Religions

Over on my other blog today I put up a post, "Statesman Journal should put Mohammed cartoon on opinion page."  It irritated me that the editorial page editor of our local newspaper, which is part of the Gannett chain, said that he'd probably never publish a cartoon that included a caricature of the Prophet Mohammed, because this is offensive to Muslims. Well, the cartoon above is the cover of the next issue of Charlie Hebdo, the satirical French magazine that courageously is going to publish shortly after a dozen staffers were murdered by Islamic fundamentalists.  The caption at the top…

Like I've said before (quite a few times), and almost certainly will say again (after this time), religious beliefs shouldn't allow people to ignore laws. Where does this end, if we allow it to begin? Some Christian religious bigots believe homosexuality is a sin, so they refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple who want one for their wedding. Which, by the way, is completely legal in 36 out of 50 of these United States, where gay marriage is allowed. Yet as Frank Bruni says in his thoughtful New York Times piece, "Your God and My Dignity," this…

So many people have been saying so much that is right about the atrocious killings by Islamic extremists of staffers at a French satirical magazine, I don't feel that I can add much to the 100% justified outrage. This is what happens when religiosity goes over the brink. For me, the big question is: who is responsible for the possibility, indeed obvious likelihood, given the course of history, that religious true believers will act in murderous, violent, oppressive, or other unacceptable ways? On the whole, my sympathies are with those, like Sam Harris, who argue that "moderate" religion provides the foundation…

Here's three godless good news pieces that popped into my web browser recently.  I liked Russ Belville's (a.k.a. Radical Russ) "No More Special Rights for Religion" a lot. I learned about Belville, who lives in Portland, via our shared interest in supporting Measure 91 -- which was passed by voters this month, leading to legalized recreational marijuana in Oregon. Along with him, I've also wondered why religious reasons for doing this or that should get more legal standing than personal reasons for doing this or that. After all, holding a religious belief is a personal decision. Why should it be treated…

Every religion is strange. Within every strange religion, some rituals and practices are even more strange. Such is the case with Kapporot (or Kaporos), a Jewish ritual of atonement. I hadn't heard about it until I got an email from someone affiliated with The Alliance to End Chickens as Kaporos. In part, she said: I am writing to ask that you cover this topic so that the cruel ritual of using chickens as Kaporos is brought to light and ended.  I have photos and video, and the founder of the Alliance to End Chickens as Kaporos is available for interview. …

Let's do away with religious freedom. There's no need for it. For lots of reasons it makes no sense. Let me explain. I'm fine with people being free to believe whatever they want to. So let's simply have believing freedom. After all, religious belief is just one form of believing. Some people believe in God. Others believe in playing golf, in listening to rap music, in eating meat -- none of which I believe in. So be it. Each to his own. Beliefs, that is. If we all looked upon life the same way, we'd be identically programmed robots. Boring.…

Some defenders of religion argue that religious belief is a harmless personal exercise. "What's the problem with people believing whatever they want? How does this hurt anyone?" Well, read Nebraska Senate Nominee Says Religious Beliefs Can Justify Breaking Any Law. This article presents excellent reasons why elevating unsubstantiated, nonfactual religious beliefs over other sorts of unsubstantiated, nonfactual personal beliefs is dangerous. Sasse, however, apparently believes that this law does not go far enough, even if the Court gives Hobby Lobby everything it is asking for. His proposed rule — that government cannot require someone to act counter to their religious…

Here's my report concerning news of all things godly during the past week. Based on my reading of two daily newspapers, TIME, New Scientist, The New Yorker, online New York Times, and many perusals of blogs, web sites, and other Internet offerings... Nothing.  A lot has been happening in material reality. Nothing seems to be going on in supernatural reality. No miracles. No appearances by God. No divine revelations. No anything. Zilch. It's been this way every week for as long as I can remember. Which is the vast majority of my 65 years of living. Same old, same old. …

That's a great word, apatheism. I hadn't come across it until I read a recent New Scientist article, "Losing Our Religion." (On the magazine's web site it is called "God not-botherers: Religious apathy reigns.") Of course, New Scientist is a British publication. The article says, "The UK is one of the least religious countries in the world, with around half of the population saying they don't belong to any religion."  However, there is good news for my country, which is a lot more religious. Even in the US -- a deeply Christian country -- the number of people expressing "no…

Today the United States Supreme Court said it was just fine to have prayers from a "chaplain of the month" open a town's public meetings.  Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority in a 5-to-4 decision that divided the court’s more conservative members from its liberal ones, said the prayers were merely ceremonial. They were neither unduly sectarian nor likely to make members of other faiths feel unwelcome. “Ceremonial prayer,” he wrote, “is but a recognition that, since this nation was founded and until the present day, many Americans deem that their own existence must be understood by precepts…