2.27.2012

What Santorum Really Means By Indoctrination

Rick Santorum has said some silly things about higher education over the past week.

Not only did he say that Barack Obama was a 'snob' for wanting all Americans to go to college (funny, since Rick Santorum has a BA, an MBA, and a JD), but he also stated that “62 percent of kids who enter college with some sort of faith commitment leave without it.”

Where to start, right?

Oh yeah, he also called universities "indoctrination mills."

There's a few things going on here. First, we have Santorum's notion that to want kids to be educated and to succeed is snobbery -- all coming from a guy with several degrees. Isn't that kind of like the priest telling his congregation that they're a bunch of sanctimonious pricks for wanting their children to attend church?

Since when have we become a society that values an under-educated society? I have a feeling it has been ever since Barack Obama took office. This is also about the same time that we became a society that looks down on being healthy, boos the golden rule, and cheers for executions.

And where did Rick Santorum get this statistic that 62 percent of kids who enter college with a faith commitment leave without it? The claim is totally bogus.

Via Talking Points Memo:
A slight problem: multiple studies have found that the opposite is true — including the one that Santorum has reportedly been referring to.

A study published 2007 in the journal Social Forces — which PBS reports that Santorum’s claim is based on, although his spokesman didn’t respond to TPM’s request for confirmation — finds that Americans who don’t go to college experience a steeper decline in their religiosity than those who do.

“Contrary to our own and others’ expectations, however, young adults who never enrolled in college are presently the least religious young Americans,” the journal concluded, noting that “64 percent of those currently enrolled in a traditional four-year institution have curbed their attendance habits. Yet, 76 percent of those who never enrolled in college report a decline in religious service attendance.”
Perhaps Santorum got his studies mixed up. A 2006 Harvard study found that 62 percent of college Republicans think “religion is losing its influence on American life.” Well, that's an entirely different thing, Rick. Republicans think a lot of things -- but that doesn't make them true.

The interesting thing about the Harvard study, if this is indeed where Santorum pulled his bogus figure, is that it found the opposite of Santorum's 'loss of faith' claim to be true. It found that “a quarter of students (25%) say they have become more spiritual since entering college, as opposed to only seven percent (7%) who say they have become less spiritual.”

Rick Santorum is scared of secular America. (He's not alone.) He knows that once children leave the nest, where they must think for themselves, they might actually embrace or formulate philosophies and life stances that are not in synch with their parents, or with their parents' faith.

He says he was ridiculed for his beliefs in college (quite frankly, he should've be ridiculed for some of them, such as his denial of evolution):

“I’ve gone through it,” Mr. Santorum said. “I went through it at Penn State. You talk to most kids who go to college who are conservatives, and you are singled out, you are ridiculed.”

“I can tell you personally,” he added, “I went through a process where I was docked for my conservative views.”
If Rick Santorum had his way, children would be home-schooled from kindergarten through graduate school, and would live under the same roof as their parents, and forced to attend church each and every Sunday.  We wouldn't want them to have to learn to defend their ideas about the world, would we?

Now, about those "indoctrination mills." I would ask Rick Santorum this: Is baptizing your child not a form of indoctrination? Is sending your child to vacation bible school not a form of indoctrination? If we are going to be honest with ourselves, we need to agree that there are many forms of indoctrination, and, sure, college might classify as indoctrination in some regards.

However, when we look at what indoctrination actually means, we find that indoctrination "is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned." We also see that "instruction in the scientific method, in particular, cannot properly be called indoctrination, in the sense that the fundamental principles of science call for critical self-evaluation and skeptical scrutiny of one's own ideas, a stance outside any doctrine."

What Santorum means by "indoctrination" is "critical thinking" and "skeptical scrutiny" and "critical self-evaluation" -- things that might lead a young person to question things they have been told.

What Santorum means by "indoctrination" is "discovering that the indoctrination received at home might not stand up to the skeptical scrutiny that is encouraged in a higher learning environment."

Santorum's rhetoric reeks of a man who knows his ideas don't stand up under scrutiny. His stance on evolution reveals quite a bit.
I think there are a lot of problems with the theory of evolution, and do believe that it is used to promote to a worldview that is anti-theist, that is atheist.

This is a man whose biggest problem with evolution isn't that he doesn't have enough data to formulate an opinion -- it's that acceptance of evolution might lead to questioning faith.

Rick, we are indoctrinated at every turn in our lives. Before we can even think for ourselves, we are told which sports teams to root for, which religion we believe in, which political party we align with. When we attend church as young children, we are told that, without a doubt, this particular religion will be our salvation.

If the biggest fear of higher education is that our children might stray from these beliefs once they leave the cocoon, then perhaps we should question the very beliefs we fear will be so easily unraveled.

2.24.2012

12 Headlines That Prove We're Living In Bizarro World

If I had a nickel for every time I heard a news story over the past 12 months that seemed like something out of a dystopian political mockumentary, I would have joined the ranks of the 1 percent by now.

While shocking, we become numb to these stories after a while. Like glitter-bombings on the GOP campaign trail, we just brush them off and go on about our business.

But, for just a minute, try to take yourself back in time -- even just a few years -- and try to forget everything you know now. Imagine the shock you'd experience upon reading the following headlines:

Conservative Voters Boo Ron Paul's 'Golden Rule' (Yahoo! News, Jan 19, 2012)

Bill Would Ban Aborted Fetuses in Food (ABC News, Jan 26, 2012)

Okla. Senate Gives 'Personhood' to Embryos (ABC News, Feb 16, 2012)

An American soldier booed at GOP debate (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Sept 23, 2011)

Tea Party Debate Audience Cheered Idea of Letting Uninsured Patients Die (ABC News, Sep 13, 2011)

Santorum backer suggests aspirin as birth control (USA Today, Feb 16, 2012)

GOP Debate Audience Boos Contraception (Dallas Morning News, Feb 22, 2012)

Mitt Romney Declares “Corporations Are People” (Time, Aug 11, 2011)

Santorum in '08: "Satan is attacking" America (CBS News, Feb 21, 2012)

Megadeth rocker endorses Rick Santorum for president (Patriot News, Feb 16, 2012)

Dick Cheney lobbied for Maryland gay marriage measure (NY Daily News, Feb. 18, 2012)

John Edwards sex tape to be destroyed (News & Observer, Feb 24)



We are truly living in strange times.

2.23.2012

Ken Ham: The Battle Over Genesis, Literal Adam & Eve, Really Heating Up

Ken Ham claims there's a war on Adam & Eve. As the founder of Answers In Genesis and the man behind the Creation Museum, you kind of expect him to say that. His livelihood, after all, depends on it.

Ken Ham: founder, house of cards
Ham spoke to the Christian Post:
"One of the things that we see happening in the Christian culture is that the battle over Genesis – the literal Adam and Eve, the literal fall – is really heating up," said Ham, who leads what is considered the largest biblical apologetics ministry in the United States. "Not just the battle over the age of the earth, between creationists and evolutionists, but now it's gone onto a battle over literal Adam and Eve, their literal fall."

The opponents are "getting much more involved, and really challenging the Church to take a stand on God's way to Genesis," which he stressed as "the foundation for the rest of the Bible."

"That history is the foundation for every doctrine."

If there is no literal Adam and Eve, then why are men sinners, Ham asks. Where did sin come from? Why did Jesus die? "Once we reject Adam and Eve, the rest of the scriptures fall like dominoes," he added.

They sure do, Ken.

Well, they do if they read the Bible as a scientific and historical document, something that most people do not do. (Three in 10 Americans take the Bible literally -- still an unfortunate number of people.)

Ham believes that too many churches are teaching that Bible stories are just that -- stories.

When I teach children I tell them: 'The Bible is a very special book. It's the history book of the universe,'" he explained. "This is history, it's not just stories." Ham also sees the churches approach to teaching the Bible as stories as the reason for young people leaving church. They are being taught that church is not the "real stuff."

he outspoken apologist is a controversial figure, even within the Christian community. He has attracted criticism from other apologists for what many view as more extreme views. For example, Ham believes that the universe is relatively new and that it was created about 6,000 years ago. He also believes that dinosaurs co-existed with modern humans, which is illustrated at AiG's Creation Museum in Petersburg, Ky.

Ham is also convinced that the animals carried on Noah's ark produced the biological diversity observed on Earth. To spread that idea he has embarked on a grand project of building a life-size ark in Williamstown, Ky., to serve a similar purpose as the museum – attracting visitors from across the nation and the world.
Ham's concern is certainly good news for rational people everywhere, for it shows us evolution in action. One day, if we want to hear about a literal Adam and Eve and a literal Noah's Ark, we won't be able to hear about it in a church. We'll have to visit a theme park or a tacky tourist trap instead.


2.22.2012

GOP Reproductive Ideology: Ridicule Is The Only Weapon

Between trans-vaginal ultrasound legislation and personhood initiatives, it is clear that the GOP is completely off the rails. One might think the train has stopped in the 18th century.

Thomas Jefferson once said, "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." It's nice to see that the spirit of Jefferson lives on in halls of legislation (even though many conservatives would like to forget about him).

Take Yasmin Neal of the Georgia House of Representatives. In response to the insane attacks on women's reproductive rights, she authored a bill that would ban vasectomies.

"Thousands of children are deprived of birth in this state every year because of the lack of state regulation over vasectomies," wrote Neal in a statement. "It is patently unfair that men can avoid unwanted fatherhood by presuming that their judgment over such maters is more valid than the judgment of the General Assembly, while women's ability to decide is constantly up for debate throughout the United States."

Beautiful.

Georgia House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams added, "What is more deplorable is the hypocrisy of HB 954's author. If we follow his logic, we believe it is the obligation of the General Assembly to assert an equally invasive state interest in the reproductive habits of men and substitute the will of the government over the will of men."

This came on the heels of another bit of legislation-as-ridicule, this time out of Oklahoma.

State Sen. Constance Johnson proposed an amendment to Oklahomas' personhood bill. The amendment was referred to as the "Every Sperm Is Sacred" Bill, after the brilliant Monty Python song from 'Monty Python's Meaning of Life.'

The amendment states, "[A]ny action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman’s vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child."

It's a slippery slope.




2.20.2012

Rick Santorum Actually Believes The Entire Cosmos Was Created For Homo Sapiens

Rick Santorum, like many humans, has a problem with perspective.

On "Face the Nation," Santorum attempted to clarify his accusations that Obama's theology is "phony":
"I accept the fact that the president is a Christian," Santorum said on CBS' "Face the Nation." "But when you have a world view that elevates the earth above man and says we can't take those resources because its going to harm the Earth, it's just all an attempt to centralize power and give more power to the government."

Santorum said that while Obama believes "man is here to serve the Earth," he believes "Earth is not the objective. Man is the objective."
Silly Rick Santorum.

Here are a few basic scientific considerations:
  • The earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old.
  • Anatomically modern humans evolved in Africa approximately 200,000 years ago.
  • Scientists estimate that at least 99.9 percent of all species of plants and animals that ever lived are now extinct.
  • Based upon evidence of past extinction rates, University of Chicago paleontologists David M. Raup and J. John Sepkoski (among others) have suggested that the average longevity of vertebrate species seems to be 2-4 million years.
  • In 7.6 billion years, the earth will be swallowed up by the expanding sun.
  • According to the Drake Equation, there are "at least 125 billion galaxies in the observable universe. It is estimated that at least ten percent of all sun-like stars have a system of planets, i.e. there are 6.25×1018 stars with planets orbiting them in the observable universe. Even if we assume that only one out of a billion of these stars have planets supporting life, there would be some 6.25×109 (billion) life-supporting planetary systems in the observable universe.
You do the math, Rick.

To think for a minute that man is the objective, you exhibit an embarrassing (and dangerous) level of ignorance about the vastness of time and space.

Someone who is capable of believing that homo sapiens are "the objective" is either deluded by their faith, or incredibly dense (and very likely both).



2.17.2012

Fischer: Muslim Immigrants Must Convert To Christianity

A day hardly goes by when Bryan Fischer doesn't say something insane.
Bryan Fischer, asshole

Now, we know that Bryan Fischer is an Islamaphobe. He's said Muslims have no first amendment rights. He thinks they should be banned from the military. He's urged the US to ban the construction of mosques. He's stated that they are dangerous, unintelligent and mentally ill due to inbreeding. He's called Muslim Americans a toxic cancer to society. It goes on and on.

Yesterday, Fischer continued his ignorant, anti-Muslim tirade, calling (once again) for the conversion of all Muslim immigrants to Christianity.

On his hateful little show, "Focal Point," Fischer stated that all Muslim immigrants have "got to embrace your God, they've got to embrace your faith," claiming once again that "America is a Christian nation."

One of my favorite of Fischer's claims from this particular tirade was, "Muslims worship an entirely different God." You know, that other God who revealed himself to Abraham.

Watch:



2.16.2012

Redefining History: The Myth Of Marriage As Religious Union Between Man & Woman

Khnumhotep and Niankhkhnum (Egypt)
One of the most common arguments against marriage equality is the claim, "Marriage has always been between a man and a woman."

We also hear time and again about the "sanctity of marriage," and that marriage was designed by God, and is therefore a religious institution.

These notions are simply not true. Anyone with a basic knowledge of human history would know these claims don't float.

Let's have a quick look at some examples from history which shed some light on how marriage has been defined, and re-defined, over time:

Pre-500 BCE

• Abraham (founding forefather of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) had his wife Sarah sleep with both the Egyptian Pharaoh and the Semitic King Abimelech for political positioning and increased riches. Unable to provide Abraham with an heir, Sarah encouraged Abraham to marry her Egyptian slave as his second wife (polygamy), which resulted in the son Ishmael.

• A wife was considered her husband’s property. Marriage was used to strengthen a family’s financial or political position.


5th Century BCE thru 1st Century BCE

• In Athens, “Marriage was respected as an institution that provided progeny and good housekeeping; it was not expected to fulfill one’s longing for a soul mate.” The ideal union was considered to be between an adult man and an adolescent boy.

• Marriage was a contract made between the bride’s father (or brother) and the groom.

• Toward the end of this period, “Roman marriage laws began to require the consent of the bride and groom.” The requirement for mutual consent between the bride and groom began spreading throughout the Western world and helped to change a wife’s position from a piece of property, like cattle, that could be given by the father to her husband.


1st Century CE thru 14th Century CE

• The early Christian church was hostile to marriage, believing that marriage and family were distractions from the path to salvation. To remain single and celibate was the ideal.

• Nero married two men, Sporus in 54 CE, and Doryphorus in 68 CE.

• Same sex weddings took place in increasing numbers over a period of time, but were outlawed in 342 CE.

• Basil I, founder of the Macedonian dynasty, entered into three same-sex unions, first with Nicholas, a monk of the church of St. Diomede; then to John, son of a wealthy widow in Achaia, Greece; and then later to the Emperor Michael. After Basil entered a formal union with Nicholas it was reported that “they rejoiced in each other.”

• “Canon law made two changes that were to have long-term effects. First, the church pressured individuals to marry in the presence not only of witnesses, but also of a priest, and to perform this ceremony ‘at church.’ Second, it downplayed the need for parental consent, and foregrounded the mutual will of the intended spouses as the major criterion in the making of a valid marriage. This revolutionary doctrine would endure and flourish over the centuries.”

• Love preceding marriage began to take hold in Europe, when previously affectionate feelings or familial devotion was expected to develop after marriage.


15th Century CE thru 18th Century CE

• Although mutual consent and love preceding marriage had taken hold, marriage retained elements of its former status as a property arrangement. Once a woman was married, her husband became her legal guardian. Her husband legally owned all the property she brought to the marriage.

• Governments and Churches in greater Europe successfully enforced a rule requiring church ceremony to validate a marriage beginning in the 16th century. This requirement came to England a bit later in, in 1735.


19th Century CE

• 1801 Murray Hall, a prominent Tammany Hall politician in New York, was posthumously discovered to have been a woman. Hall dressed in men’s clothing, lived as a man, and was married twice, both times to women. Hall also voted in elections, which was illegal for women at the time.

• The Oneida Colony in upstate New York, founded by John Noyes in 1848, cultivated a form of group marriage called "complex marriage" in which theoretically every woman was married to every man. The community also practiced "scientific breeding" in which potential parents were matched by committee for physical and mental health.

• If a woman worked outside the home, everything she made belonged to her husband. Her children also belonged to her husband. If she divorced him, he kept all of her earnings and their children, even if he was a drunkard who beat her.

• Biawacheeitchish, also known as Pine Leaf and Woman Chief, became a renowned war and camp leader among the Crow Indians. She dressed as a man when she went to war and had a number of wives.

• Henry James’ novel The Bostonians contained themes of feminism and led to the coining of the term “Boston Marriage” to describe romantic friendships between women, which often included holding hands, cuddling, sharing a bed, and making open expressions of love for each other.


20th Century CE

• Sephardic Jews in the Middle East maintained the right to polygamy until an all-inclusive ban was pronounced in the mid-twentieth century, after the formation of the State of Israel.

• 1967 In Loving v. Virginia the United States Supreme Court declared Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute unconstitutional, thereby ending all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States. The court’s decision was based on the due process and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.

• In 1969 in California, Troy Perry presides over the "holy union" of two women, Neva Heckman and Judith Belew — the first public same-sex marriage ceremony in American history.

• 1989, Denmark – The first government-recognized same-sex union in modern history takes place.


Dawn of the 21st Century CE (2000s CE thru the present)

• 2000, Vermont – Vermont became the first state in the U.S. to grant civil unions to same sex couples. Civil unions are intended to grant all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage to same-sex couples, although they are not recognized by the federal government. The legislation that created civil unions came about as a result of a state Supreme Court decision, in which the court ruled that denying marriage rights to same sex couples was unconstitutional discrimination.

• 2001, The Netherlands – Same-sex marriage becomes legal for the first time in modern history.

• 2003, Belgium – This country became the second to legalize same-sex marriage.

• 2003, Massachusetts – The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that same-sex couples should have equal rights to marry under the state constitution. Their decision is based on the grounds of due process and equal protection).

• 2005, Navajo Nation – Joe Shirley Jr., Navajo President, vetoed a bill by the tribal legislature that banned same-sex marriage on the reservation.

• 2005, Connecticut – The Connecticut state legislature became the first in the U.S. to pass civil unions legislation without pressure from the courts.

• 2005, Spain – Same-sex marriage became legal.

• 2005, Canada – Our neighbor to the north becomes the fourth country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage..

• 2006, Arizona – The state’s voters become the first to reject a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

• 2006, New Jersey – Under circumstances similar to those in Vermont in 2000, the New Jersey state legislature enacted civil unions in response to a state Supreme Court order that same-sex couples be granted the same rights as married couples.

• 2006, South Africa – Same sex marriage becomes legal.

• May 15, 2008 , Sacramento – California Supreme Court issued a decision striking down the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. Noting that the state’s domestic partnership law falls short of full equality, the ruling also holds that any discrimination based on sexual orientation must pass “strict scrutiny,” the same standard that applies to race and gender (In re Marriage Cases). Chief Justice Ronald M. George, an appointee of Gov. Pete Wilson (Dolan), writing for the majority stated that “An individual’s sexual orientation – like a person’s race or gender – does not constitute a legal basis on which to deny or withhold legal rights” (In re Marriage Cases).

• May, 2008, New York – Following an opinion by legal counsel, Gov. David Paterson directed all state agencies to begin recognizing same-sex marriages that are performed in other jurisdictions, including Massachusetts, California, and Canada.

The source of the above information, Labmda Archives San Diego, has not updated their timeline in a while, but you get the idea (I have also edited out numerous entries for the purpose of this post). It is important to note that marriage laws in the US, and elsewhere, continue to be challenged, and altered. Right now we are in the middle of several high profile same-sex marriage battles, including California, New Jersey, Washington State, North Carolina and elsewhere.

The point is this: Marriage has not always been a union between a man and a woman. Furthermore, marriage has not always been a union designed, or endorsed, by God or the church.

Here's the big one, folks: Marriage predates monotheism. Fact. In other words, marriage predates the God of Abraham -- the same God who supposedly designed marriage.

Marriage has been evolving over the course of human history, and it will continue to evolve until humans no longer walk the earth. Marriage has been re-defined over and over, and will continue to be re-defined.

To characterize marriage as "the union between a man and a woman as designed by God," is, quite simply, to freeze the definition of marriage at the point in human history that suits your idea of what marriage should be -- with total disregard for how marriage came about, how it evolved, and how it will inevitably continue to evolve.