by mr dan

Most of us do it.  Some do it every single day, others once in a while.  There’s hardly anyone who’s never done it even once.

Some people want the whole world to know, while others do it privately and hope no one in their life ever finds out.  Some only share it with people they trust.  Some seek out strangers on the internet to get feedback on how well they do it.

People used to be so uptight that you were weird if you did it.  Now you’re weird if you don’t.

I’m even doing it right now.

These days, even the Pope seems to be changing his position on it.

After years of lagging in the twelfth century, the Vatican is dipping a toe into the twenty-first.  Pope Benedict XVI is addressing his vast congregation and encouraging them to blog. Yes, blogging is how the church will reverse its sinking numbers by reaching the Web’s expansive audience of people who have never heard of God.  In his message for the 44th World Communications Day (which will be delivered in May but was posted on the Web this week, as if to punctuate how tech-savvy they really are), His Holiness calls on priests to embrace the Internet in order to convert new believers.

With the Gospels in our hands and in our hearts, we must reaffirm the need to continue preparing ways that lead to the Word of God, while being at the same time constantly attentive to those who continue to seek; indeed, we should encourage their seeking as a first step of evangelization. A pastoral presence in the world of digital communications, precisely because it brings us into contact with the followers of other religions, non-believers and people of every culture, requires sensitivity to those who do not believe, the disheartened and those who have a deep, unarticulated desire for enduring truth and the absolute. Just as the prophet Isaiah envisioned a house of prayer for all peoples, can we not see the web as also offering a space — like the “Court of the Gentiles” of the Temple of Jerusalem — for those who have not yet come to know God?

The Pope also quoted from the letter of the Apostle Paul to the Romans,

The Scripture says, “No one who believes in him will be put to shame … everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” But how can they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how can they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone to preach? And how can people preach unless they are sent?

Indeed, we atheists should rejoice that the Pope has instructed his flock to lead our path out of loneliness and despair.  Most of us aren’t strong enough to lift those heavy bibles, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses have never been able to reach us due to our frustrating ineptitude with deadbolt locks.  I’ve heard there are plenty of religious people on the Internets, but I’ve never been able to find them.  So until now, the message of the Catholic Church had never been able to reach the thick-headed, nonbelieving heathens.  And so we continue to wear poly-cotton blends and have enjoyable sex (sometimes even at the same time), never knowing the severity of our sins.

Honestly, Ben…every priest who is smart enough to turn on a computer already has a blog.  The religious community is a few centuries behind in a lot of ways, but technology is not one.  There are forums, groups on Facebook and MySpace, YouTube channels, Kirk Cameron.  If you want scriptures or prayers sent to you every day, there’s an app for that.  There are television networks and radio stations, terrestrial and satellite, devoted to every stripe of every religion.  Chances are even your local church probably has its own embarrassingly amateurish website that misspells “Revelation” at least once.  The religious community may not be great at using the Internet — I dare say our side does it much better — but they are hardly a stranger to it.

It’s never been a secret that the Catholic Church is out of touch with most of the rest of the world.  But how many times do we have to see them demonstrate how clueless they are about other Christians and even lay Catholics before it’s just not funny anymore?

And furthermore, what happens when the Pope gets ahold of all those annoying, trendy internet memes?

And Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” And they replied, “Om nom nom nom nom.”

The Caananites totally got pwned at the Battle of Jericho.

Jesus doesn’t walk on water, he walks on Chuck Norris.

Song of Solomon, Chapter 1, Verse 1 (NSFW).

All your basilica are belong to us.

This is going to be worse than when your mom joined Facebook.

mr dan is the vice president of Connecticut Valley Atheists.  The views expressed in this posting are his own and do not necessarily represent those of Connecticut Valley Atheists or its individual members.

by mr dan

In a challenge to the Town of Vernon’s yearly endorsement of Christianity, Connecticut Valley Atheists spent a chilly Sunday erecting our own display on the town green in Center Park.  Its Christian and Jewish counterparts were put up the day before (on the Sabbath, mind you).  On one side, the familiar crèche, with its somewhat miniaturized figures of Mary and Joseph flanking the blonde-haired, blue-eyed infant king; on the other a large and festive PVC menorah.  The town’s Christmas tree stands nearby.  And in the middle, our three-sided wooden sign greets pedestrians and commuters with the message:

30 Million Americans Are Good Without God.  Are You?

As in previous years, the back panel includes information on the solstice, not as a pagan holiday but as an astronomical event, an understanding of the physics of which marks the difference between religion and science.

CVA obtained a permit for the space (for a 25 dollar fee) and the town approved our design for the third consecutive year.  The specific message of the sign is that we who fall into that conservatively estimated group are fully capable of living decent and virtuous lives.  But the broader message is one of protest.  While our aims are peaceful, our goal is to make people realize that government property should not be used to make statements about religion, for or against.  We’d prefer that all three displays be removed and that the town, like all of its neighbors, let the people decide how they want to spend their holiday season.

It is our view that the government, at any level, has no business encouraging or discouraging religion of any kind, and is prohibited from doing so by the first and fourteenth amendments to the US Constitution.  The government should remain neutral on matters of faith and let its citizens practice freely, or not practice at all.  We have the right to be steadfast, resolved, pious, skeptical, scientific, open- or closed-minded, indecisive, ambivalent or apathetic.

CVA will continue the displays annually until the Town of Vernon stops endorsing religiosity.

mr dan is the vice president of Connecticut Valley Atheists.  The views expressed in this posting are his own and do not necessarily represent those of Connecticut Valley Atheists or its individual members.

by mr dan

We atheists are often asked that annoying question:  Why so hard on religion?  What does it matter to you if people believe what they  believe?  Who cares if people worship Jesus, Mohammed or the moon, if they throw salt over their shoulder or read their horoscope?  The emphasis of the question is that these mistaken and silly beliefs are nothing more than a nuisance to nonbelievers.

In the last two years, 58 albinos have been murdered in United Republic of Tanzania and the Republic of Burundi.  Now the AP is reporting that 10,000 more Africans afflicted with albinism are in hiding for fear that they too will be hunted and killed.  These are not ordinary acts of discrimination or xenophobia.  The Red Cross has deemed the killings “occult-based.”

Witch doctors are paying up to $75,000 for their bodies, which they use to make potions to bring luck, riches, health, and sexual virility.  They are being killed over silly superstition, because an uneducated populace believes they are magic.

The numerous stories are tragic and heart-wrenching.

Nyerere Rutahiro [...] was eating dinner outside in his modest rural compound, when a gang of four strangers burst in, and threatened to arrest him. As his wife Susannah looked on helplessly, the men began to hack at Nyerere’s arms and legs with machetes.

“We want your legs,” they shouted, “we want your legs,” his wife recalls, still deeply traumatised by what she saw.  (BBC)

A 10-year-old albino boy, Gasper Elikana, was killed on 21 October by hunters who fled with his leg, which they hacked off in front of his family having first beheaded him to stop him screaming. His neighbours and his black father, who was left fighting for his life in hospital, had tried bravely but unsuccessfully to protect him. (Red Cross)

Two mothers in western Tanzania have been attacked by gangs who were after their children who have albinism. The women were hacked with machetes when the attackers failed to find the two children. (BBC)

The senseless killings are motivated by profit and encouraged by religion.  Most of the potions and items made from the flesh, bones, blood and hair of the victims are produced by witch doctors in Tanzania. The victims are mostly from there, Burundi and perhaps the Republic of Congo. All are killed in the name of startling ignorance and superstition.

Believing it will bring them good luck and big catches, fishermen on the shores Lake Victoria weave albino hair into nets.  Bones are ground down and buried in the earth by miners, who believe they will be transformed into diamonds.  The genitals are made into treatments to bolster sexual potency.  (Daily Mail)

So no, it cannot be said that superstition and religiosity are victimless crimes.  When people must die because someone else believes that they are magical, the myth of personal faith being merely personal cannot be upheld.  To put it another way, when you believe in things you don’t understand, you will suffer.  Superstition ain’t the way.

mr dan is the vice president of Connecticut Valley Atheists.  The views expressed in this posting are his own and do not necessarily represent those of Connecticut Valley Atheists or its individual members.

by mr dan

Two years ago I got myself into some trouble when I sent the following request to many people in my life, specifically the ones who were in the habit of giving unnecessary gifts to me in the more wintery months of the year.

To my family and friends,

I am writing this letter to all who have been generous enough to think of me in the past at Christmastime. I am always grateful for your generosity and thoughtfulness. But as most of you know, I am not a Christian and have not been for most of my life. The celebration of Christian holidays, as well as receiving gifts in honor of them, has always been unsettling to me. Oddly, the increased commercialization, and by default secularization, of this and other religious holidays only serves in fact to amplify this discomfort. Additionally, it has always seemed ironic to me that, less than 12 hours after celebrating a holiday dedicated to the spirit of thankfulness and thoughts of the less fortunate, our thoughts immediately meander to this year’s hottest toys, bigger and better than last year’s.

It is with this in mind that I respectfully ask that you take me off your shopping list this season and instead aim your generosity in a more worthy direction. This is the same request I make every year and am always unanimously ignored; perhaps having it in writing will help to inculcate my objection. If you really feel the urge to give, in this or any season, consider making a donation in any amount to a worthy and respectable charity. Below are six of my favorites; if you do not agree with their aims feel free to choose your own. Making a donation by credit card is easy and takes only a few minutes.

And I provided information on Kiva, the Save Darfur Coalition, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, the Iraq War Veterans Organization, and the ONE Campaign. All causes and charities can be offensive to some, but I had hoped these were innocuous enough to appease those members of my family whose views are more antipodal to mine (compared to, say, CVA or American Atheists, which I am sure I could not convince any of them to donate to).

There are thousands of worthy and trusted charities, and even more causes that need your attention and assistance. Certainly these causes are more important than Christmas gifts.

Thank you, and terrific holidays to all.
Dan

Some were polite in their responses, but others were livid. I was, in their view, ungrateful, unAmerican, anti-Christian, anti-capitalist, anti-family. It was disrespectful to my uncle, who had died around Christmas seven or eight years earlier. It was upsetting family tradition. It was me trying to show that I’m better than everyone else. It was petulence. It was blasphemy.

I couldn’t understand how asking for something was the societal norm, but asking for nothing could be considered so apocalyptic.

As the economy has slumped even further in the last few years, requests like mine have become more popular. While much of it is charitable, many people are finding that a $20 donation to the American Cancer Society is a more affordable gift in this flaccid economy than a waffle iron, digital camera or particle accelerator. Either way, it’s still better to give than to receive. I know exactly where I learned that, too, and it wasn’t from Jesus.

I hope you’ll all think about making a similar request this season. It doesn’t mean you can’t still spend the holidays with your family, or that you shouldn’t get them any gifts, or that you should feel bad for having the day off of work, or that you should go around telling children there’s no…ahem…you know. But there are so many things more important than consumerism. I’ve got enough socks and I don’t want a Wii. Consider instead a donation of a small sum, or a few hours of time volunteered, or a bag of groceries to your local food pantry or shelter.

Of course, a donation to CVA is always a nice gesture, too.

mr dan is the vice president of Connecticut Valley Atheists.  The views expressed in this posting are his own and do not necessarily represent those of Connecticut Valley Atheists or its individual members.

by mr dan

At a Halloween party last weekend hosted by the treasurer of CVA, it was not a surprise to me that the topic of atheism would come up. A very intoxicated Harvey Dent, in real-life an adherent of Buddhism, began to pontificate. My companions wisely sidled away and I was left alone like a highway crash barrier to absorb the impact of his rhetorical runaway 18-wheeler. For twenty minutes he soliloquized without pause. Summarized:

• Buddha was a prince, and he was sheltered from death, disease and old age, until one day he saw a sick old man dying and wondered what it was.
• Bhuddi-ism is the best religion, but it’s not a religion, but it’s the best religion.
• Buddhi-ism is atheistic.
• Atheism is stupid.
• Buddhi-ism is just like Judaism and Christianism.
• Buddhist philosophy is peaceful and enlightening, and there is a book I should read about it, but he can’t recall the title.
• Buddha was a prince, and he was sheltered from death, disease and old age, until one day he saw a sick old man dying and wondered what it was.
• Buddhi-ism is much better than Catholic-ism or Gandhi-ism.
• Vegetarians are idiots. They bear the greatest responsibility for global warming and are malnourishing themselves to death. Humans have incisors.
• He really wishes he could remember the title of that book, because my atheism friends and I should read it.
• Buddha was a prince, and he was sheltered from death, disease and old age, until one day he saw a sick old man dying and wondered what it was.

Et cetera.

Anyway, it got me thinking about the mistaken notion that Buddhism is not a religion. The exact definition of religion is too debated to go into here, but most would agree that religion embraces elements outside the realm of science; either, as religionists contend, because science has failed to grasp it, or, as we would say, because it is baloney. If you are talking about eternal life (either in an afterlife realm or through reincarnation), higher powers, abilities or phenomena which cannot be explained, or an other-worldly influence into human events, you are talking about religion.

Buddhism, like all religions, has many branches, and many interpretations within those branches, and of course has been polluted by Western thought as its lofty promise of enlightenment found favor with trendy Americans. There are those who claim to practice a strictly atheistic interpretation or Buddhism, a religion stripped of all superstition until only philosophy remains. Most fail. But many knowingly embrace the dogmatic elements and, in Western confusion, often invent their own.

To the lay Buddhist there are principles, known as the Five Precepts, which in my opinion are rather good guidelines for living: refrain from taking sentient life, stealing, sexual misconduct, false speech, and the consumption of alcohol and drugs which cloud the mind. Debate on what exactly each of those things means aside, one does not need to believe in things unexplained by science to accept or reject these five ideas (it is worth pointing out that the omnivorous drunk fellow from the party does not fit this definition of a Buddhist).

But there is more to Buddhism than the Precepts. The concepts of karma and reincarnation do not hold up to even a moment of skeptic inquiry. Even in the West, where the practice is said to be dogma-free, these ridiculous concepts remain.

Karma is the belief that the sum of your actions and intentions today, and in previous states of existence, will have consequences in the future, either in this life or the next. Its vagueness sometimes affords it the opportunity to slip undetected through dogmatic checkpoints, but there is nothing scientific about it. Even if you could prove this absurd scenario, the alleged results are not directly related to the actions. To dole out reward or punishment in relation to the actions of a past life requires a judge of some kind. Even though Buddhism does not recognize a God in the Western sense, it has no explanation for this judge. Some would say that the judge is a sentient universe, but that is merely a disembodied deity and another article of dogma.

The result of this alleged judgement is reincarnation, and this too is a preposterous notion that ought to be expunged. Last week Dennis noted brilliantly that the soul is a flawed, disproved concept, but the soul (mind, essence, being, etc) is a necessary element in the reincarnation (samsara) cycle. The mind is a creation of the brain, and cannot exist independently of the body, nor can it be transfered from one to another. To confuse things further, the non-Western Buddhist will usually insist that what is transfered from one body to the next is not the “self” in the traditional sense but an “evolving consciousness” that still carries with it all appropriate karmic baggage. I don’t know exactly why they think that sounds less ridiculous.

These are but two flaws in Buddhism’s claim to intellectual validity. There are other things — the Buddha’s virgin birth, for instance — which add to my argument, but since they are disputed and contradicted within the schools of Buddhism I shall leave them out.

So, while Buddhist philosophy may be embraced as sound and wise, or rejected as yet another sub-par school of thought, Buddhism as a whole cannot be considered anything but a religion.

And even though the intoxicated man could not recall the title of his favorite book, his advice to me — “tell your atheism friends to read about Bhuddi-ism” — was not altogether inane. All philosophies are worth study, even those wrapped in dogma. I must say I much prefer the Buddhist religion, which claims to reward or punish deeds and thoughts, to the Christian religion, which claims to reward or punish faith or the lack of it. But a religion it remains.

Oh, and by the way, that thing about vegetarians causing climate change? Complete garbage.

mr dan is the vice president of Connecticut Valley Atheists.  The views expressed in this posting are his own and do not necessarily represent those of Connecticut Valley Atheists or its individual members.

Although Creationism is a real problem in parts of the country, here in New England most believers have long ago ceded that fight as lost and, if anything, use the obvious ridiculousness of the Creationist viewpoint as a weapon in their intraChristian factional struggles.  They congratulate themselves on their acceptance of scientific evidence where the origin of species is concerned, and claim that their religious beliefs are complementary to, and not in conflict with, science.  However, when you ask them what will happen to them when when they die, the answer is that their soul will go to heaven.

So, what is this soul?  The Catechism of the Catholic Church says, “In Sacred Scripture the term ’soul’ often refers to human life or the entire human person.  But ’soul’ also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him, that by which he is most especially in God’s image: ’soul’ signifies the spiritual principle in man.”, which tells us almost nothing.  There’s certainly nothing in this definition which implies that the soul is something which survives the death of the body, but other teachings of the Church affirm just that.  In Church teaching, and, more to the point, in the popular conception of believers, the soul survives the death of the body, and then goes on to observe, love, think, learn, etc.  It’s clear that the soul either is the mind or at least encompasses the mind.  And what is the mind?  Although the science of cognition is not at the advanced stage that the science of evolutionary biology is, it is crystal clear that the mind is an emergent property of the brain.  When the brain is affected by drugs or injury the mind is affected as well.  When the brain gets damaged the mind is damaged.  When specific parts of the brain get damaged specific and predictable abilities of the mind are damaged.  When the brain is severely damaged the mind is severely damaged.  When the brain is destroyed the mind is what?  According to the soul theory the mind is restored to perfect funtionality.  There is, however, absolutely no solid evidence for this and no proposed mechanism for the operation of the disembodied mimicking of this bodily function.  It is as clear a case of wishful thinking and intentional feigned ignorance of persuasive evidence as the Creationists’ belief in the divine creation of modern species.

I think that reluctance to accept death is a large factor in the survival of religion, even among those who are otherwise rational.  However, wishing something weren’t so doesn’t make it not so.  You’re going to die, your mind will stop thinking, and pretending you have a soul is not going to change that.  Most people, I think, actually realize that even if they won’t admit it to themselves.  To them I say, “I’m sorry, but there’s really not any fundamental difference between you and the Creationists.  Free your mind while is still exists.  You have a universe to gain.  You have nothing to lose but your cognitive dissonance.”

-

Dennis Paul Himes
Connecticut State Director, American Atheists
President, Connecticut Valley Atheists

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”
- P. Vergilius Maro

Edit: spelling correction

by Derek Schachter

If you, like me, had the (un)fortunate luck of being in front of a television screen between 3:00 P.M. and 5:30 P.M. EST this past Thursday, you were most likely watching the enticing cable news coverage of a helium balloon floating over rural Colorado. During those surreal two and a half hours, we all had our eyes glued to the screen, first with morbid curiosity, then slight panic and terror, followed by confusion and anger. I believe we are still immersed in this third stage, for we now know for a fact that not only was little Falcon Heene hiding in the attic the entire time, but, thanks to video footage, the entire Heene family witnessed the balloon’s accidental launch with no 6-year-old anywhere inside the craft. Questions as to whether Richard Heene, Falcon’s father, perpetuated a hoax still remain, and will hopefully get answered in the coming weeks [ed: the boy's mother has since confirmed the hoax].

But how could such an anomalous event reel us in and make us feel like collective dopes? If the Heene family pulled one over on us, it was by taking advantage of the lazy, unprofessional, and downright ignorant attitude the cable news networks have towards journalism. As atheists, we must lay doubt not only upon the religious, but the media soothsayers as well.

To say that I was watching cable news (CNN to be exact) at three in the afternoon is a bit of a fib; I actually received a CNN alert in my e-mail saying, “A 6-year-old climbed into a balloon-like experimental aircraft built by his parents and floated into the Colorado sky.” News alerts aren’t unmitigated truth, but after not receiving an official alert on Michael Jackson’s death until a half hour after every other news source confirmed it, I had good reason to trust the conservative, obstinate reporting by whoever decides to send out those alerts and take them as fact. Yes, I saw the alert, believed it, and immediately tuned into CNN to watch the “story” unfold.

What I witnessed were the voices of two disembodied anchors conjecturing and theorizing opposite a live feed of a floating helium balloon, one that had a 6-year-old boy inside. And how did we “know” there was a boy inside? Because the byline graphic on the screen told us that a “sibling” reported it. Not once did the anchors try to verify this mysterious sibling source. If that wasn’t bad enough, “neighbors” reported that they saw the boy on his roof getting into the balloon as it took off. From the released footage, we know that the balloon took off from the ground in an enclosed backyard. This was a false lead through and through, yet the network reported it as fact. We were also informed that the boy snuck inside a door on the balloon as it took off, yet there was never a question of where this door was on the balloon. It looked pretty self-contained and even I questioned the location of this door, eventually becoming skeptical of there being a boy at all.
That isn’t to say that CNN (and presumably other networks) did not do its job in asking questions, such as: “Why weren’t the boys at school?”, “Where were the parents?”, “How high is the balloon right now?”, “What is the air temperature up there?”, “Is he wearing his jacket?” All important questions, but also all questions of conjecture. These were all questions to frame the story as a whole, but not get to the bottom of what we were looking at. Maybe if one of the anchors were keen enough to wonder about the door, they would have wondered about the available oxygen at the high altitude in a balloon with no noticeable holes and filled with helium. That seemed like the most logical question to ask given the circumstances, instead of inquiring about the temperature and concern trolling regarding whether or not he was wearing his jacket.

The network even had a “balloon expert” on the air who explicitly said that he did not believe, based on the craft’s trajectory and angle, that there was a payload the size of a six-year-old boy inside its base.

I had thoroughly given up believing at that point, but the networks soldiered on, even in the face of scientific analysis. Once the balloon landed and it was confirmed that Falcon had not been flying, I hoped that cable news would drop the story. Instead, the situation went from irresponsible to manic once rumors started to fly that the boy had actually been in a hanging basket that fell from the balloon. The networks reported that, see, he clearly wasn’t inside the balloon, but was suspended from it, and what had been carrying him must have fallen off. Now the hunt was on to see where he had fallen and at what height he would have fallen from. A photograph of the balloon with a black dot under it was shown, claiming to be a lucky snapshot of the boy falling from the balloon. Again, in a picture taken out of thousands that just happened to show an unidentifiable object underneath it, the networks gobbled it up without any follow through. Who took this picture? Where was this picture taken? Could the boy be found based on the location of the photographer? These questions were not asked.

As we all know now, Falcon revealed himself in his attic after hours of news coverage. People are angry at his father for unnecessarily worrying the public that maybe a little boy was trapped in or fell from that balloon. Thousands of taxpayer dollars were also spent on the search and recovery of a helium balloon with no boy inside. Everybody has a right to be upset, but they should also direct some of those negative feelings towards a news media that has lost much of the public’s trust. In the future, I will treat outlandish media claims as I would any claim regarding apparitions or religious figures appearing on tree stumps, with realistic skepticism.

Derek Schachter is a writer and editor, and member Connecticut Valley Atheists.  The views expressed in this posting are his own and do not necessarily represent those of Connecticut Valley Atheists or its individual members.

by mr dan

If Ray Comfort wants to hand out 50,000 copies of Origin of Species, he’ll be the only one doing so.  Charles Darwin’s seminal work (originally published under the title On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life and later changed by the author) is somewhat less than standard reading material in American high schools and colleges.  Perhaps Comfort would know this if he had ever been to an American high school or college.

The Way of the Master Ministries, the organization Comfort founded with actor and ex-atheist Kirk Cameron, has announced that on November 19, 2009, 50,000 altered copies of Origin will be handed out on 50 college campuses. The duo are most famous for a video known as the Atheist’s Nightmare, popular on YouTube, asserting that the banana is so perfectly suited to human use that it proves God’s existence.  The truth is far more complicated, but rather than dwelling on Ray’s last failure of logic, let us turn our attention to the 50-page introduction that Comfort has added to his version of the book.

I couldn’t begin to examine all of the lies found in just the six minute video which heralds the project (it is not illegal to pray in public, open a Bible in a public school, or display the Ten Commandments in public—that covers the first 20 seconds).  Adolf Hitler has no “undeniable connection with the theory” of natural selection, as I’ve written before.  Natural selection has absolutely nothing to do with the Big Bang model for the universe’s formation.  And there is no “absence of species-to-species transitional forms actually found in the fossil record”—quite the opposite, in fact.  It’s clear that Comfort’s 50 pages are merely a propaganda tract wrapped in a Gospel message.  To disprove evolution, one needs to provide evidence that the theory does not hold up to scientific inquiry and that its details, in whole or part, are incorrect.  Whether I personally accept Jesus Christ as my personal lord and savior is another matter entirely, and one ought to have no bearing on the other.

When I heard of this project, I began to ask around.  Of everyone I know, not a single person was ever assigned to read all or part of Origin of Species in high school or college (and only one had taken it upon himself to read it).  This is mainly because Darwin is not the definitive voice on the subject of evolution.  Origin is not the most thorough, or the most accurate volume ever written on evolution or natural selection—indeed, why would anyone expect the first book on a particular subject to be?  One would assume that your local electrician knows far more about electricity than Ben Franklin did.  “If I have seen a little further,” wrote Newton, “it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.”

The Way of the Master wants intelligent people to be frightened by this gesture.  They picture atheists cowering in fear of fifty pages (several of those illustrations—gasp!) of contrarian information. It has always been the view of the believer that those who don’t share their views must be paralyzed by a lack of confidence in their dissent.  This mischaracterization has always left them unprepared for serious debate.  If Comfort, Cameron or any of their many volunteers hand you this book, graciously accept it.  No harm can come of it.  There is no need to berate them, call for book burnings or any other absurdities.  Feel free, however, to engage them in conversation about the introduction’s content.  Ask them the pointed questions that they have never asked themselves.  Colleges are places of discussion, scholarly debate, and wisdom.  Let them know that they’ve underestimated these institutions and the open minds at work within.

mr dan is the vice president of Connecticut Valley Atheists.  The views expressed in this posting are his own and do not necessarily represent those of Connecticut Valley Atheists or its individual members.

The 2009 South Windsor/Rockville Relay for Life has wrapped up and was a great success. The event’s 78 teams raised over $187,000 for the American Cancer Society. Connecticut Valley Atheists managed to raise a total of $790, and as team captain I’m really happy to thank everyone who donated to us, helped us raise money, walked with us and provided us with necessary materials, ideas and inspiration. There is no way we could have done this without all of you.

Several times along the way I was asked why the event was even taking place. After all, the 24-hour walk was entirely separate from the fundraising process, so why walk at all? Why not just raise money and give it to the ACS? All along my answer was that people are more willing to donate to an event than to a cause, and that by showing some visible effort, even symbolically, people will understand our seriousness and be willing to help.

I stand by that answer. But at the event this weekend I saw more reasons piling up. We celebrated survivors, remembered lost loved ones, thanked supporters and threw a great party. Inside the track were dozens of booths with bake sales, crafts, flowers, face and hair painting, a moon bounce, a massage tent, raffles, all manner of items for sale (one church group was selling plastic toys including lightsabers, and I took delight in the irony of a Christian organization purveying Jedi weaponry) and other great carnival-themed fun. Money raised through these efforts, of course, also went to the ACS. Outside there was live music, moving speeches, an animated feature film, more great food, and a demonstration of the latest advances in the field of robotics. Lining the whole inside perimeter of the track were thousands of luminaria; lighted candles inside paper bags, each one dedicated in memory to a particular person taken by cancer, which burned beautifully through the night and into the dawn.

Many of the teams consisted of survivors and their friends and family. Many more walked in memory. To them, the event is inspirational, something they look forward to all year, and a reason for those whose health is failing to hang on. Indeed, the Relay for Life is a fundraising event, but it is obviously so much more than that as well.

I walked 25 miles on Friday and well into Saturday morning. Only now is the pain in my legs, feet and back beginning to recede. This discomfort could not be compared to even one percent of the pain inflicted upon someone stricken with cancer; it is not a thousandth of the sacrifice that doctors, nurses and caregivers make to alleviate that pain and aid in recovery; it could never be a millionth of the heartache that a family feels when they lose someone they love.

And so I thank everyone again for helping us out, and hope we can count on your support again next year.

mr dan