Religion

Endorsed by Jesus.

Casey Luskin offered a commentary (on the Discovery Institute’s “Evolution News & Views” blog) on Kenneth Miller’s testimony in the Dover case in which he expounded on chromosomal fusion and evidence for common ancestry between apes and humans. Mike Dunford and P. Z. Myers responded, pointing out numerous errors and misunderstandings in Luskin’s argument. Luskin’s commentary has been enshrined as a paper at the IDEA Center website called “And the Miller Told His Tale." If Luskin or the Discovery Institute were serious about “teaching the controversy,” they’d at least acknowledge the existence of these responses. But even the trackbacks for the blog entry remains empty…

The latest issue of Reports of the National Center for Science Education includes an article (“The Taboo Standard”) by Marni Landry of Paradise Valley High School, who reports that she proposed a study to survey life science teachers in the Phoenix Union High School District on the subject of evolution. The survey, intended to support her M.A. thesis work at the University of Phoenix, asked the recipients whether they agreed or disagreed slightly or completely with the following statements: I have helped to write the district or state science standards. I would like to contribute in the writing of the district or state science standards. I know specifically what the district standards are concerning the theory of evolution. I have avoided details about the origin of life in order to avoid conflict in my classroom. The theory of evolution goes against my religious beliefs. If I were to get into a confrontation with a student or parent concerning the theory of evolution, I feel that [the] administration would support my actions. I feel that creationism (creation science) should be taught parallel to evolution in the classroom. I am concerned over the fact that many states have removed evolution from their science standards. Students must understand the theory of evolution in order to understand the study of biology. I have experienced conflict with a student, parent, or administrator concerning my teaching of evolution.This survey and edited versions were rejected by school district administrators as “too controversial.” The irony of being unable to conduct a survey of science teachers about a subject that they are required by state science standards to teach is explicitly noted. The author was able to complete a pilot study, and her article reports the percentages for the above statements (16.5% say that evolution conflicts with their religious beliefs and that creationism should be taught). The same issue of Reports has stories from Texas and Arkansas about high school teachers being unable to teach about evolution or (in Arkansas) even mention the ages of rocks in millions of years. This, to me, is far more frightening than attempts to force the teaching of intelligent design or creation science–that teaching about evolution has already been removed from or watered down in many of the classrooms of the United States. It’s no wonder that the average American is completely ignorant on the subject. ...

Rev. Rob Schenk of the National Clergy Council in D.C., Rev. Patrick Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition, and Grace Nwachukwu, general manager of Faith and Action were barred on Thursday from entering the hearing room where the Senate Judiciary Committee will be holding a confirmation hearing for Samuel Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court on Monday. They were permitted to bless the doors–reading three Psalms, kneeling to say the Lord’s Prayer in front of the doors, and marking a cross in oil on a door. They also said that they had actually entered the hearing room a day earlier to anoint the seats with oil. “We did adequately apply oil to all the seats,” said Schenk. Schenk and Mahoney say they had done the same prior to the hearings for Chief Justice John Roberts and were pleased with the results.

This story, which came to my attention via the No God Zone, has me incensed. When you first read it, you get the impression that the adamantly anti-gay Pastor offered money for homosexual sex (the word “soliciting” along with the word “prostitute”, seen in some versions of the story, conveys exactly that, to me). While you might agree with me that such an act is entirely harmless, it is clearly illegal, so the arrest of the Pastor comes as no surprise (and in spite of the ultimate injustice of such laws, in the case of this particular Pastor, I can’t help but exclaim a rousing rendition of Nelson’s “Ha-ha!” - especially if he’s even half as out of his mind as this wacko). However, as the No God Zone points out, no such offering of money took place. So, while the Pastor may be - nay, is - a hypocritical asshole, he apparently was arrested and had his car stolen (a.k.a., “civil forfeiture”) for simply asking another guy if he wanted to have sex. The real assholes in this story are the cops, who, it seems, just wanted to harass gays out for a good time in Tulsa, while padding their department budget. ...

Ed Brayton gives a rebuttal to what is perhaps the most egregiously dishonest critique of the Dover decision so far, by Phyllis Schlafly. John West of the Discovery Institute links to the Schlafly piece with approval. Two examples which support the heading I’ve chosen: Schlafly writes of Judge Jones: He smeared “fundamentalists,” impugned the integrity of those who disagree with him by accusing them of lying and issued an unnecessary permanent injunction.Judge Jones’ accusations of lying were directed at two individuals who testified in the trial, Dover board members Alan Bonsell and William Buckingham, not at “fundamentalists” or “those who disagree with him.” And he made the accusations because those two board members were lying, as I’ve previously described (about Bonsell here, about Buckingham here, and there’s more in the decision here) and may end up facing perjury charges. Schlafly further expands upon her misrepresentation of Jones’ criticism of these two dishonest board members: He lashed out at witnesses who expressed religious views different from his own, displaying a prejudice unworthy of our judiciary. He denigrated several officials because they “staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public."Jones never mentions his religious views, and does not denigrate these board members for expressing religious views different from his own, but for lying. Here is the passage from Jones’ decision that Schlafly is dishonestly commenting on: It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy. (p. 137 of the decision)Ed addresses more of Schlafly’s dishonesty at Dispatches from the Culture Wars.

The current (December 24, 2005) issue of The Economist features a story, “Wealth from worship," summarizing a paper by MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, “Religious Market Structure, Religious Participation and Outcomes: Is Religion Good for You?” Gruber claims that regular religious participation leads to better education, higher income and a lower chance of divorce. His results (based on data covering non-Hispanic white Americans of several Christian denominations, other faiths and none) imply that doubling church attendance raises someone’s income by almost 10%.The summary points out that ethnic density can make a group worse off (“ghettoization”), which Gruber controls for by looking at “the density of ‘co-religionists’” not of the same race. He says that “a 10% increase in the density of co-religionists leads to an 8.5% rise in churchgoing” and that a 10% increase in the density of co-religionists leads to a 0.9% rise in income. In other words, because there are lots of non-Polish Catholics in Boston and a few in Minnesota, Poles in Boston both go to church more often and are materially better off relative to, say, Swedes in Boston than Poles in Minnesota relative to Swedes in Minnesota.If this is accurate, what’s actually going on here? Suggestions offered in the Economist summary: Churchgoing increases one’s network of connections, making business dealings smoother; churchgoing provides a form of insurance against social or economic setbacks; churchgoing promotes an increase in education; churchgoing reduces the stress of life. The first two of these, and perhaps the last, strike me as plausible; whether or not churchgoing promotes education likely depends a great deal on the particular sect or denomination. ...

The long-lost “Gospel of Judas,” believed to have been written in Greek in the second century C.E., will be published next year. It was apparently recovered sometime prior to 1983, when a copy was offered for sale. Rodolphe Kasser of the University of Geneva announced in 2004 that he would be publishing a translation in 2005, but it looks like it will be out in the first half of next year. National Geographic will be doing a story on it for Easter. This gospel was in the possession of a Swiss foundation for decades, and are a Coptic translation that probably dates to the fourth or fifth century. Characters in this gospel include Judas, Jesus, Satan, and Allogenes (“the stranger”), who appears in a number of gnostic documents found at Nag Hammadi.

Just saw this cartoon at This Blog Is Full of Crap. Let’s see, depicting Mohammed, depicting Mohammed in hell, putting words in Mohammed’s mouth. I don’t think Muslims will be very happy about this, considering their unreasonable reaction to cartoons of Mohammed in Denmark (previously referred to in my posting on the “Sexy Bin Laden”). Historical Comments Einzige (2006-12-09): All I can say is, I hope to see more of it.Here's a suggestion to get off to a good start:Extremely graphic (I'd suggest Manga as a style, to start out with) orgy scenes with Mohammed, Jesus, Mary, Joseph, the baby Jesus, The Father, The Holy Spirit, Santa Claus, Buddha, the Pope, Krshna, and anyone else you'd care to throw in there... Make sure there's plenty of sodomy, and definitely some taking of THE LORD's name in vain, some dishonoring of father and mother. Some spilling of seed. Oh, and some bestiality and necrophilia, too (I guess the Holy Spirit kinda fits that definition already).Any takers? ...

As quoted in the Miami Herald: The Watchdog Report asked a follow-up question: Does the governor believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution? Bush said: ``Yeah, but I don’t think it should actually be part of the curriculum, to be honest with you. And people have different points of view and they can be discussed at school, but it does not need to be in the curriculum.’’ There’s no word on whether this opinion is backed by the Mystical Warrior Chang. It is surprising that he says he believes in it. ...