Steel City Skeptics

We know that Catholic schools in Pennsylvania are fading in popularity. Part of this transformation is the changing demographics with the growth of the “Nones”, as well as less interest in programs that indoctrinate and proselytize, rather than serve all students regardless of background.  As in most states, Pennsylvania tax dollars were generally directed to public schools, rather than religious schools with very few exceptions.

However, that pattern of funding public schools through a mixture of income taxes and property assessments, as well as grants from the Commonwealth is changing. In a recent article in Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Deb Erdley note that Catholic schools can address their declining enrollment with tax credit scholarships that support religious education.

A quiet change in the law in 2014 that allowed individuals to divert their state taxes to the tax credit program helped fundraisers in the Greensburg diocese boost their tax credit bonanza to about $1 million this year.

“That was a game changer,” said Michael Lucotch, director of development for the Greensburg diocese. “It allows participants to redirect their personal income tax obligation to a Catholic school of their choice for use as tuition assistance.”

If that was not bad enough, it gets worse.

Unlike many scholarship programs, the tax credit-funded program is not limited to low-income families. Under state guidelines, a family of four with two children could earn up to $116,216 a year and still be eligible for aid. The eligibility cap grows by $15,608 a year for each additional child.

How are these programs allowed to exist?  Public funds should be directed to public schools. Those who want to have their children indoctrinated need to do so at their own expense.   And, if you think indoctrination is to harsh of a term, take a look at some recent arguments in support of indoctrination.

In regard to allegations against the former ‘Bishop of Pittsburgh’, Donald Wuerl, the Washington Post reported this week

WHEN ALLEGATIONS came to light last year of sexual abuse and inappropriate conduct involving children and seminarians by Archbishop Theodore McCarrick, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, who succeeded Mr. McCarrick as leader of the Washington archdiocese, expressed shock and denied prior knowledge. Now it turns out Mr. Wuerl was presented in 2004 with an account of Mr. McCarrick’s alleged misconduct, which he relayed to the Vatican.

Then: nothing.

In the ongoing tsunami of revelations about the Catholic Church’s willful blindness, conspiracy of silence and moral bankruptcy on clergy sex abuse, this particular revelation may count as little more than a droplet — although it does involve two of the highest-ranking and most prominent American prelates. However, it also encapsulates characteristics that continue to dog the church nearly two decades after the scandal burst into the open: callousness directed at victims; an insistence on denial and hairsplitting; and the hierarchy’s preference for treating allegations as internal matters, as if the world’s 1.2 billion lay Catholics were an irrelevance.

It is hard to believe that Cardinal Wuerl has not been removed from his position, asked to pay retribution to his victims, and charged with crimes in a court of law. Even the conservative talk show host, Hugh Hewett, recently described Wuerl as “The Con Man in the Cardinal’s Cap”.

While the Steel City Skeptics would argue that all who wear the pointy cap are con men with regard to the truth, Wuerl is clearly at the top the game. I would also argue that prison time is not out the question as more details come forth. The Catholic church has failed to police its own, but there is not reason that civil authorities cannot proceed under civil laws. The sooner, the better.

This week, the Freedom from Religion Foundation filed a complaint about the painting of 9/11 cross, which has been posted in a waiting room within the Camden County Courthouse.  The complaint was not taken well by the County  Commissioner:

“This is something that’s been here for quite a while, and I don’t think we should have to take it down just because of others’ opinions,” said Melanie Thompson. However, Camden County Presiding Commissioner Greg Hasty says the painting is not coming down. He cites a federal court ruling in 2013 which said the Ground Zero Cross was allowed to remain on display at the 9/11 Museum because there’s no evidence the display of the historic artifact entangles the government with religion.

One can argue whether, or not, two steel beams meeting at 90 degree angles has a special meaning in a building that was built with hundreds, if not thousands, of such beams throughout the structure.  That said, it is more telling to see previous responses to the actual 9/11 cross.

Father Brian Jordan call it a message.  Now here was God explaining Himself. It was a revelation, proof that “God had not abandoned Ground Zero,” even as the awful excavations continued.

Another website described 9/11 cross this way:

And yet, something did arise. Digging amid the ruins of Ground Zero, where the Twin Towers had collapsed only a month before, one of the rescue workers discovered something he felt to be a miracle. Two steel beams from the wreckage had fallen together, and landed in the form of a cross. The cross was set upright in the middle of the wreckage, to cast its shadow—literally and symbolically—over the scene. News spread quickly, and soon firefighters, police officers, and construction workers were making “pilgrimages” to the cross, to pray and reflect on the 9/11 attack. In that bleak landscape of despair, the “Hero’s Cross,” as it came to be called, became a source of spiritual strength. At a blessing service before that site, a Franciscan friar offered these words: “Behold the glory of the cross at Ground Zero,” he said. “This is our symbol of Hope. Our symbol of Faith. Our symbol of Healing.”

So what do we do with the claim that “there’s no evidence the display of the historic artifact entangles the government with religion?” 

Personally, I can see how the museum might display it as an artifact, just any good history museum might have display of Zeus and Jupiter, without implying it to be an endorsement to the idea. However, to put the cross in the Camden County Courthouse waiting room is just not the same.  It is clearly pushing one religion.  To argue otherwise is just wrong.

And, by the way, it is not even that good of a drawing…

There has been a depressing fight going on in Ozark, Missouri, over a large lighted cross in a public park to celebrate Christmas.  The rather ugly, lighted 20+ foot cross was constructed around a utility pole and is part of a drive-through holiday light display in Finley River Park.  The problem with the lighted cross is quite clear from past rulings by the courts: The government must remain neutral with regard to religion, allowing secular symbols, such Santa Claus, reindeer, and snowmen, while disallowing religious symbols (see County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 492 U.S. 573, 1989).

Source: https://media.ozarksfirst.com

The city agreed to take down the cross after receiving a complaint from FFRF, but then immediately backed off that agreement, and will be leaving it up and lighted for this holiday season.

The placement of the 20 feet tall Christian cross is not only a clear violation but also just the wrong symbol. According to the myth, baby Jesus was born in a manger on Christmas day.  The whole execution-on-the-cross comes much later in the story, so in what way is the cross any part of the Christmas story?

Adding to the temporal misplacement (Christmas is not Easter) is the most recent Federal court ruling on the matter, issued in September of this year. In that case, “three U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals judges ruled to uphold the lower court’s ruling that the city maintaining a cross in a public park was unconstitutional, and the cross must be removed.”

As for Ozark, Missouri, why not represent the secular icons of the season, of which there are plenty to go around?  Let Christmas be the season of reindeer and Santa Claus.  Let utility poles be poles.  Even though Ozark sits in Christian County, Missouri (a true fact), it still needs to respect that there is a well-established separation of state and church to uphold.

The growth of the “nones”, being those with no religious affiliation, has been growing by leaps and bounds in the past decade.  The Catholic Church, in particular, has been losing members, due in part to the continued scandals that have been reported here and elsewhere.

But what does it mean to be a “none”? The Pew Research Center has just released a study that shows that 6 in 10 have replaced traditional religious labels with unfounded New Age Beliefs,  such as

• Believe spiritual energy can be located in physical things (47%)
• Believe in psychics (40%)
• Believe in reincarnation (38%)
• Believe in astrology (32%)

Belief in at least one of those four was found in 62% of the respondents!

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/01/new-age-beliefs-common-among-both-religious-and-nonreligious-americans/

There is some hope that the label of atheist resulted in the least acceptance of  unfounded beliefs.  That said, the freethought movement, as a whole, clearly has more work to do towards make “fact over fiction” a guiding principle in our lives.  In particular those who prefer the label “Agnostic” show much greater acceptance of unfounded beliefs.

Steel City Skeptics continues to encourage rigorous scientific studies without the “woo” of new age thought.  Unfortunately, there is much work to be done to make this principle universal.

We just got word that the great singer-songwriter, Roy Zimmerman, will be making a stop in Pittsburgh this weekend. You will not find a more poignant and relevant satirist today in America. His songs harken back to Tom Lehrer from a previous generation and represent some of the best in musical satire today, including songs like

•  Defenders of Marriage (“Defending the institution against people who want to get married”),
• Religious Freedom (“I’m free to practice my religion, and you’re free to practice mine”).
• A powerful anti-gun song: To the Victims We Send Our Thoughts and Prayers.

Roy has played for numerous secular-minded audiences across the country – most recently at the American Humanist Association (AHA) national convention in Las Vegas and the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) national convention,  as well as the recent PAStAHCon in Philadelphia.

To get a glimpse, check out the video link to Religious Freedom (To Burn Our Own Witches).

The concert will be Sunday, September 16 @ 7 pm at First Unitarian Church, 605 Morewood Ave on the corner of Melwood and Ellsworth Avenue in Shadyside. The cost is “$20 or pay what you can”.

At any price, it will be show not to miss.

There is a brand new Freethought Caucus in Congress that is making its views known in regard to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. The new group representing five states consists of Reps. Jared Huffman, D-Calif., Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., Dan Kildee, D-Mich., Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., Mark Pocan, D-Wis., and Jamie Raskin, D.-Md.  They recently penned a letter against the approval of Kavanaugh signed by the Caucus and ten additional members of Congress!

As pointed out in a press release by the Freedom From Religion Foundation:

The letter outlined six main areas of concern the group recognizes as disqualifying factors for Kavanaugh to serve a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court. Chief among these concerns is Kavanaugh referring to the “wall of separation” between church and state as a metaphor “wrong as a matter of law and history.” “The wall of separation is critical because genuine religious freedom requires a secular government,” the letter says.

Additionally, the letter calls attention to Kavanaugh’s history of hypersensitivity to burdens on religion, citing his 2015 dissent arguing that it is a “substantial burden” to ask a religious organization option out of the Affordable Care Act contraceptive mandate to fill out five blanks on a form, while two years later he deemed that forcing a 17-year-old girl detained as an illegal immigrant to continue her pregnancy did not constitute an “undue burden” on her constitutionally protected reproductive rights. Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, interrogated Kavanaugh on this very point and his answer fell flat.

Finally, the letter notes the threat Kavanaugh poses to 70 years of Establishment Clause jurisprudence, the danger he poses to our secular public schools, and his history of hostility towards secular Americans and state-church plaintiffs.

The members of the Freethought Caucus are Reps. Jared Huffman, D-Calif., Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., Dan Kildee, D-Mich., Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., Mark Pocan, D-Wis., and Jamie Raskin, D.-Md.

Additional members of Congress who signed onto the letter include Reps. Judy Chu, D-Calif., David Cicilline, D-R.I., Mark DeSaulnier, D-Calif., Henry “Hank” Johnson, Jr., D-Ga., Barbara Lee, D-Calif., Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., James McGovern, D-Mass., Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., and Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill.

It is time to write to your Representative and stop this nomination.  In the meantime, the growth freethought to promote public policy formed on the basis of reason, science, and moral values in halls of Congress is a refreshing change from the past.