "shed no light" on the issue at hand in the trial -- whether Scopes violated the state's anti-evolution laws. Many reporters leave town, believing that the trial is effectively over. Scopes is recruited to write news stories on the trial for some of the delinquent journalists.

July 20, 1925 – With the proceedings taking place outdoors due to the heat, the defense -- in a highly unusual move -- calls Bryan to testify as a biblical expert. Clarence Darrow asks Bryan a series of questions about whether the Bible should be interpreted literally. As the questioning continues, Bryan accuses Darrow of making a "slur at the Bible," while Darrow mocks Bryan for "fool ideas that no intelligent Christian on earth believes."

July 21, 1925 – The final day of the trial opens with Judge Raulston's ruling that Bryan cannot return to the stand and that his testimony should be expunged from the record. Raulston declares that Bryan's testimony "can shed no light upon any issues that will be pending before the higher courts." Darrow then asks the court to bring in the jury and find Scopes guilty -- a move that would allow a higher court to consider an appeal. The jury returns its guilty verdict after nine minutes of deliberation. Scopes is fined $100, which both Bryan and the ACLU offer to pay for him.

After the verdict is read, John Scopes delivers his only statement of the trial, declaring his intent "to oppose this law in any way I can. Any other action would be in violation of my ideal of academic freedom -- that is, to teach the truth as guaranteed in our constitution, of personal and religious freedom."

(Source: )

Then this same site continues on with some of the aftermath from the Scopes Trial:


July 26, 1925 – Five days after the Scopes trial ends, Bryan dies in his sleep in Dayton.

July 31, 1925 – Bryan is buried in Arlington National Cemetery. The words "He Kept the Faith" are inscribed on his tombstone.

1926 – Mississippi becomes the second state to pass a law banning the teaching of evolution in public schools.

May 31, 1926 – The appeal hearing in the Scopes case begins.

Jan. 15, 1927 – The Tennessee Supreme Court rules that the Butler law is constitutional. However, it overturns Scopes' verdict on a technicality, ruling that his fine should have been set by the jury hearing the case instead of by Judge Raulston. The justices declare in their ruling that "[n]othing is to be gained by prolonging the life of this bizarre case."

1927 – George William Hunter publishes A New Civic Biology, an updated version of the biology book used in the Dayton high school where Scopes taught. The new text deals with the concept of evolution cautiously and avoids explicitly naming the theory.

1928 – A third state, Arkansas, enacts legislation banning instruction on evolution.

1930 – The William Jennings Bryan Memorial University opens in Dayton, Tenn. Known today as Bryan College, the institution describes itself as "a highly ranked, nationally competitive college that puts Christ above all."

March 13, 1938 – Clarence Darrow dies at the age of 80.

Jan. 10, 1955 – The play Inherit the Wind, which is loosely based on the Scopes trial, opens on Broadway.

1960 – Thirty-five years after the Scopes trial, the film version of Inherit the Wind opens at a drive-in movie theater in Dayton. Scopes returns to the town for the premiere and is given the key to the city.

May 17, 1967 – Tennessee repeals the Butler Act, the law that banned the teaching of evolution in public schools.

1967 – John Scopes publishes Center of the Storm, his memoir of the trial.

1968 – In Epperson v. Arkansas, the Supreme Court strikes down an Arkansas law banning the teaching of evolution.

Oct. 21, 1970 – John Scopes dies at the age of 70.

1973 – Tennessee becomes the first state in the United States to pass a law requiring that public schools give equal emphasis to "the Genesis account in the Bible" along with other theories about the origins of man. The bill also requires a disclaimer be used any time evolution is presented or discussed in public schools. It demands evolution be taught as theory and not fact.

1975 – Two years after it is passed, Tennessee's "equal time" law is declared unconstitutional by a federal appeals court.

1977 – The National Park Service designates Rhea County Courthouse in Dayton a National Historic Landmark.

1982 -- In McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, a U.S. district judge strikes down an Arkansas law that required public schools to give "balanced treatment" to evolution and creationism whenever either was taught.

1987 – In Edwards v. Aguillard, the Supreme Court rules that a Louisiana law requiring public schools to give "balanced treatment" to creationism and evolution is unconstitutional.

2005 – School boards and legislatures across the country are continuing to debate how to teach students about the origins of life on Earth. Policymakers in at least 16 states are currently examining the controversy.


I find the process we had to go through to get FACT and SCIENCE taught in our schools absolutely amazing. They were willing to ban scientific fact in favor of supernatural supposition. I don't understand how that can be considered an 'education' at all. It's public indoctrination. Dave and I just ordered Scopes' book and we're looking forward to reading his take on the entire process. I'm sure I'll be making more posts on this subject in the future.

ICP hates science.

I know it's been a while since I've posted anything, but as many of you know we found out soon after the turn of the new year that we're expecting! Now that I'm in the second trimester I'm starting to feel much better, and I want to get blogging on a more regular basis.

The reason for this particular post is because of a video a friend linked me to. (See the video here: It's an Insane Clown Posse (ICP) video called "Miracles." Not only do they list some asinine things as "miracles," but they even say "And magnets! How does THAT shit work?!" Then they mention how they don't want to listen to scientists.

I never realized how religious ICP was. I've always been aware of the fact that they were awful, but not to the extent of trying to indoctrinate their listeners.

So, what's the fascination? I just don't understand. What does this band have that makes people want to call themselves "Juggalos" and enter into this painted-face Faygo-spewing cult?

Check out the video and let me know what you think.*

(Seriously. If you can shed some light, please do so.)

(Edited because the offended party and I discussed our 'head butting' point and the misunderstandings were worked out.)

*Video linked above.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

A total lack of respect.

My ex-husband takes our four kids for visitations every other weekend, and every Wednesday for a few hours. Before I get into anything, here's a little bit of background:

My ex-husband and I are (were, in his case) atheists/freethinkers. We didn't believe there was a God, and raised our children in a secular household. They were never brought to church or told there was a higher power, etc. We had agreed to let them find their own path, whatever that path may be.

Since the divorce, my ex-husband had decided that he's now a devout follower of Jesus. Good for him (and I don't mean that with sarcasm). But since he's made that decision, he's harassed our children. My children are made to listen to anti-evolution talk, talk about Jesus and God, and they are not allowed to offer a retort. They have to listen, but then aren't allowed to ask any questions or add to the conversation. When they explained that they were interviewed by a skeptic's podcast about their beliefs in God/Santa/Tooth Fairy, their aunt was so shocked she exclaimed in front of my kids, "That makes me need a cigarette!" One great lesson (listen, but don't speak for yourself) to another (I'm angry, so I'll smoke).

I have raised my children from day one to think for themselves. I want them to explore things on their own time. If they want to experience a church, we'll discuss denominations and I'll take them. If they want to learn about a foreign religion, we'll discuss them at length and them go to a service. I would never keep my kids from life experiences, nor would I make them believe what I believe, simply because I believe it. I want them to have many experiences, have lots of questions, and come to a conclusion that's right for them. What they experience at my ex-in law's house is sheer harassment. The best part is, however, he doesn't even get his religious 'facts' correct! Ahh. Awesome.

What to do? We had agreed to raise the kids to be rational freethinkers. Now, because he's had some great revelation for himself, he's forcing it upon them. There has to be some action I can take against this. If they want to ask him questions, great. If they want him to take them to church sometime, great. I want it to continue to be their decision, and he wants to indoctrinate them. Sigh.