"May [the 4th of July] be to the world,  what I believe it will be, (to some parts  sooner, to others later, but finally to all),  the signal of arousing men to burst the chains  under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government. 

      "That form which we have substituted, restores  the free right to the unbounded exercise of  reason and freedom of opinion. 

      "All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. 

      "The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored  few booted and spurred, ready to ride them  legitimately, by the grace of God. 

       "These are grounds of hope for others.  For ourselves, let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollections of these  rights, and an undiminished devotion to them." 

submitted by Robert E. Nordlander
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      As the last repressed minority in America, religious dissenters need to stand up and be counted.  We need to wage a campaign to defend our rights.  And we need to persuade our fellow citizens that equal protection of the laws should apply to all citizens, believers and unbelievers alike.

     There are millions of Americans who do not profess a belief in God.  We are a significant minority.  Yet our voice is all too rarely heard in the public square.  Intolerant attitudes and prejudice against us continue to fester.

     Heretics and iconoclasts are often considered the pariahs of society.  Who are we?  We are your children and your parents, your sisters and your brothers, your friends and your relatives.  We are your students and your teachers, your artists and your scientists, your politicians and corporate leaders, your workers and your housewives, your computer experts and your neighbors.  We represent all walks of life.  We are everywhere.  We are an integral part of society.  We only ask that we be allowed to proclaim and practice our convictions openly, without fear or recrimination.  The ultimate test of a democratic society is: that it will respect and honor honest dissent.

        According to various polls, some eight to eleven percent of the American population do not believe in God.  Moreover, 39 percent are not members of any church, synagogue, or mosque, and many who belong to religious denominations do so only nominally.  Unbelievers exist throughout the world.

        A recent poll indicates that 14 percent of the Canadian population does not believe in God. In Norway, the Netherlands, Great Britain, Germany, France, and other Western European countries, the percentages of nonbelief are significantly higher.  Indeed, in many European countries the state provides funding for both religious and nonreligious organizations alike.  Billions of people on the planet do not profess Christian, Jewish, or Muslim belief systems -- yet they have created enduring civilizations and high moral principles, such as Confucianism in China, Buddhism in Asia, and humanism in the democratic world.  This is surprising to many religious dogmatists who are convinced that unless you believe in a monotheistic religion you cannot be moral.

        Fortunately, the American Constitution includes the First Amendment, which defends the separation of church and state, prohibits the establishment of a religion, guarantees freedom of conscience and the free exercise of religious beliefs or none.  Though often quoted in principle the First Amendment is often violated in practice.  For example, the Constitution explicitly prohibits any religious test for public office.  Yet few candidates are courageous enough to admit that they are religious nonconformists.  A quasi-official doctrine of religious piety pervades public life; and most candidates feel it necessary to profess a religious creed and to "God bless" America repeatedly.

        Secular humanists -- atheists and agnostics -- have deep conviction; yet they are often afraid to express them publicly.  They are good citizens, many lead exemplary moral lives, and many have contributed significantly to society.  Many famous men and women -- philosophers and poets, scientists and artists -- were freethinkers: Socrates, Epicurus, Hypatia, Spinoza, Voltaire, Jefferson, Paine, Lincoln, Hume, Kant, Shakespeare, Shelly, Einstein, Bertrand Russell, Simone de Beauvoir, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Robert Ingersoll, Mark Twain, Walt Whitman, Clarence Darrow, Margaret Sanger, John Dewey, and others. And many ordinary men and women have shared their convictions.

       In the major institutions of American society -- the corporations and unions, the universities and foundations -- few leaders will admit to their religious skepticism.  In organizations as diverse as the Boy Scouts atheists are explicitly denied membership; they are not considered of sufficient "moral fiber."  High school atheist groups need to fight for the right to exist, though there are thousands of Bible clubs. Public meetings, high school and college graduation ceremonies, official breakfast meetings, quasi-public gatherings, and sports contests begin and end with prayers and invocations -- without any hesitation of offending nonbelievers in their midst.  This occurs, even though we are a Secular Republic and the government is supposed to be neutral about religion, neither favoring nor disfavoring one or another.

       Moreover, the laws often discriminate against secular humanists.  For example, in most of the states of the Union, humanist leaders are not allowed to officiate at marriage ceremonies; whereas religious clergy have the unquestioned right to do so.  The media very rarely if ever portrays secular humanists or atheists in positive terms; yet religious leaders from John Paul to Billy Graham are lionized, with nary a word of criticism.

       The democratic movement for equal rights has made enormous progress in recent years.  It has been made more and more inclusive, applying to racial and religious minorities, feminists, the handicapped, the aged, abused children, and gay people.  Is it not time that the rights of religious dissenters also be appreciated.  If society deplores anti-Black, anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, or anti-gay talk, why should it not also deplore anti-atheist vilification?   Is it not time that we fight back?   Let us declare: "We are secular humanists,  atheists, and agnostics and proud of it!   We demand equal access and equal rights.

     9. Humanism is in tune with today's enlightened social thought. Humanists are committed to civil liberties, human rights, church-state separation, the extension of participatory democracy not only in government but in the workplace and education, an expansion of global consciousness and exchange of products and ideas internationally, and an open-ended approach to solving social problems, an approach that allows for the testing of new alternatives.

     10. Humanism is in tune with new technological developments. Humanists are willing to take part in emerging scientific and technological discoveries in order to exercise their moral influence on these revolutions as they come about, especially in the interest of protecting the environment.

     11. Humanism is, in sum, a philosophy for those in love with life. Humanists take responsibility for their own lives and relish the adventure of being part of new discoveries, seeking new knowledge, exploring new options. Instead of finding solace in prefabricated answers to the great questions of life, Humanists enjoy the open-endedness of a quest and the freedom of inquiry.

    Though there are some who would suggest that this philosophy has always had a limited and eccentric following, the facts of history show otherwise. Among the modern adherents of Humanism have been Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood and 1957 Humanist of the Year of the American Humanist Association; humanistic psychology pioneers Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, also Humanists of the Year; Albert Einstein, who joined the American Humanist Association in the 1950s; Bertrand Russell, who joined in the 1960s; civil rights pioneer A. Philip Randoph who was the 1970 Humanist of the Year, and futurist R. Buckminister Fuller, Humanist of the Year in 1969.

     The United Nations is a specific example of Humanism at work. The first Director General of UNESCO, the UN organization promoting education, science, and culture, was the 1962 Humanist of the Year Julian Huxley, who practically drafted UNESCO'S charter by himself. The first Director-General of the World Health Organization was the 1959 Humanist of the Year Brock Chisholm. One of this organization's greatest accomplishments has been the wiping of smallpox from the face of the earth. And the first Director-General of the Food and Agricultural Organization was British Humanist John Boyd Orr.

     Meanwhile, Humanists, like 1980 Humanist of the Year Andrei Sakharov, have stood up for human rights wherever such rights are suppressed. Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem fight for women's rights, Mathilde Krim battles the AIDS epidemic, and Margaret Atwood is one of the world's most outspoken advocates of literary freedom--Humanists all.

     The list of scientists is legion: Stephen Jay Gould, Donald Johanson, Richard Leakey, E.O. Wilson, Francis Crick, Jonas Salk, and many others--all members of the American Humanist Association, whose president in the 1980s was the late scientist and author Isaac Asimov.

     The membership lists of Humanist organizations, both religious and secular, read like Who's Who. Through these people, and many more of less reknown, the Humanist philosophy has an impact on our world far out of proportion to the number of its adherents. That, I think, tells us something about the power of ideas that work.

     This may have been what led George Santayana to declare Humanism to be "an accomplishment, not a doctrine."

     So, with modern Humanism one finds a philosophy or religion that is in tune with modern knowledge; is inspiring, socially conscious, and personally meaningful. It is not only the thinking person's outlook, but that of the feeling person as well, for it has inspired the arts as much as it has the sciences, philanthropy as much as critique. And even in critique it is tolerant, defending the rights of all people to choose other ways, to speak and to write freely, to live their lives according to their own lights.

     So, the choice is yours. Are you a Humanist?

     You needn't answer "yes" or "no." For it's not an either-or proposition.

   Humanism is yours--to adopt or simply to draw from. You may take a little or a lot, sip from the cup or drink it to the dregs.

    It's up to you.                                             - by Frederick Edwords

      AMHERST, N.Y. - The Center for Inquiry Libraries have announced the opening of a special exhibition displaying of some of its rare holdings. Several first editions of Thomas Paine's Age Of Reason (English and French) will be on display, as well as an original edition of Ethan Allen's REASON: The Only Oracle Of An American. Allen was head of Vermont's Green Mountain Boys during the War of Independence. His book is considered the first major book on freethought published in the United States. There will also be on display several works written by Robert G. Ingersoll and autographed to family and friends. Ingersoll was considered the leading orator of the nineteenth century. Many  rare nineteenth-century works on spiritualism are also on display.

       The Library is currently exhibiting materials from the paranormal investigator Dr. Joe Nickell. These include items such as spirit trumpets, objects of alien kitsch, snake oil, and many classical medicines widely available in the United States but now considered to be fraudulent. Included in the display will be a rare article by Harry Houdini from a 1925 edition of Popular Science on how he exposed fake mediums. Several items from this collection have been exhibited by Nickell on national TV.

       The Libraries contain three major collections. (1) The Freethought and Humanism Library has works on humanism, atheism, freethought, and the separation of church and state. It is viewed by many researchers as the best collection of its kind in the world, specializing in the major works by English and American freethinkers, especially of the eighteenth, nineteenth, and early twentieth centuries. (2) The Skeptics' Library is the only one of its kind. It has extensive books and magazines on paranormal phenomena, psychical research, UFOlogy, alternative medicine, and pseudoscience-as well as extensive skeptical critiques of this field. There are also books and articles on critical thinking. (3) The Library of American Philosophical  Naturalism contains works by leading American philosophers, especially John  Dewey and Sidney Hook. This Library also contains an extensive collection of  works by and about Bertrand Russell, and some papers of the archives of the  Bertrand Russell Society.

       The Libraries have extensive audio and videotapes with hundreds of  programs on skeptical and humanistic topics that have been aired on national  television and radio. It also maintains an archive of all of the books  published by Prometheus Books, Western New York's leading publisher.

       The Libraries are used by a wide range of researchers. For example, Keay   Davidson of San Francisco, author of Carl Sagan: A Life, used the archival  materials from the Center's Libraries in writing his book. Visitors worldwide have availed themselves of the Libraries.

       The Center for Inquiry Libraries are sponsored by the Council for Secular  Humanism and the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the  Paranormal, both founded by noted Professor Paul Kurtz. It contains over  50,000 books, pamphlets, and magazines, and is located in Amherst, New York,  adjacent to the north campus of the State University of New York at Buffalo, 1310 Sweet Home Road. The Center for Inquiry Libraries is a member of OCLC  via NYLINK, and a member of the Western New York Library Resources Council  (WNYLRC). Timothy Binga, director of the Center for Inquiry Libraries, has  announced that it is planning to expand its services by becoming an  Interlibrary Loan supplier via OCLC. Additionally, a web site is available  with a link to the Libraries' holding site, provided by the WNYLRC.

       Researchers, scholars, and the general public interested in the extensive  files and archives and collections on either skepticism, atheism, or  humanism, are invited to use this facility. For more information regarding  the Libraries, or an appointment, please call Timothy Binga, director of the Center for Inquiry Libraries, (716) 636-1425, ext. 210, or via e-mail at  TSBatCFI@aol.com.

       LINCOLN, NE. -- Today legislators in the Nebraska State Senate have begun debate on a controversial measure to forbid the teaching of gravity in all institutions accepting state funds.

      Wilburt F. Harsheill, co-chair of the Religious Freedom Union of America, testified before the Senate Education Sub-Committee that "gravity is just one of many possible explanations why water flows down-hill.  To eliminate the possibility of Divine Intervention is an affront to the millions of church-goers in our country."  In a long and impassioned presentation Harsheill went on to assert that "the secular humanists in charge of education policy in our nation have no explanation for the Ascension of Christ or Old Faithful and that students should be exposed to all sides equally."

      Dear Jim Dew,

      I just found you and the "contact an atheist" page.  Just to get acquainted, I live in Racine.  I'm a 73 year old retired airline pilot.  I've been an atheist  since before I ever heard the word.  About age 10 I  think.  I'm more of an extremist than you, I  constantly refer to myself as an atheist.  In fact,  I use the term "hard core atheist" to describe myself.  No other particular reason for this missive, hope to  meet you personally one of these days but I'm so  lazy that driving to Madison seems like a large chore  to me. 

      Shoot me a reply sometime if you have nothing  better to do.

      Dave (the admiral) Nelson

    I do occasionally wear my "I'm Your Friendly  Neighborhood Atheist" sweatshirt to places.  And I  often wear my "Darwin" in a fish sweatshirt and  tee-shirt.  I like to talk to others about religion,  but I don't, as a rule, generally bring up the topic  directly.  More often, I will express my views about  church/state violations with others, such as those at work.

    I "converted" to atheism later in life: after intense  religious involvement in the Eastern religion Hare  Krishna and subsequent kidnapping and "deprogramming"  back when I was 18.  But, now, at 44 I've 26 years of studying psychology,  philosophy, and religion and  this has led me to my agnostic and atheist beliefs. 

    I earned a Ph.D. doing research in developmental  psychology and have applied some of these skills to studying religious beliefs, conversion, and atheism.

    Generally atheists are about 60%/40% like you/me --  60% arrive at atheism early in life, usually around  the teen age years; 40% as a result of rejecting  religion following intense belief.

    I am especially interested in the reasons people  believe in god(s) and how religion and the lack of  religion influence mental illness and mental health.   Unfortunately, there is relatively little research  studying atheists as a group; and, in fact,  scientific research of religion generally is even today widely viewed as taboo.  Of course what else  could we expect in America?! 

    I'm glad to hear you are open to challenging others'  about superstitious beliefs.  Feel free to write again.   Also, we are always open to publishing writings,  stories, etc. in REASONINGS, AAW's publication.

    Still thinking freely,

    Jim

    Sorry that it took me so long to answer you. Its not  that I'm all that busy, just all that lazy. I really  do appreciate your reply.

    A couple of weeks ago a U.W.Parkside professor by the  name of Egerton had a very good commentary published in our local paper defending science and evolution.  This was followed a week later by a rebuttal from an  ex-high school science teacher by the name of  Minnard Bakken. It was the longest commentary I have  ever seen printed in the Journal Times.  Bakken's  arguments were straight off the web page of the  Institute for Creation Research.

    I then wrote a rebuttal to the letters column which  was printed last Monday. Here is a copy of that letter. 

   David L. Nelson
  )=======================================================(

Dear Editor,

     Minnard Bakken, in his recent commentary, argues in  typical creationist fashion. He sets up a line of  straw men then handily knocks them down. Let me take  just one: Nebraska Man. 

     Mr. Bakken attempts here to  create the impression that Nebraska Man was a sensation  in the scientific world that fooled a large number of  scientists, then was proved false to their great  embarrassment. This is a long way from the truth. Only  the discoverer and one or two other scientists were  even mildly interested and even those few used great  caution speaking of it and soon conceded it's true  nature. If any scientist accepted it as "proof  positive" of any thing at all will Mr. Bakken please give me the man's name so that I can look it  up. Mr. Bakken states that Nebraska Man played an  important role in the Scopes trial. This is not so.  No scientific evidence was presented at that trial.  It may have been used in the movie or play for all I  know, what significance would that have?

     People such as Mr. Bakken are not interested in  evidence. Nothing can effect their pre-conceived  beliefs.  He states that Christianity must be totally  committed to the story of special creation as  described in Genesis and must fight for it by any  means "FAIR OR FOUL". Unfortunately for the human  race they have usually chosen the foul. 

    David L. Nelson