american atheist magazine feb 2009

8/10/2019 American Atheist Magazine Feb 2009

1/31

m ~iJ ~ ~

1M ,

-~~

iu

J i . Q ~ ~


2/31


3/31

FE B R UA R Y 2 9

Vol47, N o 2

ISSN 0516-9623 (Print)

ISSN 1935-8369 (Online)

AMERICAN ATHEIST PRESS

Editor

Frank R. Zindler

[email protected]

AMERICAN ATHEIST

'A Journal of Atheist News and Thought'

General Editor

Bill Hampl

[email protected]

Design

Layout Editor

David C. Smalley

[email protected]

Cover Design

David C. Smalley

Published monthly

(except June & December)

by American Atheists Inc.

Mailing Address:

P.O. Box 158

Cranford, NJ 07016

908.276.7300 P

908.276.7402 F

www.atheists.org

2009 American Atheists Inc.

All rights reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part without

written permiss ion is prohibited.

American Atheist is indexed in the

Alternative Press Index.

American Atheist Magazine

is given free of cost to members of

American Atheists as an incident

of their membership.

Subscription fees for one year of

American Atheist:

Print version only: $45 for 1 subscription

and $30 for each additional gift subscription

Online version only: $35

Sign up at www.atheists.org/aam

Print & online: $55

Discounts for multiple-year subscriptions:

10% for two years

20% for three or more years

Addi tional postage fees

for foreign addresses:

Canada Mexico: add $15/year

All other countries: add $35/year

Discount for l ibraries and institutions:

50% on all magazine subscriptions

and book purchases

MERIC N THEIST

CONTENTS

4 From The President

New Editors Are Announced

Ed Buckner

5

From The Out-Going Editor

Frank Zindler

6

Editor Introductions

Bill Hampl

David Smalley

8

Letter from the Editor

Bill Hampl

9

Legal Update

Edwin Kagin

10 American Atheists National Conference

Atlanta, Georgia April

9-12

Surrounded by Marxists

Dr. Massimo Pigliucci

14

Spirit, Soul, and Mind

Frank R. Zindler

17

Foxhole Atheist of the Month

Sergeant Brooks W Dingus, by Kathleen Johnson

18

Prayer Babies

Guy P Harrison

21 Why Atheists Make the Best Type of Citizen

Marie Alena Castle

22

Does Science Make Belief in God/Allah Obsolete?

Secret Authors (Courtesy of Humanist International)

24 The Faithful Atheist

David Smalley

28 Thoughts on some Material Atheist Freedoms

Greg Lammers


4/31

C

hange keeps coming

to American Atheists

and no doubt will never

cease to come. We have recently

completely revamped our Web-

site (and I say 'We' only because

I'm the president and therefore

have the formal privilege of

including myself for credit

even when others have done

all the work), using impressive

talent and many hours of work

from David Silverman, Jared

Alessandroni, Blair Scott, and

others, and I join many others

in welcoming this change and

delighting in it, but I also know

that Ed Gauci and many others

deserve great credit for the valuable Web-site that gave

way for the new one. In a similar way, I am proud to

introduce two new names-Bill Hampl and David

Smalley-to our readers and members but also proud to

acknowledge the irreplaceable contributions of the people

they succeed. Frank Zindler, a leader of leaders, has

succeeded in finding two people to partially replace him

and Ann Zindler-or more accurately to do an important

part of the work they have done. Frank has been editor of

American Atheist magazine for many years, both before

and after Ellen Johnson served in that capacity. Ann

has given untold hours of creative and technical work to

layout and the design of the magazine. Both have also led

the crucial efforts of American Atheists Press to publish

books o f singular importance to Atheists and other readers

and thinkers world-wide-and happily, the Zindlers will

continue to lead that effort. All who care about books-

and every member of American Atheists ought to be in

that category-can breathe a sigh of relief about this last

piece of information.

When it comes to taking credit as president, whether I

deserve it or not, I'm eager to take some of the credit for the

results of Frank Zindler's exhaustive search for editorial

renewal for American Atheists Magazine. We-especially

Frank, but I did do some of this, too-talked to many truly

outstanding creative and technologically accomplished

people who offered American Atheists their services.

Smalley and Hampl stood out as candidates highly likely

to succeed, but their competition was plentiful and strong.

Frank and I are agreed that we will be well rewarded for

securing the services of many others from among the ap-

plicants and we certainly intend to do just that. But now

let me explain why I have such extraordinarily high ex-

pectations for our new General Editor, Bill Hampl, and

our new Design Layout Editor, David Smalley.

Ed Buckner, PhD

President of

American Atheists

AMERICAN ATHEIST FEBRUARY 2009

Bill Hampl is a classy exemplar of Atheism and of

excellence. He values community contributions and vol-

untarism, and his willingness to take on such important

responsibilities to lead our chief enduring path of com-

munication with the world (starting with our members)

demonstrates the seriousness of his commitment. He is a

master of clear English, of writing, and of editing, and

will show readers that willing Atheist writers have much

to offer and can be persuaded to offer it. A protege of the

late 'Rev.' Jerry Falwell (you may want to read Bill's own

comments about Falwell before you call me up and dress

me down), Hampl's perspective and experience will give

fresh understanding toAtheism and this organization. The

words you will see in the months to come will be, as they

have in the past, the words of many different Atheists with

many ideas, some of them in conflict with some of the

rest. But behind those words, encouraging those words

and organizing them with greater clarity, will be the mind

and work of Bill Hampl. You will like what you read.

Dave Smalley is no less excellent an Atheist than Bill

Hampl, but he is nevertheless a very different guy. You

will like what you read, but you will also like what you

see-and the mind and creativjty that makes the way the

publication look interesting and engaging will be primar-

ily Smalley's work. He has mastered so many different

graphics and layout software packages that a layman like

me had literally never even heard of many of the tools

with which he is proficient. His expertise and interests ex-

tend as well to video, and the crucial work to be done on

the magazine will assuredly not be the only arena where

either of these leaders will be contributing. More impor-

tant than the technical sophistication, though, is Smalley's

creative eye, his highly developed talent at artistic com-

position and juxtaposition, as well as his ability to/break

out of traditional structures. Both Smalley and Hampl will

be using both words and images to maintain the traditions

that make all of us so proud our magazine, but Smalley

will be the lead image composer while Hampl is the lead

wordsmith. The work of each will complement the work

of the other, to our lasting benefit.

Welcome, William Hampl and David C. Smalley. You

cannot imagine-even though I know both of you are glo-

riously imaginative-just how glad all of us in American

Atheists are to have you with us.


5/31

From the

Out Going Editor

Frank R . Z indler

J

ust in the nick oftime, salvation is at hand Just as I

was about to 'go down for the third time,' someone

has thrown me a life-preserver. Actually, it wasn't

just one someone, it was two someones - and I am not

the only person whose life has been saved. My wife

and life-partner Ann has been in the Atheist publica-

tion business with me - days and nights - for over

thirteen years, and she is just as exhausted from chasing

publication deadlines as I am. The two stalwarts who

have effected our salvation are Bill Hampl and David

Smalley.

Early last summer, after I became acting president

of American Atheists, I found myself doing the equiva-

lent of three full-time jobs: the job of president, the job

of magazine editor (in addition to my on-going job as

managing editor of American Atheist Press), and the

job I do for pay - working past retirement age as a

linguist and editor for a scientific publishing society.

Although Ann and I had produced the American Atheist

magazine for nearly eleven years after the death of the

Murray-O'Hair family in 1995, because Ellen Johnson

assumed the editorship ofthe magazine, we had not had

to worry about the journal for two years and we were

able to concentrate our efforts on book production.

Then, literally over night, we had to resume publication

of the magazine. Needless to admit, it was too much;

we couldn't publish the magazine in a timely fashion

and deadlines routinely were missed.

Early last summer I placed two ads in the maga-

zine and on the Atheist blog: one for a new president of

American Atheists, and one for a new editor of Ameri-

can Atheist.

The presidential position was filled last Oc-

tober with the accession of Dr. Ed Buckner, and that left

me more time to concentrate on finding a replacement

for myself as magazine editor. It was about as easy as

trying to change from a snow-suit into a tuxedo while

running a relay race-and avoiding arrest for indecent

exposure. Fortunately, Ed helped me in this task as

well. Out of a large pool of applicants (Damn There

are lots of talented Atheists out there) we were able

to settle on two men whose talents nicely complement

each other: William ('Bill')

Hampl and David Smalley.

Bill will be serving as

general editor of the maga-

zine, concerning himself

with interacting with au-

thors and printers, selection of materials for publica-

tion, editing them and preparing them for publication,

and copy-editing proofs before each magazine is 'put to

bed.' David Smalley will concern himself with overall

design of the magazine, layout of text in Adobe InDe-

sign (the industry standard for creating publications),

creation of artwork, processing photographs, and even

such mind-numbing tasks as creating order-blanks and

application forms. Oh, yes: each of them will be receiv-

ing the exact same salary as I have always received:

zero dollars and zero cents per year. Their unhesitating

willingness to assume these onerous positions is a mea-

sure of their dedication to the cause of Atheism.

Once again, Ann and I will focus on publishing

new Atheist books and reprinting Atheist classics. We

hope to enlist the aid of several of the other editorial ap-

plicants whose talents seem more appropriate in book

publishing than in magazine production.

Ann and I thank both Bill and David for coming to

our rescue. We are confident that with their energy and

enthusiasm American Atheist will once again become a

journal of substance, a magazine of which we canjustly

be proud. With their help-and with the help of some

of the other applicants-we think that American Athe-

ist Press as a whole will be buoyed up and will once

again be the printed voice of Atheism for the English-

speaking world.

Thank you, Bill and David

FEBRUARY 2009 - AMERICAN ATHEIST


6/31

mvery excited. to assume the

role of General Editor for this

great organization's chief pub-

lication. I like to think of myself

as just another gay Atheist in the

civil service, but let me provide

a little background on myself. I

was brought up Baptist in a small

town in Massachusetts. My parents

elected to send me to a Baptist high

.school forty-five minutes from

my house rather than have me

attend the local public school.

At my high school, the teach-

ers strongly admonished my

fellow students and me both

from socializing or dating

people from other religions-

Catholics were a big no-no-

and also from attending any

secular colleges. Some of

the more popular institutions

of higher learning were Bap-

tist Bible College East, Bob

Jones University, and Jerry

Falwell's Liberty University

in Lynchburg, Virginia. As

a reward for graduating third

in my class (out of a class of

nine students), Liberty actually

awarded me a partial two-year

scholarship. I spent my fresh-

men year there, experimenting with

my sexuality, and narrowly avoided

being kicked out.

After taking some time off, I

went against the grain and attended

secular schools of higher learning. I

have earned a Bachelor's of Music,

a Master of Arts in English, and a

Master of Science in Management,

with a concentration in Account-

Introducing ...

Bill Hampl

the new General Editor

of American Atheist

ing. I went even further against the

grain and embraced my sexuality.

Eventually, I met my spouse, Jeff,

through a mutual friend at a vol-

leyball party, and I do not even like

to play volleyball. When same sex

marriage was legalized in 2003, Jeff

and I registered for our marriage

license on May 17. May l S was

my birthday, and we were married

amused by my WWJD-Who

Wants Jelly Donuts? bumper stic

er, ordered from the Atheist web

site, and still available there.

I am truly thankful for the conf

dence in my ability shown by Fran

Zindler and Ed Buckner to act

editor of this great magazine. I w

endeavor to provide interesting a

ticles and informative insights. F

example, when Jeff and

attended training to fost

and/or adopt children, th

instructor told the cla

not to identify as atheist

as doing so would neg

tively affect our chance

of obtaining children.

s ' I will seek to put fo

ward in print much

what we Atheists ho

dear such as free thinkin

and also how the med

present coverage of us.

Thank you and I loo

forward to working f

you and with you

on May 20

th

Also that week, we

bought our house, and our cat had

kittens

Since July of 2000, I have been

employed as an English Instruc-

tor for sailors and Marines at the

BOOST/STA-21 Programs for the

Department of Defense at the New-

port Naval Base in Newport, Rhode

Island. My students are greatly


7/31

Introducing ...

David Smalley

the new Design

Layout Editor

of American Atheist

s with great pleasure and ap-

preciation that I accept the po-

sition of Design and Layout

Editor for the American Atheist. I

have long enjoyed providing cre-

ative solutions for intellectual ac-

tivism, and this is my greatest quest

yet. The humble beginning of the

American Atheists organization is

an inspiration to many, and my ul-

timate goal is to help continue that

legacy by adding value wherever I

can. By bringing creative concepts

to the table, I hope to attract and in-

spire even more freethinkers for our

cause. I will take this introductory

opportunity to present a brief sum-

mary of how this relationship came

to be.

lt was January 10, 1980, just

nine days after the New Year - I was

lying there new to the world, and my

father was already furious with me

because I missed the tax deadline

for him to claim me in 1979 My

mother was also upset, because ap-

parently, I had attempted to enter the

world sideways, obviously against

her will. Needless to say, people be-

ing upset by my unique approach to

life started at an early age

I was raised in a primarily secu-

lar household with a Christian foun-

dation from a Catholic mother and

an Episcopalian father, who never

agreed on much; accept that their

attendance in church wasn't all that

important. Neither really cared too

much about living by particular reli-

gious doctrine, but the 'fear of God'

was ever-present in our home. After

their divorce, when I was just five

years old, my mother instilled in me

what she felt were Christian values;

which I later came to know as hu-

manisuc ethics, but nevertheless,

she did a bang-up job

My religious knowledge as a

child was minimal to say the least. I

was simply taught to fear the wrath

of 'God' but I never understood

why. This caused a unique interest

in religion, and I wanted to know

what everyone was so afraid of.

Even as a small child, I didn't grasp

the concept of having so much love

for something, yet being terrified of

it at the same time. In any event, as

a teenager, I became active in local

Baptist churches and gospel choirs

as a musician, typically playing the

drums each Sunday morning, and

being listed as the premier drum-

mer for main events and recordings,

including a live performance at the

famed

'Potters House'

in Texas.

I'm even plastered on the cover a

religious album as the drummer for

a popular gospel choir Over the

years, I began to ask questions, and

those answers lead me to realize the

many fallacies of religion. Still, the

powers of ingrained fear lead me to

continue performing with religious

groups, until I finally began my

quest to find real answers. Needless

to say, the answers I received and

knowledge I discovered eventually

lead to the marvelous freedom of

Atheism

Moreover breaking the mold, I

was the first person on my mother's

side of the family in 20 years to

graduate high school, and the first

ever to further an education with a

university. My adult volunteer work

as a secular humanist, helping the

homeless and less fortunate, and a

deep interest in exactly why intel-

ligent people fall victim to the ab-

surdities of religion, both led me to

pursue an education in psychology

with an emphasis in applied behav-

ioral analysis at Kaplan University.

While continuing my education, I

also host an online atheistic discus-

sion forum titled The Smalley De-

bate,

where theists of all types come

to argue their case, as I present evi-

dence of how each of them are mis-

lead Our very own Frank Zindler

was my first inspiration, as I read

the transcript of his radio debate of

Noah's Ark on the American Athe-

ists Web-site.

For two years, I worked with a

national television network, UATV,

as a graphics designer, video edi-

tor, and television producer. I often

performed voiceovers for cartoons

and television commercials, as well

designing scripts, magazine lay-

outs, and billboards. Combining a

creative background in graphics,

media, and music, with an activist's

mindset toward Atheism, the posi-

tion of Design Editor of American

Atheist magazine feels like the per-

fect fit For a long time now, the way

Atheists have been portrayed in the

general view has been a strong mo-

tivator for me to spread the word of

reason and free thought. I am eager

to show the world how secular hu-

manism is a productive way of life.

I currently reside in Plano, Tex-

as with my beautiful wife Brandy,

and two amazing children, Brayden

and Talissa.

I look forward to serving in our

cause for reason.

The Smalley Debate

Blog Discussion

www.davidsmalley.blogspot.com



8/31


9/31

O

n December 2,2008, American Atheists, Inc., togeth-

er with eleven named plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit in the

Franklin County Kentucky Circuit Court against the

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, the KENTUCKY

OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY, and the persons re-

sponsible for enforcing the laws that govern that Kentucky

department. The named plaintiffs are MICHAEL G. CHRIS-

TERSON, JAMES F. COFFMAN, LUCINDA HEDDEN

COFFMAN, JAN EWING, EMMETT F. FIELDS, ALEX

GRIGG, EDWIN HENSLEY, HELEN KAGIN, GARY

MARYMAN, DAVID RYAN, and JAMES K. WILLMOT.

These plaintiffs are all Kentucky residents, and they live in

a wide variety of Kentucky counties. Some are members of

American Atheists; others are not. All of them are strong as

new rope. Rarely has such a list of constitutionally aware

plaintiffs been assembled. American Atheists, Inc. is a non-

profit corporation' incorporated in Texas, with its principal

place of business in New Jersey. The corporation is also reg-

istered to' do business in Kentucky. This is a legal nicety

that it is respectfully suggested be implemented in all states.

Becoming registered to do business in a given state is gener-

ally fairly simple and inexpensive for a not-for-profit corpo-

ration, and doing so can prevent certain unpleasant potential

problems should litigation in a given state prove necessary.

tial Proclamation urging Americans to pray and fast during

one of the most dangerous hours in American history, and

the text of President John F. Kennedy's November 22, 1963,

national security speech which concluded: For as was writ-

the Commonwea lth

of Kentucky is in

fact attempting to

establish a religion

ten long ago: 'Except the Lord keep the city, the watchman

waketh but in vain. ' Effective: March 28, 2002 History:

Created 2002 Ky. Acts ch. 82, sec. 2, effective March 28,

2002. That's why.

This action is believed to be in conformity with the legal

philosophy of American Atheists as set forth at http://athe-

ists.org/press Jeleases/Legal_Philosophy _Announced and

at http://atheists.org/ American_Atheists _Legal_Philosophy.

Kagin

Information on the lawsuit can be found

at http://atheists.org/Kentucky_Home-

land_Security_Lawsuit and the text

of the Complaint at http:// www .:

atheists.org/uploadlaavky.pdf.

Why all the fuss? Because

Kentucky has passed into

law the following incredible

language, mandating that the Edwin Kagin - National Legal Director

executive director of the Ken-

American Atheists

tucky Office of Homeland Secu-

rity shall: Publicize the findings of the General Assembly

stressing the dependence on Almighty God as being vital to

the security of the Commonwealth by including the provi-

sions of KRS 39A.285(3) in its agency training and edu-

cational materials. The executive director shall also be re-

sponsible for prominently displaying a permanent plaque

at the entrance to the state's Emergency Operations Center

stating the text ofKRS 39A.285(3). http://www.lrc.ky.gov/

krs/039g00/010.pdf>. KRA 39A.285(3) states, in black

letter law: 39A.285 Legislative findings - The General

Assembly hereby finds that: (1) No government by itself

can guarantee perfect security from acts of war or terror-

ism. (2) The security and well-being of the public depend

not just on government, but rest in large measure upon in-

dividual citizens of the Commonwealth and their level of

understanding, preparation, and vigilance. (3) The safety

and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart

from reliance upon Almighty God as set forth in the public

speeches and proclamations of American Presidents, includ-

ing Abraham Lincoln's historic March 30, 1863, Presiden-

It seems to me, and to the plaintiffs, that the Com-

monwealth of Kentucky is in fact attempting to estab-

lish a religion, in violation of Section 5 of the

Constitution, of Kentucky and of the First

Amendment to the Constitution of the Unit-

ed States. In a recent national radio inter-

view with a fundangelical talk show host,

I presented a hypothetical of whether, in

choosing between two Kentucky cities

of equal size in which to attempt to survive

the kind of threat the Kentucky Office of

Homeland Security was set up to meet, each city having an

army of defenders of equal size, one would rather be in the

city where the defenders were well armed Atheists trained

in anti-terrorism tactics, or in the other city where the de-

fenders were unarmed fundangelicals who only prayed and

relied upon supernatural powers-for deliverance. The host

was outraged. Sorry. I didn't make the facts. You can hear

this interview at . The comments on it continue and you are

invited to join it. The host does not believe that our Consti-

tution gives the right to believe in 'false gods.' No kidding.

Rarely have I encountered such irrational and scary venom.

And people like that are permitted to vote and to sit on juries.

An 'Answer' has been filed by the State of Kentucky

to the 'Complaint.' It should be on our website soon. In its

Answer, Kentucky says the laws are not unconstitutional.

Also, among other things, the Answer says that any damages

suffered by the plaintiffs as a result of these laws is of their

own doing.

Stay tuned.

FEBRUARY 2009 . AMERICAN ATHEIST


10/31

The 35th

N a t i o n a l o n v e n t i o n o f

_

~

Thursday, April 9

th

6:00 - 9:00 PM

Great Hearth Room Registration and informal reception with cash bar.

Friday, April 10

th

10:00 AM - 6:00 PM Lullwater Ballroom 7:00 - 9:30 PM Silverbell Room

Open Banquet, Award Ceremony, Members Meeting

Saturday, April 11th 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM Lullwater Ballroom 7:00 - 9:00 PM Silverbell Room

Open Banquet, Honor Lifetime/Gift and Legacy Members

Sunday, April 12thDining Room Hosted Breakfast

Arrive anytime between 8:00 and 11:00 AM and be greeted by your board members directors.

Sunday, April 12th 12:00 PM - 5:00 PM

Afternoon Group Outing: Red State, Blue State; Old South, New South, From the Civil War to Civil Rights

Destinations being Stone Mountain and its many attractions, then on to the historical Ku Klux site and on to

Sweet Auburn, the birthplace and resting place of Dr. Martin Luther King. $50 per person. Includes box lunch,

transportation, and all admissions. Accessible for handicapped and limited mobility.

Additional information: President, Ed Buckner (770) 803-5353 or atheists.org/events/Nationatconvention.

AMERICAN ATHEIST' FEBRUARY 2009


11/31

AMERICAN ATHEISTS

NATIONAL CONVENTION

APRIL 9-12 in Atlanta Georgia

Emory Conference Center Hotel

1615 Clifton Road

Atlanta GA 30329

A

merican Atheists will host its 35th National Convention at the spectacular Emory Conference Center

Hotel in Atlanta, Ga. Make plans now for an exciting weekend of social events, outstanding talks by re-

nowned speakers, workshops and so much more. We'll have a special convention rate at this world-class

meeting venue, plus extended 'shoulder dates' so you can visit the many tourism attractions in beautiful Atlanta

Don't forget our Thursday night (April 9) Convention Jump-Start for an evening of fun with fellow Atheists from

around the world. Said to be the Best Kept Secret in Georgia, the Emory is a hidden oasis as its Frank Lloyd

Wright-inspired architecture and serene wooded views combine diverse meeting space, beautiful gardens, walking

trails, and much more to create a one-of-a kind experience.

The Emory is just 20 minutes from Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport. The downtown business

district and vibrant Buckhead are less than 12 minutes from the hotel. Complimentary on-site parking is an added

bonus.

The Emory offers a two-tiered guest room rate. Guest rooms in the hotel are $109 plus tax for single/dou-

ble. Guest rooms in the inn (directly connected to the hotel) are $89 plus tax for single/double and include break-

fast. You must make your reservations directly with the hotel on or before March 10, 2009 to enjoy our special

convention rate. Be sure to tell them you are with the American Atheist convention.'

Emory Hotel reservations: 404-712-6000

www.emoryconferencecenter.com

Confirmed Speakers

Ed Buckner: President, American Atheists, Inc.

Richard Dawkins:

Evolutionist/science celebrity

Mike Malloy: Nationally-syndicated talk radio personality

Jim Morrow: Award-winning writer and novelist

Dr. J. Anderson Thomson: Psychiatrist, researcher, author

Nate Phelps: Estranged son of Pastor Fred Phelps

John Lombard: Beijing business owner, activist

Special Events

(D)evangelical Stand Up Comedy Troupe

Mass De-baptism Ceremony



12/31

R

ecently I had a strange experience: I was hav-

ing dinner in Manhattan, near New York Uni-

versity, surrounded by a group of pleasant and

smart people, who happened to be Marxists It was a

nice evening, following a panel discussion at New York

University on morality without gods. Still, I couldn't

help feeling I had been thrown back to my high school

days

(circa

1977), when people were using terms like

'means of production' and 'oppression of the workers'

with genuine conviction and equal obliviousness to the

subtleties of actual socio-economic and political situa-

tions.

What I thought I

was going to hear from

my Marxist companions

was something along

the lines that Marx's

analysis of class strug-

b

gle and of the founda-

y

tions of capitalism was still largely

correct, and in fact even relevant to

the recent collapse of the worldwide by Dr. Massimo Pigliucci

financial system unleashed by the

most unbridled (as in unregulated) form of capitalism

the world has seen since the era ofthe aptly named rob-

ber barons. That, I think, is actually a defensible posi-

tion, as much as I don't believe for a second that Marx's

solution will ever work in any real human society. (My

take is that both extreme socialism and extreme capi-

talism make the same mistake, albeit for symmetrical

reasons: they ignore fundamental aspects of human na-

ture. Capitalism puts too much emphasis on self-inter-

est, dismissing the fact that we are social animals with

strong cooperative instincts; Socialism errs on the other

side, proposing an ant-like society where individual-

ism is progressively squeezed out of the human experi-

ence.)

If one actually reads Marx's The Communist Mani-

festo,

one can hardly disagree with most of his theses.

That a key to human history is the economic struggle

among classes is true, though my view of history does

not admit of a one-cause-fits-all sort of explanation.

That a more just society would be created by a fairer

redistribution of wealth and especially of the control of

'the means of production' is also true unless your defi-

nition of 'justice' is that (economic) might makes right.

And that people's understanding of their own condition

is largely shaped by a system that wishes to perpetuate

itself despite its flagrant injustice is also something I

don't dispute.

But my Marxist dinner companions really stunned

me when they claimed that Stalin wasn't all that bad,

and that Mao was even better. Come again? Let's

start with Stalin. His radical policies and pursuit of

power killed millions through famine, and that was just

the beginning. His regime was one of the most violent-

ly repressive in human history, with again millions of

people exiled to labor camps or simply eliminated, and

entire ethnic groups 'resettled' because they were not

to his liking. Oh, and while Stalin gets a lot of credit

for resisting the Nazi invasion, thereby helping to turn

the tide against Hitler during World War IIlet us not

forget that he

also pushed

the Molotov-

Ribbentrop

Surrounded

Marxists

AMERICAN ATHEIST- FEBRUARY

2 9

pact, which paved the way for Hitler's invasion of Po-

land, and thus the onset of the war. My Marxist friends

quibbled on exactly how many millions were killed (to

me, one million is one too many), and claimed that Sta-

lin's was the first experiment in applied communism,

and he had to make up stuff as he went. Well, let me

declare the first experiment such a total and abject fail-

ure that I really don't think we should attempt a second

one.

But of course many other such 'experiments' were

carried out during the 20th century, one of the most

cruel being Mao's. Far from me to be able to offer an

in-depth analysis of Maoism (or Stalinism, for that mat-

ter) here. But let us consider some examples of what

the great leader of communist China did. Mao admit-

ted to the execution of about 700,000 people just in the

1949- 53 period-justified, in his mind, because of the

necessity of consolidating power. The real number is

more likely to be somewhere between 2.5 and 5 mil-

lion. Moreover, another 1.5 million Chinese were sent

to labor camps to be 'reformed.' During the so-called

'great leap forward,' Mao's second five-year plan that

began in 1958, his policies resulted in widespread fam-

ine that killed tens of millions of people. The exact

numbers are in dispute, depending on the method used

to calculate the deaths. A widely accepted figure is of

20 million, though other estimates take that to be a


13/31

conservative number,

with a range going all

the way to the mind-

boggling figure of

72 million. Again, if

this is the hallmark

of success, I'd hate to

see a failure.

Why is it that oth-

erwise intelligent,

nice people, clearly

concerned with jus-

tice in the world, can

still whole-heartedly

claim that commu-

nism is a good idea? I suspect it is for reasons very

similar to those allowing Christians (just to pick an-

other random group of reality-challenged people) to

read the Old Testament and seriously claim that

all those instances of Yahweh commanding his

people to slaughter, rape and pillage 'in his

name' are really quotes taken out of con-

text. In what context, pray, does that sort

of injunction become morally accept-

able? The problem, in other words, is

the uniquely human penchant for

they

claimed

that Stalin

asn t all

that bad

adopting an ideological position and then sticking to

it - reality be damned.

As my favorite Marx, Groucho, aptly said (ironi-

cally, while talking about matters of economics in the

masterpiece movie Duck Soup): A child of five would

understand this. Send someone to fetch a child offive.

That is not that different

from what I wanted

to scream at sev-

eral points during

that recent dinner.

Luckily, the Neo-

Marxist Club is one

club I simply cannot

join, on the grounds

that they really

wouldn't al-

low some-

one like me

to be one of

their mem-

bers.

Dr. Massimo Pigliucci is a professor

of biology at the State University of

New York at Stony Brook. As one of

the world

s

foremost evolutionary

theorists and debaters of creationists,

he is truly a celebrity of science.

American Atheists is proud to number

him among its life members .



14/31

SPIRIT SOUL AND MIND

By Frank R. Zindler

Formerly a professor of biology

and geology in the SUNY system,

Frank R. Zindler for more than a

quarter of a century has served

as a linguist and editor for a

scientific publishing society in

Ohio. Author of The Jesus the

Jews Never Knew and more

than 100 magazine articles and

essays, he has participated in

over 400 radio and TV debates

and talk shows as an advocate

for Atheism and science. He is

managing editor of American

Atheist Press and receives

e-mail [email protected].

W

henever I peruse a dic-

tionary, I am struck by

the amazing number of

words which refer to nothing at all

in the real world. Many of the words

are obviously fabulous: leprechaun,

unicorn, gremlin, Philosopher's

Stone, Zeus, elf, Fountain of Youth,

ghost, etc. Others, though referring

equally to non-existent things, are

less obviously fabulous: The Mean

Sun, The. Average Citizen, vital

force, spirit, soul, and - in at least

some of its accepted meanings -

mind.

AMERICAN ATHEIST FEBRUARY 2009

Why the human species has

invented so many words which re-

fer to nothing in reality is a most

interesting question for scientific

investigation, and probably would

require a complete book to eluci-

date properly. In this article I shall

only attempt to deal with a few such

words, specifically, the words spirit,

soul, and mind.

It is a striking fact that nearly

all languages of the world, extinct

as well as extant, have - or have

had - words which could be ren-

dered as 'spirit' or 'soul' in English.

At first glance, it would seem that

this is a good argument in favor of

the real existence of souls and spir-

its. For, would it not be improbable

that so many different peoples and

languages could be mistaken? If

many different unrelated languages

have independently invented words

for soul, is that not a good reason to

believe they did so because there re-

ally is such a thing?

Well, no, I think not. The first

clue to the solution of this puzzle

comes from etymology, the study of

word origins.

While the origin of the English

word soul is obscure, the word al-

most certainly had its origin in a

word which meant 'breath' or 'wind'

or 'air,' or something like that. The

word spirit - generally a synonym

for soul - comes from the Latin

spiritus, and clearly meant 'breath'

originally. Spiritual and respiratory

both derive from the same root

Moreover, if we check in the

Greek and Hebrew bibles to see

which words are translated as 'soul,'

etc., in the King James Version, we

will find many whose literal mean-

ing is 'breath' or 'wind.' For ex-

ample, the Hebrew word neshamah

(literally meaning 'breath') is twice

rendered as 'spirit,' once as 'soul.'

The Hebrew-Aramaic word ruach

(lit., 'wind') is rendered 240 times

as 'spirit,' six times as 'mind.' The

word nephesh (lit., 'breath') is ren-

dered 'soul' 428 times, 'mind' 15

times, 'ghost' twice, and 'life' 119

times. Turning to the Greek Bible,

we find pneuma (lit., 'breath') ren-

dered as 'ghost' 91 times (includ-

ing the rendering 'Holy Ghost'),

292 times as 'spirit.' The reader will

recognize the same root in the word

pneumonia, a word referring to a

disease of the organs of breath. And

finally, in this somewhat pedantic

parade of words, we may note the

important word psyche. As expect-

ed, its literal meaning is 'breath.'

As we might have guessed, it is

rendered as 'soul' 58 times, 'mind'

three times, and 'life' 40 times.

The .fact that nearly all words

now meaning 'soul,' 'spirit,' 'life,'

etc., trace their origins to words

meaning 'breath' or 'wind' leads me

to conclude that the derived mean-

ings were an outgrowth of the in-

ability of primitive people to solve

a basic biological puzzle, namely,

what constitutes the difference be-

tween a live body and a dead one?

To the ancient authors of the

Bible - men who still thought they

were living on a fiat earth beneath

a solid sky (firmament) - the so-

lution seemed deceptively simple:

living things breathe, dead things

do not. At first, only animals (from

Latin anima, meaning 'breath' or

'breeze' originally) were consid-

ered fully alive. The case of plants

was viewed with confusion for a

long time. Some authorities consi-


15/31

dered them live, others did not. The

ancients did not realize that 'souls'

were really only a gaseous mixture

of nitrogen and oxygen, contaminat-

ed with varying amounts of water

vapor, carbon dioxide, noble gases,

and - depending upon what one ate

and whether or not one brushed af-

ter every meal - varying amounts

of aromatic substances

In the Genesis creation myth,

the animating power of breath is

clearly depicted. God, after having

molded Adam from the dust, has to

breathe into him the breath of life

in order for him to become a living

soul. Breath is life.

The manner in which breath be-

came equated with life is not diffi-

cult to discern. A person newly dead,

say, of a heart attack, anatomically

is not much different from what he

was like before he died. He still has

five fingers per hand, a tongue in

his mouth, a brain in his head, and a

heart in his breast. The ancients, un-

conscious of the microcosmic fever

of chemical marriages and divorces

that we call metabolism, could see

only one obvious difference: the

lack of breath of the dead.

When a man expired (lit.,

'breathed out), his spirit (lit.,

'breath ') left his body, and he died.

When a man sneezed, his spirit was

forcefully ejected from his body,

and one had to say God bless you

or make a magical gesture, such as

the sign of the cross, very quickly,

before evil spirits could come to

take over the momentarily spiritu-

ally vacant carcass. Demonic 'pos-

session' was the result, quite simply,

of inhaling one or more of the evil

breaths thought to hover in the air

around us. For early Christians, the

Devil's breath was everywhere.

Of course, not all possession

was necessarily evil. People could

become 'inspired' - that is, the

breath of a god could take over their

bodies to deliver words of wisdom

or apocalyptic admonitions. Indeed,

the origin of the Christian church it-

self was thought to have originated

in an act of mass possession by the

Holy Ghost ('Holy Breath' in the

Greek textl), In Acts 4:31 we read

that when the Apostles and others

had ended their prayer, the build-

ing where they were assembled

rocked, and all were filled with the

Holy Spirit [breath] and spoke the

When a

man sneezed,

his spirit was

forcefully

ejected from

his body,

and one had

to say God

bless you

word of God with boldness.' (Given

the close association of words with

breath - thought to be life itself -

is it any wonder that religions of all

kinds have always focused on the

magical significance of words?)

Lest anyone still think the link

between breath and the foundations

of Christianity be doubtful, attention

is drawn to the tale running through

John 20:22. Jesus has come back to

visit the Disciples to tell them that

lie is sending them out to forgive

or not forgive the sins of the world.

Then he [Jesus] breathed on them,

saying, 'Receive the Holy Spirit '

Right from the beginning, Christi-

anity was based upon warm breath

- which in time became hot air.

Modem biologists, unlike the

ancient makers of myths, know that

all the phenomena of living sys-

tems can be reduced to physical and

chemical terms. They have no evi-

dence of any 'vital force' or mysti-

cal spirit - and no need to seek for

such. They recognize the fully alive

body and the newly dead body to be

but two arbitrary points along a con-

tinuum of decreasing organization.

So much for spirit, soul, and

ghost. Originally denoting breath

or wind, they are words which have

acquired a host of mystical conno-

tations as pre scientific people at-

tempted to account for the differ-

ence between life and death. But

what of the word mind? Does it re-

fer to anything real? Or is it, too, a

fabulous entity?

Unlike the analysis of spirit and

soul, the analysis of mind is not at

all simple. This is so largely through

the grammatical accident that in all

the European languages, ancient as

well as modem, the word mind is a

noun.

We tend to think of nouns as sub-

stantive: table, chair, and plumb-bob

are all nouns, and all are substantial.

There are many words, however,

which though grammatically nouns,

are not at all substantial. Words like

beauty, truth, and velocity would be

examples. Unfortunately, our think-

ing tends to be hedged around by

the grammar and hidden assump-

tions of the language with which we

think. And so it happens again and

again that abstract nouns come to

be thought of as representing things

just as substantial as those repre-

sented by common nouns. And thus

we have the basic confusion neces-

sary to found philosophical systems

such as Plato's - whose perfect tri-

angularity exists in triangle-heaven,

and so on.

Because mind was a noun, it



16/31


17/31

S

ergeant Brooks

W. Dingus

joined the

Navy in 1981

and spent four

years on active

duty and nine in

the Naval Reserves

as a meteorological technician, responsible

for collecting data from weather balloons

and making forecasts. In 2007, he joined the

Army Reserves as an Aviation Operations

by Kathleen Johnson

Specialist and in 2008, he changed

career fields and switched to

Psychological Operations. SGT

Dingus anticipates a future

deployment to Iraq or Afghani-

stan. He has been either an Ag-

nostic or Atheist for more than

35 years and is an active member

of the Central Texas Chapter of the Military

Association of Atheists and Freethinkers, an

organization affiliated with American Atheists.

FEBRUARY 2009 - AMERICAN ATHEIST 1

R O O F R E S U E F U N D

O N T R I U T O R

THANKS TO THE GENEROSITY of the

person listed below, American Atheists is

well on the way to paying for the rescue of

the Charles E. Stevens American Atheist

Library & Archives.You are truly an Atheist

hero

R ic h a r d A A n g ro n

5

Monthly Roof-Rescue Donations

will be listed in this

section every month.


18/31

Prayer

Babies

Guy P. Harrison

I know

9

million dead children

who do not believe in prayer.

Horrific child death rates in the world's most

religious nations provide a powerful blow against

all claims that prayer works.

A

0ung mother in India prays to Vishnu, a

Hindu god revered for his mercy. She begs

or the life of the dying infant in her arms.

The 10-month-old girl suffers from dysentery and

can no longer cry in her weakened state. Like the

god who does not answer the mother's prayers, the

baby is silent. Eventually she dies.

A Muslim mother in Bangladesh faces a simi-

lar crisis. Her four-year-old son is severely mal-

nourished and near death. In a panic, the mother

prays to Allah for help. She screams for the god

to take away the boy's pain and let him live, if

only for another day, another hour. Nevertheless,

he dies.

A mother in Chad stares into the dull eyes of a

young daughter who is losing her fight against ma-

laria. The mother is afraid to blink. She fears the

child will die if she breaks eye contact for even a

fraction of a second. The mother is a Christian and

prays to Jesus. She pleads for a miracle as death

creeps closer. Finally, the crying mother offers Je-

sus anything in return for the life of her child. Still,

the baby dies.

This is business as usual in the developing

world. Every day of the year, thousands of moth-

ers who sincerely believe in a god or gods watch

helplessly as their babies die. Virtually every one

of these deaths occurs despite a torrent of passion-

ate prayers asking gods for life. The prayers are

sent out to a variety of divine beings, in many lan-

guages and from many nations. They are diverse

in both structure and delivery, faithful to the id-

iosyncrasies of numerous belief systems. Every

day and night, countless prayers from Muslims,

AMERICAN ATHEIST - FEBRUARY 2009

Hindus, Christians and other believers fill the skies

on behalf of impoverished babies on the verge of

death. But the babies keep dying by the tens of

thousands. They perish precisely as one would ex-

pect if good nutrition, clean water, medication and

access to doctors are all that matter. They die as if

no gods exist or, at the very least, as if prayer does

not work.

More than 26,000 children under the age of

five die every 24 hours in developing nations, ac-

cording to UNICEF. Most of them are killed by

malnutrition and diseases that are easily prevented

or treated in wealthier societies. This carnage to-

tals more than 9 million children per year, a statis-

tic that more people in the West should be aware

of. Future generations may look back on us and

forgive our rampant tribalism, lust for war, and

destruction of nature, but how will they ever un-

derstand our indifference to 9 million dead babies

year after year?

Being unlucky in birth and sentenced to death

by poverty is bad enough but the manner in which

these millions of children die each year is merci-

less as well. They suffer terribly in their final days

and hours, enduring high fevers, severe headaches,

cramps and nausea. Is anything in our world more

unjust than their fate? No matter what the politi-

cians and headlines tell us, this continual massacre

is far worse that wars, terrorism and natural disas-

ters. The only reason these Children die out of view

is because they are powerless and therefore invis-

ible to the rest of the world. Are there any other

victims who make more appropriate candidates

for a god to rescue than these babies? One would

think prayers for them would be a high priority for

a god to respond to rapidly and favorably. Even

if a god's answer is no to the mothers' prayers

and for some mysterious reason 9 million babies

must die each year, how can we explain why that

god refuses to ease the children's suffering before

they die?

The nearly 10 million children under the age

offive who die in extreme poverty each year have

more in common than lack of money. They also

live out their brief lives inside the most religious

societies on Earth. Based on the levels of belief in

their nations, it is likely that virtually all of them

had mothers who believe in a god or gods. Devel-

oping nations such as Haiti (Christianity), Yemen

(Islam) and Bangladesh (IslamlHindu), for


19/31


20/31

and its role in helping to convince people that gods

exist, prayer deserves more attention and more

scrutiny. Some nonbelievers ignore prayer as an

unimportant side issue but it's more than that. Con-

vince believers that prayers are not answered and

many of them may begin to consider the possibility

that no gods exist in the first place. Unfortunately,

no scientific study can conclusively disprove prayer

because believers can always challenge the results.

Prayer is too flexible, too elusive, too personal,

too silent, too invisible and too mysterious to ever

achieve total scientific closure. A study that fails to

validate prayer does not disprove prayer as a real

phenomenon .. It can only show that prayer didn't

work in that specific case and believers know this

very well. The loopholes alone make prayer studies

unlikely to change the minds of believers. Maybe

just participating in a prayer study is an insult to the

gods and will ensure that the prayers will fail. Who

determines the proper way to pray? The world's

believers have never been able to agree on who the

real gods are, which sacred writings are valid, or

even how one should dress and eat. It is unlikely

that they will ever agree on how to pray. Some-

one can always say a given study failed to validate

prayer because of one technicality or another. This

does not mean that skeptics should give up, how-

ever.

Praying mothers and their dying babies-ap-

proximately 100 million per decade-provide a

devastating blow against belief in prayer. Atheists

should cite this tragedy forcefully and frequently

because the agony and death of young innocents on

a massive scale makes a compelling case against

the power of prayer. And it is something that many

good-hearted believers are likely to take note of.

Personal stories of answered prayers and canned

comebacks are unlikely to gain much traction be-

fore a mountain of dead infants. The millions of

children who died last year, and the mothers who

prayed for them, deserve a mention every time

someone claims that prayer brought on a miracu-

lous healing of some disease. When believers say

praying brought them more money, a better job

or success in love, atheists need only bring up the

26,000 babies who were not saved by prayer yester-

day and the 26,000 who won't be saved today.

It is not rude or unfair to ask believers why their

gods do not respond to the most urgent and impor-

tant prayers of all. Given the prominence of prayer

AMERICAN ATHEIST' FEBRUARY 2009 '

in so many religions, this is a meaningful challenge

It may promote rational thinking by spurring be

lievers to question even more than prayer. For un

doubtedly some of them will have the honesty an

courage to consider the possibility that the prayers

of so many broken-hearted mothers go unanswered

every day because no gods are there to hear them.

Guy P. Harrison is an award-winning journalist and

the author of 50 Reasons People Give for Believing in

a God, published by Prometheus Books. Contact him

at [email protected]


21/31

Why Atheists Make the

Best Type of Citizen

ur religious culture, Athe-

ists are not so much on the

outside looking in as caught

in the crossfire. We'd just as

soon be left alone, but the de-

mand from all sides is that we

have a god belief. Because we

don't, the Bible calls us fools,

it is assumed we have no mor-

al compass, and we cannot get

elected to public office.

As for patriotism, An Athe-

istic American is a contradiction

in terms, according to Con-

gressman Louis Rabaut, who in-

troduced the bill putting under

God in the pledge in 1954.

The elder George Bush reit-

erated this on August 27, 1987,

at a Chicago press conference:

...1 don't know that Atheists

should be considered as citi-

zens, he said, nor should they

be considered patriots. This is

one nation under God. All this

simply because we accept that

the natural world is all there is,

having no reason to think other-

WIse.

These accusations have been

piled on us for so long that Athe-

ists rank at the bottom in social

acceptability. But, as the girl

said as she picked up the shovel,

With such a big pile of crap,

there has to be a pony in here

somewhere. There is.

The truth is that Atheists ac-

tually make the best type of citi-

zen and cause the least trouble of

any demographic group.

We go only by what makes

sense and improves life in the

here and now. Our commitment

to secular government has made

us strong supporters of free-

dom of conscience and of every

movement to repeal oppressive

laws. This includes abolition,

women's suffrage, workers'

rights, civil rights, reproduc-

tive rights, gay rights, children's

rights, medical research, and

physician aid in dying. We ap-

By Marie Alena Castle

preciate liberal religionists who

also support these issues. We op-

pose religious authoritarians as

politically and socially harmful.

In the workplace, we are there to

get the job done. We need no ac-

commodations for prayers, holy

days, religious attire or services

we refuse to pro-vide because of

religious beliefs.

In politics, we have no con-

tentious religious beliefs to im-

pose and we don't do religious

wars. In public education, our

interest is in educating students

about the arts and sciences, and

teaching them to think critically,

behave responsibly, and make

the most of their abilities.

Like all humans, Atheists

create myths to express ideas.

J don t

know that

Atheists

should be

considered

as citizens

- George

Bush Sr.

While religious myths offer in-

spiration from the past with sto-

ries of miraculous and heroic

events, Atheist myths look to the

future, often expressed through

science fiction.

Perhaps the most powerful is

the world of Star Trek, created

by Atheist Gene Roddenberry,

where humans have given up

wars, social preju-dices and di-

visive beliefs, and used science

to end hunger and poverty.

That is a myth to inspire us that

has some faint hope of realiza-

tion.

This is the reality humans

face and must deal with: We are

a vulnerable species in a uni-

verse that is basically a huge

debris field 15 billion light years

across, full of violence and de-

struction. We are hunkered down

on a small, unstable rock wob-

bling through that debris field.

The life forms that evolved in

the thin biosphere surrounding

this rock survive by eating each

other. The evolutionary process

that brought us to consciousness

works off of high birth and death

rates with many defective prod-

ucts. There is no greater pre-

scription for misery.

But here we are, with one

life to live and no one to turn

to for help but each other. We

humans have worked might-

ily to overcome nature's short-

comings, with the only god

in sight being us, warts and all.

Despite the difficulties, life re-

mains an exciting challenge, and

we accept it.

Marie Alena Castle is com-

munications director for Athe-

ists For Human Rights (www.

Atheistsforhumanrights.org

based in Minneapolis, Minneso-

ta. For most of her life she has

been involved in one cause or

another, including labor unions,

women s rights, abortion rights,

civil rights, gay rights, etc. She

discovered that all the causes

could be addressed by Atheism,

since the source of all their trou-

bles was religion .



22/31

Secret A uthors From Dangerous C ountries

A sked That Their Iden ities Be W ithheld ...

[This article is courtesy of Humanist International]

Does Science Make Belief in Allah/God Obsolete?

N

cessarily,it does - says a physicist. . .If not,.we

must invent a science- friendly, science-compat-

ible fiction of allah/god. First, try the pantheon

of available fictional creators. Inspect thoroughly. If

none fits the bill, then invent a new one. The allah/god

of your choice must be a stickler for the so-called divine

principles laid down by the priests-the classical inven-

tors of allah/god over the centuries. Science does not

take kindly to the so-called deity who, ignorant people

suppose, if piqued or euphoric, sets aside seismological

or cosmological principles and in wild dreams of many,

can causes the moon to shiver, the earth to split asun-

der, or, as to some stupid people, such a deity may even

cause the universe to suddenly reverse its expansion.

This fictional allah/god must, among other things, be

stoically indifferent to supplications for changing local

meteorological conditions, the task already being natu-

rally performed by the discipline offluid dynamics.

Therefore, religious people, even if they pray ear-

nestly with their buttocks elevated in the air, dance with

great energy around totem poles, shall not cause even

a drop of rain to fall on parched soil. This newly in-

vented, rule-abiding and science respecting allah/god/

bhagwan equally well dispenses with tearful Christians

singing the Book of Job, pious Hindus feverishly recit-

ing the

havan yajna,

or earnest Muslims performing the

special rain prayers

in hot dry deserts as they face

the former abide of idols, the so-called holy Ka'aba.

The fact is that the equations of fluid flow, not

the number of earnest supplicants or quality of their

prayers, determine weather outcomes. This is grossly

irreligious; otherwise, one could imagine joining the

faithful of all religions in a huge simultaneous but vain

global prayer that stupids feel would wipe away the per-

nicious effects of anthropogenic global climate change.

Your chosen allah/god cannot entertain private petitions

AMERICAN ATHEIST - FEBRUARY 2009

for good health and longevity, prevent an air crash, or

send woe upon demand to the enemy. Mindful of mi-

crobiology and physiology, she/he cannot cure leprosy

by dipping the afflicted in rivers or have humans remain

in unscathed condition after being devoured by a huge

fish. Faster-than-light travel is also out of the question,

even for the so-called prophets and special messengers.

Instead, she/he must stay as the fictional and nomi-

nal runner of the world according to the laws and unto

the letter, closely following the flow of Nature. A scien-

tific fictional creator should certainly know an awful lo

of science which the formerly invented medieval allah/

god didn't need. To differentiate between the count-

less universes discovered by superstring theory is a

headache. Fine-tuning chemistry to generate complex

proteins, and then initiating a cascade of mutations that

turn microbe to man, is also no trivial matter.

But bear in mind that there are definite limits to

knowledge, whether by man or by any fictional creator:

the fictional allah/god can supposedly know only the

limited, the knowable. Omniscience and science do

not go well with each other. The difficulty with om-

niscience-even with regard to a particle as humble as

the electron-has been recognized as an issue since the

1920s. Subatomic particles show a vexing, subtle elu-

siveness that defeats even the most sophisticated effort

to measure certain of their properties even when tried

by a fictional allah/god. Unpredictability is intrinsic

to quantum mechanics, the branch of physics which al

particles are empirically seen to show. This discovery

so disturbed Albert Einstein that he rejected quantum

mechanics, pronouncing that the fictional allah/god

could not play dice with the universe. But it turned

out that Einstein's objections were flawed-uncertainty

is deeply fundamental. Thus, any science-abiding fic-

tional deity we invent will be incompletely informed on


23/31

many aspects of nature. Is one being excessively au-

dacious, perhaps impertinent, in setting down terms of

reference for a fictional divine and non-existent entity?

Really Humans have always invented their objects of

worship. Smarter humans go for smarter fictional ver-

sions of allah/god. Anthropomorphic representations-

such as an allah/god with octopus arms-are a bit out

of fashion today but were enormously popular just a

few centuries ago. As well, some people might object

to binding fictional allah/god and the real human to the

same rules of logic, or perhaps even sharing the same

space-time manifold.

But if we drop this essential demand then little shall

remain. Reason and evidence would lose meaning and

be replaced by fiction, tradition, and the delusion of rev-

elation. It would then be wrong for us to have 2 + 2 = 5,

but okay for inventing the fiction of an allah/god. Cen-

turies of human progress would come to naught.

Let's face it: the day of the mythical Sky God is

long gone. In the Age of Science, religion has been

re-invented, and the medieval allah/god of classical

religions has lost repute and territory. Today, people

pay lip service to trusting that rusty allah/god, but they

still swallow medicines when sick. As a case in point,

Muslim-run airlines start a plane journey with prayers

but ask passengers to buckle-up anyway, and most sus-

pect that people who are falsely rumored to rise miracu-

lously from the dead were probably not quite dead to

begin with. These days if you hear a voice telling you

to sacrifice your only son, you would probably report

it to the authorities instead of taking the poor lad up a

mountain, and if you really took your son to an alter for

sacrifice, the state would be sure to put you in a men-

tal asylum, regardless of whether you call yourself the

prophet Abraham or somebody else. As you can well

imagine, the old trust is disappearing.

Nevertheless, there remains the tantalizing fiction of

a divine power somewhere 'out there' who is blamed to

run a mysterious, but scrupulously and rather stupidly, a

miracle-free universe. In this universe, the fictional Al-

lah/God may be dishonestly ascribed to act in ingenious

ways that seem miraculous. Yet these fictional and 'nev-

er-actually-verified-miracles' do violate physical laws

and seem ridiculous. Ordinary and naturally, no super-

natural interventions in the physical world could permit

quantum tunneling through cosmic holes. It would be

perfectly unfair for a scientific mind to invent a fictional

allah/god to explain the nonlinear dynamics to explain

how tiny fluctuations quickly build up to earthshaking

results-the famous 'butterfly effect' to give a rather

dull explanation of the deterministic chaos theory.

Nietzsche and the other philosophers were plain

right-God was never alive, but always dead. Even as

the fiction of divine habitat, the sky, shrinks before the

aggressive encroachment of science, the quantum foam

of space-time may be ascribed to create a little confused

space for the crazy delusion based on the spare univers-

es, offering space both for self-described 'deeply and

spiritually confused believers.' Many eminent prac-

titioners of science have successfully persuaded them-

selves that there is no logical contradiction between

faith and belief, by inventing a science-fiction of Allah/

God, or by clothing a traditional fiction in new termi-

nology of science fiction. Unsure of whether they hap-

pen to exist at all, humans are likely to scour the miser-

able delusion of heavens forever in search of some sort

of meaning.

T h e Founde r's F rie nd s

S o ma ny o f y ou h elp Ame ric an Athe is ts w i th dona t ions

a n d o th e r f in an c ia l s up p or t- and w e w anted to find a w ay

to sa y T ha nk Y ou W e a re p le ased to ann ou nc e th e re -e s-

t a b lis hmen t o f an Ame r ic an A the ist tra ditio n- Th e F ou nd ers'

F rie nd s, b e gu n b y t he M urra y O 'H a ir f am ily .

T hose c ontrib uting $ 50 or more to Ame ric an Ath eists w ill

have the ir names and amounts entered in sub sequent is-

s ue s o f t he Am er ic a n A th e is t. Just fill o ut th e b lu e c ard w ith

t he in fo rm at io n r eq ue st ed , in clu de y ou r g if t, a nd m ail it b a ck

to us in the enc losed env elop e. B e sure to c hec k th e a pp ro -

p ria te b ox a uth oriz in g u s t o t ha nk y ou b y p rin tin g y ou r n ame

a nd c on trib utio n a mo un t in t he ma g az in e. M a ilin g a dd re ss -

e s w ill no t b e mentioned. T his is our w ay of sa ying T HAN K

Y O U to a n e xtra ordina ry g rou p of p eop le -th ose o f y ou w ho

w a nt to d o m ore a nd fin an cia lly s up po rt th e c ritic al w ork o f

Amer ican Athe is ts

Ame r ic an A the is ts t h anks t he fol low ing pe rsons for t h eir

generous cont ribu tio ns t o our cause .

D ic k H o ga n TX - 2 0 0

S h a n e W . R o p e r A Z - 7 5

J ew e l S n o w N Y 3 0 0

C a t C o l t r e ll A Z - 1 0 0

B u rt o n B o ga rd u s C A 5 0 0

C a ro lin e G i lm a n N Y - 5 0

B . L o b i tz S C 1 0 0

E . A . a n d J . S . V a rg a s M A 1 2 5

L e s te r W . B a rn e tt P h D . L A 1 0 0

Z b ig n ie w Z io b ro w s ki T X - 5 0

H o w a r d M . P a lm e r C T 1 0 0

G a ry G a h a g a n P A 1 0 0

N e a l C a ry V A 5 0 0

A th e n a B e rg e r C A 2 5 0


2


24/31

the

FAITH FU i THEIST

O

ne of the stronger arguments against Atheism

is not made by religious folks at all, but often

times by our friends, the Agnostics; who claim

Atheism requires just as much faith as religion. The ba-

sis of their argument is that the separation of Atheism

and Agnosticism basically comes down to Atheists hav-

ingfaith that there is no god, while Agnos-

tics stand firm on the notion that Atheists

and theists alike are attempting to resolve

the unattainable. To further this argu-

ment, during a religious debate, a Chris-

tian once said to me, Idon't have enough

faith to be an Atheist

This claim comes

from the many religious folks that as-

sert being an Atheist requires

persons to have all knowledge

of the universe in order to

firmly state that

there,

are

no gods. Of course, be-

ing that we all lack

that knowledge,

the claim is made

that Atheists must

have a tremendous

amount of faith - even

more so than theists. With these

postulations coming from both

David Smalley

ends of our debate spectrum, let's

dive into exactly what they mean,

davidsmalley. blogspot. com

and how you can handle this when

presented with the accusation in your own debate.

First of all, as with any good discussion, we must

speak the same language as our opponent and not allow

them to set the definitions ofthe conversation. Do not let

them coax you 'into accepting 'faith' as only a religious

term. The word actually derives from the Latin

fidere,

meaning 'to trust' which is akin to fides, also meaning

'promise, loyal, and assurance.' This is-how we adopted

the phrase 'bona fide' meaning 'real' or 'factual,' and

'fidelity' meaning' loyalty' and 'sincerity.' Webster has

three English definitions for faith; the first being 'an

allegiance to a duty or person, and sincerity of inten-

tions.' This is used when stating a person is 'faithful' to

their spouse. The second version of the word is wholly

dedicated to belief in a god, so we can quickly rule tha

one out for Atheists. The final definition simply state

'complete trust, especially with strong conviction.

Well, they have us there We do trust evidence and sc

ence. It is impossible to say Atheists have no faith at al

in the literal sense.

A preacher once told me,

You would be a grea

Christian if you ever started to believe; we coul

use your level of conviction in our church H

followed by saying I have to say, I respect yo

for having so much determination to stand u

for what you believe in. I responded with Cor

rection - I stand upfor what I don't believe in.

That statement set the tone that w

Atheists do not project a system o

beliefs that require the burden

of proof. It is the duty of th

accuser to prove the exis

tence of their god, and w

only stand up to them when

they assert their beliefs a

fact or common knowledge

without absolute proof. Thi

is where the problem come

in. What may be proof to on

may not be proof to another; so wha

is the meaning of proof?

Imagine for a moment that faith i

measured in a single tube (such as

thermometer) in which the actual flui

represents evidence percentage, and as it rises, people

become closer to a full confirmation (proof). Any re

maining space in the tube is a lack of evidence, als

known as faith. Of course, upon discovering all pos

sible evidence, the tube is full because faith is no longe

needed. I call this

the-Faithometer Theory;

and it con

cludes that a belief in the most far-fetched assumption,

with the least amount of evidence, must have the larges

amount of faith.

In the simplest form of examining this theory, let'

set the scenario that Beth is standing in front of a closed

door. By stating that she believes a dog is behind th

door, she is making that statement on 100% faith, be

cause she has no evidence to support that claim (he

AMERICAN ATHEIST - FEBRUARY 2009 .


25/31

ithometer is empty). Once she hears a dog barking,

er evidence rises to approximately 50%, because she

st concede that while she's fairly certain the barking

s coming from behind the door, the audio she hears

uld be a recording, or the dog could be in an adjacent

oom. Her statement is then made up of 50% evidence,

nd 50% faith. If she were to open the door and find

dog, her evidence would rise to 100% because she

uld have effectively proven her faith, and confirmed

he existence of the dog. This would be the ultimate

. However, with only partial evidence, and the

ssibilities of fallacies lingering, she must rely on a

reat deal of faith to make the claim that a dog is behind

door.

In a slightly more ambiguous form, you may have

aith that your mother gave birth to you - so you go to

he hospital where you were allegedly born, and check

e records. Sure enough, your mother's name is next

yours, and the documents provide you with a sub-

tantial amount of evidence for your Faithometer. But

that really absolute proof? Should your Faithometer

e at OO%?The documents could have been mistyped

r you could have been unintentionally switched at

th, and given the name of the child that was set to

o home with your mother. Even with this document

evidence, there is a slight chance of error. Therefore,

hile you may wholeheartedly believe _your mother

birth to you, 100% of the evidence has not been

ained; therefore, even though your Faithometer has

substantial amount of evidence, say 98%, you are still

lying on a small percentage of faith - but still, it is

ith.

With a full understanding of both aforementioned

cenarios, do you think it is fair to make the claim that

ou and Beth have just as much faith? When she hears

e dog barking, is that just as much evidence as your

certificate? Of course not - simply because you

sonally deem proof to be only that which satisfies

our particular doubts. Therefore, if you do not have

nough information, or even a problem complicated

ough to form more detailed inquisitions, your doubts

ll be limited, and therefore require less evidence be-

re you consider it proof (this determines the size of

r Faithometer).

We must remember that all seas are at the same lev-

, regardless of depth. On the surface, they appear to be

same - but once you're in the water, the bottom can

ean all the difference in the world Simply because

o people have faith, it does not make them equally

ind to facts. Faith can be both justifiable and unjustifi-

able. We find a great

example with the

deep-sea fisherman

and scientists whom

prior to 2004, had re-

covered the bodies of

giant squid, but had

neither filmed nor

captured one living.

These people had

justifiable faith that

giant squid existed

alsehoods

du~ to the probable

evidence they had

found. It would com-

pletely discount their

records and evidence

to say they had just as

much faith as the be-

lievers of Demeter, the Greek Goddess of Agriculture

Since we Atheists do not have all the answers, some

level of justifiable faith is required, in the literal sense-

just as the scientists looking for the giant squid

trusted

there was one living before it was proven. But pointing

back to the Faithometer Theory, when a greater amount

of knowledge is discovered, a smaller amount of faith

is required. In addition, it is much more far-fetched to

say a magical god exists and is intervening in human

lives on earth, than it is to state no such magic is pos-

sible. In fact, one statement is 'sensible and rational, and

the other is an unjustifiable claim. Perhaps it is fair to

say the theist must have all knowledge of the universe

in order to claim their god is the only god (Most Chris-

tians would probably argue that as fact, but biblically,

Yahweh even mentions 'showing off' for other gods in

the Old Testament). It's reasons like this, that a theist

has the burden of proof with such an outstanding ac-

cusation fueled with unjustifiable faith.

If I were to try to be an Agnostic, and say,

1just

don't know if there is a god, I would feel just as silly as

saying

1

just don't know

if

there is a Tooth Fairy. In

the literal sense of trusting in evidence, I'm okay with

being a faithful Atheist, but my faith is justified, and

nothing like the unjustifiable faith required by believ-

ing in magic The strongest faith often lies in the false-

hoods of others - otherwise known as the lack of evi-

dence held by our opponent. The Atheist has not made a

single claim to require faith, accept that all supernatural

claims are without proof. If an Atheist has faith in any-

thing, it's that theists accept fallacies as evidence.

The

strongest

faith often

lies in the

of others



26/31

Faithometer is empty). Once she hears a dog barking,

her evidence rises to approximately 50%, because she

must concede that while she's fairly certain the barking

is coming from behind the door, the audio she hears

could be a recording, or the dog could be in an adjacent

room. Her statement is then made up of 50% evidence,

and 50% faith. If she were to open the door and find

a dog, her evidence would rise to 100% because she

would have effectively proven her faith, and confirmed

the existence of the dog. This would be the ultimate

proof. However, with only partial evidence, and the

possibilities of fallacies lingering, she must rely on a

great deal of faith to make the claim that a dog is behind

the door.

In a slightly more ambiguous form, you may have

faith that your mother gave birth to you - so you go to

the hospital where you were allegedly born, and check

the records. Sure enough, your mother's name is next

to yours, and the documents provide you with a sub-

stantial amount of evidence for your Faithometer. But

is that really absolute proof? Should your Faithometer

be at 100%? The documents could have been mistyped

or you could have been unintentionally switched at

irth, and given the name of the child that was set to

go home with your mother. Even with this document

as evidence, there is a slight chance of error. Therefore,

hile you may wholeheartedly believe _your mother

ave birth to you, 100% of the evidence has not been

btained; therefore, even though your Faithometer has

substantial amount of evidence, say 98%, you are still

elying on a small percentage of faith - but still, it is

aith.

With a full understanding of both aforementioned

scenarios, do you think it is fair to make the claim that

ou and Beth have just as much faith? When she hears

he dog barking, is that just as much evidence as your

th certificate? Of course not - simply because you

ersonally deem proof to be only that which satisfies

our particular doubts. Therefore, if you do not have

nough information, or even a problem complicated

nough to form more detailed inquisitions, your doubts

ill be limited, and therefore require less evidence be-

ore you consider it proof (this determines the size of

r Faithometer).

We must remember that all seas are at the same lev-

, regardless of depth. On the surface, they appear to be

same - but once you're in the water, the bottom can

ean all the difference in the world Simply because

wo people have faith, it does not make them equally

ind to facts. Faith can be both justifiable and unjustifi-

able. We find a great

example with the

deep-sea fisherman

and scientists whom

prior to 2004, had re-

covered the bodies of

giant squid, but had

neither filmed nor

captured one living.

These people had

justifiable faith that

giant squid existed

due to the probable

evidence they had

found. It would com-

pletely discount their

records and evidence

to say they had just as

much faith as the be-

lievers of Demeter, the Greek Goddess of Agriculture

Since we Atheists do not have all the answers, some

level of justifiable faith

is

required, in the literal sense-

just as the scientists looking for the giant squid

trusted

there was one living before it was proven. But pointing

back to the Faithometer Theory, when a greater amount

of knowledge is discovered, a smaller amount of faith

is required. In addition, it is much more far-fetched to

say a magical god exists and is intervening in human

lives on earth, than it is to state no such magic is pos-

sible. In fact, one statement is sensible and rational, and

the other is an unjustifiable claim. Perhaps it is fair to

say the theist must have all knowledge of the universe

in order to claim their god is the only god (Most Chris-

tians would probably argue that as fact, but biblically,

Yahweh even mentions 'showing off' for other gods in

the Old Testament). It's reasons like this, that a theist

has the burden of proof with such an outstanding

american atheist magazine feb 2009

Documents