Before the Court is a proposed Settlement Agreement [so that] the parties can operate as they peacefully move on with their lives and educate students of the Medina Valley Independent School District. …

What This Case Has Not Been About

The right to pray. Any American can pray, silently or verbally, seven days a week, twenty four hours a day, in private as Jesus taught [1] or in large public events as Mohammed instructed.[2]

The Real Issue

Does the United States Constitution allow a government entity elected by the majority to use its power to tax and its agents and employees to support and promote a particular religious viewpoint not held by a minority?

The answer, of course, is no.  The judge when on to write:

For those who choose to enlighten themselves on why separation of church and state has been an issue of great debate and importance in American history, Appendix II follows Appendix I.

But it gets better, as the judge then added a very personal statement, set off from the rest of the ruling.

During the course of this litigation, many have played a part:

To the United States Marshal Service and local police who have provided heightened security: Thank you.

To those Christians who have venomously and vomitously cursed the Court family and threatened bodily harm and assassination: In His name, I forgive you.

To those who have prayed for my death: Your prayers will someday be answered, as inevitably trumps probability.

To those in the executive and legislative branches of government who have demagogued this case for their own political goals: You should be ashamed of yourselves.

To the lawyers who have advocated professionally and respectfully for their clients’ respective positions: Bless you.

That just about says it all.  Thank you, Judge Biery.

A new report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute shows public school science standards in Pennsylvania are given a “D”, as compared to Ohio, Maryland,  New York, Virginia and Massachusetts, which were in the “A-” to “B” range.  The top scorer in the US was California.

Why only “D” for Pennsylvania?  The full report details how Pennsylvania is full of vague standards with little sense of scientific rigor or a coherent ordering through the grades.

The Pennsylvania science standards are generally poor. If a bright spot exists, it’s in the earlier grades, where the coverage does occasionally earn reasonable marks for rigor. In high school, however, the material generally descends into flabbiness and disorder. By no means could these standards serve as the foundation for a sound science curriculum for students in the Keystone State.

Throughout the standards for science, there was little in terms of expectations.  The reviewers wrote:

In addition, much of the high school content simply demands too little of students. For instance, biology standards scattered among the tenth-grade expectations are pitched at such a low level that they do not merit discussion.

But, what really hurt the ratings was the lack of clarity:

[T]he standards are written in such vague language as to be incomprehensible, as in the glossary definition of the rock cycle: “The process by which rocks are formed, altered, destroyed, and reformed by geological processes and which is recurrent, returning to a starting point.” It is a “process” made up of “processes” and returns to a starting point?

No wonder the kids are confused.   The drafters of the standards have no idea of how to describe basic concepts.

Finally, the standards fail to support any basic science that might conflict with theology.  For example, human evolution, which as in the 2002 standards, was dropped from the 2009 standards! A the same time there was support of pseudoscience that has been creeping into science classes throughout the US:

Other standards foster the insinuation of pseudoscience into science content by inviting teachers to “teach the controversy” about evolution and global warming, when delineating the specific scientific content they should learn would obviously be preferable.

As written here and elsewhere, Governor Corbett’s plan to improve education is to slash budgets and while providing state vouchers to religious schools.

It is time real standards for real science are adopted statewide.  Let’s hope this report will be a wake up call for legislators to get to work on the real issues of day.  Unfortunately, I doubt that will happen any time soon.

Many have asked why not provide a secular version of the same ideals in the new banner.  For example, Sally Quinn suggests “Let us each day desire to do our best, to grow mentally and morally as well as physically, to be kind and to be helpful.” In fact, this offer was made to the school board and they refused,  demanding that the original, religious language must remain.  Sarah Barringer Gordon, a Professor of History and Constitutional Law at the University of Pennsylvania, pointed out the hypocrisy, as the banner was first put up in 1963 by the administration as a way of thumbing their nose at the Supreme Court, whose 1962 ruling banned the recitation of religious prayers in public schools.

Now that the prayer has to come down, the floodgates of hate have opened up.  Rather than obey the law, there was name-calling, death-threats, and even the refusal to deliver flowers!  In light of the reaction, Kill By Fish recently came up with the perfect replacement for the Cranston West banner:

Now, that is a prayer that I can say amen to.

After the ruling, sparks flew.  Crazies came out the woodwork. Death threats were made and a RI State Rep. went so far as to call her “evil little thing.”

Back to Greta.  She asks:

What the hell is going on here?

Why has an entirely unsurprising court ruling — on a well-established point of law, based on one of the most fundamental rights established by our country’s Constitution, protecting everyone’s right to practice their religion without government pressure or interference — resulted in such grotesque, hateful, violently threatening rage aimed at a 16-year-old girl, simply for having the temerity to ask her public school to obey the law?

Some of it, of course, is Internet culture, and the anonymity that makes people feel comfortable saying horrible, cruel, threatening things they would probably never say in person. Some of it seems to stem from a grossly underfunded public education system, and the widespread piss-poor understanding of Civics 101 that apparently goes along with it. And some of it, of course, is just generic enforcement of conformity, and generic hostility aimed at anyone who steps outside social norms. (A tendency that’s especially prevalent in high school.)

But some of it seems to have to do with the unique nature of religion.

Religion, unlike any other belief system or social structure, is based on a belief in that which cannot be seen, felt, heard, touched, or otherwise detected by any normal or reliable means. It is based on ideas that have no good evidence to support them, and that by definition can’t have good evidence to support them.

And in a frustrating and exasperating paradox, when people hold beliefs we don’t have good evidence for, we have a strong tendency to defend them more vigorously, more vehemently, and in many cases more violently.  … So — paradoxically — the less good evidence we have for a belief, and the less defensible it is, the more vigorously we defend it.

It is interesting that this would not have gone so far, if it was not about religion.

Be sure to read the rest of Greta’s post. It is wonderful food for thought and worth the read.

The Rhode Island State Council of Churches will hold a news conference in support of Jessica Ahlquist, the 16-year-old atheist who challenged the Cranston prayer banner, on Tuesday at 2:30 p.m.

The news conference “in favor of tolerance and civility” will include faith leaders in Cranston and throughout Rhode Island speaking out to support Ahlquist’s right to challenge the prayer banner.

The press conference will also condemn the treatment and inappropriate language and words use to describe Ahlquist.

Rev. Dr. David Brown, Interim Exec. Minister of the American Baptist Churches of RI, Rev. William Zelazny, District Exec., Ballou Channing District Unitarian Universalist, Rabbi Peter Stein, President, RI Board of Rabbis, Imam Farid Ansari, Muslim American Dawah Center of RI, Rev. Israel Mercedes, Executive Director, Providence Bible Institute, Rev. Betsy Garland, President, RI State Council of Churches, and Rev. Dr. Don Anderson, Exec. Minister, RI State Council of Churches are all confirmed to speak.

I hope the local politicians, radio hosts, florists, and all the other haters in Cranston follow suit and stop the witch hunt against a courageous 16 year old student who understood the law and the basic constitutional principles.

To hear the religious right tell it, men like George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were 18th-century versions of Jerry Falwell in powdered wigs and stockings. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Unlike many of today’s candidates, the founders didn’t find it necessary to constantly wear religion on their sleeves. They considered faith a private affair.

Contrast them to former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (who says he wouldn’t vote for an atheist for president because nonbelievers lack the proper moral grounding to guide the American ship of state), Texas Gov. Rick Perry (who hosted a prayer rally and issued an infamous ad accusing President Barack Obama of waging a “war on religion”) and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum (whose uber-Catholicism leads him to oppose not just abortion but birth control).

There was a time when Americans voted for candidates who were skeptical of core concepts of Christianity like the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus and the virgin birth. The question is, could any of them get elected today? The sad answer is probably not.

The author, Rob Boston,  is  a native of Altoona, graduate of Indiana University of Pennsylvania and a senior policy analyst at Americans United for Separation of Church and State. Given those credentials it is not surprising that his comments about Thomas Jefferson were particularly pointed and spot on:

Jefferson was confident that a coolly rational form of religion would take root in the fertile intellectual soil of America. And he took political stands that would infuriate today’s religious right. He refused to issue proclamations calling for days of prayer and fasting, saying that such religious duties were no part of the chief executive’s job. His assertion that the First Amendment erects a “wall of separation between church and state” still rankles the religious right today.

It is a wonderful article that I am sure will rankle the feathers of many locals.  It should be an interesting few weeks of letters to the editor.  Consider supporting the author with a letter of your own.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation discovered the shocking extent of petty and vindictive community reactions against 16 year old litigant Jessica Ahlquist when it attempted earlier this week to order a dozen roses to be delivered to the victorious state/church plaintiff in Cranson, R.I. FFRF is in the process of filing a complaint about one of the floral shops with Rhode Island’s human rights division over the civil rights violation.

Working through a Wisconsin flower shop Tuesday, Annie Laurie Gaylor, FFRF co-president, placed what she believed to be a routine order: A dozen red roses to be delivered on Wednesday with the message to Jessica: “Congratulations, and hang in there, with admiration from FFRF.”

Late yesterday, the local florist called FFRF’s office to report she had struck out at three Cranston florist’s shops, including at Twins Florist, which responded to the order in writing with this statement: “I will not deliver to this person.” The other two shops mysteriously produced unusual excuses for refusing the order. Gaylor said when she heard this news, “My jaw literally dropped. Everyone is stunned by the bigotry.”

At a recent school board meeting, a supporter of Jessica was booed and yelled by “good” Christians in clear violation of the school board policy.  The Superintendent stopped the meeting and lectured the so-called adults like they were the four-year olds.

Jessica spoke out an injustice and her arguments were fully supported by the courts.  She is the one acting responsible.  The mayor, school board, politicians, and other in charge need to stop pandering and honor her has the heroine that she is.

Given the content of my site, and the wingnutty pious predilections of the American public and government, and the enmity and known censorious habits of Christians and creationists, how long do you think this place would stay up if SOPA/PIPA went into effect?

“ To my colleagues Robert Plomin, Günter Wagner, Martin Nowak, and Brian Greene, among many other scientists on the Foundation’s payroll: have you no shame at all at about taking money from Templeton—an organization that’s just given three million dollars to fund studies of Jesus, and about how to reconcile neuroscience with a nonexistent soul? And to hire a pastor in residence to counsel those who get into trouble when trying to reconcile brains and souls? Is there no organization so soaked in religious woo that you scientists won’t take money from it?  

I must say that although these scientists turn their back on Templeton’s pro-woo activities so they can fund their own pro-science initiatives (e.g., The World Science Festival), I find that kind of cognitive dissonance contemptible. In the end, such scientists, by lending their Big Names to Templeton’s website, only put their imprimatur on the Foundation’s pro-religion and pro-right-wing activities.  I call that selling out.

And I call on journalists to question these scientists how they take Templeton money with one hand while covering their eyes with the other.”

Militant?  Our detractors, of course, would say so and are the first to hurl this accusation in our general direction.  They have to, otherwise the voices of sanity and reason might seek their their hermetically sealed bubbles.  All so-called “Gnus” must constantly deal with such epitaphs simply because we dare to speak what is an obvious and unimpeachable truth.

I wish it weren’t so, but direct experience tells me that Coyne’s cry for help from journalists will fall mostly on totally deaf ears; they are too enamored with woo of all stripes themselves to  understand the contemptible, cognitive dissonance of which Coyne accuses them.  Just take a quick gander at the writings of Pittsburgh’s own Jack Kelly if you have any doubts.  This contemptible little squeak of a man believes with all of his being that he - in the fine tradition of the Thomas Sowell * Cal Thomas * Sean Hannity * Bill O’Liellly * Pat Buchanan School of Journalism in which he is a magna cum laude graduate – has carte blanch  license to spew as much misinformation, disinformation, distortions of the truth, incoherent nonsense and outright lies to his audience that he wishes.   It matters little to him what negative or challenging reactions he might get from his audience.  Why do I say that?  Simple.  It’s because he knows that he can simply ignore any challenges that come his way.

Jack Kelly’s not writing for reality-based people.  He’s working to shore up support from and give more encouragement to the lunatic fringe in his audience.

His employer is guilty of the very same crime.  The simple fact is, the Post-Gazette needs these readers, and the income their subscriptions bring to them.  From the Gazette’s perspective, lunatic dollars are just as green as the dollars spent by reality seekers.  So why not nurture that angle as long as they possibly can for the profit that can be wrenched from it?  Seriously now, think about is for a nanosecond.  What else could possibly explain Kelly’s continued employment at the Post-Gazette or Thomas Sowell’s or Cal Thomas’ syndicated columns appearing in newspapers throughout the US?

Jack Kelly – like his brethren of the school of journalism of which he is a member – is shameless.

Then, as A Spork in Drawer pointed out, we have the old Sesame Street game (video at Media Matters):

One of These Things is Not Like the Other..

Romney is looking younger and younger every day!

But, perhaps the best is Spork’s posting of the classic graphic of greatest thinkers of our time (click on image to enlarge):

Click to Enlarge