Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Christian Nation?

We are romping into the holiday season and in the United States that means Thanksgiving kicks off the Christmas season. I personally have a love/hate relationship with Christmas. I decorate for the holidays and have a great time doing it. I do not believe however that Jesus was the Christ or even a real person nor do I think someone else's death will give me salvation.

This season also brings out the pre-legislative session bills and those who claim there is a war on Christmas and Christianity. I read a facebook status today that for some reason got under my skin.

Let's see how many people on fb aren't ashamed to show their love for God and admit that Jesus is their Savior... We need to get God back in America... If you're not ashamed, copy and paste this in your status... P.S. - "Question with boldness, hold to the truth, and speak without fear!" - Glenn Beck


Now I personally do not care how many people on facebook profess their love for god or admit that Jesus is their savior. I think that is their right and conversely they should leave me to my atheist rants as well because that is my right. I am however concerned about the idea that we need "to get god back in America"!?! I watched a Brian Dalton lecture the other night resonated with my feelings on this subject. Brian Dalton does the popular "Mr. Deity" series on YouTube. Here is a clip;




We continue to operate under the premise of American exceptional ism stating boldly that 'god wanted us to settle this country and we are the greatest country in the world because god wants us to be'. This belief is not only foolish but it is dangerous.

When we are demanding that god be returned to our country are we demanding it be the Christian god only? Or if we bring god back can it be the Muslim god? How about a Hindu god? You see I firmly believe that god only exists in our individual minds. Your definition of god is not the same as your neighbors. In fact no two people in the same congregation will see god in the same way. The problem is that as humans we are willing to kill each other over who we believe is right.

As we move into the 2010 legislative session our conservative legislature is lining up a series of bills that will help return god to our country. The first in the series now out is a push to remove the phrase "Liberally Construed" from the rules. Not because it is bad for the agencies who are charged with the rule to "liberally" interpret or to loosely apply the rule but because it has the word "liberal" in it and liberals are against god. The Salt Lake Tribune Columnist Paul Rolly recently drew a line between the movement of Conservapedia to the Eagle Forum who is pushing to have the language removed from the rules(and there are many). The Eagle Forum has the second biggest voice on the hill next to the LDS Church. This gives the Neo-Conservative Fascist Gayle Ruzicka more access than the average citizen because she represents what god wants.

I would challenge any and all religious people to put their focus on their fellow man. This year especially. Forget about getting god back into America and look out for all Americans not just your fellow Christians. Don't do it because god wants you to or because its what Jesus would do but because it the the right thing to do.

Friday, October 9, 2009

Organic Community - Arts


I had a discussion last week with a friend about community. I live in a planned community (Daybreak) where many of our early experiences, when the community was in its infancy' were socially engineered to bring people together. We all had one thing in common: we chose to buy homes in a neighborhood that was designed from the sidewalks up to create a tight nit community. When we first moved here there were activities and they were well attended by the community members. Over the last five years something has happened to change the community. The community has grown to over 2000 individual family homes and the quaint community that we enjoyed in the beginning has been eroded.

I see the cause of this threefold. The first is the size. When you have two thousand homes and three villages you are going to see a regionalization of community. Folks will opt to know, do service with, and recreate with their neighbors. Second, the community management has failed support organic community in such a large neighborhood and also has demonstrated a lack of understanding of the local culture. The third reason was partially discussed in the last sentence. As our community started to grow the neighborhood started to develop the majority of its community inside of local LDS ward houses.

I guess that the community management recognized on one level that the community was fragmented and there was a need for a change. They fired Lifestyle Director and started a search for a replacement. However, that replacement must also come with a plan to stimulate organic community. It is fair to recognize that people with huddle in their neighborhoods and there is nothing wrong with celebrating a block, region, or village. There is also much to be said about formation of groups that serve niches inside the community as a whole.

The new community manager also has to figure out how to open the relationships between the local LDS community and those who are not members. The LDS community has a self contained social structure that dominates daily life and there is limited opportunities for cross over. Children and adults have a regimented schedule that does not leave much time for activities outside. Many families find that between church, school, and maybe some sports activities there is little time or energy left. As my friend and I discussed, they do not need community outside as much as those of us outside need community.

I have been involved in a form of organic community that seems, for some, to have bridged the gap. It has not been perfect and it is certainly not been a panacea but, it has worked very well and filled a void in our community. That specifically is our local community theatre group, South Jordan Community Theatre. This group formed as a local group of friends got together and produced a show in the neighborhood. The obvious need for this type of outlet was immediately apparent. Our neighborhood management declined to be involved in this project long term and so four of us formed a board a directors and have produced 5 shows in 12 months with great success. Our organization serves our local area and has expanded into other counties and cities. It has brought together people of all walks of life including religious and non religious folks. We have an advisory board of 19 members who are teachers, lawyers, carpenters, authors, and politicians who all have a common goal of providing quality performance arts opportunities to children and families of our local community.

I believe we have been successful because it has addressed a need, taken into account the three things listed above, and has a very targeted focus. Additionally, it has a board of directors that has made it about the product and not the individuals who serve on the board.

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Children are the Challenge-Kiera


Kiera is my youngest child. She is spunky, spirited, manipulative, smart, and cute. Of my five children she has the strongest need to fit in and to be liked. This makes her very susceptible to peer pressure. I have seen this child make decisions that are contrary to her own personal welfare or interests to keep friends and she is only 10. Unfortunately she believes what her friends tell her and does not frequently challenge them. I personally think that Kiera’s has more of a fear of rejection than a need for acceptance.

Kiera has lived in three different homes two in the same neighborhood. It was our last move that has proved to be the most difficult. Kiera has found herself on the outside looking in. In our other neighborhoods we had plenty of non-religious families in the neighborhood and Kiera had a choice of peers. The one we are in now she has been excluded from Sunday play while the religious families and their kids associate and play together.

Recently, Kiera has been invited to attend “Activity Days” with the girls who attend the local LDS Ward. I have, until this last week, approached this cautiously. Wanting to provide her with the opportunity for association but wanted to limit opportunities for indoctrination. This unfortunately proved disastrous this week. Two weeks ago they all went up to the Temple to have their picture taken. This week they made frames for those photos. Now on its face it seems okay. I don’t have an issue with the Temple. It is a local landmark and my daughter is cute!

The one thing that rocked me back on my heels was a booklet that I found on the end table: “Faith in God for Girls.” The booklet was distributed at the activity last week. The booklet outlines what the child must do to achieve their potential as a child of god. It assumes that first the child had been baptized and second the parents are on board. In my neighborhood it is not secret that I am not on board. I explained to Kiera that I do not agree with the contents of the booklet. She became very upset with me and demanded I give her the booklet back. She went on to tell me that she wanted to go to the activities because she had fun. She also stated they had started a binder for her to track her “personal progress”.
The content in the booklet may be fine for the parents of her friends but it is not acceptable in our home. There is little probability that she would be able to meet the achievement or the award at the end of the program because she is not a baptized member and her dad does not see it as harmless.

I do not spend anytime indoctrinating my children to be atheists. We just do not give them a religious identity. One of my favorite quotes from Richard Dawkins is
“There is no such thing as a catholic child…Only a child with catholic parents.”
In his example he applies this concept to other religions and political philosophies. Religion has to be taught and as a result, for most of us, the religion we end up with is the religion of our parents. It is that phenomenon that allows religions to regionalize. There is a certain smugness that results from believing we have the answer and as a result we do not have to stop and consider the other person or family that may be affected. In Kiera’s case the activity days are agenda driven and she will not be attending in the future. This will be viewed as a harsh decision but they would feel the same way if I invited their children in and told them why I don’t believe there is a god.

This video illustrates the above paragraph. The discussion starts at about 5 minutes in.

Friday, September 25, 2009

Facebook is Sorry



I emailed facebook. They responded and aplogized for blocking my ability to share my blog through the internal email and messenger.

Sorry for the confusion. It appears that you were shown this message in error.


Unfortunately they have not fixed the error. I am working with the Facebook team to reslove the issue. I should have been a little less harsh with the Facebook team.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

By what Authority.....with what Basis in Fact?


As a young Mormon, one thing that always left me scratching my head was the idea that a church calling was a calling from god. I was taught that through personal revelation the the stake president called the bishop. I began to question this on a very literal basis first when our first bishop in the American Fork East Stake 12th ward was so outwardly hostile to my parents because they were "Jack Mormons". It came into question again when I was a teen and our bishop was arrested for molesting the boys in the ward.

As an adult I find it concerning that these folks are put in a position of authority over others. They are, for the most part, lay people with no real training in either their religion or other social science issues. They are allowed to council others and to give advice on issues such as sexual abuse, divorce, marriage, sex, homosexuality, and depression among other things.

Several years ago I was writing a pre-sentence report on a young man, returned missionary, who had plead guilty to Enticing a Minor Over the Internet, a Third Degree Felony. According to the investigator's report he entered a chat room solicited an investigator who was posing as an underage 13 year-old female for sex. In the same chat room was an age appropriate girl who was interested in his proposal. He turned down her advances in favor of the 13 year-old.

During the interview I asked him if he was seeking sexual offender treatment. He said he was meeting weekly with his stake president. I asked if his stake president was a Licensed Clinical Social Worker with a State recognized specialty in Sexual Deviancy? He said he thought his stake president was a HVAC technician. I told him that his stake president was grossly unqualified to counsel him on this matter. I asked him if his bishop was better qualified. He said, "No. He happens to be my father."

Later his mother told me that because his stake president spoke highly of the young man; it should warrant leniency from the court. Additionally his father, the bishop, and his mother both engaged in a plot to conceal the offense from his fiance's parents even though the court would likely impose sentence that would keep the young man from joining his fiance on their honeymoon(which happened).

Not only were both men not qualified to provide real world counsel to his young man they assisted in keeping relevant information from the fiance and her family.

For me, this came in to focus again on Sunday while I was reading the Salt Lake Tribune. An article discussed a LDS General Authority's stance on whether homosexuality was genetic. According to the article, Elder Bruce C. Hafen, stated, same-sex attraction is "not in your DNA,". The article refutes this statement with cites to the APA and other research that indicates that homosexuality is normal and may have a genetic component.

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_13377659

Elder Bruce C. Hafen, a General Authority is not a geneticist, a psychiatrist, he is not an LCSW or a psychologist. He is a lawyer. He has the expertise to take an argument to its absurd conclusion but to represent that behavior and sexual orientation is not normal when science indicates it may well be is reckless and callous. It also flies in the face a recent studies published out of BYU.

http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/49488

In the above examples these men of god are in a position to inflict pain without accountability(they represent the broad view of their doctrine or their congregations). They are all put in positions of authority over others and in the statements, actions, and naivety have undue influence on the emotional well being of fellow humans. The LDS church does not have a professional clergy that interfaces with the congregations like other churches do. It puts men, most with a limited understanding of church doctrine, in a position to excommunicate or otherwise discipline or pass judgement their neighbors. In many cases it it their own prejudices disguised as authority from god that lead them to cause harm.

Monday, September 7, 2009

McCarthyism on facebook


McCarthyism is the politically motivated practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence.

McCarthyism is alive and well on facebook. I was chatting on facebook this evening to a friend in California who I had not spoken to in years. She asked me to send a link to my blog. So I did. I copied the blog link and pasted it into the chat window and got a message.
Warning: This Message Contains Blocked Content “Some content in this message has been reported as abusive by Facebook users.”

Okay, facebook users….the exchange of ideas represents abuse? I question, do not believe and challenge conventional religion and because you are uncomfortable with the discussion you report the post as offensive.

I am more upset at facebook. This is a social networking company that was founded by the concept of the free exchange of ideas on a peer to peer platform. I understand the need to limit content to exclude pornography, child pornography, hate groups etc. But there is no notification to the user that his post has been reported. There is no independent peer review of the content to determine it is offensive and no appeal process.

I guess I have run afoul of my religious friends and now a portion of my content has been blocked. I can’t mail it out on the facebook inbox or send via the messenger. No allegation of abuse has been sent to me, no opportunity to respond, no review of the evidence. I am not going to claim that my constitutional rights have been violated…because the government is prohibited from restricting legal free speech not facebook and not my facebook friends. I again ask the question….WHY IS THE CONVERSATION SO DANGEROUS!?!

Is the way the "War of Ideas" gets prosecuted?

It begs the question.....


I have been doing a bunch reading of late. I just finished the book God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, by Christopher Hitchens and am currently reading godless, by Dan Barker. They both discuss in great detail why they are atheists and how they came to that conclusion. I also found Sam Harris’ foundation the ”Reason Project”. Some of the concepts ring very true to and I have really wanted to discuss them out loud. I started a conversation with my lovely wife. It went kind of like this:

Her: I believe there is something more.

Me: what is your basis for that belief?

Her: Don’t try to change me. I have not tried to change you!

Sam Harris discusses a “War of Ideas” and I touched on that discussion in a previous blog post. I am finding that it may very well be ‘a war of ideas’…especially when an atheist asks questions. There is a rush to a defensive position. If someone asserts “I believe the moon is made of cheese” and you submit arguments based in science to refute the claim that is acceptable. If someone says” I believe the earth is 6,000 years old” (an assertion based in religious dogma) and you attempt to refute the claim you may be in for a very impassioned defense.

By asking questions and challenging the assertions contrived out of generational dogma, we are perceived to have crossed the line. By questioning we have lobbed the first stone. This brings me to the next point.

I read the following quote in an essay published by D. Todd Christofferson, an LDS Apostle.

“We need strong Christians who can make important things happen by their faith and who can defend the truth of Jesus Christ against moral relativism and militant atheism.”


I find two things interesting about this quote. The first is the concept of Moral Relativism. Stated simply moral relativism is the idea that morals and social moirés adapt to the needs of time and culture. It additionally accepts that the morals of one tribe may be vastly different the morals of another. To deny that Moral Relativism is alive and well in the truest believing Christians and their religions is manipulative. Ask, "why it is we do not sell our daughters into slavery anymore" and you inevitably get the response that ‘it was okay in that time and culture but it is not okay now.‘ Why don’t we practice polygamy in Utah now? Moral Relativism!

The second thing I found interesting was the term Militant Atheists. I Googled the term . I found several calls to action by Christians to defeat the militant atheists but I did not find a single atheist militia. The idea of actively pursuing the truth and questioning everything is considered a militant act? Are fundamentalists militant? What about Mormon missionaries who wish to bring me a message of Jesus Christ, are they militant Mormons?

On a daily basis I am the recipient of messages from religious people. Their facebook posts, blogs, politics, invitations to attend meetings, and television programming. I am not sure why, when an atheist asks a question or directly addresses what he/she believes to be a fallacy of religion, we are being militant.




Why is the conversation so dangerous?