Respect for Religious Scruples Being Enacted Into Law

The Idaho state legislature is considering a law which would allow pharmacists licensed and practicing in that state to refuse to fill prescriptions which are offensive to their religious beliefs. So a Catholic pharmacist in Idaho could refuse to dispense birth control pills. Even though the prescription is legal, and neither the doctor nor the customer have any religious objection to birth control.

The bill has already passed the House and is now going to the Senate. It is supported by many religious groups as a proper recognition of religious conscience and respect for individual religious scruples.

I have not read the text of the bill, so I don't know whether a pharmacy could refuse to hire a Catholic pharmacist whom they knew would refuse to fill contraceptive prescriptions. I suspect that the bill requires "reasonable accommodation."

I think the bill will soon be considered not broad enough.

What about a mortuary who hires a Hassidic Jew? Orthodox Jews believe that touching a dead body makes one "unclean."

Muslim cab drivers in large cities such as New York refuse to take passengers who are carrying alcoholic beverages. Shouldn't they be protected, too?

It is against the Mormon religion to use coffee, tobacco, or tea (as well as alcohol). Should a restaurant be forced to hire a Mormon who refuses to serve coffee to a customer, or a glass of wine?

Should a Muslim be able to refuse to make a ham sandwich, if he works in a deli?

A simpler solution: if you are Catholic, don't become a pharmacist. If you're a Jew, don't look for a job in a deli or a funeral parlor. If you're a Mormon waiter, go get a job in some small town in Utah.

But it seems to be perfectly all right that nonbelievers are paid their wages in money that says "In God We Trust." And nobody objects if the nonbeliever's children have to recite the Pledge to the flag with the words "under God."

Religious attitudes need less respect, not more.

Religion vs Superstition

The Pope has been in Africa this week, and performed mass there.

He urged the Catholic Africans to help their countrymen to abandon superstition, magic, reliance on shamans and witch doctors. They should rather accept Christianity (in its Roman Catholic form, of course).

It is dangerous to believe in such superstitions, Benedict said.

Indeed! I agree with His Holiness entirely.

It is dangerous (as well as emotionally harmful) to believe such superstitious things as these:

- sprinkling with magic water while a witch doctor says magic words will wipe away your faults;
- a priest saying the proper words will turn a cracker into actual flesh;
- eating a bite of magic cracker-flesh will make you acceptable to the gods;
- if a demon possesses someone you love, you can get a witch doctor to "exorcise" the demon by waving a cross over him and saying certain magic words;
- you had better participate in the magic rituals on special magic days, at least twice a year;
- you can ask holy dead people for special favors;
- burning candles on an altar has a magic effect and will bring you your wishes;
- a Jewish rabbi who was executed two thousand years ago for treason wants you to devote your life to him.

Yes, superstition can be a terrible thing, if you let it get hold of your mind.

The Pope's Solution to AIDS

The Pope is visiting Africa now, and speaking there about the many problems that plague that great continent.

One of the most troublesome problems is the prevalence of AIDS, a withering disease that is usually (but not always) transmitted by sexual contact. The easiest and most widespread preventive measure is the use of condoms. Where condoms have been widely distributed and have been easily available, the incidence of AIDS has dramatically decreased.

But the Pope is opposed to promoting the use of condoms in Africa as a means for preventing the spread of this life-threatening disease. His alternative solution?

Abstinence!

Yes, His Holiness suggests that an entire continent become celibate. No more sex, no more physical love, no more children.

Why, one must ask, is the Pope so opposed to condoms? The answer seems obvious: for so many years the Roman Catholic Church has been opposed to any form of birth control (except abstinence, or the so-called "rhythm method"), and condom use was one of the most widely used contraceptive methods. One must suspect that it is only that long aversion to condoms as contraceptives that now colors the Catholic pontiff's rejection of a simple and effective method of preventing death for millions of Africans.

Another example of narrow-minded religious dogma causing human suffering.

Fortunately, most people ignore the pronouncements of the Pope. Thank God for that!

More Problems With God

Most believers in God claim that God is "perfect." Usually they do not seem to draw the ultimate conclusions from saying that, but simply use the word without thinking of the implications.

What does "perfect" mean, anyway? The Hebrew and Greek words in the Bible which are usually translated as "perfect" mean complete, faultless, whole, plain, finished, honest.

The same believers usually claim that God has always existed. That is, there was never a time when God did not exist. And, we must assume, there was never a time in God's existence when he was not perfect. Believers insist that God never changes, so he must have always been perfect.

Believers can cite scriptural passages to support all these claims: God is perfect, God has always been perfect, God does not change.

But then believers go on to say things about God that deny his being perfect.

Why would a perfect God create a universe? Imagine God, in the eternities before he created the universe. What was he doing? Remember, he was perfect. He needed nothing, he wanted for nothing. He was perfectly content, since if he was not content with himself, it would imply that he was needing something else. What would a perfect being, perfectly content, need? Nothing. It would be inconsistent with the idea of perfection to use the verb "want" with a perfect being as the subject, as in "God wanted to create mankind..." Merely saying that amounts to an admission that God was not perfect.

Even if God's wanting to create something he did not already have does not make us doubt God's perfection, how about the universe that he created? One would think that a perfect creator would create a perfect creation. But everyone, even believers, admits that the universe is not perfect. It is riddled with problems, not the least of which is the existence of evil. Can a perfect God create evil? (Some Bible passages even admit that God can do evil: Ex 32:14, Job 42:11, Amos 3:6.) Or (just as bad) allow evil to exist and continue to exist? Believers try to excuse God for creating (or allowing) evil by asserting that God gave his creatures "free will" and is therefore not responsible for the evil done by his creations. But would a perfect being deserve to be called perfect (especially "perfectly good") to have created such imperfect creatures that they were not also perfectly good, and thus incapable of doing evil?

Let's look again at the perfect God before he created anything. What was he doing? Since he had not yet created anything, there was nothing for him to be acting upon or even contemplating. He was the only thing that existed. Was he just thinking? About what? He can only have been thinking about himself. (Can you be perfect and narcissistic?) He cannot have gotten bored, since that would imply dissatisfaction and incompleteness. Perhaps time did not yet exist. That would have helped, since nothing - absolutely nothing - would have been happening. There would have been no "moment to moment." Was God simply planning something in his mind? Not possible, since God does not change. What was in his mind cannot have varied - it must have always been there. And change can take place only over time, and time did not yet exist. Or maybe it did.

So why did God decide at some particular moment to create the universe? If he was perfect, and unchanging, he cannot have decided anything of the sort. He would have simply remained the perfect, complete, solitary, timeless being that he was, frozen, immobile, in a single timeless state.

It seems that the existence of the universe, rather than being evidence for the existence of God (as many believers assert) is instead evidence that the perfect God they believe in does not exist, and never did.

Why believing in God is difficult

One of the big reasons that makes it difficult to lend any credence to a belief in God (and I'm referring here to the God that Christians and Jews worship) is that nobody can say much about God without finally talking in absurdities and contradictions.

If you ask probing questions of a believer about the God they worship, you very quickly get some statement like, "We cannot understand God's ways," or "God is inscrutable," or "We will learn the answer to that in the next life."

So why should we respect or venerate (worship) such a being whom we cannot possibly understand or even describe in a sensible way? Simply out of abject fear?

Examples:

God is supposed to be all-knowing (omniscient), knowing the future as well as the past. He also is all-powerful (omnipotent), able to do anything he wants. Apparently, then, he knows exactly what all of us are going to do (sin!) and he does nothing about it. He created a universe (supposedly for his own glory and satisfaction) and peopled it with creatures who he knew would disobey him and therefore he would have to condemn them to eternal torment.

If I were writing a computer program and knew it was going to crash when I ran it, I would not be a very good programmer.

God is supposed to love us, since he created us. But he sends storms, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, wildfires and all kinds of natural disasters to destroy and kill us. After having promised in the Bible that he would protect us from harm.

It makes about as much sense as worshipping a stone idol or a good luck charm. Actually, less.

Any believers out there who can clear this up (without telling me I simply have to "have faith")?

"Why do you choose to be an atheist?"

A Christian recently congratulated me on having given up the religion of my youth (which he rightly viewed as a "cult"), but then asked me quite puzzled, "But why did you choose atheism as its replacement?"

Here is another misconception many believers have about atheists. They think that one chooses to be an atheist the same way one chooses to buy a Dodge or a Ford or a Toyota - it's just a matter of preference or taste. And probably many Christians do choose their denomination in the same way: they try ("test-drive") the Presbyterians, the Baptists, the Methodists, the Congregationalists, and decide which one they like better. And if a new pastor takes over and they don't like him, they switch.

Atheism is not like that. It is not an affirmative choice. One does not simply decide to be an atheist. Atheism is the natural and quite involuntary result of examining the evidences and doctrines about God and realizing that they don't make sense. Once you realize that, you are an atheist, willy-nilly. It's not a choice.

I suppose I could have asked this Christian, "Why do you choose not to believe in fairies? I can understand why you don't believe in gnomes or leprechauns, but what do you have against fairies?"

In a way it is like your realization that you are mortal, and one day you are going to die. It may not be a pleasant realization, but it is unavoidable. You don't choose that. You actually have no choice in the matter. Maybe I should have asked the Christian, "Why do you believe that someday you are going to die? Why not believe that the angel of death will pass you by?"

Of course, he might say, "Well, I AM going to live forever, with the God I believe in!" Hmm, yes, but you have to die to get there, don't you?

More About Atheists

Here are a few more misconceptions about atheists.

"Atheists are rebelling against God." Since atheists do not have a belief in any gods, such a statement makes no sense. Only believers could possibly rebel against their own god, and only believers make this statement about atheists. It would make as much sense to accuse a Christian of "rebelling against Wotan, Thor and Freya."

"Atheists hate God." Same problem as above. You can't hate something that you do not believe actually exists. Some atheists may hate the IDEA of "God" but that it quite different from hating God. Only a believer in God can possibly hate him (or her, or it). When you stopped believing in the Tooth Fairy, did you hate the Tooth Fairy? Of course not!

"There are no atheists in foxholes!" This statement is used by believers to cast doubt on the sincerity and firmness of an atheist's nonbelief when in a crisis situation. It is not based on any evidence. In fact, many atheists have served in the military, under fire, without feeling the need to acknowledge the existence of any god. There is even an organization of atheists in the military: The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers.

For an excellent analysis of the falsity of the assertion, see this link: http://tinyurl.com/6reake

"Atheists want to take over the government and control our society!" I find this accusation bitterly ironic when it comes from a devout Christian. All atheists want is that NO special group - believers or non-believers - determines how our society functions. But many Christians are working very hard to make Christianity the basis for all the rules and customs of our society.

I suppose the Christian fear of atheists becoming too influential is based on the following facts:

• Almost all members of Congress are atheists.
  

• That is because it is almost impossible to get elected to public office unless you affirm your lack of faith in God.

• Both houses of Congress open each day's session with remarks from a professional atheist (whose salary is paid by the government) to the effect that no belief in God will influence the deliberations.

• All our money says: "We trust in ourselves because there is no God."

• School children start the day with the Pledge of Allegiance, which contains the phrase: "...one nation, without God,..."

• Government offices are closed one day a week, the day when most atheists attend their atheist meetings (Wednesday).

• Towns all across America are dotted with atheist meeting-houses, where atheists gather once a week to bolster their lack of belief in God.

• Believers who want to get married, but don't want a judge to perform the ceremony, have to find a professional atheist to do it, since God-believing ministers are not allowed to perform weddings.

• When taking a formal oath, it is customary to place the left hand on a copy of the U.S. Constitution.

• Each unit of the military has a professional atheist attached to it, to minister to military personnel and conduct atheist meetings. They are paid a salary by the government.

Obviously, the atheists have already taken over!