by Hemant Mehta
Brother Richard (Atheist Nexus), Jerry Dewitt (Recovering from Religion), and Ernest Perce V (American Atheists) all have backgrounds in the pulpit.
In the video below, they tell their stories:
As always, if you hear anything that needs to be spread, please leave the timestamp and summary in the comments!
The Clergy Project is getting some well-deserved attention in the press.
Barbara Bradley Hagerty tells the story of project director Teresa MacBain:
Her secret is taking a toll, eating at her conscience as she goes about her pastoral duties week after week — two sermons every Sunday, singing hymns, praying for the sick when she doesn’t believe in the God she’s praying to. She has had no one to talk to, at least not in her Christian community, so her iPhone has become her confessor, where she records her private fears and frustrations.
…
Moments later, in the darkened, cavernous conference room, MacBain steps onstage.
“My name is Teresa,” she begins. “I’m a pastor currently serving a Methodist church — at least up to this point” — the audience laughs — “and I am an atheist.”
Hundreds of people jump to their feet. They hoot and clap for more than a minute. MacBain then apologizes to them for being, as she put it, “a hater.”
…
MacBain tried to see the church’s district superintendent to explain, but he canceled the meeting. She was immediately locked out and replaced…
…
But MacBain did go home. People shunned her. Job interviews were canceled. The Humanists of Florida Association offered to pay her salary for a year, but there’s no guarantee. Only two of MacBain’s friends called her and took her to lunch…
Teresa has her family, but many pastors-turned-atheist don’t even have that.
It’s a more powerful story when you listen to Teresa speak for herself and you can do that here. The moment right after she declared her atheism at the American Atheists convention can be seen below:
Meanwhile, Kimberly Winston of Religion News Service profiles both Teresa and Jerry DeWitt, the first “graduate” of the Clergy Project:
Speaking in March before a cheering crowd of several hundred unbelievers at the American Atheists conference here, he described posting the picture [of himself with Richard Dawkins] as “committing identity suicide.”
The response was swift. His congregation put him out, friends cut him off and some family members will not speak to him, he said.
…
Today, DeWitt is the executive director of Recovering From Religion, a group that helps people — not just clergy — find their way after a loss of faith.
“Not only can you survive, but you can thrive through this process,” he said as the crowd erupted into applause.
You can see a part of Jerry’s speech from the American Atheist Convention below:
Keep in mind that neither Teresa nor Jerry have full-time jobs in the same way they used to. Their skills — as speakers, as (unlicensed) counselors, as motivators, as managers — are no longer being utilized.
One of the biggest challenges these ex-pastors face is trying to figure out what they can do with their life — to be fulfilled and to make money — now that they’ve left the ministry. The church isn’t about to help them — they prefer to take care of their own kind. And we don’t have atheist organizations flush with money that can provide job support or even loans to help the pastors get back on their feet. (Granted, in this economy, it can be hard for anyone to find work, period.)
If we want to see more members of the clergy come clean about their atheism, though, we have to give them a path out.
Murray Lynch of Auburn, New York has a problem.
He has no idea what the word “fact” means. So in a letter-to-the-editor, he just throws it everywhere and hopes it’ll stick:
The proof that Jesus truly was the Son of God has been proven 100 percent. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost comprise the Holy Trinity. Everyone, even those who don’t believe in God, have guardian angels. They, too, have been proven 100 percent factual. Life after death has also been proven 100 percent factual.
It’s also a fact that those who choose to deny God’s existence cannot enter Heaven.
…
I can’t comprehend the stubbornness and bull-headedness of anyone and everyone who refuses to acknowledge the existence of God.
Jesus Christ actually walked the earth. That’s a fact. That’s not an Aesop’s Fable and that’s not malarky.
Adam and Eve believed in God. God actually talked to them. That’s another fact.
Got that, everyone? It’s all factual. Not malarky. So stop arguing about it, ok?!
At first, I was wondering why the Auburn Citizen would even publish a letter like that… and then I figured it out. It’s too hilarious not to print. They’re just *begging* for reader responses…
(Thanks to @freechild85 for the link)
I recently received an unusual email apparently from a young Christian girl. The subject line was “one Question,” but there were seven questions. The email address contained a male name, but the letter was signed with a female name. I had some doubts about the letter’s veracity, but I decided to respond anyway, and I’m interested in how you, the readers, might have handled it and the ensuing discussion with the girl’s mother:
Note: Letter writers’ names are changed to protect their privacy.
Hi Sir,
Do you Hate Christian?
Do you Hate there God?
Do you Hate when they talk to you?
were you ever a christian?
if so why did you stop being a christian?
What prompted you to start giving atheistic advice?
were you treated badly by christians?
if so not all christians are trying to force you to convert,
somtimes you run into a major christian & somtimes you have a christian friend & there only trying to convert you because they a scared for you they don’t want there friends to go to hell, you should try reading a few storys from Jesus freak and see what most christians would do for God its a good book try it.
PLease get back to me on this & i dare you to read Jesus Freak it’s eye opening.
By Megan
This was my private response to Megan:
Hi Megan,
Your subject line says “one Question” but you asked seven questions. Forgive me, I have a feeling that your email might be a prank, like a Poe, but I’ll answer your questions as if they are legitimate and earnest.
Do you Hate Christian?
No. I generally really like people of all sorts. I dislike some things that a few of them do.
Do you Hate there God?
I cannot hate something that I am not convinced exists. If you are not convinced that unicorns exist, your question is like me asking you if you hate unicorns.
Do you Hate when they talk to you?
Christians very seldom actually talk TO me. They much more often talk AT me. Many just turn on a tape player in their heads and run it. They don’t show any interest in getting to know me as an individual. I’m just some kind of object, target, or goal to them. When they do actually talk TO me, I generally enjoy the conversation, and they seem to enjoy it too.
were you ever a christian?
No.
if so why did you stop being a christian?
Never was. You can read my short bio on the Contributors page on Friendly Atheist. Click the “Contributors” button near the top of the page, and scroll down.
What prompted you to start giving atheistic advice?
Several friends asked me to, and when I started, I realized that there is a tremendous need. Many, many non-believing people are being treated with appalling cruelty by religious people. Many non-believers want to have loving, respectful relationships with their families, friends, and lovers, but religion makes those people drive the non-believers away. I get hundreds and hundreds of heart-breaking letters, far more than I can ever answer.
were you treated badly by christians?
No. I am very fortunate to have not been mistreated by anyone. Many of those people who write letters to me have been treated badly by Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, believers in every religion. Once in a while a Christian writes to me because he or she is being treated poorly by atheists. I try my best to help them too.
if so not all christians are trying to force you to convert, somtimes you run into a major christian & somtimes you have a christian friend & there only trying to convert you because they a scared for you they don’t want there friends to go to hell, you should try reading a few storys from Jesus freak and see what most christians would do for God its a good book try it. PLease get back to me on this & i dare you to read Jesus Freak it’s eye opening.
Megan, I fully understand and appreciate that not all Christians are trying to convert me, that not all are the dreadful people mentioned in the letters I receive, and that there are all kinds of Christians. They’re people. Like all categories of people, some are wonderful, most are ordinary, and a few are seriously malevolent. Their wanting to “save” people is too often used to justify imposing their will on others, and sometimes they are willing to do reprehensible things. They would have much more credibility if they just lived as examples of people emulating Jesus, rather than pretending that they’re superior, and looking down their noses at everyone else. Sadly, it seems that the more religious Christians are, the less Christ-like is their behavior.
Your daring me to read Jesus Freak does not make me interested. I am not interested in what people are willing to do for their gods. I am very interested in what people are willing to do for other people, without any reward in mind from Earth or Heaven. I’m interested in the wonderful things that people do for each other just because they’re people, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with religion.
I hope this answers your questions to your satisfaction, Megan. I wish you well. Please be good to people around you just because they’re human, and just because you’re human, regardless of what beliefs might be in their heads or in yours.
Respectfully,
Richard Wade
A day later, I received this from the same email address:
Hi I’m Donna (Megan’s mom) My 14 year old daughter who lives her life loving on others is the one who wrote you. I didn’t know until I got this. I appreciate your response. If you are right then you are right and nothing happens. But if she is right then you will go to hell. And after reading the bible, hell is like pealing all the skin off your body and dumping hot water on what is left of you And that is the reason she cares. She cries at night sometimes thinking about people like you and in fact I’m sure your on her prayer list if she wrote to you
Sincerely, Donna
Smile, see the beauty. Open your eyes wide to the the joy that is all around you. You are a gift take a leap and be a gift to others as well (Jesus loves you…. And me:)
And my reply to her:
Hi Donna,
Thank you for responding. I admire Megan because of her compassion and her caring about other people. I hope that she can extend those qualities to people beyond the considerations of their damnation or salvation. I hope that she can express her love for people by doing things to help them in the here-and-now, and FOR the here-and-now.
I think it is unfortunate that she has been taught to believe in a god who would hide his existence very, very well and then torture people forever just because they could find no reason to believe he existed, regardless of how lovingly, caringly, and selflessly they lived their lives. That would be far more monstrous than the worst human being I have met or heard of. That would be a god not worthy of worship.
You brought up the question of if you’re right or if I’m right, also known as Pascal’s Wager, an argument for belief with very serious flaws that I won’t go into here. Okay, if you are right, then there are many, many people just as sweet and caring as Megan who will suffer in divinely designed agony, and Megan will spend eternity crying for them, unless a lifetime of this horrid belief has eventually left her pitilessly indifferent to the idea of outrageously disproportional infinite punishment for minor and finite human failings.
If you think that Megan will be spared this eternal grief for others in hell while she is in heaven by being put into a state of sublime bliss, then she will have been divested of very important and beautiful parts of her personality, which include her empathy, compassion, and loving kindness for others. Those are among the qualities that make her a unique person. If those were wiped out by heavenly bliss, then for all intents and purposes, the Megan you know and love will have ceased to exist.
If, instead of you or me, it’s the Muslims who are right, or the Hindus who are right, or the Zoroastrians, or any of hundreds of other religions that have used the threat of suffering to extort unquestioning belief from their members, then it will be you, and I, and Megan too who will be screaming side by side forever, despite the fact that we all lived our lives practicing loving kindness, fairness, and selflessness.
This is the barbarism of the damnation doctrine, a sadistic and cynical manipulation that dehumanizes people, steadily wearing down their natural empathy that you see so beautifully expressed but misdirected in young Megan. I hope that she can see through it before she becomes aloof and callous about human suffering in THIS life. Please just encourage her to be a good person, which is defined by what she does rather than what she believes.
Respectfully yours,
Richard Wade
A couple of days later I received this from Donna:
There is no question hell is going to be a horrific place, but what I believe will be most horrific about it we be the knowledge that the loving God, creator and master of the universe loved you so much He endured the penalty of your sin, humiliation and death on a cross, to save you for all eternity and you are rejecting that salvation, the salvation that is available to everyone. At that point you will be more aware of your sin and how it hurt yourself and others and will know that your condemnation is just and all you had to do was accept the free gift of salvation offered by a loving, merciful, benevelant God; but you chose to reject it. Deep down, you know God exists. You can see his handiwork throughout all nature. No response is necessary to me, you are not answering to me or anyone else but God. So I pray you will reconsider your stance before you become painfully aware of the truth, and it is too late for you.
Once more I replied:
Hi Donna,
By your phrase “No response is necessary to me,” I take it that you don’t want to continue any further dialogue. I assure you that this is my last response, because the dialogue has already stopped.
In your first email to me, you showed me the respect to speak as a unique individual addressing and showing interest in me as a unique individual. But in this last email, you have done exactly what I had described to Megan, where Christians usually don’t talk TO me, they talk AT me with prerecorded messages, as if there is a tape player in their heads.
You have completely retreated from personal communication, and instead have sent me a series of cliché statements that you have heard and read elsewhere, and that I have heard and read literally hundreds of times, word-for-word. You have not responded directly to anything I have said to you. I have listened carefully and responded thoughtfully to you, but you have apparently not done that for me. Receiving a message from a machine or a parrot has very little impact on me, or on any human being who actually thinks original thoughts and wants to communicate with other human beings who think original thoughts. This is why your message fails.
For you to tell me that “deep down I know God exists,” is just as arrogant, insulting, and condescending as if I were to tell you that deep down you know that God does NOT exist. Fortunately, I have learned better manners than that, and I don’t pretend to be able to read people’s minds. I show them the respect to listen carefully, take them at their word, and respond carefully.
I wish you and Megan well. Goodbye.
Richard Wade
To the readers: Megan was apparently using an email address that is not exclusively her own, so I have very little confidence that she has been allowed to see even my first response directly to her. That is another reason I have published this. Since she has read Friendly Atheist at least once before, she might be able to read this.
I’m grateful for your thoughts on any of this; how I handled it, how you might have handled it.
You may send your questions for Richard to 
. Please keep your letters concise. They may be edited. There is a very large number of letters. I am sorry if I am unable to respond in a timely manner.
It was a bit of a challenge writing this book review without revealing or spoiling the number of anecdotal gems contained within. Herb Silverman, if you’re unfamiliar, is an atheist, activist, and the President of the Secular Coalition for America.
When asked to review Candidate Without a Prayer, I was at first concerned that it would be a three hundred page advert for the Coalition. It wasn’t.
This book doesn’t take off quickly; in fact, the first three chapters have a very slow pace. These pages, though, are packed with information that is vital to explaining the role Silverman’s home-life played in his development. Incrementally, the book progresses into an insightful look at the life of a passionate and wise gentleman.
We’re all shaped by our families. Herb Silverman’s thoughtful introversion was carved in childhood by a family shaped by the Great Depression and the Holocaust. While his mother appears a caricature, her controlling personality leads to several humorous tales.
I hadn’t realized how unusual my helplessness was. I partly blame my mother for not encouraging me to learn the rudiments of taking care of myself. However, I mostly blame myself for not being assertive or interested enough. I began trying as best I could to do things for myself. I followed Bill’s lead the first time we went to the Laundromat. I thought I was doing quite well until Bill said, “Don’t you think
you should put your clothes in the washer before putting them in the dryer?”
From an early age, Silverman questioned authoritarian leadership, and was actually “dishonorably discharged” from the Cub Scouts for such “rebellious” behaviour. Sometimes, it’s a simple question that can lead a person to begin questioning their faith; this was very true for Silverman. His telling of such experiences, throughout the book, is consistently concise; and it is the accumulation of these tales that gradually reveals the core of the whole man.
One of my best teachers asked, “Why does the Torah say ‘God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob,’ instead of the more concise ‘God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob’?” His Talmudic explanation was that each had a different god, and we must search for and find our own god. I took his statement very seriously and applied Talmudic reasoning to draw my own conclusion, rather than rely on the wisdom of ancient scholars. My search beginning at age twelve eventually led me to a god who wasn’t there. I was thrilled and a little bit frightened. I didn’t believe there was a god and I didn’t know if anyone else thought as I did.
Outside of activism, Silverman had an education and career based in theoretical mathematics. Scattered in a few places of this autobiography, his background reveals itself in dry language, but quickly recovers with rich tales of personal development. While I enjoyed learning more about the work that Silverman has championed throughout his life, the chapter I was most enthralled by was one about the global travels that he and his wife ventured on. From Israel to India, the pair experienced a broad range of cultures, and religious mandates; Silverman acknowledges these differences, and he retells each memory with precision and wit. This was one of the few autobiographies that I would pick up again; there is much to be learned from those, like Silverman, that have been actively and positively changing the world around them for so many years.
If a finite man created infinity, perhaps a finite man created God and gave him infinite attributes. Infinity is a useful concept to help solve math problems. Was God merely a useful concept to help solve human problems?
…
Image Source: Leslie A. Zukor
An interview with the author:
You say that you’re more interested in “converting” people from apathy to activism, rather than from theism to atheism. What, have you found, is the best way to inspire people to action?
I can identify with apathetic atheists, having been one most of my life. What inspired me was finding out that I was ineligible for public office in South Carolina simply because I was an atheist, and working to do something about it. Many atheists have been active in civil rights for African-Americans, women, gays, and other minorities. Atheists are now the minority that people in this country seem to feel most comfortable openly denigrating. That has to stop, and we need reasonable people to make it more of an activist priority.
What advice can you give to inspire and encourage potential and beginning atheist activists?
It’s been said many times, but the most important thing an atheist activist can do is to come out of the closet. It worked for the GLBT movement, and it can work for us. Negative attitudes will change when people learn that their friends, colleagues, neighbors, and even family members are atheists. Aside from that, follow your passion. You are more likely to join and stay active in the movement if you are having fun and meeting other activists with whom you can have fun.
Bertrand Russell’s Why I’m Not a Christian was an inspiration to you in your youth, what books have inspired you in your adult years?
I don’t think any book can inspire me like Bertrand Russell’s did, because you only lose your virginity once. Russell showed me I wasn’t alone. He had as many “nots” as I did, and described ways in which godlessness could free people to be ethical and moral. Fortunately, atheism isn’t in the closet as much as it once was, and there are many fine and inspirational books by Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, and many others. I try to read as many as I can, and find inspiration from each I read.
Was there a time as a child that you believed the rhetoric told to you? If yes, what were the events and thoughts that changed you? If no, why do you think you were so resistant to indoctrination?
I don’t think I ever believed the God rhetoric, but there was a time I would reflexively say I was a believer without knowing what that meant. I once went along with the family belief that Jews should stick to their own kind because all Gentiles were anti-Semitic. When I began to think about and question such views, it didn’t take long for me to break free from such indoctrination.
Relationships often play a large role in shaping our personalities and life experiences; it was clear that this has been true in your life, too. What advice can you offer about forming positive and beneficial bonds, even with those who oppose your activism?
Look for things you have in common with others, not just what sets you apart from them. There may be important issues on which people can work together even though they have very different theological views. We should respect the right of people to believe whatever makes sense to them, though we need not respect the belief itself.
What does it feel like to have put all of your history down?
Great! It felt good to come out of the closet as an atheist. I’ve now taken one further step and come out of the closet with my life. If I ever run for office again, my opponent will not have to do any opposition research. He or she will only need to read my book.
In the book, you take the position that atheists “should come out softly,” as religious people accuse us of arrogance. What are your thoughts about more aggressive forms of activism? Do you think that varied styles can co-exist in the ‘movement’?
Not only can varied styles co-exist in the “movement,” the movement will fail if we try to restrict it to a “one size fits all” approach. That had been the problem for too long. Secularists would spend an inordinate amount of time arguing about minor differences (like whether to call yourself an atheist, agnostic, humanist, etc.) and too little time cooperating on what we have in common and working on issues that would benefit all secular Americans. That’s why I helped form the Secular Coalition for America, which now has eleven cooperative national organizations that cover the full spectrum of nontheism.
Have you ever considered editing your own “Jefferson Bible”?
I think everyone who takes the Bible seriously and recognizes it as an important part of American culture should do some biblical editing. Jefferson called what remained in his edited version, “Diamonds in a Dunghill.” I’ve taken a slightly different approach. I have a section in my book about treating the fables in the Bible as we do Aesop’s fables. Both theists and nontheists can discuss what moral lessons they get out of the different fables. I do this with ten biblical fables from Genesis, with the hope of inspiring someone to write a complete book of such biblical fables.
What dangers do you foresee for the United States if we cannot maintain a separation of church and state?
To answer the question, look at any country where religion is mixed up with government and ask yourself if that’s the kind of country you would want ours to become. Look also at the first Pilgrims and Puritans who settled here and established Christian colonies, where those of the “wrong” religion were excluded from government participation and persecuted. Such church-state unions led to the Salem witch trials. The framers of our U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights wanted no part of the religious intolerance and bloodshed they saw in Europe or in our own early theocratic colonies, which is why they wisely established the first government in history to separate church and state.
Would you encourage other atheists to run for office, if only to challenge existing laws. (If so, what would your advice be to them?)
I would encourage other atheists to run for office, but not only to challenge existing laws. The more atheists that run, the more our issues will be discussed and the more stereotypes of atheists will be eliminated. I’m hoping for a day when political candidates are judged by their character and their positions on issues, rather than on their professed religious beliefs. Atheists running for office can help bring this about.
Lastly, after participating in numerous debates, what rookie mistake do you regret most and would advise others to avoid?
I would originally focus only on making the best logical and rational argument to “defeat” my opponent. I now understand that a debate is about the audience, not about the opponent. Your opponent is likely an experienced debater who will not change his mind, no matter how good the evidence you present. You want to give open-minded audience members something to think about that they have never thought about before. They may have only heard the atheist side presented from their fundamentalist minister. So show a sense of humor, and smile a lot. Audience members will be more receptive to you if they find you a likeable person. This was hard for me to understand, since smiling is important in debates but meaningless in my career of solving math problems.
…
Candidate Without A Prayer: An Autobiography of a Jewish Atheist in the Bible Belt is available online now and in bookstores soon.
This image was making the rounds online…
… but the ratio of men to women in that picture is pretty uneven. Even when it comes to celebrities, it’s not like there’s a lack of well-known ladies to put in the mix.
On Twitter, @ultraturquoise created this alternative image:
I like it! Maybe someone else can create a more gender-balanced version, though? Also: Include more minorities. And [insert some other form of diversity here].
(That’s one of the downsides of trying to inspire people with an image like the original. People will find something to complain about no matter what you do. Some of the complaints may be rightly placed, like in this case, but you’re never going to please everybody.)
Sam Harris is bound to get a lot of pushback for his latest essay, in which he makes the case that Muslims — or anyone who looks like s/he could be Muslim — ought to be specially screened at the airport:
Is there nothing we can do to stop this tyranny of fairness? Some semblance of fairness makes sense — and, needless to say, everyone’s bags should be screened, if only because it is possible to put a bomb in someone else’s luggage. But the TSA has a finite amount of attention: Every moment spent frisking the Mormon Tabernacle Choir subtracts from the scrutiny paid to more likely threats. Who could fail to understand this?
…
Granted, I haven’t had to endure the experience of being continually profiled. No doubt it would be frustrating. But if someone who looked vaguely like Ben Stiller were wanted for crimes against humanity, I would understand if I turned a few heads at the airport. However, if I were forced to wait in line behind a sham search of everyone else, I would surely resent this additional theft of my time.
…
We should profile Muslims, or anyone who looks like he or she could conceivably be Muslim, and we should be honest about it. And, again, I wouldn’t put someone who looks like me entirely outside the bull’s-eye (after all, what would Adam Gadahn look like if he cleaned himself up?) But there are people who do not stand a chance of being jihadists, and TSA screeners can know this at a glance.
When discussing this, keep this in mind:
Harris isn’t a racist. I don’t think so, anyway. He’s making (what he feels is) a logical argument in favor of profiling. So if he’s wrong, focus on why his argument doesn’t make sense.
A few immediate points to bring up:
Earlier this month, the Dallas–Fort Worth Coalition of Reason started an advertising campaign called “Our Families Are Great Without Religion.”
Their plan was to have the following ad play on movie theater screens before the films began:
After getting rejected by one theater that had a “no religious advertising” policy, the Angelika Film Center in Plano said they would be happy to run the ad.
Until Christians started complaining…
(Apparently seeing happy, diverse, non-religious families destroys whatever narrative their pastors try to sell them about us.)
The Angelika people reneged on their contract. Even though churches could run ads, the atheists could not.
Now, a lawyer from the Appignani Humanist Legal Center of the American Humanist Association has written the theater a letter (PDF) threatening a lawsuit:
Please note that under the [Civil Rights Act of 1964] it is irrelevant whether your decision to refuse to do business with the Coalition was based on personal or organization animus to the atheist views of the Coalition and its proposed advertising or whether it was purely a business decision intended to avoid controversy…
If you would like to avoid any potential litigation related to this matter, please contact me immediately and indicate that you will reverse your illegal decision and lease pre-show advertising space on the screens in your theater to the Coalition on the same terms as offered to religious advertisers, as the Act requires
If the theater doesn’t respond by Tuesday, they may be seeing a lawsuit.
Incidentally, one local lawyer suggests the theater might not be doing anything wrong:
[Attorney Stewart] Thomas questions whether the movie theater is really violating the law.
He says, “it seems to me the public accommodation is to attend the theater and watch the movie everyone has the right to watch the movie. I’m not sure the theater has to sell to anyone that wants to buy advertising.”
…
Meanwhile, The Center for Inquiry – Michigan is suing the Wyndgate Country Club in Rochester Hills because they also reneged on their contract to host Richard Dawkins for a lecture and book signing last fall.
The owner decided not to host the event after seeing Dawkins interviews on The O’Reilly Factor and finding out (wait for it…) that Dawkins was an atheist.
The complaint calls for unspecified damages based on breach of contract, and that the club be stopped from discriminating against others on religious grounds. The group is asking for a jury trial.
…
The suit follows a cancelled 100 seat, $95 per ticket dinner on Oct. 12 with noted atheist Richard Dawkins. The event was relocated to the Royal Park Hotel in Rochester.
CFI Michigan claims in the lawsuit that club employees acting under the direction of owner Larry Winget called them to cancel the event because Winget “does not wish to associate with certain individuals or philosophies.”
One argument that could be made is that this is a private facility and the owner ought to have the right to do as he pleases. So if he wants to put up a “No Blacks Allowed” sign, he has that right. This lawsuit, however, focuses on the breach of contract aspect of it (as well as the discrimination). He made a promise. Money was exchanged. Then he went back on it.
Both lawsuits are worth pursuing. At the very least, the ensuing media attention shines light on the idea that atheists are discriminated against (whether it turns out to be for legal reasons or not).
Ireland’s Justice Minister Alan Shatter is planning to introduce legislation later this year that would put people in jail for 10 years if they withheld information that would help prosecute a child abuser.
Who would oppose legislation like that?
Catholics priests, of course. And Bill Donohue.
Spokesman Fr Sean McDonagh told the paper: “I certainly wouldn’t be willing to break the seal of confession for anyone — Alan Shatter particularly.”
Auxiliary Bishop of Dublin Raymond Field said: “The seal of the confessional is inviolable as far as I am concerned, and that’s the end of the matter.”
So if someone comes into the confessional booth and says, “I molest kids,” the only thing these priests will do is have them say a few Hail Marys.
Tell God? Sure. That’ll help…
Call the cops? Never. That would be unconscionable.
Is there any other organization that claims to care about children while actively harming them in the process?
(via Joe. My. God.)
Follow Patheos on
Copyright 2008-2012, Patheos. All rights reserved. Terms of Service | Patheos Privacy Policy
Follow Patheos
Atheist: