Issue # 153      June  2002       Price: $1.00

Islam Awareness Programs: They Seem To Be Working

     We've all heard about the Islam Awareness programs being taught in many of our nation's public schools... Because of these programs, most of our youngsters now have at least a working acquaintance with the religious beliefs of almost one-sixth of the world's population: those who practice Islam. With even a cursory familiarity in place, someone (with an agenda, maybe?) is far less likely to be able to get away with saying some falsehood about Islam, perhaps to shift the blame for something onto the shoulders of people who have done nothing blameworthy. (People do this to members of other groups, don't they?)

     So after we've made our kids and ourselves aware of... the significantly popular belief systems, let's make sure that the major branches of our own dominant paradigm, Christianity, are given fair treatment. Gaud nose we've seen our share of trouble simply because the various players on the Christian team aren't even aware of one another's rights and responsibilities, so to speak.

     ...I would like to suggest a novel but worthwhile approach for our own dilemma as atheists -- a tack which, I think, might fit in rather nicely along side the local Islam Awareness program and any others that might crop up in the coming months or years.

Nonbelief Awareness: It's Not Just Time, It's Long Overdue!

     Here is my plan to put the brakes on the dangerous slam-and-slander campaigns being waged against 14.1% of America's adults, those of us who are not religious, who do not believe that gods exist. First, we need to see what has been happening, to point this out to ourselves and to each other, and even hammer this home, if need be. The fact of the matter is that spokesperson after spokesperson has stood before the public in recent months and has insisted that the perpetrators of the Day of Atrocity crimes were not really religious! No, that was not real religion these creeps had been practicing!

     Okay, then, what was it? What did Mohamed Atta mean when he wrote... ...for his own eyes, ...this prayer:

     "Oh, God, open all doors for me. Oh God who answers prayers and answers those who ask you, I am asking you for your help. I am asking you for forgiveness. I am asking you to lighten my way.  I am asking you to lift the burden I feel.  Oh God, you who open all doors, please open all doors for me, open all venues for me, open all avenues for me.  God, I trust in you. God, I lay myself in your hands....  There is no God but God, I being a sinner. We are of God, and to God we return."

(see: www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/attaframe.htm)

     If I had recited these words to you (regardless of your religion or lack thereof) and if I did not tell you where they came from, you would surely agree with me that these were the words of a devoutly religious person. This was not mere propaganda deliberately left behind for all the world to see.

     By all appearances, the hijackers either were, or at least thought they were, deeply and devoutly religious men of God. But that is not what those well- respected notables have been telling us, telling the world, actually, about Mohamed Atta and his associates. In attempting to redeem the name of modern Islam, they are saying that these criminals were not practicing any religion at all.

     It is good that people would try to reconcile the reputation of mainstream Islam, of all religion, actually, by explaining the difference between what these creeps were about and what most religionists are about. Indeed, this is crucial for keeping the peace. But in their zeal to find the strongest terms with which to describe the venomous malevolence of these men, the concept of "false religion" just will not mollify the leaders of America's people. Only one concept will do for them, indeed, only one concept is left: these criminals did not practice false religion, they tell us, these terrorists simply practiced no religion -- meaning, of course, that they were all atheists!

     Imam Izak-el Mu-eed Pasha, leader of the Malcolm Shabazz Mosque in Harlem, New York, and chaplain of the New York Police Department, had a grave responsibility before him during President Bush's National Prayer Service held on Sunday, October 28, 2001. The first order of business, for him, was arguably to soften the fierce blow that the reputation of Islam had just received at the hands of nineteen or more men who claimed to be devout followers of that faith...   ...Whether or not it was his intention in doing this, Imam Pasha, the chaplain of the New York Police Department, found just the way to bring the crowd to its feet:

     "We are Muslims, but we are Americans. We Muslims, Americans, stand today with a heavy weight on our shoulder that those who would dare do such dastardly acts claim our faith. They are no believers in God at all."

     ...The notion of "false religion" seems not, for them, to be a clean enough break in scampering to wash their hands of even the remotest affiliation, as there's no denying that the culprits were fellow humans, members of our own species!

      For the reflexive act of describing the attacks as an "atheistic evil," humorist Ben Stein later apologized.  ...I expect [less] from Conservative columnist William F. Buckley:

      "The principal sponsors of the terrorists are not religious fanatics.... [They] have made themselves the icons of Islamism despite the fact that they are well-known atheists..."

      I agree that the likes of U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft need to be countered with all the resources we can muster. Views similar to what he expressed last January are still way too common, and are the very reason we scrambled to put together the Islam Awareness programs:

     "Christianity is a faith in which God sends his son to die for you, [while Islam is] a religion in which God requires you to send your son to die for him."

      Such sentiments are entirely devoid of the empathy and compassion that I and most of my fellow activists in this field hold for people of all religious persuasions! Contrary to being the lifeless, heartless people whose class is the only group into which they rightly relegate these most notorious of criminals, atheists who think about their atheism tend to be guilty, if anything, of caring too much! Those of us who give of ourselves for this cause often find ourselves wishing mental freedom even for people who are happy in their faith! If that's it, if that's our biggest mistake, wanting to see people freed from what we see as a vicious form of slavery with disastrous potential (if that's even a mistake at all), then they associate these criminals with the wrong group.

The Longstanding Vilification of Atheists

     Unfortunately, large segments of the public are swallowing it, too -- hook, line, and sinker. The weekly vilification of anybody who does not believe in the Imaginary Friend has created a very common myth that feeds right in to the very sentiments they're pretending to address with their Muslim Awareness groups! This hostility portrays atheists as more than simply unbelievers. Atheists are, according to this longstanding and very popular tradition, wicked to the core!

     As often as not, these leaders of society have gone beyond simply implying that the terrorists were not "really religious," but have flat-out insisted that they were atheists! Look up the word "atheism" in Merriam-Webster's and see how far back this misnomer goes. Read almost anything from the eighteenth century and see how firmly entrenched it has been up until very recently, to the point where this connection, if not the outright usage, prevails today, even though the dictionaries call it archaic..  ...Certainly: atheism, as we know it today, did not gain intellectual respectability until Charles Darwin adequately addressed the argument from design in his 1859 book, Origin of Species; until then, the intellectuals were Deists or, as Deism was also called back then, Unitarians.

     ...When people connect atheism with wickedness these days, they are not even being ignorant; they're simply being bigoted. It is clear that one's religious belief, or lack thereof, has little if anything to do with their prospects for moral behavior.
 Some religious people are the picture of morality and ethics, while our newspaper headlines sound about other religious people, terrorists pretending to act in behalf of various different religious interests, brutal family violence inspired by sincerely held religious beliefs, and clergymen committing all manner of crimes. Similarly, many atheists, like many members of "the wrong religion," behave in such a way as to put members of "our religion" to shame. And atheists similarly commit atrocities like anybody else. In short, there is really no connection between religiosity and morality! If you wanted to predict a child's prospects for growing up to lead a life of crime, the family's religious tradition, or lack thereof, would not be among the more reliable indicators!

     People who try to connect atheism with wickedness, immorality, amorality, disrespect for authority, the dishonoring of an agreement or contract, sexual licentiousness or impropriety, or any other seemingly undesirable behavior are not acting according to commonly known and easily seen facts. At minimum they're engaging in lazy thinking, failing to see what is obvious even to the casual observer. At most they are trying to discredit an opposing ideological viewpoint in an attempt to make their own ideology appear more attractive, perhaps in an attempt to sell that ideology to others. Whatever the motive, this behavior results in doing great harm to a class of people who have, as a class, done nothing wrong.

     This is happening not just in the privacy of the common people's day to-day-affairs -- well respected leaders, speaking on behalf of society and setting an example for society, are taking this plain and obvious error and using it in explaining to the people these horrible tragedies that have beset our nation and shocked the world.

Awareness Programs Address This Thinking

     This is the same behavior we have succeeded in stopping at first: "These acts were committed by Muslims because Islam is, by nature, a violent religion." Careful educational endeavors have shown us that Islam is no more or less violent than any of the other major religions. The Koran and the Bible each have passages which appear to advocate violence against nonmembers! But nobody from the mainstream religions has interpreted any of these passages as commanding that adherents commit violence. Indeed, the rank and file members of both major sects are, for the most part, only vaguely aware that such passages even exist! Commendable indeed have been those efforts which show these portrayals of Islam to be patently untrue and wholly unfair.

     Unfortunately, in clearing up the widespread misunderstanding of Islam, they have fostered further misunderstanding of atheism! Instead of simply saying, "These acts of violence are not proper expressions of Islam," and leaving it at that, they have carried it one step further, carried it over to the point of error: "These acts of violence are not expressions of religion at all." ...They have stated that these acts are ..."expressions of irreligion — expressions of outright atheism."

     In order to protect Islam, some Muslims pass the blame to atheism; in order to protect religion as a whole, some Christians (and others) pass the blame to atheism; in order to protect atheism, the temptation would be to try to pass the blame back to religion in general or Islam in particular. Every one of these acts is dead wrong: in order to protect the innocent from the blame game, we must, in truthfulness, pass the blame entirely and exclusively where it belongs: these tiny bands of opportunists and their sponsors. Then and only then will we have the luxury of investigating the bigger picture in an attempt to prevent this whole thing from happening again.
 

Needed: An Atheist Awareness Program

      The Muslim Awareness programs were highly successful from both sides. First, they very effectively showed everybody involved the dangers that can come from letting the popular vilification of Muslims continue unchecked. Various elements in our culture have been promulgating this bigotry for too long. Antibigotry sentiments have become popular these days, and this fed right into those trends. Secondly, just noting how many groups and people were ready to support the concept of such a program showed that we know that teaching awareness of different groups and cultures works.

      So if we can set up and run a program for the benefit of Muslims, who represent as many as a million people in America,  why is this open vilification of the nonreligious, representing as many as 27 million Americans allowed to go unchecked?

      I am suggesting simply that we demand similar treatment, that we, as atheists, demand that programs be set up to help our children become aware of the fact that the question of religion versus no religion is not a way to determine or predict morality. We can even discuss some of the accepted methods we have used to learn and teach morality to ourselves and our children. A thorough program will show that many accepted religions do not necessarily teach the existence of a deity: Unitarianism no longer requires a belief in a God, some forms of Buddhism are entirely godless, as are several other religions such as Jainism.

      Crucial to such a program would be to show that the range and degree of disbelief parallels the range and degree of belief. Just as there are believers who are very certain that God exists, others cry out, "Help thou mine unbelief!" Similarly, some atheists are certain that there's no such thing as God, and others simply do not have a god-belief because they haven't paid much attention to the subject (the vast majority of atheists, actually).

      Most importantly, and certainly most vividly, we can gain much headway by celebrating all of humankind's heroes and heroines who have been unbelievers. A roll call of atheism's heroes and heroines, including those who are controversial because Christianity has likewise claimed them as having come from among their ranks, would be most effective in putting out the fires of bigotry against atheists. An aspect of this would be to show that persecution played a big role in keeping us "in the closet."  So we really don't know if, for example, Galileo or Newton or anybody who lived prior to the Era of Enlightenment was or was not an atheist.  Most people who lived during those times knew better than to be so foolish as to admit their atheism and risk being burned at the stake.

      The beginning of a call to implement such programs would require an outspokenness toward distinguishing the Islam claimed by the terrorists and the Islam practiced by mainstream Muslims. For us to blame Islam would be just as erroneous, and dangerous, as for them to deny Islam altogether. Making this distinction with sufficient forcefulness is crucial because this could very easily have been some militia group claiming to be "Christians" or even Earth First! claiming to be "environmentalists." I'm sure that the Islam awareness programs addressed some of the thinking and misnomers that fostered the vilification of Muslims and the relegation of Islam off to the side. Similarly, we would need to include talk of why atheists are still openly vilified, and we would do well to show how the protection of mainstream Islam's reputation post September 11 was done at the expense of atheism's reputation.

      Will such a program work? I see no reason why not, considering that Islam has, up until very recent times, had at least as much going against it as atheism does today. If a program redeeming the name and reputation of Islam can be as successful as this one appears to have been, it should be a simple matter to develop an effective program for the benefit of what now constitutes one-seventh of America's population: those who lack a god-belief!

      What's embarrassing at this point is that a group which constitutes fully one-seventh of the population could still be having the problems we're having to the extent that we're still experiencing them when it comes to taking it on the chin like we do -- and have, for as long as anybody can remember or bothered to write it down!

Let's Start Hearing Some Proposals!

      I want to start hearing proposals that the schools establish a program to go along side the Islam Awareness programs that, as far as I can tell, have passed muster with most Separationist groups. Such a program would do for atheists (nontheists) what the Islam Awareness programs are doing for Muslims -- and for the exact same reasons. I would recommend that a brief lesson be devised, preferably with the help of both the community's atheistic leaders in cooperation with, perhaps, representatives of the local Ecumenical Council.

     Such a lesson would, of course, need to teach children what atheism is and is not, including a discussion on the various "shades" of atheism, ranging from those who rarely if ever even think about religion to those who have given the subject much thought and know exactly why it is that they do not accept the teachings of the various religious traditions.

     Surely we would need to emphasize that being unwilling to accept the claims of a religion is not necessarily the same as openly opposing religion. Many who don't believe hold their friends and neighbors in with very high regard, some going so far as to wish that they could believe! Most, however, simply checked it out at some point, decided that they don't believe, and haven't thought much about the subject since then. Finally, most atheists that we've asked tell us that if someone gave them a strong reason for believing, that is, if someone came by and could prove that God exists, they would immediately become believers.

     The language that we have found to be most powerful (thus far, in our search) is to say that we simply have not been given a sufficient reason to believe, and therefore remain atheists.

     A lesson showcasing unbelief would certainly need to include a brief run-down of the various expressions of nontheism over the years, each one giving a slightly different emphasis on the subject. Humanism, of course, focuses on the precedence of the human rather than on the nonexistence of God. Skepticism, certainly not limited to atheism, doubts the many claims made by those who vie for our allegiance to their sect in particular or for religion in general. Freethought, likewise not limited to atheism, holds that we are responsible for obtaining all of our information on our own, that we cannot depend upon supernatural messages or, most importantly, hold an opinion simply because of "tradition." There are other expressions, including more than a few variations all called "agnosticism."

     It is our hope that this tough, tough situation quickly passes into the history books and stops affecting people who just don't get what religion is all about (if, indeed, it's about anything at all!). The first step to accomplishing this is to do for atheists what our communities and schools are already doing for Muslims: exposing students, teachers, workers, community leaders, and citizens to the customs of these subcultures. Millions of young people can now tell you such things about Islam as how many times a Muslim prays, upon which religions Islam is based, and exactly what Muslims do and do not believe about Jesus. Hopefully, each of these students was presented this information in a manner which denigrated neither Islam nor the student's family heritage.

     I am certain that we can do the same for atheism (nontheism). My only questions would be, are we willing to do this? Obviously, we would meet at least as much resistence as those organizing the Islam Awareness programs did. This would mean that we, the normally quiet, peaceful, mind-your-own-business atheists ...organize efforts first to develop a pilot program or two -- in case one fails for lack of good design [and] the whole idea is not scrubbed. Then we'd need to try it out in a few communities. Finally, ...we'd do best to start by introducing the idea, as people sometimes take a while to catch on to new ideas.

Reply to the Positive Atheist at: editor@positiveatheism.org

     Lately everyone is wondering how much advance information about the 9/11 terrorist attacks was available to George W. Bush. This serves as a good reminder that the total number of psychics, mediums, palm and tea-leaf readers, tarot interpreters, spiritualists, fortune tellers, numerologists, and astrologers who foresaw the attacks is precisely zero.

     Coincidentally, this is the same number of lives saved by the no doubt abundant prayers for deliverance offered up by the passengers and crew members of the hijacked airliners.

Sue Strandberg featured in the Sheboygan Press
by Clare Knight

     Scientific theories don't spring forth perfectly all at once.  Rather, they build gradually over time, changing and evolving as new information and experience modify what we once believed.  It makes sense, then, that an approach to life that's based on scientific reasoning would develop slowly, throughout history.

     Seen as the quest for universal values and truths, and grounded in current knowledge of the world, humanism constitutes a basic part of the Western approach to science, political theory, ethics and law.

     However, as an organized philosophy secular humanism is relatively new.  Its foundations can be found in the ideas of classical Greek philosophers such as the pre-Socratics, the Stoics and the Epicureans.

     These early philosophers based their systems on a study of the natural world as the means for gaining knowledge, solving human problems and replacing revelation and dogma with tolerance.  They also came to understand and respect the views of others.

     Though freedom of enquiry was eclipsed during the Middle Ages, the Renaissance saw a rebirth of interest in human-centered art, literature and the role of reason.  This renewed interest in classical philosophy eventually came to expression in the Enlightenment of the 18th century, and brought with it a growing emphasis on science, human rights, democracy and freethought.   Contemporary secular humanism strives to carry on these ideals, and could not have a more passionate and well-read advocate than long time Plymouth resident, Sue Strandberg.

     "I always had an interest in freethought" Strandberg explains, "I discovered Mark Twain when I was eleven and promptly became an atheist. On further reflection I became agnostic, then new age spiritual, then religious and finally back to atheist."

     Freethinking was encouraged in her Evanston, Illinois, childhood home, since neither parent was particularly religious. Because her father had an interest in the paranormal, Strandberg explored extra sensory perception, eventually coming to the conclusion that evidence to support the theories was lacking.

     "Most of my friends didn't know what being a freethinker meant" Strandberg says, "so I told people we were 'Christian sympathetic' by which I meant we were cultural Christians.

     "Now, with my own family (husband Jim and children Stefan and Anna) we celebrate religious holidays for their secular meaning - fellowship, family, affirming compassion for others, peace on earth and goodwill to all."

     Strandberg met her husband at Western Illinois University where she was an English Literature major and they married when she was just 21. Her serious spiritual search began around that time.

     "I have always enjoyed talking with friends about religion" Strandberg continues, "and many were both very religious and very intelligent people. Yet they had beliefs that I found difficult to understand and accept."

     The conflict prompted Strandberg to begin a study of religion, which eventually brought her to the realization that it didn't make sense that somebody who is living it could miss the true meaning of life.

     "It seemed to me that if a God existed, or if there was a spiritual reality that makes life important, that it would be impossible to miss. One would not have to study it, one would not have to read about it, one would simply discover it through living."

     She decided to test her theory by continuing her search purely experientially. Living with that kind of awareness she discovered that, indeed, the real values that held meaning for her and for others, had to do with life on this earth. About six years ago she discovered secular humanism.

     "Before discovering secular humanism I described myself as agnostic since I don't claim to know whether God exists or not. But reading the definitions I thought, well I'm also atheist, by which I mean that if I'm asked the question 'do you think God exists?' my honest answer would have to be no."

     Strandberg acknowledges that before she read about secular humanism she thought it had something to do with socialism or communism, and was surprised to find that the philosophy echoed what she had come to believe via her own exploration.

     On the basis of this discovery she joined some secular humanist organizations and groups and since then she has become very enthusiastic about the burgeoning movement.

     "This philosophy has enormous potential to bring people together, to find common ground between all people." Strandberg explains, " We don't call it a religion, we call it a life philosophy. It's not a religion because we don't worship anything, including human beings.  We follow principles instead of people, and question, investigate, and test everything."

     When asked what God means to her Strandberg responds, "there are a lot of definitions, but I think the basic definition of God usually seems to be a type of transcendental mind, a consciousness or intention which grounds values of good and evil, and that creates or sustains the universe under some sort of plan.

     "But I don't think that the universe is likely to be a mind dependant thing" Strandberg continues, "It seems very likely to me that when minds examine things they are going to see things like themselves, so they are going to say 'Ah, I see a pattern, I see a cause, I see a purpose.' But those things are projected from the mind of the mind that's seeking, it's not out there in the universe.

    "When you study through science how minds work you find that they evolved in connection with the brain. You find that they are extremely complicated things. So it's unlikely that something so complicated would start out as an independent entity, before anything else."

     Strandberg thinks that morals and ethics are different than religious claims. She says that you can take a moral and ethical system of belief and ascribe it to a god, or a man, and it would stand the same either way.

     She stresses that as a secular humanist she has a moral and ethical belief system that is very similar to those found in many of the great religions. She just doesn't believe in gods, the supernatural, or an afterlife. She is, instead, guided by reason, science, logic and a desire to find a common ground and love, between all people.

     To illustrate the point Strandberg explains "If I were to discover that God existed, my underlying philosophy wouldn't change. I would simply refer to myself as a religious humanist, instead.

     "The problem with supernatural forms of revelation is that you can end up with things that can't be verified in a secular world, but which make sense in the spirit world. Based on that you can justify virtually anything. If you have a supernatural basis for your belief system you can redefine ordinary people into being dangerous."

     Secular humanists hold that the beginning of wisdom is a love of truth. Its more important for them to believe something because it's true, rather than to believe something simply because it's easy to believe, or  comforting.

     They see it as  important not to look  for what they want to  find, but to learn to  live with the truth that  they do find.  Humanists hold that  each individual has to  weigh and test things  in the light of reason,  and not simply follow  a dogma or authority  without thinking it  through.

     "Religious claims  are the same as any  other claim about the  nature of reality,  especially if people  are going to act on  them. They should be  scrutinized using methods of reason and science", Strandberg explains.

     "Humanism is not so much about conclusions as it is about method.  Since human beings make mistakes and are not terribly reliable, it seems wise to use a means for understanding that constantly forces us to check and test ourselves. Not all humanists agree on social and political issues either, but nevertheless, they value diversity and dissent in the market place of ideas."

     In response to the question of whether or not she thinks life has a particular purpose Strandberg answers thoughtfully, "it doesn't appear that the universe was created with us in mind, or that the universe itself has particular desires or intentions for us. We are here basically as an accident. Meaning is something we create by how we live and what we care about."

     When asked how she sees the future of humanism Strandberg responds "if you take away the supernatural things from religion you'll still have the core essence of what makes a religion or philosophy important--a love for others, a love for truth, a search for wisdom and understanding and living the good life. These values will endure, regardless.

     "Bertrand Russell once said, 'the good life is one guided by reason and inspired by love.' I think most people would recognize that as a good way to live," Strandberg concludes.

Geology shows that fossils are of different ages.
Paleontology shows a fossil sequence, the list of species represented changes through time.
Taxonomy shows biological relationships among species.
Evolution is the explanation that threads it all together.
Creationism is the practice of squeeezing one's eyes shut and wailing 'does not!'.
-author unknown

CONQUER YOUR VICES WITH HUMOR & SONG AT THIS YEAR'S SOLSTICE PICNIC!

---

---

The Atheists and Agnostics of Wisconsin Bring You the Thirteenth Annual

SUMMER SOLSTICE   PICNIC