There will be a federal observance to honor the 225^th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the United States of America on September 17^th, 2012. A day prior to that day, FreeThought Arizona will host a special meeting in the DuVal auditorium at the University Medical Center at 1501 N. Campbell Avenue beginning at 8:45 AM.

The meeting is open to everyone. The parking is free, the meeting is free and the first 200 people attending will get their very own copy of the constitution—free!

Richard Miller will talk about the separation of church and state starting at 9:00 AM. Seráh Blain will then conduct a Secular Values Town Hall along with an update on the state of secularism in Arizona. There will be plenty of time for audience questions during both presentations.

Richard Miller served in the US Navy aboard Polaris submarines. After leaving the Navy Richard worked for several high-tech firms including IBM and Intel, primarily in the area of training and development where he taught internal and customer design engineers, system architecture, high-speed system design, and microprocessor architecture. Since Retiring Richard has become active in secular and progressive issues; he is a member of the ACLU, American Humanists, Vice President of the Phoenix chapter of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and a board member of the Phoenix Freedom From Religion Foundation.

Seráh Blain is the Executive Director of the Secular Coalition for Arizona, where she advocates for Arizona’s atheists, agnostics, Humanists, and other freethinkers at the State Capitol. Blain has been an active member of the Arizona non-theistic community since moving to the state in 2009, and is the organizer of the Prescott Freethinkers, Flagstaff Freethinkers, and Sedona/Verde Valley Freethinkers. Seráh founded the Secular Student Alliance at Prescott College, where she studied Social Ethics, and served on the inaugural board of the Secular Coalition for Arizona. Seráh also serves on the board of the Prescott Pride Center and is a hospice volunteer. She lives in Flagstaff with her two children and a dog.

FreeThought Arizona has other lectures planned for the future that should be of interest to many members of the Tucson community. In October, Kevin Bonine will talk about desert ecology and the Biosphere and in November, author Darrel Ray will give his talk on “Sex and the God Virus.” If you’d like to be reminded of these events, go to http://www.meetup.com/freethoughtaz/ and become a member. It doesn’t cost you anything and you can quit at any time. There is no commitment but you’ll receive an email to remind you of the FreeThought Arizona upcoming events along with other events of interest to the Tucson FreeThinking community.

Just yesterday, I received the following letter:

Hello Mr. Lacey,

I am student at %%%%%%%%%%%% Community College and I am writing a research paper for my English Composition class. My thesis statement is; “Atheists are not welcome in today’s society”. I need to cite from an expert in the field. I would be so grateful if you could answer a few questions.

What is at the heart of anti-atheism? Fear? Distrust? Or are there other reasons?

Since organized religion has a large voice and deep pockets, what is the future for atheists?

I will also need to know your credentials and title.

Thank you for helping me in this endeavor.

Sincerely,

%%%%%%%

Dear %%%%%%%

I will gladly answer your question to the best of my ability. However, understand that you’re asking me, an Atheist, about the motivations of people who are anti-Atheist. I can speak with great authority about my motivations but I can’t know for certain what’s in the hearts and minds of what is apparently my opposition. Anything that I say about the motivation of others, friends or foes, is a guess. I have to make assumptions. All too often, ascribing motivations to others creates unnecessary conflict. Playwright James M. Barrie once said, “Never ascribe to your opponent motives meaner than your own.”

Question: What is at the heart of anti-atheism? Fear? Distrust? Or are there other reasons?

Answer: Fear and distrust might be at the heart of anti-atheism but I believe it is discomfort that makes the religious believer shun the Atheist.

Most people, me included, were introduced to religion at a very young age and grew up with the belief that God was the creator and has a personal stake in our lives. When something comes up that is seemingly unexplainable—God did it. There are many ways to maintain this comfortable belief. We can short circuit logic by employing confirmation bias. When things go right, God is responsible. When things go wrong, that’s just life or we can find a way to blame ourselves. It’s also comfortable to be with friends that share beliefs.

The mere fact that Atheists exist make some people uncomfortable. While it is uncomfortable to discard something that has been a part of our life from our earliest memories, the more powerful source of discomfort comes from cognitive dissonance—trying to hold conflicting ideas simultaneously.

Atheists remind the believer of their doubts and shake their faith. I suspect that every person that believes in a god has had doubts. It is certain that anyone believing in the literal Bible has had questions. Logic and evidence doesn’t support a literal interpretation of the Bible. In order to stitch together a religious world view, faith must be introduced. Faith according to the Bible is “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Hebrews 11)” Without faith, belief in an invisible creator and the tales of the Bible are impossible. To the religious, everyone must have faith and it’s a virtue to believe things without evidence. That’s not true for the Atheist. The natural reaction is to shun the thing that causes the discomfort.

Question: Since organized religion has a large voice and deep pockets, what is the future for atheists?

Answer: The future for Atheists is bright and I reject your unstated premise. Atheists have a large voice, too and there are plenty of deep pockets. In the past five years, “none” is the fastest growing religious affiliation according to Pew surveys. We’re now at 19% or almost one in five and the numbers are growing. There are rich Atheists and 93% of the scientists in the National Academy of Sciences are Atheists.

As far as my qualifications, I’ve been an Atheist since the age of 15. I am the Arizona State Director of American Atheists and have been for over three years. I am also the Treasurer of the Secular Coalition for Arizona and serve on the board of directors for FreeThought Arizona, a secular Humanist group in Tucson. I’m the organizer for two Meetup.com groups—Tucson Atheists with over 500 members and Skeptics of Tucson with over 200 members. I’m also the editor of the Tucson Citizen FreeThought Arizona blog.

The first part of this blog was published on the 16^th, a couple of days ago. Here is the fourth part of This is a Christian Nation: What That Statement Really Means by Gregory W. Chmara.

 In part I, Gregg listed four statements:

1. “The United States was founded on Christian values and all are troubles are because we have drifted away from those.”
2.  “Christian values are founded on the rock solid principles of the Ten Commandments and they should be on display in public buildings and courts to remind us.”
3.  “All Christians believe the same things – those taught by Jesus Christ.”
4.  “I am a Christian and that settles the argument.” (Whatever the argument is.)

FOURTH STATEMENT:

“I am a Christian and that settles the argument! (Whatever the argument might be.)”

As Dana Carvey’s Church Lady might have said, “Well, isn’t that special?”

Well not really.  There are in excess of 15,000 various Christian sects for the billion professing Christians. I might add that one billion professing is a number greater than actual practicing Christians.  Each sect has its own interpretation of what Christianity is, who gains the rewards of recognizing Jesus Christ as a savior in their own special way, and what range of issues they wish to control.

A person who stops conversations with the phrase, “I’m a Christian, and Christians believe…” is avoiding any real discussion or study of a particular problem. Those problems could range from whether Mary was a virgin (totally unimportant), world hunger (important), the proper role of clergy in politics (very important), and acceptance of science and technology in solving problems of health and well being (exceptionally important). Using “my mind is made up by Christ” statement above indicates blind, willful ignorance.  It exposes the individual’s limited capacity to approach the real world in a thoughtful and understanding way.

The Amish Community openly rejects modern technology beyond that of a horse and buggy. Christians with a similar rejection of the discoveries of science should not be allowed to politically sway the rest of society. It is antithetical to everything I believe.

For example, science found that lives can be saved with blood transfusions.  However, refusal to receive whole blood is a settled issue for Jehovah’s Witnesses.  They are doctrinally enjoined from using whole blood to save their own life.  They cite ecclesiastical and Biblical references to support their views and go as far as to maintain their own health facilities (I refuse to call them hospitals) that do not offer transfusions.  I would hate to be in an accident with blood loss and be transported to a Jehovah’s Witnesses facility emergency room. It is OK for these ultra-religious people to accept that threat into their own life, if it’s a choice freely made but to push this anti-scientific faith-only doctrine as a law on everyone, or to force the belief on any other individual, including minor children or non-believing family members, is a crime against humanity. To deny that transfusions save lives more than prayer is a form of insanity — but it is a socially acceptable insanity under the U. S. Constitution, nonetheless.

This belief is similar to the no medical doctor or medicine beliefs promulgated by Christian Scientists. They, as Christians, believe that Jesus Christ was the great scientist healing with prayer, driving out spirits, demons, and defeating attitudes that caused ill health. A number of minor children with common but life threatening conditions have had to be removed from families who believed only prayer would save their disease ridden child. They imposed their irrational belief on the child often letting the child get close to death when a simple anti-biotic could quickly restore them to the state of health. (Prayer is not as effective as anti-biotics against infections.) Others have refused food to children in order to drive out demons. Recent court cases, luckily, have removed minors in danger from these fanatics and mandated life-saving treatment until the child is back to health.  Personal religious belief does not trump an individual’s right to live with the protections of our advanced secular society.

Consider the Terri Shiavo case. It is another example where the Christian dogmatic arguments conflicted with science while determining life and death. Hundreds of thousands of dollars had been expended keeping Terri’s body alive by machine. Her body had shrunk and science showed that recovery was not possible. Her parents went as far as Congress to stop her legal representative (her husband) from pulling the plug. The Christians in congress aligned with the Catholic Church to make “pulling the plug” look like murder instead of recognizing very real and very unpleasant medical facts.  Being Christian, the parents fomented a religious vote seeking congress to vote for the idea you fight for life regardless of truth, pain, medical evaluation, or cost.  They tried to create a law that would make it a Christian’s (with a capitol “C”) duty to protect life at all costs and give prayer the time to work a medical miracle. The courts finally ruled that the husband had the right to withdraw the treatments that were running her vital signs by machine. As expected by Skeptics, no miracle took place and Terri Schiavo died. Prayers of all the Christians and even Congress did not save the life of her brain dead body. Quietly, an autopsy report was issued. It showed there was no possibility for recovery. Her dysfunctional brain had shrunk to a totally non-functioning organ during the months on the machines which kept her body “alive” in its vegetative state.

These are just a couple of extreme cases but they demonstrate that the ignorant, very vocal, dogmatic Christians involved were effective in using their passion and religiosity to sway public opinion and thwart the benefits of scientific advances. They used their beliefs to suggest all good Christians must morally support their radical view or lose heaven, and maybe go to jail. While Terri Schiavo’s body lived under the type of artificial stimulation that makes a dead frog’s leg jump with a shock from a battery, the legislators wearing their Christianity on their sleeves used the moral bludgeon of guilt (we are all sinners, but we can prevent this one murderous death) to force their view into a political precedent, one that could affect everyone under law in the United States, believer or not.

This is the same technique used by the Roman Catholic church in its very political alliance with Evangelicals to outlaw abortion.  Consider this, the term “abortion” (not just for birth control) covers natural functions of a women’s body and now includes psychological guilt cast on women who suffer a natural miscarriage and may seek medical aid. Consider too, that the religious articles of faith advanced by each Christian group as to when a soul enters a human embryo or fetus to make it human are very different. The Catholic Church believes the soul’s potential begins with ejaculation and even condoms are a form of “abortion.” Conjecture, evidence, and evaluation standards other than those found in the 2,000 year old philosophies of the Bible need not apply. Evangelical doctrine agrees that abortion is a sin — but not necessarily with the Catholic prohibitions on condoms.

In Arizona the legislature, controlled by Republican religious conservatives, passed a law that makes abortion illegal past 20 weeks following the last intercourse before a woman misses her period. Where is the evidence that would support this law’s assertion? By what fiat do they make rules for all women based upon little or no medical efficacy?  Now it’s up to the courts to decide if this law is another religious travesty. What happened to the previous tacit and legal agreements that a fetus must be viable before the mother’s choice is limited by state intervention?

Then there is this: In the past few years the infallible Roman Catholic Pope declared that Limbo does not exist — but did not explain what happened to all those souls of fetuses that previously allegedly resided there — or if in-vitro baptism to save them would be restored.

It was not too long ago that the Catholic Church was sure that any aborted (or miscarried) fetus’s soul went to Limbo instead of Hell. Now, everyone (infants too) who is not baptized as a Catholic ( you know those who are supposed to hell anyway) has no way station to get to Heaven except Purgatory, a  place of punishment for sin until released to heaven, after burning to perfection.

This doctrinal change is in no way is a comfort to Catholic women who lose a fetus and have tremendous hormonally caused emotional problems of loss to deal with but most Christian’s believe “God’s ways are not man’s ways” as if that was an explanation or comfort.

Previously, not too long ago in history, the Catholic church in its wisdom required in-vitro (in the womb) baptism to save an unborn child or fetus in danger of dying before emerging from the woman’s body. This applied especially in cases of then inoperable and deadly breach birth and used enema like inserts. This would assure the unborn fetus a place in heaven, even if it risked the life of the mother and/or child.

Now, add to this the consideration that the Catholic Clergy’s mind is made-up in all matters of birth control. The Roman Catholic Church equates all birth control methods, except vaginal intercourse on the rhythm method, with abortion in the weighing sins that will get you to Hell.

If you look closely  you will discover that those particularly Catholic doctrinal views have now slowly been inveigled into state and national  health bills riding alongside arguments and legislation to remove a woman’s right to choose, (abortion) under the broad-brush that Christian views do not permit birth control.  This now influences not just abortion but all pre and post coital birth control measure in use — and if and when legislated, controls everyone of every faith or non-faith.

Many Christians who may feel that abortion is morally reprehensible and distasteful are less than thrilled with this shift in the anti-abortion movement’s goals.   They believe in family planning. These Christians do not want their newly won reproductive and sexual rights to contraception and birth control that is scientifically viable, safe and healthy, should not be broad-brushed into a Christian anti-abortion issue by those Catholics.

The dogma and doctrine of these Christians and the allied Roman Catholics hierarchy openly conflict in the real world when you move beyond the issue of abortion.

Clearly, these are secular issues, at best, based upon the health of a mother and potential child, and her mate. Religious discussion of fantasized and unsubstantiated claims of when a fetus is imbued with a soul belongs in a religious frame of the specific sect’s beliefs and rules do not belong in secular law.  They should not be imposed on those who do not subscribe to them.

And without a clear understanding of responsibilities for raising a child, when a fetus becomes viable, the potential costs to society of hundreds of thousands of dollars in care for the fetus and child, and the mental and physical health of the potential mother, legislation based upon religious dogma or doctrines should not be part of our secular government.

Now turn to this. There are some who believe that the theory of evolution is wrong-headed and un-Christian. It is supposedly capable of morally turning man into no more than an animal.  They would have us use a broad-brush to think this is a widely held Christian belief.

But the Catholic Church accepts evolution and believes the evidence for it is more than substantial, at least until it comes to the infusing of the soul of man into the human body. That infusion is the work of God.  Other sects believe that evolution and godliness ran concurrently, over unknown eons,

The broad-brush of fundamentalist, literalist, and anti-evolutionary theory Christians does not admit to the fact that science is always investigating, researching, and revising, based upon the latest information and advances, even contradictory evidence.

While us  humans do not know every last step of development from single cell creature billions of years ago to humanity, we can see and prove not only the blind alleys and pathways that nature has taken to develop life and human thought and curiosity, but we can use our brains to connect the dots. We can demonstrate a solid convoluted path to thinking humans even those using religious thought and blind belief to explain the creation of the world.

This should be clear to anyone who is rational, and more importantly in the future will be able to understand all the developments in medicine, physics, germ theory, and the sciences and technologies of human life and curiosity.

Let’s turn to global warming.  Note, more than 90 per cent of every living species that has ever been on earth is now extinct.  There is a Christian belief offered and promulgated on a broad-brush basis saying that the end of the world is near.  Broad-brush Christian preachers offer the idea that an apocalypse will occur in our lifetime, so we need not worry about the rapidity with which man (as a species) has changed (some would say spoiled)  the ecology of the planet.

Is it possible they do not understand the belief that Christ predicted that ‘the apocalypse” would happen before all the original apostles left the earth 2,000 years ago?  Then consider the Christian apocalypses of 1,000 CE, and Y2K, etc.

A change must be made in this broad-brush Christian belief.  It is too often applied to keep people in ignorance of our industrial destruction of the planet and changes that must be made, no matter how unpopular and difficult those changes may be. And changes must be made if we are to offer a living planet to future generations. These Christian people have a right to their apocalyptic opinions and speech. However I also have an opinion and a few rights under law and beliefs I feel are moral.  First, remember that law can be amended to account for modernity. I believe ignorance is not a benign state or a state of grace.  I believe that deliberately blind ignorance is at least a misdemeanor if not an intellectual crime against humanity. It is an excuse for not thinking, then not acting unless directed by a “Christian leader.” By the way,  I plead guilty of  inaction for too many years.

I firmly believe those who use the four arguments quoted at the start of this article have no right to avoid evidence, they have no right to promulgate falsehood (remember thou shalt not lie — as in bear false witness, etc.).  They have no right to force their unsubstantiated doctrinal beliefs into law or public policy to govern everyone.

No, we are not a Christian nation.  We are a human nation experimenting in self government. We do not subscribe to religious blind belief and adherence to mindless dogma or doctrine handed down from an unseen, improvable, invisible beings. We realize statements of doctrine come through men, whether they claim to be prophet, priest or king. Men, especially men in ecclesiastical power, have agendas that vary from advancing the full bloom, curiosity and development of mankind. These agendas may be couched in godly phrases, but most often do not bring liberty, thoughtfulness, and progress to all humans. Rather they benefit the select few in power or who subscribe to the dogma and doctrine advanced.

In closing, let me paraphrase the old Negro College Fund public service announcement used to raise funds during and after the Jim Crow era:

“A closed mind is a terrible thing – it is a waste of human potential.”

A nation that lets itself be run by religious totalitarianism, closed minds and willful ignorance, with laws based upon lies and misinformation that has been preached and repeated from pulpits and biased, unknowledgeable, and frightened news sources,  deserves everything it gets.  And that nation will probably, in the end, lose everything it really values as it deserves.   That’s my broad-brush statement.

The first part of this blog was published on the 16^th, a couple of days ago. Here is the third part of This is a Christian Nation: What That Statement Really Means by Gregory W. Chmara.

 In part I, Gregg listed four statements:

1. “The United States was founded on Christian values and all are troubles are because we have drifted away from those.”
2.  “Christian values are founded on the rock solid principles of the Ten Commandments and they should be on display in public buildings and courts to remind us.”
3.  “All Christians believe the same things – those taught by Jesus Christ.”
4.  “I am a Christian and that settles the argument.” (Whatever the argument is.)

THIRD STATEMENT -

“All Christians believe in the same things.”

The official title of the Mormon Church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”  It includes the proclamation that its members accept and follow the perceived deity of Jesus Christ. The church also maintains that Christ allegedly visited the American Continent after his crucifixion to teach true doctrine to the righteous descendants of the tribes of Israel who then inhabited the American Continents.

Mormon doctrines in other areas agree with that of many protestant sects. In construction and management the Mormons closely follows an interpretation used by the early Roman Catholic Church in centralizing how scripture and “moral” law are to be interpreted and applied.

Yet dozens, even hundreds of Christian sects, evangelicals, main stream Protestant and Catholic declare Mormons are not Christians.

Another example:

Until the election of John F. Kennedy no Catholic “papist” could be elected to the Presidency of the U.S.A. — because they would take their orders from the Pope. And were Catholics Christian? (Never mind the Constitution’s restrictions against religious tests.)

Schisms based upon both real-world problems and imagined theological discussions over the centuries have driven wedges into Christian beliefs.

To some, Baptists will go to hell, while to others all Jehovah’s Witnesses will take up residence there after death. Catholics know they are going to have to wear asbestos underwear if they wish to visit their Protestant Christian friends in Hell after death. They contend Catholics will be saved to heaven by deathbed confession and absolution by a priest even if the sinner was a cheat, liar, thief, adulterer, fornicator, and in most cases a murderer.  Mormons believe only Mormons can get to “the highest degree of Celestial Glory,” (heaven) but you can join their church by proxy after death and get there if you work at it.  They also believe only ex-Mormons can go to hell or “outer darkness” because they have known, and then denied the truth of the LDS Church and its priesthood.

Very recently the Christian designated First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs, Mississippi refused to permit their pastor to marry Charles and Te’Andrea Wilson in their facility.  The reason?  The couple is African-American (Black.)  The Church governing body (local) felt that blacks should not be married in their religious facility. Why?  Well because their Christian (with a capitol “C”) facility was for marriage of whites only.

For this nation it took a major war and constitutional amendments to give blacks their full rights after the fiasco of the 3/5 of a person and no vote compromise embodied in the original Constitution. Many of the founders knew it was inhumane, immoral, and abhorrent. It eventually led to the Civil War. Then it took another 150 years of struggle and constitutional amendments, the shame of Jim Crow laws, church bombings, lynchings, voting purges, poll taxes, segregation, and massive congressional action to drop the level of racial prejudice to its still unacceptable and inhumane simmering lower level of today.

But those who believe in the inerrancy of the Ten Commandments most often refer to their scriptures as the only correct moral guides.  This, in turn gives credence to those vocal enough to use those “moral” arguments and language. They focus unknowing voters’ attention on issues that end up being used as wedges to facilitate the broad-brush insidious agendas of totalitarian control of information, thought, and liberty. Some even believe segregated church buildings are moral and correct.

To these Christian folks, unlike the Constitution, neither the Ten Commandments nor their scriptures are open to amendment.  To them, as to rebels in the south during the Civil war – owning slaves and racial inequality, was and remains in the same inerrant category and is scripturally supported. It was, and is, to them  a matter of State’s Rights being used in protecting a religious belief and opposing national unity on the value of man.

I said in an earlier part of this essay the Ten Commandments are a distillation of 613 commandments given through Moses in what is called the Old Testament. (Even though it has been revised, condensed, and manipulated many times.)  Most Christians and their sects find the specifics of those 613 laws onerous at best. They tend pick and choose which their specific doctrines and laws they will follow.  As we see in the case of the Wilsons in Mississippi, picking and choosing the way through these ancient moral codes and laws in the Bible brings Christian in conflict with Christian, and none will brook amendments to their beliefs.

Too often the fallacious claim of unity of belief of among all Christians frightens politicians into positions that do not allow for compromise or amendment if they wish to continue to serve in elected office. Promised Christian voting blocks are meaningful in winning re-election.

In past generations, the United States population dealt with major problems and programs by coming together for common secular causes like winning wars, getting out into space, creating highways, and preserving public health through regulation of food and drug supplies.  Today those secular issues are being delayed and subjugated to discussions of matters best dealt with in ecclesiastical realms and in their member’s practices or in the areas of personal belief.

The resolution of these common sectarian issues should be happily applied to believers in the believer’s organized churches. But ecclesiastical matters and decisions have no place being forced upon non-believers.  These include subjects such as divorce, abortion, death with dignity, civil union versus religious concepts of marriage, birth control, the use of Shari’ah law, teaching evolution, and/or unsupported opposing religiously based hypotheses.

The entanglement of church and state in education funding was demonstrated recently in the Louisiana Legislature when it passed a bill to fund religious schools through a tuition transfer bill.  It was a little while before it leaked out how unhappy some legislators became when they discovered that religions other than Christian (for example: Muslims, Mormons, Scientologists and Jews) could receive those funds.

So, in this way, maybe all Christians do think alike.  My late father used to put it this way:

“Hooray for me — the rest of you — go to Hell.”

Here at FreeThought, we’ve been hitting the religious issues pretty heavily. A very big part of FreeThought Arizona’s mission concerns religion but we can’t forget about Skepticism and Humanism. Last night the Skeptics of Tucson met to discuss “What’s the Harm?” This is a question that often comes up when a Skeptic expresses an opinion on something like Astrology. Sometimes people say, “Ya, I know it is BS but what’s the harm?” In many cases, there may be no harm. To me and other Skeptics, however, truth matters. Some go as far as not being able to enjoy shows on TV or movies because of implausible science or supernatural content. That may be taking it a bit far. I enjoyed watching Medium when it was on TV and saw no problem with suspending my Skepticism of the paranormal to enjoy a story now and then. I think everyone has to suspend their scientific knowledge and Skepticism from time to time. We all know that there is no noise in space, right? It’s still fun to count the stars on the flags carried by the cavalry in old western movies, however.

So “What’s the Harm?” There are a couple of web pages dedicated to the harm caused by unscientific thinking and belief in the paranormal. One of the pages goes as far as pointing out how over dependence on technology can be harmful to your health and wellbeing. Check out http://whatstheharm.net/ and the Jenny McCarthy Body Count Page. For a light hearted but very well performed song on Skepticism tune into this song by Eddie Scott. We finished up as a sort of a summary with this clip from Dara O’Briain.

In summary:

• Being a Skeptic is hard work.
• Sometimes we have to remind ourselves why Skepticism is so important to us.
• Sites like “What’s the Harm?” remind us that we’re not alone…and we’re needed in society.

It is my pleasure to introduce Donna Viola. She is a recovering catholic (self-identified atheist for ~6 years), presently a graduate student at the University of Arizona, and moved to Tucson from the east coast about a year ago.

She is today’s contributor to the FreeThought Arizona blog and a volunteer camp counselor for Camp Quest.

(Editor’s Note: I was just informed that there is a FaceBook page for Camp Quest Arizona. You can check it out HERE. Also, all photos courtesy Siobhan Riordan, a camp counselor at Camp Quest Chesapeake.)

When I was growing up, summer meant spending lazy days on the beach, playing manhunt with the neighborhood kids until well past dark – and, for at least a couple of years when I was fairly young, going to vacation bible camp for a week. I don’t remember much about it now save for the religiously-themed craft projects and watching episodes of Davey and Goliath, but it was part of the “good Catholic upbringing” that my parents imposed on me. I lost my religion years later, but there were many such instances where my social circle was defined by the faith of my family.

So what about the children of non-religious families? Right now, they represent a minority in our country – and even in public schools religion tends to seep through, be it by the words “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance that they recite every morning, or in the fact that many of their friends come from religious backgrounds. What opportunity, then, do these children have to be around people like them?

Enter Camp Quest.  First held in Kentucky in 1996 with only 20 campers, the week-long sleepaway camp “provides an educational adventure shaped by fun, friends, and freethought” (directly quoted from its mission statement ). Camp Quest has since spread to more than ten locations in the United States which hosted hundreds of campers between the ages of 8 and 17 throughout the country during the summer of 2012. I have been fortunate enough to have had the opportunity to work as a volunteer cabin counselor at Camp Quest Chesapeake for the past two summers – the first two times the camp was held in this region. Located in a national park south of Washington, DC, this camp brings together children largely from Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, although campers have come from as far away as New York and Florida.

At the most basic level, Camp Quest is about having fun – the kids got to play games, do arts and crafts, go hiking, make s’mores and sing songs around the campfire. We held a carnival where they could win prizes or the chance to pie a counselor in the face, a talent show that included singing, magic tricks, and ukulele-playing, a karaoke night, and a camp dance.

But there was so much more to camp. There was a strong emphasis on scientific inquiry, with activities like cow eye dissections, hunting for pond bugs, identifying fossils, and considering the possibilities for alien evolution. There was a (college-level!) engineering challenge where the kids had to devise a mechanism for “landing a spacecraft on Mars” (aka protecting an egg from an 8-foot drop) using minimal supplies, including a handful of craft sticks, some cotton balls, and a drinking straw. There were philosophy discussions about topics like personal identity and religion in schools. We had “Humanist Heroes” awards, where the kids could acknowledge times when other campers had gone out of their way to help them out and embodied humanistic characteristics, and “Famous Freethinkers” to expose the campers to people well-known people who also identified as humanists, including Daniel Radcliffe, Carl Sagan, and Jessica Ahlquist.

collecting pond creatures

digging for fossils

And one night, the counselors sat down with their campers for “life discussions” – where the topic of conversation focused on instances when the kids had been singled out or prejudiced against because of their personal worldview. Children shared stories about play dates with religious friends: sitting through awkward pre-meal prayers, or being brought to Sunday school after a sleepover. There were stories about being rejected by friends (or friends’ parents) who found out about their lack of a belief in god, and even stories about being scorned by more religious family members. However, one of the most commonly-expressed sentiments was just how nice it was to be at Camp Quest, where they were surrounded by like-minded individuals and where no one judged them.

In all my dealings with the kids of Camp Quest, I have been nothing short of impressed. When faced with challenges, they asked intelligent questions and came up with brilliant ideas. When talking about their worldviews, they were notoriously articulate. When interacting with each other, they were for the most part kind and considerate. When asked what makes Camp Quest special, more than a few kids said, “Everything!” When asked if they wanted to come back next summer, nearly all said yes. In the words of the kids themselves, Camp Quest is a place where “you can be yourself”, where “everyone is accepted” and you have “opportunities to try new things”.

On one of the last nights of the week, during the camp dance, we played the song “We Are Young” – and the kids and staff spontaneously formed a circle and sang along; it was an experience that nearly brought tears to my eyes. It was amazing to see just how close these kids had grown over the course of a week, and to realize how much they all meant to me. I feel privileged to be a part of the Camp Quest Chesapeake family, and to have had the chance to get to know not only the kids at camp, but also the wonderful, dedicated group of volunteers who made it all possible. And now that I’m back home in Arizona, I find myself feeling a little feeling a bit homesick… for summer camp!

The good news is, there’s no need for humanist families in Arizona to ship their kids off to distant states to have this kind of summer camp experience: Camp Quest Arizona will be holding its inaugural camp near Prescott in June 2013; watch out HERE for details  about camp registration and volunteering!

Jim Wilson would like to point out that the evidence for evolution is everywhere:

He’d also wanted to say, “Special thanks to Aron Ra for providing me with the mallard example.” 

“Come on pretty baby won’t you take a chance, Be my natural selection, dance dance dance
Exorcise your demons with that monkey friend, Because we’re gonna inherit the wind”
-New York Dolls, Dance Like a Monkey

In a recent conversation with a Creationist, the individual asserted that evolution was not true because it never was observed.  He told me, “No one has ever observed the transmutation of one species into another.” I replied that he was wrong, and elaborated as follows:

In lake Malawi, there are parts of the lake that did not exist until flooding in the 1800′s and there are now fish species of Chiclid—a freshwater fish—that are indigenous specifically to those parts of the lake.  We have also observed the emergence of a new species of flowering plant called the Mimulus that has developed the ability to live in copper mine tailings that were not present until 1859.  Furthermore, what do you think happens when bacteria, become resistant to new drugs?  We now know dogs are descended from wolves and that corn is descended from a grass called Teosinte.  Both developed as a result of selective breeding by humans.  You can dismiss these as minor changes but they are actually quite drastic and there is no reason why they cannot accumulate into bigger changes. It happens so slowly you do not notice it occurring.

There are also the ring species where species have diversified over space rather than time.  For example, in California’s central valley there is a continuous population of Ensatina salamanders in a sort of geographic horseshoe.  Subpopulations that live next each other in the horseshoe can interbreed while those on the opposite ends cannot.  This same thing has been observed with Larus Gulls around the Arctic Circle, Greenish Warblers in the Himalayas, deer mice populations in North America and various others.

Furthermore, instead of appearing as discreet kinds living things appear in the exact type of nested hierarchy that one would expect if they were created through a branching process, like evolution. For example, the mallard is one of many species of duck.  Ducks are part of a larger group of similar birds that also includes geese and swans.  These water birds are a specific subset of birds and in general.  Birds are a specific subset of the group vertebrata which also includes fish, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals.  All these vertebrates are a subset of the group chordata, which includes not only the vertebrates but other animals with notochords, dorsal nerve cords, pharyngeal slits, and a post-anal tail in all or some parts of their life cycle, such as sea squirts, and lancelets.   These chordates are still a subset of a larger group the dueterostomes which are part of a larger group Animalia that includes all animals.  This in turn is part of a larger group Eukarya, which includes all lifeforms with a cellular nucleus.

Nowhere is the hierarchy broken.  We do not see mammals with feathers, birds with chlorophyll, or bats with dragonfly wings.  We never see mixes of features from distantly separated parts of the hierarchy, such as griffins, centaurs or Pegasus or crocoducks.  We do however see life forms that manage to straddle to close connected groups of the hierarchy.  For example, platypuses have mammalian fur, endothermic metabolism, primitive milk glands, and yet they retain a reptilian reproductive system.  Other living creatures that do this, are lungfish.

There are also countless fossilized life forms that straddle adjacent groups in the taxonomically hierarchy.  We have a near a substantial record of the transitions between land mammals and whales, fish and amphibians, different types of reptiles, reptiles and birds, reptiles and mammals, and different groups of mammals, and the transition between humans and non-human primates.  Furthermore, the geographic, distribution of living things on earth, as well as the distribution of genes is exactly what we would expect to find if life diversified in an evolutionary branching process.  There are in fact so many examples that elaborating on them would greatly lengthen this blog.  Feel free to ask for more details in the comments if you like.

Everything I describe here is exactly what we would expect to see if evolution is true.  There is no reason why a creator would organize his creations in such a way, unless he badly wanted it to look like he used evolution.  When we look at things that are intelligently designed they do not obey strict branching patterns. For example, one could start a rock band, that adds Scottish bagpipes, Indian Sitars, and Tuvan throat singing to its sound or design a car, with a Chevy body and a Ford engine.

The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. However, for some Creationists no amount of evidence would be sufficient to change their minds.

Apparently, that’s what Rick Warren thinks when he tweeted, “When students are taught they are no different from animals, they act like it.” James Holmes, the Aurora tragedy suspect was raised Christian but I’ll bet there isn’t a single church that’s going to claim him. After all, no TRUE Christian would do such vile things. And Ricky, just how was his actions like an animal? Animals don’t kill for no reason or for sport, only humans do that. Let’s not forget the Atheists’ role in the tragedy. Mike Huckabee won’t let us.

Previously, the Columbine tragedy was blamed on the fact that school prayer and the 10 Commandments were taken out of the schools.

Britain’s decline? You guessed it—Atheists! According to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach (America’s Rabbi).

Chris Hedges says, “Secular Atheists are to Blame for Norway Massacre.” The right wing Christians initially thought that the Muslims were to blame until it was discovered that Anders Behring Breivik is a Muslim hating Christian. Chrissy then blamed the secular fundamentalists for instilling the hatred for Muslims in Mr. Breivik’s head.

Did you hear that the Pope blames Atheists for the Holocaust?