|
Diary Archives 2004
|
|
December 10, 2004 Ah, the solstice season, when everybody starts freaking out about the so-called secularization of Christmas. How dare we say Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas? How dare the school have winter holiday instead of Christmas vacation? How dare those evil atheists and the ACLU strip this Christian nation of its holiest of days? And how dare those vile evergreen salesmen put up signs saying Xmas Trees? It's ironic that Christians are so irritated at the usurping of their sacred day by the massive frenzy to spend and feast and make merry. They post "Jesus is the reason for the season" on their church billboards and stomp their feet in rebellion. Well, what can I say but: what goes around comes around. First, let's get it right out in the open: December 25th is not Jesus' birthday and no scholar will try to say so. And second, let's admit that celebrating December 25th was not the original brainstorm of the early Christian church. Just as the fight to put Creationism in science class is evidence of the poor state of science education in America, so the opinion that Christmas is being stolen by secularists is a testament to our lack of history education. Solstice rituals began with early man. Each year the sun appeared to lose its strength as its arc rose lower and lower on the horizon. Daylight hours grew shorter and shorter. The sun was dying. Finally, after the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year, early humans would have reason to celebrate as they saw the sun rising and strengthening once more. The sun had been reborn. The concepts of birth, death and rebirth were associated with the winter solstice. These early people could track the slight elevation of the sun’s path within a few days after the solstice–perhaps by December 25th. Celebrations were often timed for the 25th. Ancient Egyptians honored the man-god and savior Osiris, who died and was entombed, on December 21st. At midnight priests emerged from an inner shrine crying, "The virgin has brought forth," hailing his rebirth. At the solstice, the Egyptians also celebrated the return of the sky god Horus. As they honored Horus with a twelve month calendar, their celebration lasted 12 days. Their celebrations spread to the ancient Mesopotamians who celebrated solstice with a 12-day festival designed to help their god Marduk tame the monsters of chaos for one more year. In ancient Greece, the winter solstice ritual was called Lenaea, or the Festival of the Wild Women. It is speculated that, in very ancient times, a man representing the harvest god Dionysus was torn to pieces, his body and blood ritually feasted on by a gang of women on the day of the solstice. Later in the ritual, Dionysus would be reborn with a baby representing him. By classical times, the ritual employed the killing of a goat to represent Dionysus, while the women’s role had changed to that of funeral mourners and observers of the rebirth. In ancient Rome, Saturnalia began as a feast day for Saturn on December 17th and of Ops on December 19th. Both were later converted into two-day celebrations. During the days of the Empire, the festivals were combined to cover a full week: December 17th through the 23rd. Saturnalia was marked by riotous merry-making; halls were decked with boughs of laurel and evergreen trees. Lamps were kept burning to ward off the spirits of darkness. Friends visited one another and exchanged gifts of fruit, cakes, candles, dolls, jewelry and incense. Temples were decorated with evergreens which symbolized life’s continuity, and processions of people with masked or blackened faces danced through the streets. By the third century CE, in the Roman Empire many religions and mysteries, if not most, celebrated the birth of their god-incarnate saviors at the winter solstice. Emperor Aurelian (270 to 275 CE) blended the Pagan solstice nativities of such gods as Apollo, Attis, Baal, Dionysus, Helios, Hercules, Horus, Mithra, Osiris, Perseus, and Theseus into a single festival called "the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun" celebrated on December 25th. Any record of the date of birth of one Yeshua Ben Nazareth, later known as Jesus Christ, has been lost. Many historians have speculated for good reasons that there never was a Jesus, that he was merely another pagan Jewish version of other gods who symbolized the dying and rebirth of the sun. The gospel stories offer sufficient evidence that, had he been an historical figure, Jesus would have been born in the fall. Because the early Christian church simply usurped the Saturnalia celebrations as their own, the symbols and practices associated with Christmas are of pagan origin: holly, ivy, mistletoe, yule logs, the giving of gifts, decorated evergreen trees, trees brought indoors and lit with candles, etc. So the truth is that early Christians took a lively and festive season and tried to tame it and make it their own. That it refuses to be subdued is a testament to our human nature. Christianity has two options. It must give up the solstice season to embrace an historical man-god born in late summer or fall. Or it must embrace the solstice celebrations of all savior gods and admit Jesus is no different from Attis, Adonis, Osiris or Mithras, namely, a mythical representation of the sun.
October 13, 2004 Well, if you believe some of the letters to editors in Florida newspapers, God was determined to strike at us for some reason. Hmmm. What could it be? Let's see...the first time he headed through the state from the left, barely missing me on his exit. (We then proceeded to taunt him by meeting at that very spot to hear a speech by Ellen Johnson [devil incarnate!].) Then he made a direct path right at me, but missed a direct hit. And once more, same path, missed again. No. I guess it wasn't me he was after. Must have been some poor Humanist down the way in Stuart. And who knows what the heathens have been up to in Pensacola [den of iniquity!]. It is strange to see the Christians arguing among themselves. You've got those who believe God Almighty sent the storms to warn us. Either their divination skills are faulty, or the Big Guy has trouble making himself clear. He was either warning us not to re-elect Bush, warning us not to elect Kerry, or warning us to turn from our evil ways and repent. Knowing him and his ability to be three things in one, maybe all three excuses are correct. (And maybe we all need to vote for Nader this time around.) Then there were the Christians expressing anger at that nonsense. God doesn't bring the hurricanes, they said. Hurricanes just happen. I did see a bulletin board at a church that read: God is our refuge and our strength. Certainly he couldn't be refuge and still send a hurricane to topple the steeple or damage the building. And I don't think hurricane strength is the kind of strength their talking about. However, some do say that God sends these kinds of disasters for good reasons. First, he wants us all to feel compelled to help each other. [I guess it isn't enough that children are starving to death and dying of cancer.] And second, scaring the *&$% out of us leads us closer to him. Fear is a very effective negative motivator in God's play book. The Christians who refuse to give God credit for the hurricanes, however, run the risk of putting holes in their theology. If God isn't responsible for the hurricanes, isn't he at least responsible for not acting to save the little children in harms way? Better to claim he did it and had a darn good reason, than to admit to his neglect. It's so much easier, in my world anyway, to just understand the weather and to realize that if we're going to be safe, we must act to see it happen. I noticed that the Christians worked just as hard as everyone else to protect themselves, trust in God's will notwithstanding. In the end, it seems, we're all atheists in the face of danger. Some of us pray to our imaginary friend for comfort, but the vast majority take responsibility for their own safety when push comes to shove. We weathered this storm like we do them all and came out stronger for it. Now, if only we could weather this plague of religious illiteracy.
August 21, 2004 We were brushed by a hurricane last week. It took a turn our way and we were told to expect 90 mph winds! In the end we got nothing, really. The northern part of the county got hit a bit, but we were spared all but some gusts of wind. The Orlando area was hit really hard; and of course down south a bit, on the coast, they caught the brunt of it. We had the usual praise of the Christian God when lives and property were spared; no one dared to attach blame for his creating the hurricane in the first place. The Saturday after Charley, Ellen Johnson was scheduled to speak in Ormond Beach (Charley's Florida exit spot). Surprisingly, some 30 brave activists attended. I went with a group of six from Brevard. We encountered a darkened SR 40, no place open for a rest stop and stoplights out. At major intersections police directed traffic. Trees and signs were down, but we saw no major damage. We had to let trail mix and popcorn from an open convenience store suffice for lunch and the restaurant our dinner reception was to be held in was gracious enough to open early for Ellen's speech which had been planned for a library now without power. Ellen spoke to us about the difficulty of herding cats; we are not sheep, she said. Freethinkers, atheists, Humanists--whatever our labels--are not followers. We're independent. And that is what may be our downfall in the face of an organized, political push by the religious right to eliminate our freedoms and set up a theocracy in this country. We must act. According to the American Religious Identity Survey, some fifteen percent of the population claims no religion and the number is growing. If this percentage voted with separation of state and church and freedom from religion in mind, we could oust the religious right from power and start rebuilding the wall of separation. To that end, the Godless Americans Political Action Committee has been set up as a lobby for our rights. The GAMPAC focuses solely on separation of state and church, as that is the only common goal freethinkers of all labels can agree upon. I urge everyone to support the GAMPAC and the Secular Coalition for America, as well as Americans United for Separation of Church and State, American Atheists and the Freedom From Religion Foundation. We must work together for change while at the same time working individually in our own cities. Activism works on a grand scale, but it also works with simple letters to editors and legislators. If there isn't a Yahoo Groups letter writing campaign for your state, start one! Check out Florida Writes for the Wall for a good example of how to set it up.
June 8, 2004 I had my hair cut last week and boy do I feel better! I tend to wear my hair short, above the shoulders. I don't see how Floridians can have long hair, personally. But I know a woman who had long hair for a while. I found out some time after meeting her that her husband has cancer and she grew her hair out to donate it to Locks of Love, an organization that makes hair pieces for children suffering long-term medical hair loss. I thought that was a wonderful thing for her to do, but didn't think about it much again until I started getting messages from the cosmos that I, too, ought to grow and donate my hair. Of course I'm being silly. I didn't really get messages from the cosmos. But you know how, after you buy a new car, you suddenly notice how many others exactly like yours are on the road? Once I'd heard about Locks of Love, suddenly I was hearing about it everywhere. Finally, last year I decided to just do it. Everything was relatively alright for the first ten months, I'd say. I went through stages of bad hair days and good hair days. But the last couple of months were horrible. I hated my hair. I hated the long periods I had to spend each morning and evening brushing it out. It took a while and not just a few dollars to discover the proper brush to use. Even when I pulled it back into a pony tail, it never seemed to look neat. At times it was a beautiful mane of twirly curls, but most of the time it was a frizzy blanket. I guess it's not a bad thing to suffer just a little so somewhere a kid can have a nice head of hair. There are people in the world, I know, who think atheists never think about anyone but themselves. They think we're "social Darwinists" which is a silly phrase that means we think the strong should let the weak just die. Or, worse, they think we're only nice because their god makes us nice whether we like it or not...which never made sense to me. But I've always wanted to help others. One of the (few?) good things about going to church is that you can put money in the basket (or better yet, as with the Catholic church, you get pre-printed envelopes telling you just how much you owe them) and feel you've done your moral good for the poor and suffering masses. There are Christian charities too, not always affiliated with a particular church, that you can give to. And there are plenty of homeless shelters and thrift stores that mix religion with charity so not only do you get to feel like you're helping others, but you're spreading the good word of your god (you know the one that says I'm going to hell?). For many years I continued to give to Salvation Army because I didn't consider my actions. But as an atheist, I'd like to know that I can help people (and/or animals) without that help meaning they must endure religious proselytization. I found that there are many charitable organizations that don't have anything to do with religion. Goodwill comes to mind. I now donate all my used items to their thrift store instead of the Salvation Army (what a name!). Generally, medical-cause charities are without religious bias. For instance, the Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation is a good choice, or the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation International. But sometimes it isn't readily apparent that a charity is secular. And if it is built and run by the religious, it may not necessarily be an organization that proselytizes. If you're looking for a good charity for your time and/or money, the Charity Navigator is a great resource. While secular vs. religious isn't part of the ratings given at the Navigator, they offer a lot of information about each charity including its mission statement. Local food banks are usually secular, as are animal shelters. And don't forget your local libraries and hospitals or museums and nature centers. Now, we all know there are no "atheist charities" right? At least, to hear the apologists talk, there aren't. When you think about that, realize that anything not dedicated to (1.) helping people for the glory of God or (2.) helping people so you can witness to them could be considered a great charity for an atheist. So, do we actually NEED an "atheist" charity? Atheists have a long list of great charitable organizations and causes to donate time and money to. But of course, the apologists like to accuse us of never having built a hospital, meaning we, as a group, haven't gotten together to do anything charitable. Well, there are "atheist" charities after all. EARTHWARD is one--Earth's Atheist Resistance to Holy Wars and Religious Devastation. There are atheist charities in other countries, either directly atheist or founded by atheists--India, Australia and Denmark for instance. And a couple of new atheist charities are beginning here in the United States. I won't link to those because, until they get on their feet and we can learn about them, I won't endorse them. The point is, though, that as atheists, we have plenty of opportunities to help. And, though we are a minority, perhaps one day we will build a hospital.
April 5, 2004 Okay, okay, I'm late; I see that. But I've had quite an eventful few weeks. First things first, my book, Like Rolling Uphill: Realizing the Honesty of Atheism, is finally available at the publisher's website. Look for it soon at Amazon! On March 24, I attended the rally in support of Michael Newdow on the steps of the Supreme Court building. It was fabulous. I left my hotel early; the rally wasn't to begin until 11:00. I figured I'd find something to eat. I got off the Metro at Capitol South and headed north to the Supreme Court. As I approached, I saw the crowd I knew would be there. The Christians had started at 9. Our podium was set up just beyond them, and a few on our side were already there. Someone from the Infidel Guy radio show was there with a banner; he was heckling the Christians. Each time a new speaker was announced, he'd shout out "another bigot!" The Christians pretty much proved that "under God" is a divisive, religious phrase and violates separation of church and state. They preached about the evils of homosexuality and sexual perversion; they called atheists wicked. It was sad. An old lady approached me and at first seemed really nice. She wondered if I could explain what was happening and why I was there. I explained atheism to her and then she asked me how far back my family went in this country. I told her about the Daughters of the Confederacy and that my Aunt had traced us back to the Revolutionary War as well. I forgot all about my Father's side coming over in the 1700s. Anyway, she asked what I would think if the DAR, which she belonged to, refused to accept me. I told her I didn't care. She seemed affronted by that. I took off my sunglasses, put my hand on her arm and said, "Look, I can't change what I am; I can't make myself believe something that I don't." She then stormed off saying, "But you could study! You could learn!" The Christians announced that they would end their rally at eleven, when ours was planned to begin. They said they were going to spend an hour in prayer at that time. I figured, great, that works out. We might annoy them with our rally while they're praying, but that's their problem. But, their hour of prayer was like a revival! They weren't praying really, they were being led in resounding, rhythmic, mind-altering chanting by various preachers. At times they were shouting about god and Jesus and sinners and hell and, of course, sexual perversion and we could hardly hear our speakers. I got a picture of one guy on his knees bent over with his face to the ground. Very weird. I'm pretty sure I carried a big sign that said "Under God destroys Indivisible." I didn't bring a sign of my own; I borrowed one from Margaret Downey and the Freethought Society of Greater Philadelphia. I've looked at pictures available online of the rally, and not only do I not see myself anywhere, but I can't even catch a glimpse of the sign. Being that it was much bigger, certainly taller, than I am, I thought I'd at least see the sign! I did see a picture of a sign that read "One Nation, Indivisible" whose bearer was obscured by much taller persons. So, hey, that could have been me for all I know! One person had one that said, "Look Mom! I'm an atheist!" When Michael Newdow came out onto the steps of the Supreme Court building after the session, we all started shouting, "We want Mike" hoping he'd come over and talk to us. But he'd promised interviews to CNN etc. and after that he disappeared. We were terribly disappointed groupies. At 1:00, the rally ended. I wandered off to Union Station in hopes of lunch and caffeine and found myself in a group with Margaret Downey. We sat at a table with about 15 people at America. Another 15 or 20 people passed us and took up seats around the corner. After our meal, Michael Newdow came in and we all gave him a standing ovation. We did it again as he left. He shook everybody's hand...he shook mine twice by accident. He looked tired. But he said, "We're going to win!" I was too tired to wander the mall so I spent the afternoon in the airport waiting for my flight home. All in all, it was a very rewarding experience. The best part for me, for some odd reason, was the chanting of "one nation, indivisible" loud, and proud. If only the Christians could understand what religious freedom is really all about...
January 13, 2004 I thought the problem with the issue of separation of church and state was one of misunderstanding. Christians who complain of prayer being taken out of school, not being able to post the Ten Commandments on public property, or not being able to let the city council pray before meetings just didn't understand the fine points of separation and the benefits it lends the religious and nonreligious alike. I thought that explanations were all that was needed to help them understand why we ought not to have student-led prayers in government schools. Not all children believe in gods; and if you allow Christians the right to pray over the intercom, you must allow Satanists to do so also. I thought the same argument would clear up the controversy of representative bodies of government praying before conducting the public's business. I thought, certainly, a gentle reminder that the Ten Commandments was inherently Judeo-Christian and ought not be displayed in court buildings owned by a religiously diverse population would spark a light of understanding in the minds of Christians who claim their savior god was the originator of tolerance and peace. But these arguments fall on deaf ears. Why? It's not because these Christians are merely stupid, or stubborn, or not listening. It's much, much worse. The problem lies in the very definition of religious freedom. Atheists (Pagans, Wiccans, Buddhists, etc. too, I have little doubt) think religious freedom means that all people have the right to worship as they choose and the government will have nothing whatsoever to say about it. But that's not what religious freedom means to Christians. No, to Christians, religious freedom means Christians are free to use the government to promote and support their religion and exclude other religions from the public square. Christians don't want all religions represented on government property beside their Ten Commandments, creches and crucifixes. They wouldn't stand for a Satanic, Pagan or Wiccan symbol placed next to theirs. They don't want religious freedom at all. There is a reason why presenting factual evidence that our Founders established a godless constitution and intended a separation of church and state does nothing to change the minds of Christians who claim the Founders were Christian men and meant to create a Christian theocracy. The reason is that they don't care what the facts are; they want to establish a theocracy in the United States and they don't care if they lie to do it. And they do lie. The vast majority who listen to and accept their lies are sheep who have no desire for the truth. If we don't stand against them, we will find ourselves persecuted by the most intolerant, vicious religious sect history has ever known: Christianity. Don't believe it's as bad as I make it sound? Take a look: They're out there; they're organized; they're rich and they're powerful. And they lead a country of mindless sheep. |