Obama supports marriage equality!

Today is an historic day.  Finally our President has said what many of us have known for a long time: gay and lesbian couples deserve the same rights as everyone else.

This is what America is all about.  Treating people equally, being tolerant of others, embracing diversity, fairness.  And part of being an American is accepting that sometimes, people do things you don't agree with.  But as long as it doesn't hurt you, doesn't cost you anything, doesn't impose upon others and doesn't take anyone else's rights away, then we have to be mature enough to accept things we don't necessarily like or agree with sometimes.

So if you're opposed to gay marriage, I have a question for you: what does it matter to you?  I mean that seriously and sincerely.  If a gay couple gets married, what harm or impact does that have on you (and if you're married, on your marriage)?  There are six states in the US today where gay marriage is legal: New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire.  Also, the District of Columbia.  Are heterosexual marriages any less meaningful in these states?  Is there really any harm being done?  What possible reason could you have for being opposed to this for loving, committed gay couples?  If you don't like the idea of gay marriage, then don't have one.  Really.  But don't deny that right to others just because you think it's icky.

Atheist opposes Ill. funding restoration of 111-foot cross

Is this a religious symbol?

Yeah, I thought so.  It may be other things as well, like a tourist attraction and a local landmark.  But as it's a symbol of Christianity, the funds to repair it should not be supplied by the government.  However, in 2009 the state of Illinois provided a $20,000 grant towards its repair.

Rob Sherman, an atheist and the founder of Rob Sherman Advocacy, is contesting the state's action with a lawsuit.  He's presenting his arguments today before Chicago's 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Good luck Rob!

FFRF blocking prayer at Alabama high school

Brooks High School in Killen, Alabama this year was airing prayers to Jesus Christ before varsity and youth football games, and not surprisingly, this illegal practice brought about a complaint by the Freedom From Religion Foundation (the Alabama chapter).

Of course it's wrong to coerce students in a public school to participate in prayer.  The FFRF is right to make its complaint, and the school district, which is now reviewing the complaint, should stop the practice or risk further legal action.  I'm guessing that the district is strapped for cash, just like most public school systems in the country right now, and they shouldn't waste their limited money defending a clearly illegal practice.  (See Lee vs. Weisman 1992 and Santa Fe Independent School Dist vs. Doe 2000 for relevant legal precedent).

But what inspired me to write about it today were some of the comments by readers of the article posted about this in the NY Daily News, such as:

these players and fans who dont like prayer in these events, then dont pray. its the minority trying to dictate to the majority. and that *** me off.

...and

liberals....not happy unless everyone else is miserable.

What strange, misguided views.  You're not happy unless your religion is being forced down everyone's throats, and you complain because a minority dare to point out that the practice is illegal and should stop?  The first commenter has it exactly backwards: if the players and fans want to pray, they can pray, anywhere and at any time they want.  What they can't do is compel student participation by leading the prayer (which is what happens when they broadcast it over the loudspeakers).  The whole point to the bill of rights is that certain rights cannot be subject to majority vote; the majority will vote to take rights away from the minority every time.

These aren't complicated concepts, but unfortunately it takes a level of intelligence and integrity to understand that are sadly lacking among the NY Daily News readers.  And no, I'm not surprised.

Firing squads in Florida?

Not satisfied with the current methods employed to kill people in Florida, state representative Brad Drake wants to bring back firing squads.

South Bend update: Judge says "no!"

I had previously written about how the city council in South Bend, Indiana wanted to purchase some land to the tune of $1.2 million, and give it to St. Joseph's High School for their athletic department.  Clearly this kind of thing is a violation of the separation of church and state, so I fully expected that this wouldn't go unchallenged.  On 9/7/2011, US District Judge Robert Miller Jr. issued an injunction to stop the transfer of land.  Yay!

The watchdog group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State filed suit against the city.  Whenever there's some overreach by government officials wanting to endorse religion, expend public money in benefit of religious groups, or some other church / state infraction, these guys are there in a prominent way.  Go AU!

The city has 30 days to file an appeal.  We'll be watching.  I wonder if they'll do the right thing and drop it?  Not holding my breath.

Appellate Court rules in Forsyth County, NC prayer case

An official, government meeting should not open with a sectarian prayer.  In Forsyth County, NC the Board of Commissioners' policy of opening meetings with a prayer was contested by two county residents, who were represented by Americans United For Separation of Church and State and the ACLU.  Today, a federal appellate court ruled in their favor, putting an end to the practice.

Does this mean that members of the Board of Commissioners do not have the right to pray at their meeting?  Of course not.  Any member who so chooses can pray individually, at any time.  What they cannot do is make the prayer a compulsory part of the meeting by having the prayer be a part of the agenda.  It is not fair to citizens and board members who may be of different faiths, or who do not practice any particular religion.  The appellate court was correct to rule in favor of the US Constitution.

[via AU on 7/29/11]

Science wins in Texas

A few days ago I wrote about the Texas school board holding hearings on whether to force schools to purchase science textbooks that include creationism.  Given past history with the school board, I was not hopeful that science and reason would prevail.  But they did.

Pentagon certifies repeal of DADT

Via NBC News:

Senior defense officials tell NBC News that the Pentagon will announce tomorrow that both Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and all of the Joint Chiefs have certified that the military is ready to repeal "Don't Ask Don't Tell."

Each member of the Joint Chiefs had to submit a recommendation to Secretary Panetta, indicating that they are far enough in their training to repeal DADT, and that it will not have an impact on military readiness.

The next step is for President Obama to certify the repeal, which then begins a 60-day waiting period to implement the repeal -- before "Don't Ask Don't Tell" is officially a thing of the past.

About flippin' time.   Let's see what actually happens in 60 days.

Texas State Board of Education

Texas has a disturbing history of allowing religion to encroach on education (for example, here, here and here).  Over the next two days the school board is meeting, and one of the topics is selecting instructional materials for science classrooms.

Politics and Religion: The Dalai Lama

The Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of Tibet and the Gelug branch of Buddhism, is also a political figure.  The current Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, was "enthroned" in 1940, and then exiled from Tibet in 1950 during the invasion from the People's Republic of China.  He now resides in northern India, where the Tibetan government in exile is run.

Today, US President Barack Obama is scheduled to meet with the Dalai Lama, and the Chinese government is in a tissy. 

Reported in The Hindu on July 16, 2010.

***UPDATE ***  The meeting took place, and China is pissed.

Rick Perry sued by Freedom From Religion Foundation

Rick Perry, the governor of Texas, is hosting a "prayer event" called The Response, in which he is inviting other governors to come together to pray for the future of our country.  From his website (emphasis mine):

Right now, America is in crisis: we have been besieged by financial debt, terrorism, and a multitude of natural disasters. As a nation, we must come together and call upon Jesus to guide us through unprecedented struggles, and thank Him for the blessings of freedom we so richly enjoy.

Some problems are beyond our power to solve, and according to the Book of Joel, Chapter 2, this historic hour demands a historic response. Therefore, on August 6, thousands will gather to pray for a historic breakthrough for our country and a renewed sense of moral purpose.

I sincerely hope you’ll join me in Houston on August 6th and take your place in Reliant Stadium with praying people asking God’s forgiveness, wisdom and provision for our state and nation. There is hope for America. It lies in heaven, and we will find it on our knees.

Rick Perry can pray if he wants.  He can even ask others to pray with him, and they're free to do so.  What he can't do is use his government office to endorse or promote a specific religion, and that's what he's doing.  And make no mistake, this is a political event.  He is not acting as a private citizen with civic concerns; he's acting as the governor of the state of Texas.  (Governor Perry doesn't seem to understand the difference.)

The Freedom From Religion Foundation, however, does.  The FFRF is

asking the federal court to declare unconstitutional Perry’s initiation, organization, promotion and participation in the Aug. 6 prayer event. A proposed order to restrain Perry’s continuing involvement in the prayer rally will be filed after a hearing date is set.

If Perry really wants to hold this rally and pray about our country's future, then he should raise money and pay for it without imposing this on the taxpayers of his state (already in trouble financially), and participate as a private citizen, not as a public official.

Of course, I would prefer a leader who, you know, leads by finding real solutions to real problems, rather than just throwing up his arms and saying that it's too hard and there are no solutions.  Doesn't sound like the kind of person you want responsible for working out your problems, you know?

South Bend Indiana uses public funds for religious education

In these times of recession, public funds are increasingly limited.  Everywhere, public schools are cutting back important programs for kids because they just don't have the money.

This is partly why it is disappointing that in South Bend, Indiana, the city council has approved the purchase of a property at an expense of $1.2 million, for the purpose of donating to a private Catholic high school, to use for religious education and sectarian activities.