The Gaytheist Agenda

I’ve mentioned Specialist Jeremy Hall two times previously. Well, he’s in the news again over his lawsuit against the army.

FORT RILEY, Kan. — When Specialist Jeremy Hall held a meeting last July for atheists and freethinkers at Camp Speicher in Iraq, he was excited, he said, to see an officer attending.

But minutes into the talk, the officer, Maj. Freddy J. Welborn, began to berate Specialist Hall and another soldier about atheism, Specialist Hall wrote in a sworn statement. “People like you are not holding up the Constitution and are going against what the founding fathers, who were Christians, wanted for America!” Major Welborn said, according to the statement.

Major Welborn told the soldiers he might bar them from re-enlistment and bring charges against them, according to the statement.

Last month, Specialist Hall and the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group, filed suit in federal court in Kansas, alleging that Specialist Hall’s right to be free from state endorsement of religion under the First Amendment had been violated and that he had faced retaliation for his views. In November, he was sent home early from Iraq because of threats from fellow soldiers.
…..

Specialist Hall’s lawsuit is the latest incident to raise questions about the military’s religion guidelines. In 2005, the Air Force issued new regulations in response to complaints from cadets at the Air Force Academy that evangelical Christian officers used their positions to proselytize. In general, the armed forces have regulations, Ms. Lainez said, that respect “the rights of others to their own religious beliefs, including the right to hold no beliefs.”

To Specialist Hall and other critics of the military, the guidelines have done little to change a culture they say tilts heavily toward evangelical Christianity. Controversies have continued to flare, largely over tactics used by evangelicals to promote their faith. Perhaps the most high-profile incident involved seven officers, including four generals, who appeared, in uniform and in violation of military regulations, in a 2006 fund-raising video for the Christian Embassy, an evangelical Bible study group.

“They don’t trust you because they think you are unreliable and might break, since you don’t have God to rely on,” Specialist Hall said of those who proselytize in the military. “The message is, ‘It’s a Christian nation, and you need to recognize that.’ ”
…..

That old “Christian Nation” canard. America is not, and never has been, a Christian Nation. Sadly the revisionists will never tire of repeating that as they hope repetition will make it true.

Complaints include prayers “in Jesus’ name” at mandatory functions, which violates military regulations, and officers proselytizing subordinates to be “born again.” After getting the complainants’ unit and command information, Mr. Weinstein said, he calls his contacts in the military to try to correct the situation.

“Religion is inextricably intertwined with their jobs,” Mr. Weinstein said. “You’re promoted by who you pray with.”
…..
Specialist Hall said he did not advertise his atheism. But his views became apparent during his second deployment in 2006. At a Thanksgiving meal, someone at his table asked everyone to pray. Specialist Hall did not join in, explaining to a sergeant that he did not believe in God. The sergeant got angry, he said, and told him to go to another table.
…..
Though with a different unit now at Fort Riley, Specialist Hall said the backlash had continued. He has a no-contact order with a sergeant who, without provocation, threatened to “bust him in the mouth.” Another sergeant allegedly told Specialist Hall that as an atheist, he was not entitled to religious freedom because he had no religion.

There are definite and serious violations of Church/State Separation involved here. And the sergeant who claimed Hall had no freedom of religion because he had no religion reminds me very much of this individual who claimed the Constitution doesn’t protect atheists. How hateful some people can be.

I now move on to this letter I came across which makes a common false assertion about atheists.

I read with interest your recent story about 23-year-old U.S. Army Specialist Jeremy Hall who calls himself an atheist and feels harassed because his superiors challenged him in his ability to lead people of faith in combat conditions.
Advertisement

This young man’s convictions and character must be very weak if he had to resort to a lawsuit and a lawsuit in a time of war. Atheist means simply “no god.” If he feels this is a fact, why argue? It should be moot to him.

I suspect, however, that this young man doubts his atheism and senses that there may indeed be a God with whom he must reckon with and the fight is not with his superiors but his heart in this matter.

We need military leaders at all levels who can respect the beliefs and convictions of the ones they lead. If, in the case of this young man, they profess no faith, respect them, too. We cannot, however, suspend any discussion of faith or our chaplaincies because of a small number of insecure atheist who should really say they are agnostic.

A dishonest atheist is just as annoying as a dishonest believer.
Walter Jackson
Millbrook

Would Mr. Jackson claim a Christian who sued an employer for harassment and threats of physical violence was weak of character? Would he think for a minute the Christian was doubting his faith? I don’t imagine he would.

So why is it that atheists are held to different standards than Christians? Why should we tolerate verbal harassment and threats of violence where others would not? Why are our intentions always called into question whenever anything like this occurs?

Maybe it’s because some people can’t fathom that others are actually content not being like them, and that all the begging and even threatening in the world won’t change things. That seems to strike a deep chord in certain people, and their reactions are very unpleasant indeed.

 

Several days ago I was reading The Friendly Atheist and came across the story of Mayor Larry Langford, who was dealing with the ever-increasing rate of crime in Birmingham, AL. His answer was to pray and to pass out Bibles to the citizens.

Langford is holding a family summit April 4, where he will hand out 5,000 bibles in English and Spanish.

“I’m gonna give you something far better than a gun to protect yourself with. I’m gonna give you the word of God,” Langford said. “He is the only source of protection you’ve got. I make no apologies for it. I serve a good God and I’m glad He found me.”

Just yesterday Ebon sent me this update on the crime-fighting tactics of Mayor Langford. It seems the Bibles weren’t enough.

Mayor Larry Langford declared Friday as “It’s Time to Pray Day” in Birmingham and will mark the event with a prayer service at Boutwell Auditorium.

Langford made the proclamation Tuesday during the City Council meeting.

“We’re going to pray for a change in this city,” he said.

During the service, participants will be given sackcloth to wear and ashes to put on their skin. The practice is mentioned in the Bible of the Bible as an act of repentance and humility.

Langford ordered 2,000 of the sacks.

“Even if you get upset, we’re still going to have it,” Langford said. “This city needs to humble itself.”

…..

“The moral fiber of this community is also our responsibility,” he said.

Langford also admonished the pastors surrounding him and others not to attend the rally for spectacle, but for a religious experience.

“Do not come looking pretty,” he said. “If you’re too cute to put a little ash on your hands, stay home. If you’re too cute to pray, stay home.”

There are definitely issues with Separation of Church and State there. Beyond that, I wonder if Mayor Langford has ever seen this study from 2005 that debunks the belief that a moral society depends on faith and religiosity.

A STRENGTHENING of religious faith is often raised as the answer to society’s ills. Peter Costello has said, for example, “that a recovery of faith would go a long way” to solving many of our society’s problems. The Prime Minister, too, has publicly argued for the societal benefits of religiosity, claiming that “the Christian religion is the greatest force for good in this nation”. Labor’s Lindsay Tanner, a self-described agnostic, seems to agree, stating that “without some kind of sustained spiritual input” our society will “degenerate into a bleak utilitarian shell that debases us all”.

Many ordinary Australians share the belief that religious faith is an indicator of morality, and it is accepted wisdom that high rates of religious practice correlate with lower rates of crime, promiscuity and abortion.

However, a study published in the Journal of Religion and Society, an American academic journal, set out to test this hypothesis and found there is an inverse relationship between religiosity and public health and social stability. The study, “Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies”, compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy using data from the International Social Survey Program, Gallup and other research bodies.

“In general,” writes the author, Gregory Paul, “higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.”

A striking example of this is the US, which has the highest degrees of religious faith and the highest rates of homicide, abortion, STD infection and teenage pregnancy. The least religious countries - Japan, France and Scandinavia - have the lowest rates of violent crime, juvenile mortality and abortion….

He might also be interested in this study that shows prayer doesn’t work–at least not in the way intended.

Seeking to assess the effect of third-party prayer on patient outcomes, investigators found no evidence for divine intervention. They did, however, detect a possible proof for the power of negative thinking.

The three-year Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP), published in the April 4 American Heart Journal, was the largest-ever attempt to apply scientific methods to measure the influence of prayer on the well-being of another. It examined 1,800 patients undergoing heart-bypass surgery. On the eve of the operations, church groups began two weeks of praying for one set of patients. Each recipient had a praying contingent of about 70, none of whom knew the patient personally. The study found no differences in survival or complication rates compared with those who did not receive prayers. The only statistically significant blip appeared in a subgroup of patients who were prayed for and knew it. They experienced a higher rate of postsurgical heart arrhythmias (59 versus 52 percent of unaware subjects). …

It would behoove Mayor Langford to use more proven, practical means of solving his city’s crime problem. Handing out Bibles and forcing his religious faith on the citizens is not the answer. It will solve absolutely nothing, and in fact may make matters worse.

 

Let this story put that misconception to rest. Be aware it is but one of many. From The Atheist Blogger:

 

For those who aren’t already aware, I’m a first year Computer Science student at Royal Holloway, University of London. I live in halls, in a flat with 7 other people. Most, if not all of them are from a Christian background and would call themselves Christians, however the fact that I am openly atheist has never discouraged them in any way. Of course the same could not be said for other inhabitants of the halls, as I would find out within the first few weeks of term.

I’d met a fellow atheist in the neighbouring flat, and we had both decided that the university needed an “Atheist Union” of sorts to oppose the active Christian Union. We drafted up some posters explaining our cause and purpose, and began sticking them up around campus, mainly in the vicinity of our halls. After a few days, 3 of them had been torn off the wall and ripped into pieces. Evidently, I thought, there were some people who really didn’t like atheists. So I reprinted them with a message that tried to get through to their sense of reason. I wasn’t imposing on their beliefs, so why should they impose on mine?

The posters stayed up a few more days…before being ripped down again. I gathered up the pieces, stuck them back together, and decided to display them on my door, as a kind of “shrine” dedicated to my futile efforts to reason with these people. One of the posters I found still intact, but with the words “Pricks” and “Nobs” (British slang for the word “penis”) written across it.

Nevertheless, I managed to build up a small gathering of atheist and agnostic students after we changed our name from “Atheist Union” to “Atheist & Agnostic Alliance” (for an awesome alliteration). Things were going well, until a few weeks ago, when the vandals struck again…only this time they attacked my door.
…..

 
Read the rest of the story here.

 

This time they’re attempting to bully Marriott International into removing “sexually explicit” movies from its in-room pay-per-view options. Apparently groups like American Family Association believe that adults shouldn’t have the opportunity to decide for themselves what they will view in the privacy of their own hotel rooms.

Several conservative groups, including the American Family Association, are asking Marriott International Inc. to stop giving hotel guests the option of ordering pay-per-view movies with strong sexual content - gay and straight.

AFA, based in Tupelo, said 47 “pro-family leaders” have signed a letter asking chain’s chief executive, J.W. Marriott Jr., for a meeting to discuss their concerns.

Marriott was told that stopping “porn movies” would be in keeping with the corporation’s position of “promoting the well-being of children and families,” AFA said in a news release.

Marriott’s website says the hotel chain has about 3,000 properties in the U.S. and 67 other countries and territories. AFA said most of these hotels offer in-room movies with pornographic content.

Roger Conner, vice president of communications for Marriott International, said Thursday the company would review the group’s letter and the request for a meeting.

Conner said Marriott and most hotel chains offer in-room entertainment that includes a wide range of films and “just one of those is adult offerings.”

“Every guest can quickly and easily block out just the adult movie offering by either calling the front desk or using their (TV) remote pad in the room,” Conner said. “It does not appear at all if the guest does not want the offering.”

…..

Among those participating in the letter to Marriott, according to AFA, are James Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family; Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council; Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission; Bishop Harry Jackson, chairman of High Impact Leadership Council; and Robert Peters, president of Morality in Media.

This is utterly ridiculous. If a guest doesn’t want adult movies shown in their room they simply don’t have to order them. If they want to prevent another individual, such as a minor staying with them, ordering them, they can ask the hotel management to block them from the room. It’s that simple. There is no reason for the RRRW busybodies to make it impossible for everybody who stays at a Marriott hotel to be unable to see a particular form of entertainment simply because they themselves wish not to.

In case they’re not able to understand the implications of their bullying tactics let me propose this. Perhaps atheists and other non-Christians should band together and demand that Bibles be banned from all hotel rooms. After all, if we don’t believe in the Bible and don’t wish to see them then why should something we don’t approve of be so readily available in the nightstand of every single hotel room of the nation? Consider what is in the Bible–infanticide, genocide, incest, prostitution, murder, misogyny and a whole host of other heinous atrocities. Yet it’s readily available in nearly every hotel room within easy access of any child.

Of course I’m not seriously proposing the above, but merely offering it as food for thought. The RRRW wishes to control everything and everyone, yet rends its garments if anybody utter a peep against them (let alone attempt to thwart their megalomania). This nation was built on individual freedoms, and that is exactly what groups like FOF, AFA and others are attempting to destroy under the boot of “Family Values”. It’s time that We the People fight back if we are to keep those precious freedoms.

 

You know people like this ‘worry me’ more so than disturbing or angering me. There’s something else going on in their lives, that they would waste such energy on the invasion of consenting adults personal lives/homes/and bedrooms. There are so many other more urgent and pressing causes they could concern themselves with. World Hunger, The Economy, The War, The Lack of Health Care etc. and they’re worried about sex - I guess that’s what happens when you’re not happy in yours. I dont mean it as a laugh or for a joke.

 
They are the new Puritans, and they seem to think that if only life would return to how it was when Leave it to Beaver ruled the airwaves–the “Good Old Days”–things would be right with the world again. What they don’t understand is that the Good Old Days never existed. What they see on television as a depiction of the 50’s or whatever era they think was idyllic is pure fiction and can never be created or captured. As much as I love utopian fiction I’m wise enough to understand it’s just fiction. I don’t seriously expect to create a utopia of any kind, nor do I anticipate anybody ever could. Sadly some people think that if they just yell loud enough or apply enough force they can get their utopia (of course one person’s utopia is another person’s dystopia).

 
I don’t see them applying their time, money and energy to serious problems like poverty, health care, world hunger or global warming any time soon. That takes genuine concern with the needs of others, and I don’t get the impression that they have that despite their constant calls to “please think of the children”. They could prove me wrong at some point in the future, however…