It’s Humanlight, a newish religion-free holiday for spreading good cheer and celebrating a vision for a better future.

Anyway, despite the fact I’ve never had a pet cat (unless you count Kat the Iguana from my college years), after the 4th email from someone pointing me to this clever new product, I decided to make my own remote to control the uncontrollable.

It makes a great Darwin Day present! (Only 2 shopping days left.) Order them anywhere you find irrefutable proof of God’s existence.

It seems the Christians of Britain were so jealous that three different groups have launched their own ad campaigns in the same, ahem, spirit.

“There definitely is a God” says the Christian Party. Really? You have proof?

“There is a God. BELIEVE. Don’t worry and enjoy your life.” from the Russian Orthodox Church. This from the church that has said of homosexuals, “Such people are deeply unhappy,” while pushing ex-gay agendas. See if you can spot the contradiction?

“The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” said the Trinitarian Bible Society quoting Psalm 53:1. I see your Bible quote and raise you one: “whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.” (from Matthew 5:22, New American Standard Bible).

Anyway, now that everyone is doing it, why not make your own catchy atheist slogan for the side of a London bus? You can even use the Bus Slogan generator to see how it will turn out.

Shalom, Salaam, Namaste, Amen, Goddess Bless, and Blessed Be.

Wow. I don’t know that it’s a perfect metaphor in all cases, but I like it.

Although I remember having a few battles with my family over seminary and church attendance, I’m grateful that they never shipped me or any of my siblings off to this kind of forced religiosity.

Lately, there has been a dramatic rise in the right-wing use of the “freedom of conscience” argument. The argument goes like this: by passing laws to protect women’s choice/queer rights/psychoactive drugs/brown people, you are violating our first amendment right to freedom of religion by forcing us to professionally and respectfully coexist in a pluralistic society.

“Freedom of conscience” is, of course, the rationale-du-jour for all sorts of hateful and abusive behavior. Bush cited it in passing a regulation that will allow medical service providers to refuse service that violates any aspect of their faith (examples: doctors can refuse to perform abortions or fertility treatments, pharmacists can refuse to fill hormone prescriptions for transgender people, Scientologist home care nurses can refuse doctor’s orders to give their patients anti-psychotic medications). In Kalamazoo, MI, paid homobigot Gary Glenn argues that the newly passed nondiscrimination law may force some people to base decisions that run counter to their religious convictions, passing around a flier that claims “This ordinance violates the First Amendment rights of religion and free speech of those who oppose cross-dressing and homosexual behavior.”

It’s nonsense, of course. The laws and protections that would seemingly violate this “right of conscience” exist to ensure that all people are equal and have equal access to the privileges and institutions of citizenship. Freedom of religion depends on freedom from religion in the public sector. Although I recognize “slippery slope” arguments as inherently faulty, one must still wonder where it ends? Will I soon discover that my bank teller cannot, in good conscience, take money from an atheist? Will I be forced to walk to work because my bus driver finds it offensive to her faith that I wear a white knot in support of marriage equality? Will I die in the streets because an EMT refuses to treat anyone hit by a car after coming out of Unitarian Universalist church building?

Combine this right-wing trope with the other great right-wing talking point, parental rights, and you’ve got a recipe for disaster. “Parental rights” are another favorite of Chris Buttars. Parents have the right to decide if their underage child can have an abortion. Parents have the right to excuse their children from scientific education on evolution or human reproduction. Parents have the right to make deadly medical decisions about their children.

Examples, the AIDS-denialist whose 3-year-old child died of AIDS-related pneumonia because she refused to allow doctors to give her baby retroviral drugs. The questions surrounding a Hollywood star’s culpability in his son’s recent death because of religious views that don’t allow certain types of medication. Parents who send their children to ex-gay facilities that engage in harmful aversion therapy practices. States passing laws that make child amnesty difficult and require parental consent (and/or consent of the father of the fetus) for abortion services to women under 18.

It all makes me more convinced then ever that Richard Dawkins was right in claiming that the indoctrination of children into religious systems is a form of child abuse. As psychologist Nicholas Humphrey [pdf link] argues:

No human being, in any other circumstances, is credited with having rights over any one else. No one is entitled, as of right, to control, use or direct the life-course of another person – even for objectively good ends. It’s true that in the past slave-owners had such legal rights over their slaves. And it’s true too that, until comparatively recently, the anomaly persisted of husbands having certain such rights over their wives – the right to have sex with them, for instance. But neither of these exceptions provides a good model for regulating parent-child relationships.
Children, to repeat, have to be considered as having interests independent of their parents. They cannot be subsumed as if they were part of the same person. At least so it should be. …
I think we should stop talking of “parental rights” at all. In so far as they compromise the child’s rights as an individual, parents’ rights have no status in ethics and should have none in law.

The “right of conscience” and “parental rights” combo serves one primary purpose: to maintain and enforce a dominance of white, Christian, conservative mores. Secondary effects of these arguments cast the dominant institutions in our society as victims, mask power as powerlessness, and invent rights that contradict the progressive values and fundamental building blocks of the great American story.

For the time being, however, can we all agree that the Utah Boys Ranch–and institutions like it–are horrible examples of the consequences of unchecked religious fundamentalism?

Join me in calling for the Utah Attorney General and Legislature to investigate these claims about Chris Buttars’ culpability in criminal child abuse and not just oust him from his seat, but throw him in jail!

The sign read:

At this season of the Winter Solstice, may reason prevail. There are no gods, no devils, no angels, no heaven or hell. There is only our natural world. Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds.

Interesting to me is the fact that so many Christians believe the sign to be an attack on Christianity.

“The bottom line is this,” said Larry Stickney, President of the Washington Values Alliance. “The atheists display is in bad taste and it was a bad call to give them a permit this time of year…Allowing groups like these to thumb their nose at those who believe in God during the sacred Christmas holiday runs counter to sensible decorum and keeping the peace. There are many appropriate forums, both public and private for these folks to promote atheism, this isn’t one of them.”

No problem with Christians pushing their holiday, mores and culture onto public grounds and into our government, but a small expression of free speech which provides a perfectly reasonable statement is hateful, intolerant, disparaging, and an attack. In Utah, howling monkey Chris Buttars has introduced a resolution to “not exclude Christmas from their holiday greetings.” Et cetera, et cetera.

This graphic from Joe.My.God sums my thoughts up nicely:

Look, I’m not at war with Christmas. I quite like the holiday season, inclusive of all the holidays (Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Solstice, whatever), but I also like that I am not obligated to participate.

Last week, we had a gospel choir performing in the store where I work. I came back from a break to hear “God has a gift with your name on it” being sung in jubilant praise. I wanted to get annoyed or offended, but I really wasn’t. I simply dismissed it as an expression of sentiment that I don’t share (and a short break from the obnoxiously cheery “It’s the Most Wonderful Time of the Year” by Andy Williams – which may be the most annoying song on our retail playlist). I was in the workplace, where I am expected to celebrate diversity among my coworkers and customers. Much like my coworkers with religious objections to homosexuality are expected to celebrate my contributions.

So, if I can put up with dozens of customers chirping “Merry Christmas” at me without the slightest concern for my actual beliefs, if I can smile and appreciate the gospel choir providing an interruption from the endless loop of holiday standards, if I can participate in my family’s holiday celebration without complaint, then why is it so damned offensive when someone like me speaks their own truth?

There is probably no God, so why don’t we all just try to be happy and treat each other kindly because that’s the way we wish to be treated? Or, as another campaign puts it, can’t we just be good for goodness’ sake?

So I’m writing today to encourage you to vote no on these ballot measures if you are registered to vote in those states.

Look, I’ve been working on marriage equality since before I joined the staff of Nevada’s “No on 2″ campaign in 2000. Even when I’ve questioned whether or not marriage equality is the right fight for the queer community, even when I’ve wrestled with my personal feelings about heteronormative and assimilationist priorities, even when I’ve argued with others about the inherent classism in the marriage equality movers and shakers, I’ve always stood by the fact that so long as marriage is recognized by the government as a legal institution, barring any group of people from the full and honest enrollment in that institution is wrong.

Banning same-sex couples is nothing more than discrimination. In the end, after all the arguments and red herrings about children in school or lies about churches being forced to perform ceremonies that are in violation of their beliefs, it all boils down to this… a vote “yes” on prop 8 is a vote that says “I don’t like homosexuals and I think I am inherently better than them.” Which is another way of saying, “I am choosing to discriminate against an entire group of people.”

Banning marriage equality won’t stop children from learning about gay people. Banning marriage equality won’t improve or protect anyone’s marriage. Banning marriage equality won’t make lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people shut up and stop fighting for equal treatment under the law.

And now, on a related note, this year’s election cycle has put a great deal of strain on me personally. I find the actions and the extreme politicization of the Mormon church to among the most offensive displays of my life. As someone raised in an LDS family and as someone who still tries to remain kind-hearted and forgiving about the Mormon faith, I’m having a hard time reconciling my fantastic relationship with my family with the putrid hate coming from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

To be a faithful Mormon, to be deemed worthy of the “Temple Recommend” (which grants access to the LDS Temples and the important rituals of life and afterlife performed within), one must affirm their belief that Thomas S. Monson (the current President of the church) is a living prophet and that his leadership is directly guided by God. This is a belief on which all other faith in the church relies. To believe or to know that the prophet is morally wrong is to deny the fundamental doctrine on which the church is built. I hope and believe that those who are close to me, my Mormon family and friends, do not wish to see discriminated against. I know that they do not believe me to be evil and inherently “less” than themselves.

A day of reckoning is coming for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. If the Mormon church continues to pursue this agenda of close-minded hate, denying science and the evidence of millions of families, they will tear their very membership apart. It would break my heart to see my mother, my father, or my siblings forced to choose between their love of me and their lifelong faith in the church. Yet I believe that day is coming unless the Mormon faith can shake loose the chains of hypocrisy and institutionalized discrimination.

I’m trying hard not to paint an entire population with the same brush, and I recognize that there are many, many Mormons who are conflicted and torn about this issue. The news has been filled in the last few weeks with public declarations of LDS members who are wrestling with their faith and unable to grasp how a church that once brought them such peace has now become a place of pain and heartache. So my anger is directed at the small patriarchal enclave of church leadership who are steering this ship and those marching troops who never allow themselves to question a single directive or pronouncement from these out-of-touch and bigoted old men.

To the rest of the Mormons, I can offer only this small piece of advice: be okay with skepticism. Approaching life with a skeptical eye to all decrees of “God’s will” can be difficult, it can be painful, it can be soul-sickening work at times… but when you pass through those times and find the answers that come not from some old man you’ve never met, but from your own intelligent and honest mind, the peace is a thousand times greater than anything I ever knew praying in public or private. You have minds, and voices, and votes… do not give away your power.

The trailer for Milk was released today. Please ignore the commercial for another crappy film at the start of this embed, it’s the only embeddable copy I could find. But you can download the trailer for free through iTunes.

To be honest, this trailer caused the first pangs of homesickness for San Francisco. If I could pack up and go home right now, I would. But I can’t, and I have other things to focus on.

The staffing agency I’m working with asked me to revise my resume today. Most people need help making their resume impressive. Mine was too intimidating and I was asked to remove the words “manager” and “editor” entirely. In other words, cut all but two of my actual job titles going back to college. Anyway, we’ll see if the new and humble resume scores more points in the job hunt.

I’m bracing myself for tonight’s convention coverage. I’ve got news for the McCain-Palin campaign, the scrutiny of Palin and the vetting process is not “nonsense” and it won’t go away just because you stamp your foot and act forcefully. After all the bullshit nonsense about Rev. Wright, I can’t wait for the mainstream media to pick apart the Wasilla Bible Church and Pastor Larry Kroon. For instance, Palin was in the audience when they had David Brickner of Jews for Jesus as a special guest. Brickner has described terrorist attacks on Israelis as God’s “judgment of unbelief” of Jews who haven’t embraced Christianity. Palin’s church apparently supports ex-gay reparative therapy. Or we can back up a couple years to Palin’s former long-term pastor, Ed Kalnins of the Wasilla Assembly of God, who

preached that critics of President Bush will be banished to hell; questioned whether people who voted for Sen. John Kerry in 2004 would be accepted to heaven; charged that the 9/11 terrorist attacks and war in Iraq were part of a war “contending for your faith;” and said that Jesus “operated from that position of war mode.”

Family and children may be “off limits” but surely pastors and religious affiliations are not, right? I mean, the Republicans couldn’t possible imply that questioning a candidate’s fitness to lead and policy positions might be dangerously affected by extremist and offensive religious leaders, right?

Will someone please ask Joe Lieberman, once praised for the historic moment as the first Jewish person selected as vice presidential nominee on a major party ticket, how he feels about endorsing a woman who was reverently listening to David Brickner less than three weeks ago?

Well, okay, Focus on the Anus’s “regular guy”, I know you said this isn’t a contest, but I can’t resist.

But I’m not going to pray. I’m going to look to science for some guidance as to what is likely to occur. A quick check on Weather Underground finds that there is a 29% chance of rain (any rain) based on 14 years of historical record. While that’s no guarantee of anything – what with global warming and the natural unpredictability of weather – I still think the odds are stacked more than 2/3 in my favor.

But even if there is rain on August 28, once again looking to that nasty science of meteorology, we can see that historically, rainfall has been at most 0.31″ – not really the “network cameras can’t see the podium” downpour you’re hoping for. After checking numerous weather forecast sites, those that predict precipitation of any kind for Denver this month (none go as far as 20 days out) don’t anticipate anything higher that .06″ in a day. A little summer sprinkle that cuts the heat is hardly what you’re looking for.

And before you get excited about some other act of God, the chances of a cloudy day (based on historical data) are 14% and of a windy day (avg. windspeed over 10 mph) or a humid day are both 21%.

But let’s say that despite the probabilities, despite the more up-to-date forecasts sure to come, despite the technology and experience of television professionals who have surely shot events in that very stadium under poor weather conditions, we still get that “unexpected, unpredicted, unforecast rain” silencing Barrack Obama’s voice… is it true that you’re so pathetically insecure in your ability to win the so-called culture war based on reason and argument? Are you so bothered by the country’s increasing acceptance of a woman’s right to choose and gay couple’s right to be married that you’ve moved on to praying for a miraculous display of divine intervention?

Well, you go on crossing your fingers and wishing really, really hard that the heavens will part and some inexplicably Caucasian dude who grew up in the middle east 2000 years ago will float down on a beam of light. While you do that, this queer atheist progressive feminist liberal will keep on making arguments based on reason, science, an appeal to basic human compassion, and hope for a better, more just and equitable world in the future.

And we’ll see who wins.

EDITED: I’ve deleted three paragraphs of angry and unpleasant things I had to say about the Mormon religion. Suffice it to say, if there was any lingering interest I might have ever had with reconciling with the LDS church (there wasn’t), it’s gone.