October, 1985

CA efcoul

$2.95

A Journal of Atheist News and Thought

is:

g.ustworthy.
A Scout tells the truth. He keeps his promises. Honesty is part of his
code of conduct. People can depend on him.
.
ci?oyal. A Scout is true to his family, Scout leaders, friends, school and natir "n~
9telpful. A Scout is concerned about other
others without payor reward.

eORle.He

9;.iendly. A Scout is a fClienoIJ t). a

understand othe . B~ respecl1&tl, se lidi' eas and custom ot

"

gs

11 ~

e seeks to
IS own.

<!((ourteo '.
SCOI!!' polife to everyone tega<;;'es of a e r
good an e make it easier f T ) ea b 10 get along to:get'ller.
I/IJfIIIIIi'

mind. A Scout u M:ersliap8sdie i~rengt

in being gentle. He treats others as he
wants to be trea ed. e, oes not hurt or kill harmless things without reason.
c9hedient. A Stout follows the rules of his family, school, and troop. He obeys the
laws of his community and country. If he thinks that these rules and laws are unfair,
he tries to have them changed in an orderly manner rather than disobey them.
@heerful. A Scout looks for the bright side of things. He cheerfully does tasks that
come his way. He tries to make others happy.
ghrifty. A Scout workstopay his way and to help others. He saves for unforeseen
needs. He protects and conserves natural resources. He carefully uses time and
property.
cfZ3rave.A Scout can face danger even ifhe is afraid. He has the courage to stand for
what he thinks is right even if others laugh at or threaten him.
@Jean. A Scout keeps his body and mind fit and clean. He goes around with those
who believe in living by these same ideals. He helps keep his home and community
clean.
cfReverent. A Scout is reverent toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He
respects the beliefs of others. "Ice~~Elsl5

*************************************************************************************************

AMERICAN ATHEISTS
is a non-profit, non-political, educational organization, dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of state
and church. We accept the explanation of Thomas Jefferson that the "First Amendment" to the Constitution of the
United States was meant to create a "wall of separation" between state and church.
American Atheists are organized to stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry concerning religious
beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals and practices;
to collect and disseminate information, data and literature on all religions and promote a more thorough
understanding of them, their origins and histories;
to advocate, labor for, and promote in all lawful ways, the complete and absolute separation of state and church;
to advocate, labor for, and promote in all lawful ways, the establishment and maintenance of a thoroughly
secular system of education available to all;
to encourage the development and public acceptance of a human ethical system, stressing the mutual sympathy,
understanding and interdependence of all people and the corresponding responsibility of each individual in relation
to society;
to develop and propagate a social philosophy in which man is the central figure who alone must be the source of
strength, progress and ideals for the well-being and happiness of humanity;
to promote the study of the arts and sciences and of all problems affecting the maintenance, perpetuation and
enrichment of human (and other) life;
to engage in such social, educational, legal and cultural activity as will be useful and beneficial to members of
American Atheists and to society as a whole.
Atheism may be defined as the mental attitude which unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at
establishing a lifestyle and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all
arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.
Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own
inherent, immutable and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that man
-finding his resources within himself - can and must create his own destiny. Materialism restores to man his
dignity and his intellectual integrity. It teaches that we must prize our lifeon earth and strive always to improve it. It
holds that man is capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism's "faith" is in man and
man's ability to transform the world culture by his own efforts. This is a commitment which is in very essence life
asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation and impossible without noble ideas that
inspire man to bold creative works. Materialism holds that humankind's potential for good and for an outreach to
more fulfillingcultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited.
*************************************************************************************************
American Atheist Membersip Categories
Life
Sustaining
Couple/Family
Individual
Senior Citizen */Unemployed
Student*

$500
$100/year
$50/year
$40/year
$20/year
$12/year

*Photocopy of ID required
All membership categories receive our monthly "Insider's Ne-wsletter," membership card(s), a subscription to
American Atheist magazine for the duration of the membership period, plus additional organizational mailings,
i.e.,new products for sale, convention and meeting announcements, etc.

American Atheists - P.O. Box 2117 - Austin, TX 78768-2117

October,

Vol. 27, No. 10

1985

American Atheist
A'Journal

Editorial: On Seizing
Ask A.A.

Power

of Atheist News and Thought

Jon G. Murray

News and Comments

God's Little Bastions: The Boy Scouts
The Secretary
of (Private) Education
Meese's
Original Intention
Marti and The Mass
Dial-An-Atheist
Massachusetts
Atheists - Brian Lynch
Abner Kneeland
and God: The Roots of a Blaspheme-In
The Atheist Next Door - David J. Mann
The Prospect
of Physical Immortality,
Part II: Stalling The Reaper
Poetry
Allah in The Dock - Margaret
Bhatty
Historical
Notes
An Inquiry About God's Sons
Book Reviews
Me Too - John Sikos
Letters to the Editor
Crosswords
Reader Service

Frank

11
14
19
19
20
23
25
27
30
31
33
34
36
37
38
39

R. Zindler

40

On The Cover: Individuality is receding in America at a rapidly increasing rate. This can be seen in the group-like manner in which people dress, the
faddish popularity of certain styles of music, the election of stereotyped political personalities, the contagiously-acquired usage of drugs - but most of all,
in the manner in which mind-sets are transferred from generation to generation. The latter of these drifts from individualism is perhaps the most subtle the least noticed. It stems from the usual conformities, acquired in childhood, in any society; the authoritarianism of parenthood; the requirements of strict
nationalism (fascism). But most of all it stems from the synthesized insanities of religion - reverence! No better example exists than that of the Boy Scouts
of America. As you read this month's issue of American Atheist you may become more aware of the psychologically damaging effect that practiced
conformity has on the people of a nation - why few people object to the programmed dissolution of individuality that is plaguing our nation. The
destruction of singularity is manipulated through the props and fetishes and fantasies of a god-system from which only the strongest of individuals can ever
hope to escape. Individuality is the only true enemy of religion and fascism. It could never be tolerated in a "Christian Nation."
-G. Tholen
Editor/R. Murray-O'Hair,Editor Emeritus/MadalynO'Hair,Managing Editor/Jon
G. Murray,Assistant Editor/Gerald Tholen,Copy Editor/Sandra M.P. McGann,
Poetry/Angeline Bennet, Gerald Tholen, Production Staff/Christina Ditter, Bill
Kight, Claudia Kweder, Laura L. Morgenstern, Jes Simmons, Non-Resident
Staff/Margaret Bhatty,MerrillHolste, LowellNewby,Fred Woodworth,Frank R.
Zindler.
The American Atheist magazine
is indexedin
Monthly Periodical Index
ISSN:0332-4310
copyright1985 by Societyof Separationists,Inc.

The American Atheist magazineispublishedmonthlyby the AmericanAtheistPress

(anaffiliateofAmericanAtheists),2210 HancockDr.,Austin,TX 78768-2596, and the
Society of Separationists, a non-profit, non-political,educational organization
dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of state and church. (Allright~
reserved.Reproductioninwholeor in part withoutwrittenpermissionisprohibited.) ,
Mailingaddress: P.O. Box 2117, Austin,TX 78768-2117. Subscriptionis providedas
an incidentof membershipin the organizationof AmericanAtheists. Subscriptions'
alone are availableat $25.00 for one year terms only.(Frequency:monthly.Library
and institutional discount: 50%.) Manuscripts submitted must be typed, doublespaced, and accompanied by a stamped, self-addressed envelope. A copy of
AmericanAtheistsMagazineWritersGuidelinesis availableon request. The editors
assume no responsibilityfor unsolicitedmanuscripts.

ARE YOU MOVING?

Please notify us six weeks in advance to ensure uninterrupted
label from a recent magazine in the bottom space provided.

NEW ADDRESS:

delivery. Send us both your old and new addresses.

OLD ADDRESS:

(please print)

Name

Name

Address

Address

City

(Please print)

City
Zip

State
Mail to -

Austin, Texas

If possible, attach old

American

State
Atheists,

Zip

P.O. Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117

October,

1985

Page 1

EDITORIAL / Jon G. Murray

ON SEIZING POWER
~'--------------------------------------------n the course of the publication of this
Ijournal
it has reported to the Atheist

community many facts concerning various

religious communities and how they bring
their "faith" to focus in the area of public
policy so as to pressure everyone into
"believing." In focusing on the particulars of
various persons or sects, I think that we all
may have made the mistake of missing the
larger view. Conservative religiosity and the
stilted morality that it carries with it is
becoming the bedrock of our political, judicial, and educational systems.
The vast majority of "liberal" groups on
any issue whether that be state/church separation, ecology, the economy, civil rights,
consumer protection, free speech, free
press, or freedom of information tend to
focus on particular facts or local situations.
They seldom, if ever, as the old cliche goes,
"see the forest for the trees." The leadership
and rank and file members seem each to be
fixated on the particular axe that they have
to grind. The opinions of each group are so
diverse beyond the single issue that holds
the group loosely together, that cooperation
with any other generally "liberal" concern is
virtually impossible. I have had some years
of personal experience in this area as a
cause leader. Virtually no other "liberal"
cause group willassociate itself with American Atheists for fear that the stigma of our
"Atheism" and the popular implied communism that the word Atheism connotes will
sully its supposedly snow-white reputation.
Black rights groups resent the presence of
concerned white liberals at their meetings
because they are "whitey." Women's rights
group members feel uneasy with supportive
men who attend meetings. Peace groups
begin and end their marches in a major city
at a church or group prayer and are offended at Atheists or anarchists who join in
the parade. Well-educated, liberal males will
not sit in the same meeting room with homosexual males who are interested in the same
.issue and willingto lend their free time to a
group effort for said issue. On and on it goes
until we all wise up.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch (Reagan's
ranch in California), the conservatives are
forming one coalition and think-tank after
another to combat their unorganized liberal
foe. The pro-god, pro-gun, pro-life, procensorship, pro-interventionism, pro-police

Page 2

I have seen the inability to communicate

state crowd are all on good terms among the
leadership, where it counts, and they .bring one plan of action after another to an
scratch one another's backs at every turn in end. Consider the following. If you put one
the road. They share information, work to- dozen Atheists into a room together, locked
gether, share funds, share mailing lists, and the door, and asked them to come out of the
get results. Meanwhile, the liberals fight room at the end of the day with a working
themselves as hard as they fight "the
definition of what an Atheist is, the ensuing
enemy." Not very logical, is it? But then who debate would erupt into name-calling and
ever said that logic was part of the liberal eventual fisticuffs within hours and the meetcreed. Bruce Fein, one of the founders of a ing would need to be adjourned. Now put a
plethora of new right wing think-tank
group of one dozen right -wing religionists in
a room and ask them to come up with a
groups, said it best as quoted in The
Washington Post recently: "The strategy is definition of what a "conservative" is, and
they would emerge with a list of what a good
to win the war, not a particular battle." "The
left is tactically oriented," he added. That is conservative should be on dozens of issues
exactly the point. The right has never striven
and all be in agreement. That is the essential
to be different for the sake of being different problem we face.
alone. They have always had an ulterior
This is why liberal causes have always
been championed by inspired indiuiduals
motive, a long range plan. They need not
wear their positions on their backs or have it who have set out on their own to "do somereflected in their office address, as seems to thing." These individuals have begun with a
be the case with their liberal foes. The liberal naivete that has caused them to wind up in
has to drive a Volkswagen, wear an old one sand trap after another along the way as
tweed jacket or jeans, and smoke a pipe they pursued the learn-as-you-go route. The
while living in the Village in order to be lib- conservative community knows the value,
eral. A clean office with modern technology,
on the other hand, of seeking expert advice
presentable attire, the ability to stay out of often and of following established and
jail, and other marks of establishment con- proven business and professional procetamination that somehow elude the liberal dures. I emphasize expert advice in distinction to arm-chair philosopher advice which
are marks of success, not surrender.
The leadership of American Atheists has often substitutes erudition for working
preached about the need for some liberal knowledge. The latter type of advice is well
coalitions for years now. It only makes good known to the liberal group.
Let us take a look at what we are up
common sense. Just one example will sufagainst in just the years of the Reagan
fice. What is the one failing that is common
to every struggling cause organization in this incumbency via the example of just four
groups. The American Enterprise Institute is
country, on every issue base? Media access
is the answer. Every cause group in the the oldest, founded in the 1940s. Its focus
country needs to present its message to the has been on conservative legal issues such
general public in a massive way that pam- as school prayer, government financing of
parochial schools, pornography (free press),
phleteering will never provide. Conservatives are able to get network airtime, satellite communism (free thought), and many othtransmissions and the like while we sit and ers. The kingpin of the Enterprise Institute is
pump out newsletters to relative handfuls of Bruce Fein, a legal analyst who used to work
for the Justice Department under former
people. Why cannot all the liberal groups
unite just around the objective of getting Attorney General William French Smith. A
airtime equal to the conservatives from liberal group spokesperson could not even
major media sources? The coalition re- get past the security check to get a Justice
quired would only need to be a loose align- Department job.
The Washington
Legal Foundation
ment to achieve that specific objective. It
was founded in 1976 by Daniel J. Popeo.
need not impinge on the individual autonomy of any single group. Yet, such an idea Popeo is a former trial lawyer for the
of the Interior, not some
seems to be elusive to the liberal cause lead- Department
ership as they focus on distributing a greasy-suited liberal public defender. He
allegedly started the group with a small perhundred more mimeographed pamphlets.

October, 1985

American Atheist

sonal bank loan, a one-room office, and a

hundred dollars worth of rented furniture,
with his wife as a typist. In less than ten
years, the Legal Foundation now operates
out of a fashionable Washington, D.C.,
townhouse with an annual budget of $2 million, a staff of fifteen, and 200,000 duespaying members. Forty percent of its funding
comes from foundations and corporations
and individuals such as Richard Mellon
Scaife (note the middle name) and Joseph
Coors. American Atheists has been trying to
get corporate or foundation grants now for
some twenty years and has been turned
down as often as a whore's bed.
The Free Congress Foundation is only
eight years old. Its founder is well-known
New Right activist Paul M. Weyrich. The
foundation's focus is to provide the "intellectual power" for conservative members of
Congress to back up their right-wing legislative proposals. If a member of Congress
came to American Atheists for advice, it
would take us months to sort through the
carton boxes of clippings to get an answer,
and by that time the important vote would
be long since over and done. Joseph Coors
provides the major portion of the foundation's $1.9 millionannual budget. No millionaire will pour funds into a liberal cause,
chiefly because they all look like they are
about ready to fold from month to month.
What a prospectus that is to encourage
investment!
The Center For Judicial Studies operates
out of Cumberland, Virginia, and is but two
years old. Its focus is to promote the constitutional theory of "strict constructionism." It
publishes a monthly journal called Benchmark, which is distributed to the entire Federal judiciary, all the state supreme courts,
the U.S. Congress, all the major law schools
in the country, and naturally the major
media sources as well. The American Atheist is distributed mainly to individuals who
are not in any positions of power whatsoever
and who must be stroked constantly to get
them to admit their Atheism even to their
own bathroom mirror.
Every liberal cause organization must
prostitute its leadership's talent and what
resources it can muster to the task of servicing the tunnel-vision concerns of its membership in return for operating funds. The
funds, in turn, are never enough to do more
than to pay for the mechanical means of
servicing the membership. It is a circle that
leads nowhere. The group never has enough
left over to accomplish its purpose, because
it all goes back into the cost of asking for
more money just to survive.
Meanwhile, the top legal scholar for the
Heritage Foundation joins the White House
staff. A Harvard Law School professor who
provided expertise for several conservative
groups is now Acting Solicitor General. A
law professor working for the Center For

Austin, Texas

Judicial Studies used to be an aide to Jesse

Helms and was the former chief counsel to
the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has
placed a member of his advisory board on
the staff of Attorney General Meese, who in
turn has put him in line for a key Justice
Department assignment. A letter-writing
campaign organized by a network of Federal
employees bombards individuals and editors with letters about the greatness of
America as a "Christian nation." They have
access to correspondence from the files of
various government departments. The Secretary of Education, whose glorious speech
appears in this issue, has formally offered to
help school districts delay the implementation of a recent Supreme Court decision
banning public aid to parochial schools.
That boils down to a government official
supporting lawless activity on the part of
government school systems. The Undersecretary of Education can come out in public
and blame the breakdown of our moral
values, the rise of drug abuse, teenage
alcoholism, and the rising suicide rate on the
absence of prayer in the schools and go
totally unchallenged.
The point that needs to be made here is
that in order to be effective, any cause
movement has to seek to establish itself
within the prevailing system. It cannot labor
totally outside of the system and make gains.
The larger goal must be to "win the war,"
which means making the system as a whole
partial to your particular view. There is no
need to convince masses of individuals in the
streets. They don't count. They have never
counted. They willgo along with those persons who control the system under which
they live. Ideas must become part of the
basic fabric of a culture or educational or
political system in order to be effective.
Being in favor of free speech and free
thought and equal rights must come as
second nature to each new generation
because they have been brought up that
way. The Right wins all the time because it
controls the mechanics of education, of
information distribution, and of law making.
Each of those areas have increasingly conservative undercurrents. Each generation

II

will become more "Reagan-like" as time

goes on. We must in turn think in terms of
the saturation of our culture with a different
set of values so that everywhere one turns
one is subtly reinforced with ideas such as
liberty and justice and self-worth and, yes,
the importance of free thought.
In short, the liberal left needs to think in
terms of changing places with the conservative right. A given liberal would say "Are you
saying that I should do the same kind of
dastardly things that the fascists are doing?"
The answer is yes. The modus operandi of
the right is effective, so merely apply those
techniques to the furtherance of a different
set of values. Doing so does not make you a
rightist, it makes you "in command." That is
what it is all about. Ifthe vast majority willgo
along with either position, and history has
proven that they will,then they might as well
go along with the Atheist position as the
religionist position. They can get accustomed to one just as well as to the other.
I keep getting back to analogies with
respect to the Black anti-racism movement
in this country. They finally figured out that
what they had to do was to change places
with their white oppressors. They needed to
be the sheriff, the judge, the mayor, the governor, the politician. They set out to fillthose
positions and they have done so step by
step. It is now to the point in most communities that one dare not discriminate against a
Black. Whites are actually afraid to discriminate, when they used to enjoy it. We need to
be in the position where religionists are
afraid to discriminate against Atheists instead of enjoying it.
Atheists must become the establishment
instead of resenting it. The sooner we get
that goal firmly fixed in our minds, the
better. ~
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
A second generation Atheist,
Mr. Murray has been the Director of
the American Atheist Center for nine
years and is also the Managing Editor
of the American Atheist.
He advocates "Aggressive Atheism."

GOD LOVES US FISHES SO MUCH THAT HE FLOODED

THE REST OF 'EM OUT."
October, 1985

Page 3

ASK A.A.

In Letters to the Editor, readers give

their opinions, ideas, and information.
But in "Ask A.A." American Atheists
answers questions regarding its policies, positions, and customs, as well as
queries of factual and historical situations.

I recently heard you on a radio talk show

saying that Adolph Hitler was a practicing
Roman Catholic. You just hate my church
and you take jabs at it without any proof at
all.
Anne Taylor
Lynchburg, Virginia
A letter in the Reader, Vol. 14, No. 49,
Chicago, Illinois, on September 6, 1985,
gives a contemporary answer to this query.
Here is the entire quote:
Hitler's Religion
To the editors:
In his eagerness to pass Adolf Hitler
along to Atheists, the Reverend
Chumbley (Letters, May 10) overlooks the following:
Hitler regarded himself as a [Roman] Catholic until he died: "I am
now as before a Catholic and will
always remain so," he told Gerhard
Engel, one of his generals, in 1941.
The Roman Catholic Church never
asked for his excommunication.
When Hitler narrowly escaped assassination in Munich in November,
. 1939, he gave the credit to providence. Cardinal Michael Faulhaber
sent a telegram instructing that aTe
Deum be sung in the cathedral of
Munich "to thank Divine Providence
in the name of the archdiocese for the
Fiihrer's fortunate escape. " The Pope
also sent his special personal congratulations.
Hitler was anti-Semitic; inpersecut. ing Jews he repeatedly claimed he
was doing the "Lord's work." From
Mein Kampf: "Therefore, I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of
our Creator. By fighting off the Jews, I
am doing the Lord's Work." At a Nazi
Christmas
celebration
in 1926:
"Christ was the greatest early fighter
in the battle against the world enemy,
the Jews ....
The work that Christ
started but could not finish, I - Adolf
Hitler - will conclude." In a Reichstag speech in 1938, he again echoed
the religious origins of his crusade, "i

Page 4

believe today that I am acting in the

sense of the Almighty Creator. By
warding off the Jews, I am fighting for
the Lord's work."
Biographer John Toland wrote of
Hitler's religion: "Still a member in
good standing of the Church of Rome
despite detestation of its hierarchy,
he carried within him its teaching that
the Jew was the killer of god. The
extermination, therefore, could be
done without a twinge of conscience
since he was merely acting as the
avenging hand of god ... "
Jews were not the only "holy" victims. In Yugoslavia, Hitler installed a
Croatian, Ante Pavelic, as his puppet.
Pavelic, a [Roman] Catholic like
Hitler, began extermination of the
Serbs, who were Greek Orthodox.
The Vatican was not unaware of
the massacres conducted in Yugoslavia in the name of [Roman] Catholicism, but Pope Pius remained quiet
and received Ante Pavelic in private
audience, thereby giving his blessing
to this regime.
There is much more that could be
reported on Hitler's deeds. The
thought that Hitler could see himself,
and be seen by others as "providentially" guided, protected, and inspired
is chilling. Religionists may keep
Hitler's membership for themselves;
Atheists surely don't want credit for
him.
Rita E. Bell
W. Chase

A friend of mine, who is an Atheist, scribbles out the phrase "In God We Trust" on all
the paper money he spends. He is also in the
habit of taking post -paid cards from religious
organizations and sending them back with
messages such as: "Religion is the problem,
not the solution." Since he hates air pollution as much as religion, he sends the postpaid cards from certain magazines back to
them with the message: "Stop Tobacco
Advertisements." I think all this is fine, and I
hope it will make people think about what
they are doing, but I just wonder if there is
any danger in this. Could he be arrested if
the authorities find out about it?

one has the intention of changing its value.

For instance, one cannot add a zero after
the five on a five dollar bill. One can, however, otherwise write any sort of message
one wishes on the bill. Don't worry; hundreds of Atheists write anti-religious messages or protests against the religious
inscription of "In God We Trust" on the
currency they handle every day. None have
faced anything worse than a strange stare
from a cashier. Infact, we would encourage
Atheists to make this sort of quiet, yet constant, rebellion against the Christianization
of our country.
As for the second matter - it is unlikely
that your friend would be taken to court by
any of the companies involved, unless he
bombarded one company in particular. We
would, though, discourage him, and any
other Atheists, from doing this sort of thing.
The companies offer those post-paid cards
and envelopes in good faith for the convenience of their customers, just as the American Atheist Center occasionally provides
post-paid envelopes for the convenience of
its members.
And American Atheists has been at the
receiving end of such tactics as your friend
uses. Once way back when, it provided
post-paid envelopes for all, members, nonmembers, and subscribers. But envelopes
were returned once too often affixed to a
brick or a telephone book or filled with
paper junk. The "return" postage American
Atheists had to pay was staggering.Now itonly
sends such envelopes to members. It is for
this same reason that American Atheists
does not "invoice" as some other organizations do. The number of bilkers (i.e., cheats)
would be overwhelming.
But even with these precautions, The
American Atheist Center suffers from antiAtheists. Each day, dozens of bills are
received at the National Office for magazines and products which have been "ordered" in the names of our staff members by
persons unknown and hostile.
Also, please remember that when one
writes a protest on one of those cards, the
only person who sees it is the mail clerk who
throws it out. In the long run, it is more
effective to get out pen and paper and write
a letter to the company or individual(s)
against whom one wishes to complain.
Remember the religious people can play
the same game with The American Atheist
Center - only they can win by the sheer
force of numbers.

Joe Wanner
Pennsylvania
It is only unlawful to write on currency if

October, 1985

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

GOD'S LITILEBASTIONS: THE BOY SCOUTS

Since the ejection of a young West Virginia youth from the Boy Scouts because of his
reluctance to recognize a "Supreme Being,"
the American Atheist Center has been contacted by many Atheists who were Boy
Scouts in their youth or who presently have
children in either the Boy Scouts or the Girl
Scouts. One and all refuse to believe that
there is a requirement for the belief in or
acceptance of a god idea in any Boy Scout or
Girl Scout regulations.
The American Atheist Center carefully
documented that such was the case twentyfive years ago, ten years ago, and presently
with this issue of the American Atheist
magazine.
The Boy Scouts of America was incorporated by an Act of Congress on December 6,
1915. The Articles of Incorporation are reproduced here for your perusal. Subsequent1y,"Bylaws" were written for the organization. They are in full force and effect and
.have always been so.

I I I I I
-ii-

-..,-

$COU11_C.,

-..,-

U~.

-..,-

J,C:"'U.'U

-..,-

KOIIIIIIC.IIH

CHARTER
Sixty-Fourth Congress of the
United States of America .
at the First Session
Begun and Held at the
City of Washington
On Monday, The Sixth Day
of December
One Thousand Nine Hundred
and Fifteen
AN ACT
To Incorporate the Boy
Scouts of America And
For Other Purposes
SECTION l.

Be it enacted by the Senate and

House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled, That Colin H. Livingstone
and Ernest P. Bicknell, of Washington, District of Columbia; Benjamin L.
Dulaney, of Bristol, Tennessee; Milton A. McRae, of Detroit, Michigan;
David Starr Jordan, of Berkeley, California; F. L. Seely, of Asheville, North
Carolina; A. Stamford White, of Chi-

Austin, Texas

cago, Illinois; Daniel Carter Beard, of

Flushing, New York; George D. Pratt,
of Brooklyn, New York; Charles D.
Hart, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
Franklin C. Hoyt, Jeremiah W. Jenks,
Charles P. Neill, Frank Presbrey,
Edgar M. Robinson, Mortimer L.
Schiff, and James E. West, of New
York, New York; G. Barrett Rich,
Junior, of Buffalo, New York; Robert
Garrett, of Baltimore, Maryland; John
Sherman Hoyt, of Norwalk, Connecticut; Charles C. Jackson, of Boston,
Massachusetts; John H. Nicholson, of
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; William D.
Murray, of Plainfield, New Jersey; and
George D. Porter, of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania, their associates and
successors, are hereby created a
body corporate and politic of the Dis. trict of Columbia, where its domicile
shall be.
SECTION 2.

That the name of this corporation

shall be "Boy Scouts of America," and
by that name it shall.have perpetual
succession, with power to sue and be
sued in courts of law and equity within
the jurisdiction of the United States;
to hold such real and personal estate
as shall be necessary for corporate
purposes, and to receive real and personal property by gift, devise, or
bequest; to adopt a seal, and the same
to alter and destroy at pleasure; to
have offices and conduct its business
and affairs within and without the District of Columbia and in the several
States and Territories of the United
States; to make and adopt bylaws,
rules, and regulations not inconsistent
with the laws of the United States of
America, or any State thereof, and
generally to do all such acts and things
(including the establishment of regulations for the election of associates and
successors) as may be necessary to
carry into effect the provisions of this
Act and promote the purposes of said
corporation. (emphasis added)
SECTION 3.

That the purpose of this corporation shall be to promote, through

October, 1985

organization, and cooperation with

other agencies, the ability of boys to
do things for themselves and others,
to train them in Scoutcraft, and to
teach them patriotism, courage, selfreliance, and kindred virtues, using
the methods which are now in common use by Boy Scouts.
SECTION 4.

That said corporation may acquire,

by way of gift, all the assets of the
existing national organization of Boy
Scouts, a corporation under the laws
of the District of Columbia, and defray
and provide for any debts or liabilities
to the discharge of which said assets
shall be applicable; but said corporation shall have no power to issue certificates of stock or to declare or pay
dividends, its object and purposes
being solely of a benevolent character
and not for pecuniary profit to its
members.
SECTION 5.

That the governing body of the said

Boy Scouts of America shall consist of
an executive board composed of citizens of the United States. The number, qualifications, and terms of office
of members of the executive board
shall be prescribed by the bylaws. The
persons mentioned in the first section
of this Act shall constitute the first
executive board and shall serve until
their successors are elected and have
qualified, Vacancies in the executive
board shall be filled by a majority vote
of the remaining members thereof.
The bylaws may prescribe the number of members of the executive
board necessary to constitute a quorum of the board, which number may
be less than the majority of the whole
number of the board. The executive
board shall have power to make and
to amend the bylaws, and, by twothirds vote of the whole board at a
meeting called for this purpose, may
authorize and cause to be executed
mortgages and liens upon the property of the corporation. The executive
board may, by resolution passed by a
majority of the whole board, designate

Page 5

NEWS AND COMMENTS

three or more of their number to constitute an executive or governing

committee, of which a majority shall
constitute a quorum, which committee, to the extent provided in said
resolution or in the bylaws of the corporation, shall have and exercise the
powers of the executive board in the
management of the business affairs of
the corporation, and may have power
to authorize the seal of the corporation to be affixed to all papers which
may require it. The executive board,
by the affirmative vote of a majority of
the whole board, may appoint any
other standing committees, and such
standing committees shall have and
may exercise such powers as shall be
conferred or authorized by the bylaws. With the consent in writing and
pursuant to an affirmative vote of a
majority of the members of said corporation, the executive board shall
have authority to dispose in any
manner of the whole property of the
corporation.
SECTION 6.

That an annual meeting of the incorporators,

their associates and
successors, shall be held once in
every year after the year of incorpora-

tion, at such time and place as shall be

prescribed in the bylaws, when the
annual reports of the officers and
executive board shall be presented
and members of the executive board
elected for the ensuing year. Special
meetings of the corporation may be
called upon such notice as may be
prescribed in the bylaws. The number
of members which shall constitute a
quorum at any annual or special meeting shall be prescribed in the bylaws.
The members and executive board
shall have power to hold their meetings and keep the seal, books, documents, and papers of the corporation
within or without the District of
Columbia.
SECTION 7.

That said corporation shall have the

sole and exclusive right to have and to
use, in carrying out its purposes, all
emblems and badges, descriptive or
designating marks, and words or
phrases now or heretofore used by
the Boy Scouts of America in carrying
out its program, it being distinctly and
definitely understood, however, that
nothing in this Act shall interfere or
conflict with established or vested
rights.

SECTION 8.

That on or before the first day of

April of each year the said Boy Scouts
of America shall make and transmit
to Congress a report of its proceedings for the year ending December
thirty-first preceding. * (emphasis
added)
SECTION 9.

That Congress shall have the right

to repeal, alter, or amend this Act at
any time.
Approved 15 June 1916
WOODROW WILSON

*As amended August 30, 1964, Pub.

L. 88-504, 78 Stat. 636.

~
scu_, cs

"
~

$Ulll1I~"1/U

The American Atheist is taking the

extraordinary measure of reproducing below the Article of the bylaws concerned with
religion exactly as published in Boy Scouts
of America's own literature. We ask each
Atheist who was a Boy Scout and each Atheist who has a child in the Boy Scouts to read
this article carefully.

ARTICLE IX. POLICIES AND DEFINITIONS

toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of
others."

POLICIES
SECTION 1.

Freedom
Religion
Clause 1. The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can
grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to
God. In the first part of the Scout Oath or Promise the member declares,
"On my honor I willdo my best to do my duty to God and my country and
to obey the Scout Law." The recognition of God as the ruling and leading
power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and
blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship and are wholesome
precepts in the education of the growing members. No matter what the
religious faith of the members may be, this fundamental need of good
citizenship should be kept before them. The Boy Scouts of America,
therefore, recognizes the religious element in the training of the member,
but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious
training. Its policy is that the home and the organization or group with
which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious
life.
.

Clause 3. In no case where a unit is connected with a church or other

distinctively religious organization shall members of other denominations
or faith be required, because of their membership in the unit, to take part
in or observe a religious ceremony distinctly peculiar to that organization
or church.
Leaders
Clause 4. Only persons willing to subscribe to these declarations or
principles shall be entitled to certificates of leadership in carrying out the
Scouting program.
Clause 5. Other major policies are set forth in Article IX of the Rules
and Regulations.

DEFINITIONS

Activities
SECTION 2.

Clause 2. The activities of the members of the Boy Scouts of America

shall be carried on under conditions which show respect to the convictions of others in matters of custom and religion, as required by the
twelfth point of the Scout Law, reading, "Reverent. A Scout is reverent

Page 6

In addition to those contained in these Bylaws, there are others, some

pertaining to the Bylaw material, set forth in Article IX of the Rules and
Regulations.

October, 1985

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

If the Congress of the United States is
bound by its own promulgated principles, it
should vitiate these provisions of the Boy
Scouts as being in derogation of the numerous laws which have been passed by that
Congress all affirming that there may be no
discrimination in our nation based on religion, race, or sex.
And, there is the rub. Atheism is not a
religion. Therefore, it is not protected. When
Madalyn O'Hair took a case to the United
States Supreme Court, * in which she
demanded that the Court speak to the
meaning of a preposition, that Court refused
to do so and left a lower court ruling standing. The request to the court was to clarify if
"freedom of religion" included the idea of
"freedom from religion." The thrust of the
lower court decision had been that it did not.
In the United States citizens may choose
"any of the above" for a religion, but may not
opt out of the choice. The Reagan administration is making this more and more clear to
all.
Just as long as Atheists in the United
States pretend that they do not know about
religious requirements for membership not
alone in the Boy Scouts, in the Girl Scouts,
in the V.F.W., in the American Legion, in
most fraternal organizations, in government
employment, it is just that long that they will
be treated as fifth class citizens.

1I 1
.1,1.

$tDUIII'-IiSi

'!h

,,1;h

-v-

SUluII~'_IISA

.s..:.oo1l.',~$J

The Boy Scouts of America are inextricably intertwined with religious organizations
which promote the Scouts' programs. These
include:
African Methodist Episcopal Church
African Methodist Episcopal Zion
Church
American Baptist Churches in U.S.A.
The American Lutheran Church
Armenian Church of North America
Assembly of God Church
B'nai B'rith
Buddhist Churches of America
Catholic Church, Knights of Columbus
Catholic PTO
Catholic War Veterans
Catholic Youth Organization
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Christian
Methodist
Episcopal
Church

*O'Hair v. Paine #1190 U.S.S.c., Oct. Term

1970.

Austin, Texas

Church of Brethren
Church of Christ, Scientist
Church of God
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints (Mormon)
Church of Nazarene
Congregational Church
Eastern Orthodox Churches
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church
Federation of Islamic Associations in
the U.S.
Jewish War Veterans
Knights of Columbus
Lutheran Church in America
The Lutheran Church, Missouri
Synod
Methodist Episcopal Church
Missionary Baptist Church
Moravian Church in America
National Baptist Convention
of
America
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc.
Public Parochial School (Roman
Catholic)
Religious Society of Friends
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints
The Salvation Army
Southern Baptist Convention
Unitarian Universalist Association
United Brethren Church
United Church of Christ
The United Methodist Church
United Pentecostal Church International
Unity Church
Young Men's Christian Association
The Roman Catholic Church originated
the Religious Emblem Program of the
Scouts. The idea to recognize those who
demonstrate faith, observe creeds, and give
service to god originated in 1939 with the
Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles. A program was developed by the
National Catholic Committee on Scouting
and approved by the Council of Bishops in
Washington, D.C. Then a medal was created called "Ad Altare Dei," a phrase derived
from the Forty-Third Psalm, "With joy I
come to the altar of God."
This Ad Altare Dei program provided a
pattern and guide to other religious bodies
as they then created their own versions in
accord with their concepts of spiritual education. All of the religious denominations'
Scouting programs are characterized by the
same ideas of exclusivity. Each Scout must
have a religious counselor of his own faith,

October, 1985

work toward a religious emblem which signifies his own denomination, receive his emblem in a religious service, and wear the
religious emblem on his uniform centered
above the left pocket flap.
The first religious emblem program in the
Protestant field was prepared and released
in 1943 by the National Lutheran Committee
on Scouting under the title "Pro Deo Et
Patria." In the same year the Jewish Committee on Scouting released its program,
made available in 1944, entitled "Ner
Tamid." And, the God and Country program was developed in 1945 by the Protestant Committee on Scouting.
A typical religious interpretation of The
Scout Law is that issued by the National
Catholic Committee on Scouting and distributed to Roman Catholic Boy Scouts. It
follows:

I I I I I
-v-

-1,1-

$tDUlId.lI$I

-v-

"""11II'-IiS

-y-

stOlIHIiIISl

THE SCOUT LAW

The Scout Law is really a definition of
a Scout. Wearing the uniform does
not make the Scout. In fact, the boy
who keeps the Scout Law, even if he
has no uniform, is the real Scout far
more than the one who wears the uniform but does not keep the Law. This
is the Scout Law you promise to obey
in the Scout Oath:
A Scout is trustworthy: Character
is what a man is. Reputation is what
people think about him. A youth of
character is worthy of trust. No one is
worthy of trust who does not recognize his dignity and the dignity of all
men as children of God.
A Scout is loyal: Because our first
loyalty is to God, a Scout is loyal to all
to whom loyalty is due - his parents,
his church, and his country.
A Scout is helpful: Christ has told us
that the good turns we do for others
he will consider as done to him. Our
motive, or the reason why we are
helpful, is that we see Christ in everybody. If our Lord was willingto die
for everybody, a Scout certainly
should be ready to render help. The
whole Scout program gives us an
opportunity to be helpful.
A Scout is friendly: The basis and
motive of this point of the Law is

Page 7

NEWS AND COMMENTS

Christian charity. We are all children
of the same father, and brothers of
Jesus Christ. Recognizing this, a
Scout should be a friend to all, and a
brother to every other Scout.
A Scout is courteous: A Scout
should respect the image of God in
everyone. The meaning of love as a
Scout should be taken from the words
of Christ himself - "I have come not
to be served, but to serve."
A Scout is kind: This point of the
Law refers mostly to animals. They
exist for our use. They have life and
feeling and God has given them to us
as a trust; as such we must use them
well, never abusing or mistreating
them.
A Scout is obedient: Jesus Christ
gave us an example of perfect obedience throughout his life. This willbe
a difficult point of the Law for a Scout
to keep because it willmean discipline
and giving up his own willat times. He
should obey, not because the command pleases him, but because the
one giving it has the right to do so, is
someone in authority, and is right in
doing so. Disobedience brought death
and sin into the world; obedience
brought our salvation. Real victory
comes from obedience - first to God,
then to all he has placed in authority
as long as they deserve our obedience.
A Scout is cheerful: Joy should be
one of the marks of a child of God. A
Scout will have joy in his heart and
manifest it outwardly by his cheerful
manner.
A Scout is thrifty: Thrift teaches
self-respect, making us unwillingto be
a burden to others. Far from being a
burden, we are able by thrift to help
them. A Scout is deeply concerned
with preserving our natural resources.
A Scout is brave: He can face danger even ifhe is afraid. He has courage
to stand for what he thinks is right
even if others scorn him.
A Scout is clean: He keeps clean in
body and thought; stands for clean
speech, clean sport, clean habits; and
travels with a clean crowd.

Page 8

A Scout is reverent: He is reverent

toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties and respects the convictions of others in matters of custom
and religion.

and subscribe to the Scout Oath or

Promise and Law, as follows:
The Scout Oath or Promise

I I I I I
_'oJ_

,'."

-v-

-v-

$C.OIJ11~,.ijSl

!.UIuUh.~SA

-v-

-v-

$COIIIIR' ~Sl

The Rules & Regulations of the Boy

Scouts issued to every scout also includes
the following:

I I I I I
-y-

ltOUun.u5I

-v-

-y-

W)ull_'USl

-y-

i.I:~U.'\lS

The Scout Law

-y-

$tOllh~'USl

ARTICLE IX. PRINCIPLES,

POLICIES, AND DEFINITIONS
PRINCIPLES - OATH,
SLOGAN, PROMISES, MOTTO,
AND CODE
SECTION 1.
The Scout Oath or Promise and
the Scout Law
Clause 3. All Boy Scouts must know

October, 1985

On my honor Iwill do my best

To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally
straight.

A Scout is:
Reverent. A Scout is reverent
toward God. He is faithful in his religious duties. He respects the beliefs of
others.
The Cub Scout Promise, Law of
the Pack, and Tiger Cub Promise
Clause 4. All Cub Scouts must know
and subscribe to the Cub Scout Promise and the Law of the Pack.

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

leliliouS

~rinci~lesan~lraininl

BOY SCOUTS OF AmERICA

"The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of
citizen without recognizing an obligation to God." Article IX Section 1, Charter and
Bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America.
The BSA does not define what constitutes belief in God or practice of religion. Religious
instruction is a responsibility of parents or the religious institution to which a member
may belong.
The BSA expects a member to accept the religious principles stated in the Charter and
Bylaws, the Scout Oath or Promise and Law, the Cub Scout Promise, the Explorer
Code, and on the membership application.

These commitments are involved:

1. Belief in God.
2. Reverence toward God.
3. Fulfillment of religious duties.
4. Respect for beliefs of others.
The Boy Scouts of America maintains a close working
relationship with authorities of all religious bodies on a
national level. Although Scouting is nondenominational, it
strongly encourages religious loyalty on the part of its
members. The BSA looks to each religious body to
provide for the spiritual training of its members.
Recognition of the spiritual is of great importance as a ,
youth participates in Scouting. This is done through
opportunities to worship at summer camps, camporees,
jamborees, and other Scouting activities.
Scouting members are encouraged to observe religious
practices in Scouting activities which they were taught at
home.
RELIGIOUS EMBLEMS
The purpose of the religious emblems program is to give
members guidance in achievinq the spiritual ideals of the
Cub Scout Promise, Scout Oath or Promise, Scout Law,
and Explorer Code. It gives them an opportunity
to
become more aware of what his denomination is doing on
a local, national, or world level. It is a chance to serve and
grow as a participating communicant. Just as a Scout
keeps himself physically strong by camping, hiking, and
other outdoor healthful activities, so also he develops
spiritually and morally by practicing his religion. There are
many differen) religious emblems available so that every
Cub Scout, Boy Scout. or Explorer, regardless of religious
belief, hiS a program to relate to.
To ensure proper religious observance in the unit, the
rabbi, priest, pastor. or imam should serve as chaplain.

The chaplain gives guidance to the youth members and

leaders in all religious matters.
Each year in February, during Scouting Anniversary
Week, the Boy Scouts of America encourages the
celebration of Scout Sabbath or Scout Sunday. This event
is highlighted by the presentation of religious emblems.
One of the purposes of Scouting is to bring its members
closer to the ideals of their faith and country.

BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA

NO.

RELIGIOUS

RELATIONSHIPS

5-203

Austin, Texas

October, 1985

Page 9

NEWS AND COMMENTS

Cub Scout Promise

tion to Life Scout. While being interviewed

by his local Scout Review Board he told its
members he did not believe in a Supreme
Being but rather had complete belief in self
and self-reliance.
The Review Board contacted the current
Chief Scout Executive at the Scouts' National office and was advised

,I,
, promise
To do my best to do my duty to God
and my country,
To help other people, and
To obey the Law of the Pack.

The Trout family simulated amazement at

the requirement and stated that neither the
Scout handbook nor registration materials
specify that explicit belief in god is a requirement. When faced with the Scout
Oath, which reads, in part (see above) "On
my honor, I willdo my best to do my duty to
God and my country," Paul said that he had
not taken such oath literally, that he approached it as being in the same category as
the nation's Pledge of Allegiance - basically, a mouthed requirement which had little meaning. Paul, who said that he respected the rights of others to believe in god,
petitioned the Scouts to permit him to
remain in the organization and to gain the
Eagle rank he coveted.
The Scout hierarchy replied that the

The Law of the Pack

The
The
The
The

Cub Scout
Cub Scout
pack helps
Cub Scout

Youth and/or adult members of the

Boy Scouts of America must meet
certain membership requirements.
One of these requirements is belief in
a Supreme Being.
If a person does not have belief in a
Supreme Being, then they [sic] cannot be a member of the Boy Scouts of
America.

follows Akela.
helps the pack go.
the Cub Scout grow.
gives goodwill.

Tiger Cub Promise

,prom~
to love God, my family, and my country and to find out about the world.
The Explorer Code
Clause 5. All Explorers must subscribe to the Explorer Code, as
follows:

National OOffu~Of AMERICA

BOY SC

Wllnul HIA U~
relephOne: 214-669-1:325

INlnll r.,.aa 750:l8-

me

As an Explorer
I believe that America's strength lies in
her trust in God and in the courage
and strength of her people. I will,
therefore, be faithful in my religious
duties and will maintain a personal
sense of honor in my own life.

KOUIIlt.US.

I I
";-'.:'(i fj-v-

SCOIIU_'.UU

-v-

~1I."'uU

-~!~

u;;o,U",Ul.

June

~ii-

The Boy Scouts itself also issues a statement concerned with its religious position,
which is reproduced on the preceding page.
Any Atheist parent with an Atheist child in
the Boy Scouts (or the Girl Scouts) can
challenge Article IX of the Bylaws of the
organization. All you need do is put your
family, your employment, your place in the
community on the line, and pay any attorney
perhaps $50,000 to $500,000 to wind a case
through the legal channels of the federal
courts up to the United States Supreme
Court. It will only take five to seven years
while you and your family are being excoriated by the media every inch of the way.
On the other hand, if all you ex-Scouts or
parents of Scouts would fund The American
Atheist Center, the job could be done for
you, while you continue your life in an unaffected manner.
In the matter of Paul Trout of Shepherdstown, West Virginia, after seven years in the
Scouts he qualified in June, 1985, for promoPage 10

t N. Trout
Mr. , Mrs. Rober
POBOX
660
25443
Shepherdstown,
WV

1
SClI\III."UU

5. 1985

'&'

Mr
,Mrs.
Trout:
h National
Dear

AXea council contact~~a~c:

related.to
The stonewall JacKson f Nnerica. scck~n'J ~~S. board o f rev1C"
council. aoy ~CO~~Sy~ur
son paul dur1ng
statements ma e
..
Lfe Rank.
d he did not
~::n :Sk~d abo~t thel~c~u~ o~~~.
o~a~;c~~~~~~~~.o~
~~ys!~~r~~~
~
~ona1 be 1e ln
had complete bc le
have any per~
He stated he
Being or force.
.

scouts 0 f Nncr~ca must

.
_
sel~-reliance.
lt members of the gBOY
One of these requlrC
youth and/or adu
ship rcquirement
_
~

"

tai" memb cr
.
.n<l..
-lDeet ce.r
lief in a SU
e
.
. n
then thcy
",ents
.
.n a suprcme Be 1n."
t have bellef 1
f Nnerica.
If a person doeS. no f the noy Scouts 0
_
__.--cannot be a membo;.- ~p.
4 'cct :n'their response
r

~~~~~,~
~
11 Jackson
councl1 was
hp cor
requirements.
The stonewa
ing members 1
to TrOOP 105 concern

.9

ZlYi!~
Ben H.
OV~
Chief Scou

October, 1985

Executive

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

Trouts were equivocating, that the Scout

Oath was not "a casual utterance," and that
in regard to Paul, "He'll have to decide
between our ideology and his."
The appeal from the parents went unanswered, but a letter from the national Scout
organization to the local Scouting Review
Board strongly suggested that it deny
Trout's promotion and revoke his membership. And, on July 19, that occurred when
his scoutmaster declared, "He [Trout] is no
longer a troop member or a member of the
council. I hated to lose him. He was the best

disciplined and most helpful of the boys in

my troop."
At the end of it all, the Trouts were still
maintaining that they knew nothing of the
god-belief requirement and Paul was still
hopeful that he would eventually be allowed
to be reinstated - and to make Eagle. And,
his parents were petitioning another troop in
another town to enroll Paul.
The Scouts, however, were adamant. A
Scout spokesman closed the episode with
the simple statement that the Trout family's
efforts were useless.

"The Boy Scouts makes a firm commitment to duty to God and to the country. It is
absolutely clear that's one of our regulations. There is no discussion. That's it. He
had a nice tenure, but he cannot be a Boy
Scout anymore."
The position of American Atheists is that
the Trouts should have sought to challenge,
legally, the requirement rather than attempt
to seek an exemption on the grounds of
feigned ignorance or to ask another troop to
violate Scout regulations to permit Paul's
entry.

THE SECRETARY OF
(PRIVATE) EDUCATION
William J. Bennett, United States
Secretary of Education, a "born-again"
Christian, delivered the following address to the Supreme Council Meeting
of the Knights of Columbus in Washington, D.C., on August 7,1985.
Three years ago, President Reagan spoke
to the centennial meeting of your Order. He
paid tribute to the values that the Knights of
Columbus have embodied - the values of
family, work, neighborhood, religion, and
personal freedom. These are values, he
reminded us, that "most Americans, whatever their social, ethnic, or religious heritage, hold dear." Well, let me begin by echoing both the President's tribute and his
reminder. And, speaking as Secretary of
Education, I would add that our schools public and private - have no higher calling
than to transmit those values that all Americans share.
The reason is simple. As President Reagan went on to say, "it is only in these values,
only in the faith that sees beyond the here
and now, that we find the rationale for our
daring notions about the inalienable rights of
free men and women." Today as yesterday it
remains a fact that - in the President's
words - "the Western ideas of freedom and
democracy spring directly from the JudeoChristian religious experience." That is,
ladies and gentlemen, the fate of our democracy is intimately intertwined - "entangled," if you will- with the vitality of the
Judeo-Christian tradition.

Austin, Texas

Yet in our time this fact is denied. It is

denied because the implications of this fact
would shatter some false clarities, some
simple formulations, which make up so
much of contemporary discourse. It is easier
to repeat, like an incantation, the phrases
"wall of separation" or "no entanglement of
church and state," than to think seriously
about such issues as the relationship of religious beliefs and self-government, about the
connection between the beliefs of our people and our form of self-government.
Yet it is important now to think seriously.
For, if I can borrow one more time from
President Reagan's speech to you, let me
repeat his quotation from the philosopher
Alfred North Whitehead*: "There is a
danger in clarity, the danger of overlooking
the subtleties of truth." We are today in
danger of overlooking subtleties of truth, at
great cost to our political and social wellbeing. Let me try today, if only briefly, to
recall with you some "subtleties of truths"
about our political and social order and their
intimate relation with religious beliefs.
The best place to begin is with the subtle
truth embodied by your organization. The
Knights of Columbus was founded, in part,
to combat a principle of false clarity, one that

*Alfred Whitehead [1861-1947], English

mathematician and philosopher, proposed a
philosophical system predicated on Godism,
creative interchange, and individuality.

October, 1985

once had more appeal than we today care to

remember. That was that America was and
had to be a Protestant nation, and that
[Roman] Catholicism had no rightful place in
our country. We cannot forget the repeated
episodes of nativism, the violent outbreaks
of anti-Catholicism, that mar our history though I would hasten to add that it is to the
credit of America that these episodes were
transient, the outbreaks contained, until
today they are but a distant memory.
Yes, this all may seem very long ago. But
virulent nativism flared up as recently as the
1920s, most notably in the attempt to forbid
all non-public education in Oregon. A truly
unholy alliance of groups ranging from the
Klu [sic] Klux Klan to the Oregon Good
Government League succeeded in passing
in a state-wide referendum a compulsory
public education initiative. This simple solution to the subtle difficulties of a nation of
many religious and ethnic groups had considerable appeal; fortunately, it was struck
down by a unanimous Supreme Court in
Pierce v. Society of Sisters, t in a case for the
preparation of which the Knights provided
crucial financial support.

tPierce v. Society of Sisters, 45 S. Ct. 571

(1925) held that an Oregon Compulsory
Education Act (1922) which, practically
construed, required all normal children between ages eight and sixteen years of age to
attend public schools violated the Four-

Page 11

NEWS AND COMMENTS

This was sixty years ago. Within two

generations, thanks in no small part to the
education and example offered by organizations like yours, America had changed. A
[Roman] Catholic, John F. Kennedy, was
elected President, and the issue of divided
loyalty was laid to rest. The passage of federal aid to education in 1%5, with provision
for aid to all needy students, reflected an
acknowledgement of the clear legitimacy of
[Roman] Catholic and other private schools.
The long history of bitter religious division
seemed over. And in a sense it was over.
But in a sense it was not. For even as the
traditional sorts of religious intolerance were
being largely overcome, a new aversion to
religion was becoming increasingly respectable. This new aversion manifested itself in
certain intellectual and social circles; but it
manifested itself politically especially in the
guise of constitutional interpretation. The
same Constitution that had protected the
rights of religious parents, and under whose
aegis a host of religions had found happy
accommodation, now became, in the hands
of aggressive plantiffs and beguiled judges,
the instrument for nothing less than a kind of
ghettoizing of religion.
It would be fruitless here to go into a long
recapitulation of almost four decades of
misguided Court decisions, intensifying in
the last twenty or so years. These decisions
have had two effects: they have thrust religion, and things touched by religion, out of
the public schools; and they have made it far
more difficult to give aid to parents of children in private, church-related schools.
These decisions have hurt [Roman] Catholic parents. But they have hurt public
schools as well, and the children, and the
parents of children, in those public schools.
For neutrality to religion turned out to bring
with it a neutrality to those values that issue
from religion. "Value clarification" flourished
in our schools, but when public schools in
Kentucky posted the Ten Commandments
in classrooms, the Court found this unconstitutional. The Commandments were tainted, according to the Court, because they are
"undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and
Christian faiths." And public school children
cannot be exposed to any statement of such
faiths. This, we are told, would violate the

teenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

in that it deprived parents and their children
of their rights in matter of selection of
schools and in a measure destroyed the profitable business of private schools and diminished their property in value.
Page 12

clear principle of separation of church and

state, of religion and the public.
The consequences of this attitude for our
public schools have been damaging. And
these consequences follow from a failure to
appreciate a subtle truth about the relationship between religion, the values and habits
that religion supports, and the requirements
of education among a people charged with
self-government. For example, we in this
country cherish self-government because
we believe in the dignity of man. That dignity
is manifested in our possession of unalienable rights. Whence come those rights?
Listen: "We hold these truths to be selfevident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights ... "
As in the public school cases, in the aid to
parochial school cases I respectfully submit
that the Court has failed to reflect sufficiently on the relationship between our faith
and our political order. The Court has itself
acknowledged the lack of "clarity and predictability" in its decisions, that it can "only
dimly perceive the boundaries of permissible
government activity" in this area. Judge
Antonin Scalia of the District of Columbia
Court of Appeals, writing a few years ago as
a law professor, put it more bluntly: "Supreme Court jurisprudence concerning the
Establishment Clause in general, and the
application of that clause to governmental
assistance for religiously affiliated education
in particular, is in a state of utter chaos and
unpredictable change." Aid for textbooks
for parochial schools is fine; aid for school
supplies such as maps is not. Bus transportation to and from school can be provided
for parochial school students; but bus
transportation to and from field trips cannot
be provided. State money can pay for standardized tests in parochial schools, but not
for teacher-made tests. Senator Moynihan's
famous question - What do you do with a
map that's in a textbook? - has yet to be
litigated.
It would be funny if it were not so serious.
What is serious isa failure on the part of the
Court to reflect on the central importance of
religion in our public life. This is seen vividly
in the recent Felton decision. That decision,
which forbade public school teachers from
teaching remedial classes in parochial
schools, greatly impedes efforts to fulfillthe
Congressional mandate, dating back to
1%5, to provide compensatory services to
all needy students, whatever school they
attend. The Court could not be bothered by
the fact that not one complaint of improper
indoctrination had been filed; that this program had, in the words of the Court of

October, 1985

Appeals, "done so much good and little, if

any, detectable harm"; that the program had
ignited nothing in the way of divisive controversy - beyond the lawsuit itself. But the
program was ruled unconstitutional because
it excessively "entangled" church and state.
How? Here is the majority opinion:
Administrative personnel of the public
and parochial school systems must
work together in resolving matters
related to schedules, classroom assignments, problems that arise in the
implementation of the program, requests for additional services, and the
dissemination of information regarding the program. Furthermore, the
program necessitates frequent contacts between the regular and the
remedial teachers (or other professionals), in which each side reports on
individual student needs, problems
encountered; and results achieved.
"Must work together ... ," "frequent contact" - these features are not praised, as
they should be. Rather these, in the Court's
opinion, are the problem.
We at the Department of Education will
do our best to nullifythe damage done by the
Felton decision to the education of needy
children. We will work with local school
authorities to devise other means to provide
services; and we are about to introduce legislation allowing local school authorities to
convert Chapter One funds into a voucher
program. Such a program would allow parents to use those funds in any school, including private ones; and we are confident that
this Supreme Court willfind such a program
passes constitutional muster.
But the broader implications of Felton,
and its predecessors, cannot be nullified by
particular pieces of legislation. The attitude
that regards "entanglement" with religion as
something akin to entanglement with an
infectious disease must be confronted broadly and directly. It is this attitude that allows
the New York Times to speak blithely of the
desirability of drawing a line at the parochial
schoolhouse door, as if parochial schools
are somehow less American than public
ones. It is this attitude that leads the Boston
Globe to label me "Secretary for Private
Education" when I endorse methods, such
as vouchers and tuition tax credits, that
would foster choice among schools. It is this
attitude that simply cannot understand why
over three-quarters of the American people
support this Administration in our effort to
restore prayer to our public schools. It is this
attitude, this underlying disposition about

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

the place of religion, and the values based on

religion, in American life, that we must confront directly.
This means refusing to accept that the
reasoning underlying recent Supreme Court
decisions is sound. It means reminding
judges that these decisions are false to the
intentions of the Founders; that, in the
words of Walter Berns, the Court has
"launched an interpretation under which the
First Amendment forbids precisely what
many a man in the First Congress went to
such pains to protect - namely, public support of religion, albeit on a non-discriminatory basis." It means saying what needs to
be said about the relationship of religion, and
the values that follow from religion, and the
preservation of a free society.

Austin, Texas

And that relationship is this: Our values as

a free people and the central values of the
Judeo-Christian tradition are flesh of the
flesh, blood of the blood.
In saying this, lA!e- I - will be charged
with being divisive: Indeed, a crucial reason
Justice Powell gave for joining the majority
in the Felton case was the potential of such
programs for fostering divisiveness. But the
fact is that the program was in no way divisive; on the contrary,
this program,
grounded in the 1%5 legislation, marked the
overcoming of past tensions. Indeed it is the
Court's decision in Felton, and the attitude
underlying that and previous decisions, that
fosters divisiveness. It is a great and tragic
irony that, having overcome to so great a
degree the old divisions of Protestant and

October, 1985

Catholic, Gentile and Jew, we now face a

new source of divisiveness: the assault of
secularism on religion. Nothing could be
more divisive than the attempt, in the words
of John Courtney Murray* almost forty
years ago, to channel "all government aid
simply and solely towards the subsidization
of secularism as the one national 'religion'
and culture." It would be - it is - tragic
indeed to find that the passing of old-

*John Courtney Murray [1904-1967], "liberal" American Jesuit theologian who taught
at the Society of Jesus' Woodstock College,
Maryland (1937-1957);advocate ofinterfaith
dialogue.

Page 13

NEWS AND COMMENTS

fashioned suspicion of particular religions
has been fo\1owed, with barely an interruption, by a new suspicion of our broad religious tradition on the part of secularized
elites, far more sophisticated, a bit better
disguised, but no less divisive, no less reprehensible, no less damaging.
To some my language will seem harsh.
But how else is one to react to commentators heralding the Felton decision on the
grounds that it helps save us from the fate of
Iran and Lebanon? But let us ask: Is American Catholicism a religion of car-bombs and
terrorism? It is not. Does the attempt to
deliver remedial education to needy students in parochial schools augur an attempt
to turn the government to the service of one
religious faith? It does not. Is the Pope a
force for intolerance in the world? Is intolerant Christianity the problem that bedevils
the people of Eastern Europe? Is Catholic
Lech Walesa an Ayato\1ah waiting to happen? No. The Judeo-Christian tradition is
not a source of fear in the world; it is a
ground of hope.
And what of the United States? Was
George Washington wrong when he argued
that "reason and experience both forbid us
to expect that national morality can prevail
in exclusion of religious principle"? Was Jefferson wrong when he asserted that the liberties of a nation cannot be thought secure
"when we have removed their only firm basis

- a conviction in the minds of the people

that these liberties are of the gift of God"?
Has subsequent history made the wisdom of
our Founders obsolete? I do not believe so.
Indeed, our history has, if anything, deepened the intimate relationship between the
Judeo-Christian tradition and the American
political order. Lincoln understood the Civil
War as a sort of divine punishment for the
sin of slavery - a sacrifice that made possible "under God," "a new birth of freedom."
And religious faith was central to the civil
rights movement a hundred years later:
Martin Luther King had a dream. It was a
dream that, as he said, "the sons of former
slaves and the sons of former slaveowners
willbe able to sit down together at the table
of brotherhood;" and it was a dream that
"one day every va\1eysha\1be exalted, every
hill and mountain shall be made low, ... and
the glory of the Lord sha\1 be revealed, and
a\1flesh sha\1 see it together."
In a word, then: American history - the
fundamental shape of the American experience - cannot be understood without reference to the Judeo-Christian tradition, a
tradition which gave birth to us and which
envelops us.
Let me be clear. No one demands doctrinal adherence to any religious beliefs as a
condition of citizenship, or as proof of good
citizenship here. But at the same time we
should not deny what is true: that from the

Judeo-Christian tradition come our values,

our principles, the animating spirit of our
institutions. That tradition and our tradition
are entangled. They are wedded together.
When we have disdain for our religious tradition, we have disdain for ourselves.
This Administration is fu\1ycommitted to
the First Amendment. We are fu\1ycommitted to the principles of non-establishment of
religion and tolerance. We are fu\1ycommitted to equal rights for all - for the believer
and no less for the non-believer. But we do
not shy away from what has become an
urgent necessity - a national conversation
and debate on the place of religious belief in
our society.
I intend to speak up in this debate; I have a
responsibility to speak up, insofar as many
of these issues come to a head in our
schools. The Administration in which I serve
wi\1 continue to press for legislation and,
where necessary, judicial reconsideration
and constitutional amendment to help correct the current situation of disdain for religious belief. And we do this for the sake of
our national we\1-being in general, and for
the sake of education in particular. And we
do this for the sake of education in the public
as we\1as in the private schools. For we are
a\1equa\1yheirs and beneficiaries of the same
religious tradition. That is the subtle truth
that, in our time, we should not forget.

MEESE'S ORIGINAL INTENTION

Edwin Meese, the Attorney General
of the United States, a "born-again"
Christian, delivered the following address to the American Bar Association,
in Washington, D.C., on July 9,1985.
Welcome to our Federal City. It is an
honor to be here today to address the House
of Delegates of the American Bar Association. I know the sessions here and those
next week in London wi\1 be very productive.
It is, of course, entirely fitting that we lawyers gather here in this home of our government. We Americans, after a\1, rightly
pride ourselves on having produced the

Page 14

greatest political wonder of the world - a

government of laws and not of men. Thomas
Paine was right: "America has no monarch:
Here the law is king."
Perhaps nothing underscores Paine's
assessment quite as much as the eager anticipation with which Americans await the conclusion of the term of the Supreme Court.
Lawyers and laymen alike regard the Court
not so much with awe as with a healthy
respect. The law matters here and the business of our highest court - the subject of
my remarks today - is crucially important
to our political order.
At this time of year I'm always reminded of
how utterly unpredictable the Court can be
in rendering its judgments. Several years

October, 1985

ago, for example, there was quite a controversial case, Tennessee Valley Authority v.
Hill. This dispute involved the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] and the nowlegendary snail darter, a creature of curious
purpose and forgotten origins. In any event,
when the case was handed down, one publication announced that there was some good
news and some bad news. The bad news in
their view was that the snail darter had won;
the good news was that he didn't use the
Fourteenth Amendment.
Once again, the Court has finished a term
characterized by a nearly crushing workload. There were 24,935 cases on the docket
this year; 179 cases were granted review;
140 cases issued in signed opinions, 11 were

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

per curiam* rulings. Such a docket lends
credence to Tocqueville's t assessment that
in America, every political question seems
sooner or later to become a legal question. (I
won't even mention the statistics of the
lower federal courts; let's just say I think
we'll all be in business for quite a while.)
In looking back over the work of the
Court, I am again struck by how little the
statistics tell us about the true role of the
Court. In reviewing a term of the Court, it is
important to take a moment and reflect
upon the proper role of the Supreme Court
in our constitutional system.
The intended role of the judiciary generallyand the Supreme Court in particular was
to serve as the "bulwarks of a limited constitution." The judges, the Founders believed,
would not fail to regard the Constitution as
"fundamental law" and would "regulate their
decisions" by it. As the "faithful guardians of
the Constitution," the judges were expected
to resist any political effort to depart from
the literal provisions of the Constitution.
The text of the document and the original
intention of those who framed it would be
the judicial standard in giving effect to the
Constitution.
You will recall that Alexander Hamilton,
defending the federal courts to be created by
the new Constitution, remarked that the
want of a judicial power under the Articles of
Confederation had been the crowning defect of that first effort at a national constitution. Ever the consummate lawyer, Hamilton pointed out that "laws are a dead letter
without courts to expound and define their
true meaning."
The Anti-Federalist Brutus took him to
task in the New York press for what the
critics of the Constitution considered his
naivete. That prompted Hamilton to write
his classic defense of judicial power in The
Federalist, No. 78.
An independent judiciary under the Constitution, he said, would prove to be the
"citadel of public justice and the public
security." Courts were "peculiarly essential
in a limited constitution." Without them,
there would be no security against "the
encroachments and oppressions of the representative body," no protection against
"unjust and partial" laws.
Hamilton, like his colleague Madison,
knew that all political power is "of an encroaching nature." In order to keep the

*Per curiam refers to a decision issued by

the court as a whole.

Austin, Texas

powers created by the Constitution within in the truest sense of that word. It is a prothe boundaries marked out by the Constitu- . cess wherein public deliberations occur over
tion, an independent - but constitutionally
what constitutes the common good under
bound - judiciary was essential. The pur- the terms of a written constitution.
pose of the Constitution, after all, was the
As a result, as Benjamin Cardozo [1870creation of limited but also energetic gov- 1935, American jurist] pointed out, "the
ernment, institutions with the power to gov- great tides and currents which engulf the
ern, but also with structures to keep the rest of men do not turn aside in their course
power in check. As Madison put it, the Con- and pass the judges by." Granting that,
stitution enabled the government to control
Tocqueville knew what was required.
the governed, but also obliged it to control
As he wrote:
itself.
But even beyond the institutional role, the
The federal judges therefore must not
Court serves the American republic in yet
only be good citizens and men of eduanother, more subtle way. The problem of
cation and integrity, ... (they) must
any popular government, of course, is seealso be statesmen; they must know
ing to it that the people obey the laws. There
how to understand the spirit of the
are but two ways: either by physical force or
age, to confront those obstacles that
by moral force. In many ways the Court
can be overcome, and to steer out of
remains the primary moral force in American
the current when the tide threatens to
politics.
carry them away, and with them the
Tocqueville put it best:
sovereignty of the union and obedience to its laws.
The great object of justice is to substitute the idea of right for that of vioOn that confident note, let's consider the
lence, to put intermediaries between
Court's work this past year.
the government and the use of its
As has been generally true in recent years,
physical force ...
the 1984 term did not yield a coherent set of
It is something astonishing what audecisions. Rather, it seemed to produce
thority is accorded to the intervention
what one commentator has called a "jurisof a court of justice by the general
prudence of idiosyncracy." Taken as a
opinion of mankind ...
whole, the work of the term defies analysis
The moral force in which tribunals
by any strict standard. It is neither simply
are clothed makes the use of physical
liberal nor simply conservative; neither
force infinitely rarer, for in most cases
simply activist nor simply restrained; neither
it takes its place; and when finally
simply principled nor simply partisan. _The
physical force is required, its power is
Court this term continued to roam at large in
doubled by moral authority.
a veritable constitutional forest.
I believe, however, that there are at least
By fulfilling its proper function, the Su- three general areas that merit close scrutiny:
preme Court contributes both to institu- Federalism,** Criminal Law, and Freedom
tional checks and balances and to the moral of Religion.
undergirding of the entire constitutional edifice. For the Supreme Court is the only
Federalism
national institution that daily grapples with
the most fundamental political questions In Garcia IJ. San Antonio Metropolitan
and defends them with written expositions.
Transit Authority, the Court displayed what
Nothing less would serve to perpetuate the was in the view of this Administration an
sanctity of the rule of law so effectively.
inaccurate reading of the text of the ConstiBut that is not to suggest that the justices
tution and a disregard for the Framers'
are a body of Platonic guardians. Far from it. intention that state and local governments
The Court is what it was understood to be be a buffer against the centralizing tendenwhen the Constitution was framed - a polit- cies of the national Leviathan. Specifically,
ical body. The judicial process is, at its most
fundamental level, a political process. While
not a partisan political process, it is political
**Federalism - the distribution of power in
a government between a central authority
and the constituent units (states), with a
tAlexis de Tocqueville [1805-1859], French
favoring of a strong centralized national
statesman, author, Roman Catholic.
government.

October, 1985

Page 15

NEWS AND COMMENTS

five Justices denied that the Tenth Amendment protects states from federal laws regulating the wages and hours of state or local
employees. Thus the Court overruled - but
barely - a contrary holding in National
League of Cities v. Usery. We hope for a day
when the Court returns to the basic principles of the Constitution as expressed in
Usery; such instability in decisions concerning the fundamental principle of federalism
does our Constitution no service.
Meanwhile, the constitutional status of
the states further suffered as the Court
curbed state power to regulate the economy, notably the professions. In Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Ward, the Court
used the Equal Protection Clause to spear
an Alabama insurance tax on gross premiums preferring in-state companies over outof-state rivals. In New Hampshire v. Piper,
the Court held that the Privileges and
Immunities Clause of Article IV barred New
Hampshire from completely excluding a
non-resident from admission to its bar. With
the apparent policy objective of creating
unfettered national markets for occupations
before its eyes, the Court unleashed Article
IVagainst any state preference for residents
involving the professions or service industries. Hicklin v. Orbeck and Baldwin v. Montana Fish and Game Commission are
illustrative.
On the other hand, we gratefully acknowledge the respect shown by the Court
for state and local sovereignty in a number of
cases, including Atascadero State Hospital
v. Scanlon.
In Atascadero, a case involving violations
of 504 of Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the
Court honored the Eleventh Amendment*
in limiting private damage suits against
states. Congress, it said, must express its
intent to expose states to liability affirmatively and clearly.
In Town of Haile v. City of Eau Claire, the
Court found that active state supervision of
municipal activity was not required to cloak
municipalities with immunity under the
Sherman Act. t And, states were judged able
to confer Sherman Act immunity upon
private parties in Southern Motor Carrier

*Eleventh Amendment - the Amendment

to the U.S. Constitution, added in 1798,
which provides that the judicial power of the
U.S. shall NOT extend to any suit in law or
equity, commenced or prosecuted against
one of the United States by citizens of
another state, or by citizens or subjects of
any foreign state.

Page 16

Rate Conference v. U.S. They must, said

the Court, clearly articulate and affirmatively express a policy to displace competition with compelling anti-competitive action
so long as the private action is actively
supervised by the state.
And, in Oklahoma City v. Tuttle, the
Court held that a single incident of unconstitutional and egregious police misconduct is
insufficient to support a Section 1983**
action against municipalities for allegedly
inadequate police training or supervision.
Our view is that federalism is one of the
most basic principles of our Constitution. By
allowing the states sovereignty sufficient to
govern we better secure our ultimate goal of
political liberty through decentralized government. We do not advocate states' rights;
we advocate states' responsibilities. We
need to remember that state and local
governments are not inevitably abusive of
rights. It was, after all, at the turn of the
century the states that were the laboratories
of social and economic progress - and the
federal courts that blocked their way. We
believe that there is a proper constitutional
sphere for state governance under our
scheme of limited, popular government.

permitted warrantless searches under certain

limited circumstances.
The most prominent among these Fourth
Amendment cases were:
New Jersey v. T.L. 0., which upheld
warrantless searches of public school
students based on reasonable suspicion that a law or school rule has been
violated; this also restored a clear
local authority over another problem
in our society, school discipline;
California v. Carney, which upheld
the warrantless search of a mobile
home;
U.S. v. Sharpe, which approved onthe-spot detention of a suspect for
preliminary questioning and investigation;
U.S. v. Johns, upholding the warrantless search of sealed packages in
a car several days after their removal
by police who possessed probable
cause to believe the vehicle contained
contraband;
U.S. v. Hensley, which permitted a
warrantless investigatory stop based

<Criminal Law
Recognizing, perhaps, that the nation is in
the throes of a drug epidemic which has
severely increased the burden borne by law
enforcement officers, the Court took a more
progressive stance on the Fourth Amendment, tt undoing some of the damage previously done by its piecemeal incorporation
through the Fourteenth Amendment.***
Advancing from its landmark Leon decision
in 1984which created a good-faith exception
to the Exclusionary Rulettt when a flawed
warrant is obtained by police, the Court

ttFourth Amendment - amendment of the

U.S. Constitution guaranteeing people the
right to be secure in their homes and property against unreasonable searches and
seizures and providing that no warrants
shall issue except upon probable cause and
then only as to specific places to be searched
and persons and things to be seized.

tShermanAct -an Act (15 U.S.CA 1-7)

which prohibits any unreasonable interference by contract orcombination or conspiracy with the ordinary, usual, and freelycompetitive pricing or distribution system of
the open market in interstate trade.

***The Fourteenth Amendment of the

Constitution of the United States, ratified in
1868, creates (or at least recognizes for the
first time) a citizenship of the United States,
as distinct from that of the states; forbids the
making or enforcement by any state of any
law abridging the privileges and immunities
of citizens of the United States; and secures
all "persons" against any state action
which results in either deprivation of life,
liberty, or property without due process of
law or in denial of the equal protection of the
laws.

**Section 1983 - one of the federal statutes

viewed as a group known as Civil Rights
Acts. This includes federal statutes enacted
after the Civil War and more recently in 1957
and 1964, intended to implement and give
further force to personal rights guaranteed
by the U.S. Constitution. Such acts prohibit
discrimination based on race, color, age, or
religion.

tttExclusionary Rule - This rule commands that where evidence has been obtained in violation of the privileges guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, the evidence
must be excluded at the trial. Evidence
which is obtained by an unreasonable search
and seizure is excluded from evidence under
the Fourteenth Amendment, U.S. Constitution, and this rule is applicable to the states.

October, 1985

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

on an unsworn flyer from a neighboring police department which possessed reasonable suspicion that the
detainee was a felon;
Hayes v. Florida, which tacitly endorsed warrantless seizures in the
field for the purpose of fingerprinting
based on reasonable suspicion of
criminal activity;
U.S. v. Hernandez, which upheld
border detentions and warrantless
searches by customs officials based
on reasonable suspicion of criminal
activity.

Similarly, the Court took steps this term

to place the Miranda ruling* in proper perspective, stressing its origin in the court
rather than in the Constitution. In Oregon v.
Elstad, the Court held that failure to administer Miranda warnings and the consequent
receipt of a confession ordinarily will not
taint a second confession after Miranda
warnings are received.
The enforcement of criminal law remains
one of our most important efforts. It is crucial that the state and local authorities from the police to the prosecutors - be able
to combat the growing tide of crime effectively. Toward that end we advocate a due
regard for the rights of the accused - but
also a due regard for the keeping of the
public peace and the safety and happiness of
the people. We will continue to press for a
proper scope for the rules of exclusion, lest
truth in the fact findingprocess be allowed to
suffer.
I have mentioned the areas of Federalism
and Criminal Law, now I will turn to the
Religion cases.

*Miranda ruling - Prior to any custodial

interrogation (that is, questioning initiated
by law enforcement officers after a person is
taken into custody or otherwise deprived of
his freedom in any significant way), the person must be warned: 1)That he has a right to
remain silent; 2) That any statement he does
make may be used as evidence against him;
3) That he has a right to the presence of an
attorney; 4) That if he cannot afford an
attorney, one willbe appointed for him prior
to any questioning if he so desires.
Unless and until these warnings or a
waiver of these rights are demonstrated at
the trial, no evidence obtained in the interrogation may be used against the accused.

Austin, Texas

Religion
Most probably, this term will be best
remembered for the decisions concerning
the Establishment Clause of the First
Amendment. The Court continued to apply
its standard three-pronged test. t Four
cases merit mention.
In the first, City of Grand Rapids v. Ball,
the Court nullified Shared Time and Community Education programs offered within
parochial schools. Although the programs
provided instruction in non-sectarian subjects, and were taught by full-time or parttime public school teachers, the Court nonetheless found that they promoted religion in
three ways: the state-paid instructors might
wittingly or unwittingly indoctrinate students; the symbolic union of church and
state interest in state-provided instruction
signaled support for religion; and, the programs in effect subsidized the religious functions of parochial schools by relieving them
of responsibility for teaching some secular
subjects. The symbolism test proposed in
Ball precludes virtually any state assistance
offered to parochial schools.
In Aquilar v. Felton, the Court invalidated
a program of secular instruction for lowincome students in sectarian schools, provided by public school teachers who were
supervised to safeguard students against
efforts of indoctrination.
With a bewildering Catch-22 logic, the
Court declared that the supervisory safeguards at issue in the statute constituted
unconstitutional
government entanglement: "The religious school, which has as a
primary purpose the advancement and
preservation of a particular religion, must
endure the ongoing presence of state personnel whose primary purpose is to monitor
teachers and students in an attempt to
guard against the infiltration of religious
thought." Secretary of Education William
Bennett has suggested such logic may reveal
a "disdain" for education as well as religion.

tIn order for any law "to pass muster" under

the Establishment (religious) Clause of the
U.S. Constitution, it must pass a tripartite
test set by the case of Lemon v. Kurtzman,
411 U.S. 192 (1973).
First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."

October, 1985

In Wallace v. Jaffree, the Court said in

essence that states may set aside time in
public schools for meditation or reflection so
long as the legislation does not stipulate that
it be used for voluntary prayer. Of course,
what the Court gave with one hand, it took
back with the other; the Alabama moment of
silence statute failed to pass muster.
In Thornton v. Caldor, a 7-2 majority
overturned a state law prohibiting private
employees from discharging an employee
for refusing to work on his Sabbath. We
hope that this does not mean that the Court
is abandoning last term's first but tentative
steps toward state accommodation of religion in the creche case.
In trying to make sense of the religion
cases - from whichever side - it is important to remember how this body of tangled
caselaw came about. Most Americans forget
that it was not until 1925, in Gitlow v. New
York, that any provision of the Billof Rights
was applied to the states. Nor was it until
1947 that the Establishment Clause was
made applicable to the states through the
Fourteenth Amendment. This is striking
because the Bill of Rights, as debated,
created, and ratified was designed to apply
only to the national government.
The Bill of Rights came about largely as
the result of the demands of the critics of the
new Constitution, the unfortunately misnamed Anti-Federalists. They feared, as
George Mason of Virginia put it, that in time
the national authority would "devour" the
states. Since each state had a bill of rights, it
was only appropriate that so powerful a
national government as that created by the
Constitution have one as well. Though
Hamilton insisted a Bill of Rights was not
necessary and even destructive, and Madison (at least at first) thought a Billof Rights
to be but a "parchment barrier" to political
power, the Federalists agreed to add a Billof
Rights.
Though the first ten amendments that
were ultimately ratified fell far short of what
the Anti-Federalists desired, both Federalists and Anti-Federalists agreed that the
amendments were a curb on national power.
When this view was questioned before the
Supreme Court in Barron v. Baltimore
(1833), Chief Justice Marshall** wholeheartedly agreed. The Constitution said
what it meant and meant what it said.

**Chief Justice John Marshall [1755-1835],

American jurist; chief justice U.S. Supreme
Court (1801-35).

Page 17

NEWS AND COMMENTS

Neither political expediency nor judicial
desire was sufficient to change the clear
import of the language of the Constitution.
The Billof Rights did not apply to the states
- and, he said, that was that.
Until 1925, that is.
Since then a good portion of constitutional adjudication has been aimed at extending the scope of the doctrine of incorporation. * But the most that can be done is to
expand the scope; nothing can be done to
shore up the intellectually shaky foundation
upon which the doctrine rests. And nowhere
else has the principle of federalism been
dealt so politically violent and constitutionally suspect a blow as by the theory of
incorporation.
Inthinking particularly of the use to which
the First Amendment has been put in the
area of religion, one finds much merit in
Justice Rehnquist's recent dissent in Jaffree. "It is impossible," Justice Rehnquist
argued, "to build sound constitutional doctrine upon a mistaken understanding of constitutional history." His conclusion was
bluntly to the point: "If a constitutional theory has no basis in the history of the
amendment it seeks to interpret, it is difficult
to apply and yields unprincipled results."
The point, of course, is that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment
was designed to prohibit Congress from
establishing a national church. The belief
was that the Constitution should not allow
Congress to designate a particular faith or
sect as politically above the rest. But to have
argued, as is popular today, that the amendment demands a strict neutrality between
religion and irreligion would have struck the
founding generation as bizarre. The purpose
was to prohibit religious tyranny, not to
undermine religion generally.
In considering these areas of adjudication
- Federalism, Criminal Law, and Religion
- it seems fair to conclude that far too many
of the Court's opinions were, on the whole,
more policy choices than articulations of
constitutional principle. The voting blocs,
the arguments, allreveal a greater allegiance
to what the Court thinks constitutes sound
public policy than a deference to what the
Constitution - its text and intention - may
demand.
It is also safe to say that until there
emerges a coherent jurisprudential stance,
the work of the Court willcontinue in this ad

*Doctrine or theory of incorporation - to

declare that another law shall be taken as a
part of the one under discussion as much as
if it were set out at length therein.

Page 18

hoc fashion. But that is not to argue for any

jurisprudence.
On my opinion a drift back toward the
radical egalitarianism and expansive civil
libertarianism of the Warren Court would
once again be a threat to the notion of
limited but energetic government.
What, then, should a constitutional jurisprudence actually be? It should be a Jurisprudence of Original Intention. By seeking
to judge policies in light of principles, rather
than remold principles in light of policies, the
Court could avoid both the charge of incoherence and the charge of being either too
conservative or too liberal.
A jurisprudence seriously aimed at the
explication of original intention would produce defensible principles of government
that would not be tainted by ideological
predilection.
This belief in a Jurisprudence of Original
Intention also reflects a deeply rooted commitment to the idea of democracy. The
Constitution represents the consent of the
governed to the structures and powers of
the government. The Constitution is the
fundamental willof the people; that is why it
is the fundamental law. To allow the courts
to govern simply by what it views at the time
as fair and decent, is a scheme of government no longer popular; the idea of democracy has suffered. The permanence of the
Constitution has been weakened. A Constitution that is viewed as only what the judges
say it is, is no longer a constitution in the true
sense.
Those who framed the Constitution chose
their words carefully; they debated at great
length the most minute points. The language
they chose meant something. It is incumbent upon the Court to determine what that
meaning was. This is not a shockingly new
theory; nor is it arcane or archaic.
Joseph Story.T who was in a way a lawyer's Everyman -lawyer, justice, and teacher of law - had a theory of judging that
merits reconsideration.
Though speaking specifically of the Constitution, his logic reaches to statutory construction as well.
In construing the Constitution of the
United States, we are in the first
instance to consider, what are its
nature and objects, its scope and
design, as apparent from the structure of the instrument, viewed as a
whole and also viewed in its compo-

tJoseph Story [1779-1845], American jurist.

October, 1985

nent parts. Where its words are plain,

clear and determinate, they require
no interpretation ... Where the words
admit of two senses, each of which is
conformable to general usage, that
sense is to be adopted, which without
departing from the literal import of the
words, best harmonizes with the
nature and objects, the scope and
design of the instrument.
A Jurisprudence of Original Intention
would take seriously the admonition of Justice Story's friend and colleague, John Marshall, in Marbury that the Constitution is a
limitation on judicial power as well as executive and legislative. That is what Chief Justice Marshall meant in McCulloch when he
cautioned judges never to forget it is a constitution they are expounding.
It has been and will continue to be the
policy of this administration to press for a
Jurisprudence of Original Intention. In the
cases we fileand those we join as amicus, we
willendeavor to resurrect the original meaning of constitutional provisions and statutes
as the only reliable guide for judgment.
Within this context, let me reaffirm our
commitment to pursuing the policies most
necessary to public justice. We willcontinue
our vigorous enforcement of civil rights
laws; we willnot rest till unlawful discrimination ceases. We willcontinue our all out war
on drugs - both supply and demand; both
national and international in scope. We
intend to bolster public safety by a persistent
war on crime. We willendeavor to stem the
growing tide of pornography and its attendant costs, sexual and child abuse. We will
be battling the heretofore largely ignored
legal cancer of white collar crime; and its
cousin, defense procurement fraud. And
finally, as we still reel as a people, I pledge to
you our commitment to fight terrorism here
and abroad. For as long as the innocent are
fair prey for the barbarians of this world,
civilization is not safe.
We willpursue our agenda within the context of our written Constitution of limited yet
energetic powers. Our guide in every case
willbe the sanctity of the rule of law and the
proper limits of governmental power.
It is our belief that only "the sense in which
the Constitution was accepted and ratified
by the nation," and only the sense in which
laws were drafted and passed provide a solid
foundation for adjudication. Any other
standard suffers the defect of pouring new
meaning into old words, thus creating new
powers and new rights totally at odds with
the logic of our Constitution and its commitment to the rule of law.
Thank you.

American Atheist

NEWS AND COMMENTS

MARTI AND THE MASS

Ronald Reagan was born on February 6,
1911, and when he was just nine months old
the first commercial radio station went on
the air - KDKA in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Just when Ronnie reached his majority
(then, age twenty-one), Franklin Delano
Roosevelt was elected President of the United States, being returned to office in three
successive elections. All through the thirteen years of his term, he delivered a weekly
"fireside chat" over radio, then the most
powerful communications system known in
the United States. Meanwhile, of course,
Ronnie was getting his first important job as
a sportscaster on radio. That medium probably shaped him in more years of his lifethan
any single cultural influence other than his
father's Roman Catholic Church. The impact on the nation of Roosevelt's "fireside
chats" was a phenomenon not duplicated
since by any other President. Of course,
Ronnie has tried. He gives his own version of
an outreaching, chatting President talking to
his nation's people each Friday. It isn't the

same. Nobody cares. No one is influenced

by it. His remarks only hit the media when he
bungles in a mike test, for Reagan is not
Roosevelt, nor could he be. Nostalgically, he
reaches back to what he remembers with
emotion and hope. The Voice of America,
beamed to all countries of the world, in fortytwo languages, finds a special fondness in his
heart.
It was perhaps because of his emotional
memories that he ordered the start -up of
VOA radio Marti in Miami, Florida, earlier
this year, to beam to Cuba what he considers to be the same kind of "hope" he heard
from F.D.R. in his youth. But in the late
summer, the U.S. Congress was also hearing much of Marti. Government employees
tape the Roman Catholic Mass celebrated
on Saturdays at Miami's Our Lady of Charity Roman Catholic Chapel built in honor of
Cuba's patron saint. The highest-ranking
Cuban clergyman officiates at the Mass,
which is then broadcast to "Atheist" Cuba
on Sundays at 6:00 P.M. to bring the way-

FORTUNATEL'C',
COMMUIllICA1"\ON

ward sheep back to the Roman Catholic fold.

The Baptist Joint Committee, representing eight powerful Baptist groups in both the
United States and Canada, protested to
Congress that the Mass is "clearly, blatantly,
a violation of the spirit of the First Amendment." Of course, if Protestant services
were broadcast, that would be different.
The fight came when the White House
was asking for $11.2 million for Radio Marti's
1986budget and a Marti spokesman argued,
"The broadcasts are needed because faith
has always been a part of the lives of Cuban
people." No one saw that the underlying
premise was Reagan's felt need to intrude
into another country to bring Jesus Christ to
its citizens, willy-nilly,whether they wanted
to "receive him" or not.
Congress, showing more sense than it has
in the last five years, cut twenty-four percent
from the budget - $2.7 million. Want to bet
the C.LA. willget the money to Marti? Nostalgia, even for a president, costs the taxpayers money and rapes the Constitution.

TEC.HNOL..OGY

HAS \MPRO'lEP
IN '2.000 YEARS..
.:

DIALANATHIEST
The telephone listings below are the various services where you may listen to short comments on state/church
issues and viewpoints originated by the Atheist community.
Tucson, Arizona
San Francisco, California
South Bay (San Jose), California
God Speaks
Denver, Colorado
Greater DC
South Florida
Atlanta, Georgia
Northern D1inois
Des Moines, Iowa
Lexington, Kentucky
Boston, Massachusetts
Detroit, Michigan

Austin, Texas

(602) 623-3861
(415) 668-8085
(408) 377-8485
(408) 732-4646
(303) 692-9395
(703) 280-4321
(305) 925-7167
(404) 662-6606
(312) 335-4648
(515) 266-6133
(606) 278-8333
(617) 969-2682
(313) 721-6630

Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota

Northern New Jersey
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Schenectady, New York
Sierra Nevada
Columbus, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Portland, Oregon
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Austin, Texas DIAL-THE-ATHEIST __
Houston, Texas
DiaI-A-Gay-Atheist
Salt Lake City, Utah

October, 1985

separation

(612)
(201)
(505)
(518)
(702)
(614)
(405)
(503)
(412)
(512)
(713)
(713)
(801)

566-3653
777-0766
884-7360
346-1479
972-8203
294-0300
677-4141
771-6208
734-0509
458-5731
664-7678
527-9255
364-4939

Page 19

Brian Lynch

MASSACHUSETTS ATHEISTS
n 1979, Madalyn Murray O'Hair came to
IBoston
to encourage local Atheists to

organize and to file a suit to remove a state

law requiring a daily moment of silence for
prayer in public schools. So the Massachusetts Chapter was born. The Chapter is now
five and one-half years old, and its tumultuous history has produced an extremely
strong core group of members who contribute a great deal of time and money, along
with many ideas, to both the Chapter and
The Center in Austin.
Looking Back

We have been fortunate - the people

who have joined have generally been hardcore Atheists. Strong personalities and varied perceptions of what the purpose of an
Atheist organization is, or what it should do,
have twice threatened to unsettle the Chapter. It has only been the intensity of the
members' Atheism and their recognition
that an Atheist organization is needed which
has sustained the Chapter.
When I became Director in late 1983, the
Chapter was at a low ebb. Contributions
were down, members were unenthusiastic,
and there were few on-going activities or
programs. An additional problem was (and
is) the wide geographical distribution of our
members over four states (over 50,000
square miles), with some members living
nearly three hundred miles from Boston. As
a result, it is difficult to get many people
together for a meeting. We have managed to
hold regular meetings at least once a month,
however. Yet even meeting places have
been a challenge; we have met in libraries,
gymnasiums, and bowling alleys. Harry
Sherman, a long-time member, arranged for
us to meet in a room at a bowling alley of
which he is a member. After eight months,
the management told us that we could no
longer use its room since we were not
bowling, were not members, and were not
paying anything. When we offered to pay,
management suggested an exorbitant rate,
so we began seeking out a new meeting
place. We found that nearly all public libraries had several restrictions which made it
difficult to hold meetings, the most severe of
which was time. Since members work at
other jobs during the day, evenings are the
only time we can hold meetings, and the

Page 20

libraries were not open late enough. Hotels

were too expensive and restaurants tended
to be nonconducive to discussing
business. Fortunately, a member
came through with an ideal place:
his office. Since early 1984we have
been meeting there and are extremely grateful for this contribution to the Chapter.

text. For example, he gave a nice spread to a

small, unaffiliated group of Atheists who

Massachusetts Today
Since it is important for members to get together, we have been
holding monthly brunches. I am
amused by the fact that the person
who suggested the brunch idea
has yet to come to one, but the
crowd at a typical brunch has
grown steadily. Since our members are so spread out, we keep
encouraging them to organize local meetings and events. To date,
no one has done this, but we wait
to see what happens.
In general, meetings focus
around developing a set of policies
which can be fitted into an overall
strategy for improving the Chapter's financial condition, finding
and keeping members, and developing liaisons with the media. After
listening to people who came to
one or more meetings, it became
clear that there are many local
Atheists who previously had no
idea that a national organization
existed, but who recently became
aware of it through the American
Atheist Forum outreach. Since
members are by far the most valuable resource we have, finding
them has become our top priority,
and use of the local media our targeted method of achieving this.
Brian Lynch, Chapter Director; Peggy Amberson, Seen
This has, however, proved to be
Officer; Lauri Simmons, Publications C
extremely difficult. In Boston, the
major newspaper (the Boston
Globe) is edited by Roman Catholics, and went on a picnic in New Hampshire, but did
most of the staff is also Roman Catholic. The
not mention state/church separation or any
Op-Ed page editor is very hostile to any other substantive Atheist issue. Ironically,
organization which "attacks his church" (he the only major paper in town which is not
did not say this to us, but to a "mole" in the completely dominated by Roman Catholics
Globe staff). The Religion editor will only is the Christian Science Monitor.
report on us in a negative or harmless conThe electronic media is mostly Jewish,

October, 1985

American Atheist

but in our dealings with them they have confided to us that the influence of the Roman
Catholic Church is so strong in Boston that
they have even deliberately censored or
killed stories so as not to offend Roman
Catholics. In off-the-record comments to me
and to a member on separate occasions, one
local television producer stated that he
could not do a show dealing with the Vatican's role in assisting thousands of Nazi
criminals escape Germany after World War
IIor its continuing support of fascist regimes
around the world, because the station would
lose advertising revenue. He, not being an

newsletter entitled ''The Vatican/Nazi Con- - making it difficult to form any liaisons with
nection" by member Ron Tanguay.
them. For this reason, I encourage all AmerThe producer's concern over loss of ican Atheists to approach the public access
advertising revenues was well-founded,
people at their local cable access television
since the station is one of the most profitable
outlet and find out what procedures are
in the nation (it was recently sold to Rupert
necessary to get the American Atheist TeleMurdoch for $450 million). There are insuffi- vision Forum (AATVF) on. This is a major
cient media outlets in Boston for a truly project in our Chapter. As Director, my job
democratic exchange 'of information and is motivating people to act, since public
ideas. Time for commercials is at a premium,
access people will usually deal only with
so program content is dictated by powerful,
people who live in the particular town.
wealthy interests - big business and reli- Regrettably, the city in which I live does not
gion. The content of local newscasts reflects
have cable access television yet, so I cannot
the influences of these special-interest
set an example. So far, no station has
groups; much of it is random gos- refused to air the AATVF (we would probasip - tales about local people,
bly sue any that did), although some have
fashion plugs, sports, and weather,
declined because of policies requiring public
and an incredible amount of access programming to be "locally origi"news" showing priests and
nated." To encourage members to get the
preachers talking to congregations
AATVF on cable access television, we have
(especially on weekends). The
begun to recognize successful efforts in our
local PBS outlet is the only televi- newsletter. Larry Tall, our former Vicesion station which has even men- Director, and I were the first to be so recogtioned that the famine in East nized after we got the AATVF onto Boston
Africa is due to explosive populaCablevision for a second eight -week run.
tion growth - or even suggested
Another avenue we have pursued vigorthat abortion and birth control are ously is that of getting the American Atheist
good ideas. No television station
magazine into public libraries. We thought
has ever dared to examine whether
that we would encounter a lot of resistance,
or not Christian Science parents
so we geared up for a tough battle with librarare engaging in child abuse when
ies and town governments. To our pleasant
they deny sick children medical
surprise, librarians have been very cooperatreatment for religious reasons,
tive, and do display the magazine.
although once in a while they reIn the past year, we also tried an experiport on cases where state agencies
ment in advertising which taught us that
have administered needed treatsmall ads in "big" papers are a poor strategy
ment to children of Jehovah's Wit- for getting members. We ran ads in a popunesses, citing regulations which lar weekly paper for thirteen weeks, and got
overrule parents' religious objec- only three members out of the endeavor.
tions.
After looking at the results of the national
Lest you think we Boston Athe-. survey, it became clear why this was a disasists are never given media attenter. Atheists are generally older and more
tion, I will say that we have been
socially/politically conscious than the pawell-treated by several radio sta- per's readers, who are mostly college stutions. Talk-show hosts like to have dents and working people 18-30 years old
us on during ratings sweeps (which (fortunately for the Chapter, most of the
occur every three months). They
project's cost was covered by one member's
know an Atheist will keep people
generous donation). While we do not wish to
listening, and this willenable them
"write off" college students, we see the proto charge advertisers more money. fessors as our target audience, so we plan to
\
For radio stations, which appeal to advertise in college newspapers to see if we
small market segments, the rates
do better. A large percentage of college proare lower than for television, so fessors and educators in our area seem to be
more advertisers can afford to agnostics or Atheists, so we think it is imporadvertise. This broader base of tant to reach them and let them know there
advertisers
allows somewhat
is an organization working to end the progreater latitude for programmers.
motion of irrational, primitive ideas.
etary; Steve Mason, Vice Director; Nic Johnson, Liaison
Of course, the real problem is a
It is even more difficult to reach educators
oordinator; Arthur D'Angelo, Treasurer
restricted number of media outlets
in public primary or secondary schools. I
(this limit is set by the FCC). We was appalled to hear a junior high school
Atheist, said that we "would not believe how are encouraged by the growth of cable tele- science teacher - who I have not heard
intimate and extensive the Vatican's rela- vision, since there is a potential for greater
from since - tell me that Watertown distionship with repressive military govern- access, but this remains to be seen, since courages teachers from talking about evoluments is." I am not so sure that we (as people much of what is on cable is simply redundant
tion (especially saying it is a fact) because it
broadcast television, and many of the cable
well-acquainted with the Roman Catholic
is too "controversial." I am told that the
Church's history) would not believe it. At access television-only stations are run from situation is worse in cities like Brockton
any rate, the result was an article in our Washington, New York, and Los Angeles
(where there is a large fundamentalist popu-

Austin, Texas

October, 1985

Page 21

lation), Lawrence, New Bedford, and Fall

River (with a large immigrant/Roman Catholic population), and cities where a small
tax-base (made up largely of low-income
people) results in poorly-funded, poorquality schools. So religionists have had an
effect on education here - science is being
downgraded because people fear controversy more than they value education.
We maintain a Dial-An-Atheist line. I have
tried a number of different types of messages and have found the hard-hitting ones
to draw the best responses. Our messages
are not primarily intended as attacks on religion; they are efforts to educate the public
concerning the real nature of religion. In the
past, messages have dealt with the Declaration of Independence, statements by famous
Americans, repressions by religion, state/
church violations, and the ethical and intellectual superiority of Atheism vis-a-vis
religion.
In 1985, we gained two new members who
have contributed immensely to American
Atheists: Lauri Simmons and Ron Tanguay.
Lauri's assistance with the Chapter Newsletter has been invaluable, and she is willing
to type press releases (not that the press
ever releases them), letters to congressmen,
and other correspondences. Ron Tanguay
possesses a staggering collection of books,
and his knowledge of history is extremely
comprehensive. Currently, he is working on
a book which willexpose Christianity as the
biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the human race and show how this religion has
been the greatest bar to human progress
over the past 1900 years. Other members
whose efforts deserve recognition are Arthur D'Angelo, who has dutifully kept
records of the Chapter's finances for five
years, and Peggy Amberson, who coordinates all of our mailings - largely by herself
- and has never failed to get an important
notice out to members and supporters (even
when it went out to one thousand people).
Liaison Officer Nic Johnson is very good at
stabilizing and injecting reason into discussions at meetings, and longtime Atheists
John Solo and Harry Sherman have given us
many helpful suggestions.
A few accomplishments in 1985 are worth
noting: First, we held a meeting with Congressman Barney Frank, who addressed
and listened to our concerns. Second, we
have begun to set up booths at town fairs
and festivals. And finally, for the really brazen Atheists (of which we do have a few!),
we have had printed sweatshirts designed by
member Lauri Simmons which say "American Atheists" on the front, and "In reason
we trust" on the back. The purpose of the
sweatshirts is both to bring in revenue for
the Chapter and to promote the organization, both of which are being accomplished.
So far, no one has been attacked by mad
religionists while wearing one - in fact, it

Page 22

has been found to keep the religionists away

(Religionist Repellant?), while attracting the
Atheists.
Looking Forward
Our next major project is to get the state's
"blue laws" repealed. There is a whole chapter in the General Laws of the Commonwealth which outlaws activities such as distributing contraceptives to unmarried people, adultery, "unnatural" sex acts, and "blasphemy." We know that some state legislators want these laws removed, but for the
past fifteen years religious groups (Roman
Catholic in particular) have fought to keep
the laws on the books. While we do not
doubt the sincerity of legislators' expressions, we know that there will probably
never be enough votes in the legislature to
repeal some of these laws. Therfore, we are
thinking of challenging the Commonwealth
in a federal court. I think this is important,
since it willbe an effective vehicle for making
ourselves known to many of the Commonwealth's Atheists. But I am not certain if we
willbe able to finance the suit. In the meantime, we are slowly building a "war chest" of
funds.
Our first step towards challenging the
blue laws and seeking their repeal, as well as
promoting freedom of speech and separation of state and church, was a "Rally for the
First Amendment" on the steps of the state
capitol building in Boston on July 4, 1985.
[See page 23.] Merely asserting one's First
Amendment-rights in Massachusetts is not,
however, a simple matter of getting people
together and assembling for a "free speech."
In order to legally march in front of the
capitol, we had to obtain permits from the
City of Boston and pay for police protection.
Naturally, if we were Roman Catholics, we
would simply have to cry "freedom of religion means never having to pay for anything" - or words to that effect - and the
city would have imposed costs on the taxpayers, as it did when the pope came to town
a few years back. This is just another example of how the state and local governments
in the United States violate the Constitution
by forcing people to support religion but pay
for dissenting, or speaking out, as they are
entitled to do.
The state, however, cannot stop us from
speaking entirely, and the Boston police
(who were very helpful) told us we could
hold a protest without cost ifwe restricted all
activity to public sidewalks, did not obstruct
traffic, and did not assault pedestrians. So
we carried signs, made literature available
(free, of course; ifwe sell anything in Boston,
we need a vendor license), and made short
speeches to protest the government's continuing support and promotion of religion
-even to the point of making criticism of
religion an unlawful act.

October, 1985

The Reagan presidency has set a tone in

the nation which denigrates intellectualism
and encourages superstitious, unreasoned
thinking. Religiosity has been encouraged
and promoted to a degree not seen since the
McCarthy era, and most people refuse to
discuss it. Many people who are concerned
will not act (they seem to be afraid of some
dire consequences), but they might support
an organization of Atheist activists - ifthey
knew one existed.
It is difficult to have a major impact for the
reasons I have outlined, and also because
the principal means for redress and equity
for dissenting groups (the judiciary branch
of government) has been largely closed off
by the Reagan administration - which has
stuffed the federal courts with right -wing
radicals who are extremely hostile to the Bill
of Rights and who are deeply religious. Since
1981, over 240 of the 740 judgeships in the
federal system have been filled by Reagan
appointees, and the projection by legal scholars is that by 1988, over 400 judgeships will
have been filled by Reaganites. That's over
fifty-fivepercent! The effect of this on organizations like American Atheists (and other
organizations working for a just, humane
society) will be devastating; the federal
courts will become a tool which the executive branch can use to ratify or enforce its
own policies, rather than a separate but
equal branch of government.
Nonetheless, our Chapter knows it must
maintain visibility, and this may take many
forms. We plan to set up more booths at
public fairs as well as independently; we will
continue to stage rallies and public protests,
and we are willingto work with other organizations the goals of which we share when we
playa role in shaping the agenda. While we
have not joined any of the loose coalitions
for disarmament or abortion rights, we have
put out literature on our own which makes
our positions on these subjects clear. We
deplore the efforts by religious organizations
to capitalize on these issues, and we willnot
join a coalition which uses morality arguments, prayers, and other religious actions
to promote its programs. We think these
issues are intrinsically important enough to
warrant enough attention and action without any interference by religion.
It is never easy to see or know what the
future holds, but it looks like a tough road for
Atheists in the United States. There is more
need than ever to find and organize Atheists
to fight the onslaught of religious irrationality
and superstition being promoted by the
allied forces of government and religion.
You can be sure the Massachusetts Chapter
of American Atheists willbe there. ~

American Atheist

Left: Brian Lynch researching for his next article.

Below Left: Peggy Amberson, Lauri Simmons,
John Solo, Arthur DeAngelo,
and Peter
Dazmond,
story concerning him is as much a fable and a fiction
as that of the god Prometheus, the tragedy of whose
death is said to have been acted on the stage in the
theatre at Athens, five hundred years before the
Christian era.
"3. Universalists believe in miracles, which I do not;
but believe that every pretension to them can be
accounted for on natural principles, or else is to be
attributed to mere trick and imposture.
"4. Universalists believe in the resurrection of the
dead, in immortality and eternal life, which I do not;
but believe that all life is mortal, that death is an
eternal extinction of life to the individual who possesses it, and that no individual life is, ever was, or
ever will be eternal."
Kneeland was found guilty as charged and sentenced to imprisonment for three months in the
common gaol. From this judgment he appealed to the
Supreme Judicial Court and in the Noveru,ger, 1835
term was tried and again convicted. Kneeland then
asked for a new trial which was argued on March 8,
1836. He was again found guilty and this time sentenced to sixty days in jail - which he served.
Despite several attempts to have the law erased
from the books, it stillstands, as Criminal Statute 272 ;
36 Blasphemy and reads as follows:
"Whoever wilfully blasphemes the holy name of
God by denying, cursing or contumeliously reproaching God, his creation, government or final judging of
the world, or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ or the Holy Ghost, or by cursing or
contumeliously reproaching or exposing to contempt
and ridicule, the holy word of God contained in the
holy scriptures shall be punished by imprisonment in
jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more
than three hundred dollars, and may also be bound to
good behavior."

ABNER KNEELAND AND GOD

The Roots of a Blaspheme-In
On December 20, 1833, over one hundred and fifty years ago, Abner Kneeland, an Atheist, was indicted under St. 1782, c, 8 of the Massachusetts code.
The indictment alleged that Kneeland unlawfully and wickedly composed,
printed, and published in a newspaper called the Boston Investigator, of which
he was the editor and publisher, a certain scandalous, impious, obscene,
blasphemous, and profane libel, in which he "did wilfullyblaspheme the holy
name of God, by denying and contumeliously reproaching God, his creation,
government, and final judging of the world, and by reproaching Jesus Christ
and the Holy Ghost, and contumeliously reproaching the holy word of God."
The disgusting, scandalous, profane, vile, and blasphemous words of Abner
Kneeland were then set out in full, to wit:
"1. Universalists believe in a god which I do not; but believe that their god,
with all his moral attributes (aside from nature itself) is nothing more than a
mere chimera of their own imagination.
"2. Universalists believe in Christ, which I do not; but believe that the whole

Austin, Texas

October, 1985

On July 4th, 1985, the Massachusetts Bay Chapter

of American Atheists, under the leadership of Brian
Lynch, decided to hold a "Blaspheme-In" in front of
the State Capitol Building in Boston, Massachusetts.
Distinctly confronting the statutory provision, a typical sign read: "There is no god. There are only liars
who say there is, and fools who believe them."
Nothing could have been more explicit as an example
of contumelious blasphemy. The turnout was excellent for this god-ridden state, and so was the level of
enthusiasm among those who participated. Not alone
did the picketing Atheists assert again their rights to
free speech and peaceable assembly but they, by their
activity, protested the continual attempts by the religionists to subvert the Constitution of the United
States or replace it with religious strictures.
Although some Atheists were discouraged or dissuaded from attendance because of Boston's legendary bad driving conditions, or the looming threat of
potential arrest since the Blasphemy Statute is in full
force and effect, all such fears turned out to be largely
unfounded. The traffic was light and the Capitol police

Page 23

were very helpful - one of them even seemed to

support what the picketers were attempting.
The oldest picket on the line was Ida Spiegel, age
ninety. And to fly in the face of the lie that as one gets
older one gets more religion, she was attended by
John Solo, age seventy-seven, and Arthur D'Angelo,
age seventy-four!
As thousands of Bostonians drove or walked by on
this special holiday for the country, many took pictures, some stopped to talk - and the religious crazies were also in evidence. As the latter kept assaulting pedestrians with religious junk-literature, the
police needed to intervene to instruct them to desist
from making nuisances of themselves by their obnoxious proselytizing efforts.
The Connecticut Chapter of American Atheists
sent representatives, and Larry Carter, with his
daughter Courtney, drove over 1,300 miles from Des
Moines, Iowa to be a part of the endeavor.
The news in Massachusetts that night did not cover
any event in the state dealing with the Constitution,
the Billof Rights, or the Declaration of Independence,
so it was axiomatic that it would not report on this
group which was demonstrating for the Independence
of the A erican Mind from the Shackles of Religion.
In our day and age, that is simply exercising too
much "independence" even on the Fourth of July.
Nonetheless it was an invigorating and interesting
afternoon for those on the picket line and an educational display for all those who saw them and came to
have an understanding that American Atheism is alive
and well in Massachusetts. ~
Top: American Atheists (left) trying to keep a
straight face; Jews for Jesus (note puppet) on
right.
Middle: John Solo, Arthur DeAngelo, Don
Batchelder.
Bottom Right: The Massachusetts/Connecticut
picket line.
Below: 90-year-old Ida Spiegel, 77-year-old John
Solo.

Page 24

October, 1985

American Atheist

THE ATHEIST NEXT DOOR

The Atheist Next Door" is an attempt to supply information regarding

contemporary Atheists, their feelings,
problems, and perspectives. And it is
written by the experts in this field: everyday American Atheists. From time to
time the life and opinions of an Atheist
are spotlighted in this column. If you are
interested in being The Atheist Next
Door," just write to: P. O. Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117 and ask for information.
This Atheist Next Door" is David J.
Bear" Mann, a thirty-six-year-old
computer technician. His hobbies include amateur radio, computers, reading, walks in the country, and photography. He is currently pursuing a
Master's degree in Management.
Why are you an Atheist?
I am this way because as I grew up, I
became a voracious reader; I got my hands
on every book I could find. My favorite fields
are science and nineteenth- and twentiethcentury history. From my studies of science,
I came to recognize the fact that everything
can be explained scientifically. Polio is not a
punishment from gawd, but a virus. Epilepsy
is not devil-possession, but a problem with
synaptic junctions in the brain, which can be
controlled with medication. Geology, physics, mathematics ... all can be explained
rational/y. Gawd is for those who find it difficult, or who refuse, to acknowledge the fact
that Man does not know everything. I do not
have those problems.
How did you become an Atheist?
Early in life, I was seeing things which did
not make sense. I had to go to those boring
services and Sunday School, but Mom and
Dad never went. Why? I was taught that we
Jews were not racist nor did we harbor prejudices, only to hear my maternal grand
mother using words like shikse and shaygets, goyim, and the like, as though every
non-Jew was something dirty, horrid, nasty.
My mother was not as bad, but she sure
wanted my brother and me to be around
"our own kind" - to the point that when we
moved to another neighborhood, we went to
an area filled with Jewish people. Good people, but they were of a whole different way of
life, and I felt as though I was in a foreign
land. As I grew older, Icame to recognize my
parents' behavior as hypocrisy. It blew my
mind when my mother remarried, to a goy of
all things! He is also about the finest human
being I have ever known. Mom doesn't say

Austin, Texas

much about the goyim anymore. I wonder

why?
What have reactions to your Atheism
been? From family, friends, co-workers?
Well, that runs a broad spectrum. I have
said to my folks that I am an Atheist, at least
to my mother I did, and got about as much
reaction as if I had said, "There's a ladybug
on that flower over there." Nothing! Yet, I
have noticed that when I have dinner at their
house, my step- dad does not say grace
anymore, at least not in my presence. He is
Presbyterian, by the way, and goes to church
about six or eight times a year maximum.
Friends? I have one, raised in a hellfire and
brimstone family who thinks I am crazy (he's
right, but for the wrong reasons), but who
has not been preachy. Two Roman Catholic
co-workers expressed interest in why I have
become an Atheist, and my explanations are
met with what seems to be a genuine interest! One former boss of mine (Romanflavored), who knew that at one time I was a
Jew and am now an Atheist, was a bit taken
aback, but at the same time, we always were
able to carryon intelligent conversations,
with no hard feelings at all. This man reo
spected me for my hard work, my intelligence, and for being me. My lack of a beliefset did not seem to affect our relationship as
friends or as worker and boss.
Has your weltanschauung caused you
any personal or professional problems?
None I am aware of, but then again I do
not shout my Atheism from the housetops. I
note that there are Atheists who will not
permit religious people in their homes. I, for
one, welcome them, if they are not "thumpers" or "saviour" types. I want them to see
my books on the shelf, my music collection,
my hobby projects, and the like, and for
them to see that I lead the same sort of life
they do and am interested in the same
things. I just don't cart the unneeded baggage of an outmoded set of beliefs.
I daresay my weltanschauung was more
adversely affected in the days when I said I
was a Jew than now. Being Jewish got me
poor evaluations from a Baptist sickie I had
the misfortune of having as my division chief
when in the Navy. Seems Jesus commanded
him to do this. Our base chaplain tore a strip
offthat clown like you wouldn't believe. See?
At times military chaplains are worth something! Being Jewish got me subject to racial
and other epithets in college at the hands of
the local chapter of the Alpha Tau Omega
fraternity. After that, my step-dad resigned

October, 1985

from membership in the frat alumni association. I feel I am better off now than before!
Atheism has brought me freedom in many
ways!
Where do you, as an Atheist, get your
ethics?
Simple! Do I want someone to treat me
well and be honest? Yes! So, I do the same
for them! The British have a phrase which
comes to mind: "It just isn't done, old thing,
it just isn't done!" One just does not do
certain things, because of honesty, honor,
or consideration for others.
Do you feel that Atheism affects your
day-to-day life? Your performance on
the job or in personal relations?
I can't say much about job performance. I
do as well as I am able, treat others as they
treat me (or I avoid confrontations with the
distasteful ones), and have done with it. My
everyday life just goes right along. Saturday
and Sunday are days off, not "deh lawd's
day," and I tend to business, do my shopping, and visit my friends. No, I really don't
think being an Atheist guides my daily activities that much. I go to our local chapter
meeting every month, but aside from that,
Atheism does not act as that much of a guide
in day-to-day events.
Frequently, Christian business owners
willassociate their businesses with their
religions. For instance, such an individual's camera shop might advertise itself
as a "Christian camera shop." Do you
think that business and religion should
be mixed in this way? Should Atheist
business owners do the same?
IfI see a Jesus fish in the window, or Bible
tracts in the lobby, I turn on my heel and" go
in the direction of away!" Even in myoId
"borscht -belt" neighborhood, you saw a
Shield of David in the window of an old store
only if it happened to be one of the little
store-front synagogues the area had. Hebrew might be in a window of a deli or a
bookshop. But that is quite another matter
from places like Maranatha Auto Repair,
Christian Appliances (ever see a Christian
washing machine?), and the like. These folks
are sending a message to the community. I
find that such enterprises more often than
not are hiding something - at least it seems
to me they are. But withgawd on their side,
what have they to lose? Religion and business do not belong together in this way.

Page 25

Should Atheists try to make "converts"?

In a passive way, they can create converts. You can't push Atheism down anyone's throat any more than the Roman
Catholics were able to bring the prince of
peace to people through the thumbscrew
and stretcher rack. My friends know I am an
Atheist, they see the life I lead (honest,
clean, helpful to others, active in the community and hobbies) and if they choose to
emulate this, that is fine with me. IfAtheism
becomes part and parcel of their lives along
with it, that's marvelous! If they remain religious, that is their problem. Just let them
leave me out of it and not expect me to
support or pay for it. If they have questions
on Atheism or want to discuss it, they know
where I live and they have my phone
number.

, C\T~

Would you feel comfortable married to

a theist? Or if you already are, what special problems, if any, do you face as a
spouse?
I have no prospects of being married now
or in the future from the way things have
been going, so I am not in a position to
discuss the spousal issue. I can see where
there'd be problems about the rearing of
children, but this sort of thing can be resolved before marriage. Pre-marital agreements are common enough now that it
would be an accepted issue in such a
document.
How do you deal with traditionally religious activities or ceremonies, such as
marriages or wakes?
Ido not participate in group prayers or the
like. When my step-dad would say grace, I
would not bow my head. I didn't drum my
fingers on the table or sing "Oh! Susannah!"
but Imerely looked ahead and waited for this
boring bit of time-waste to go by. As for
funerals, I have been to one, and hope never
to go to another. A very dear friend went
down in a small plane, and I went to a
memorial service which was held before his
body was flown back to his home in Nigeria.
He was taken out of that aircraft in several
pieces, and fortunately it was a closed-coffin
ceremony. At the end of the service, they
opened the lid, and I was out the back door
like I had been shot from a cannon! Outside,
someone said he looked fine, like when he
was alive but sleeping! Iwas so angry at this!
I prefer to remember someone how they
were when they were living beings, not
reconstructed meat in a box. This is one
aspect of religion I find so repugnant: dwelling over what one cannot correct. Funerals?
Feh! ~

Page 26

~.

~~~oHO$P~t

"SHE" CME.~~

Eons ago ... & mating with the dust of earth brought forth the crucial
elements that "she" finally bred into the hybrid, man/womankind! It's history as you have never heard it explained to you by Emanuel, the new man! A
"60 minute" audio tape cassette is now available to you by merely filling in
the coupon below & mailing it now along with your check or money order in
the amount of $9.45 per cassette!

Please send __
"60 minute" audio cassette tape(s) explaining the real
history of life on this planet & what is going to happen on November
28,2001. Enclosed find $9.45 (we pay postage & handling) for each
tape ordered.
Name
Address
City
Mail to:

Apt. #
State

Zip

_
_

End of the World Enterprises

11684 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 332
Studio City, CA 91604

October, 1985

American Atheist

THE PROBING MIND / Frank R. Zindler

'\

THE PROSPECT OF
PHYSICALIMMORTALITY
PART II: STALLING THE REAPER

When forty winters shall besiege thy

brow,
And dig deep trenches in thy beauty's
field,
Thy youth's proud livery, so gaz'd on
now,
Will be a tatter'd weed, of small worth
held:
Then being ask'd where all thy beauty
lies,
Where all the treasure of thy lusty days,
To say within thine own deep-sunken
eyes
Were an all-eating shame and thriftless
praise ...
- William Shakespeare
Second Sonnet
n the first part of this series ("Why Die?",
ISeptember,
1985) I examined the evolutionary background of the question, "Why
do animals and people die?" My conclusion
was that there was no theoretical reason for
men to continue to die, now that science has
given us the knowledge needed to bypass
the wasteful process of natural selection and
to direct our own further evolution as we see
fit. I predicted that man would be able to
achieve immortality by the year 2000 - less
than fifteen years from now.
It was part of my thesis that aging - and
therefore death - may to some extent be
the result of genetic programming and that
there may in fact be actual "suicide genes." I
argued that it would be good fortune, not
tragedy, if in fact our life-spans were genetically determined, since genetic engineers are rapidly learning how to turn genes
on and off, alter genes, and add and subtract
genes from living cells. Disarming human
suicide genes and/or reprogramming them
into immortality-conferring genes would
require genetic techniques only slightly
beyond our present capability.
Although I am convinced we have a
genetic predisposition to succumb to the
ravage wrought by time, there are other factors with which we must deal first, even if
they should prove not to be the central
cause of aging. These are problems which, if

Austin, Texas

dealt with effectively, would allow us to buy

extra time during which we could grapple
with The Reaper himself.
Two such factors for immediate attention
are cellular oxidation and molecular crosslinking. As we shall see, these two factors
are quite interrelated.
When life first originated, billions of years
ago, the earth's atmosphere was rather similar to the atmosphere of the other planets. It
lacked molecular oxygen. Though we tend
to think of oxygen as essential for life, the
first steps toward the formation of livingsystems would have been impossible had there
been more than tiny amounts of oxygen in
the atmosphere. Oxygen would have destroyed the simple organic molecules present on the early earth long before they could
have joined together to form the complicated molecules needed in living systems.
For all early forms of life - indeed, for some
anaerobic bacteria yet today - oxygen was
a poison, a substance destructive to the
machinery of the cell.
Some while after life began, an evolutionary crisis developed. Although the first
photosynthetic microorganisms were not
oxygen-producers, eventually photosynthetic algae evolved which began to produce
what was to be the first world-wide environmental pollutant: molecular oxygen.
From that time on, algae and the plants descended from them have given off oxygen as
a waste-product of photosynthesis, and
nearly all forms of life on earth have had to
develop physiological defenses against it or
perish. Over billions of years of evolution,
most living things have "turned adversity to
advantage" and are now actually dependent
upon this erstwhile enemy for the production of energy.
But oxygen can still be an enemy in the
cell. In a process analogous to rusting, it can
still break down the compounds of which life
is made. It may also cause the production of
enormously reactive particles called free
radicals.
Free radicals may often be to cells what
bulls are to china shops: dangerous. They
may attack any of the giant molecules of the

October, 1985

cell, including the genes themselves (DNA

molecules). They may chemically activate
molecules in such a way as to cause two or
more of them to link together, producing
giant, insoluble molecular monsters. In
short, oxidation may lead to the formation of
free radicals; free radicals may activate proteins and other molecules and cause them to
cross-link and join together. And that, as we
shall see, may lead to trouble.
One of the most dramatic examples of the
destructive power of oxidative free-radical
processes in human aging is the damage
done to structural proteins - molecules
which give us our characteristic shapes,
provide a stage on which the chemical marriages and divorces known as life can be
solemnized, and serve as selective barriers
between the participants in these rites and
the often-hostile audience known as the
environment.
One such protein is collagen. Perhaps the
most abundant single protein in the body,
collagen accounts for twenty-five to thirty
percent of total body protein. It is abundant
in skin, bones, tendons, and the walls of
blood vessels, and it is frequently encountered as a sort of wrapping around the cells
of many other organs of the body. It is a
major component of connective tissue. It is
often associated with elastin, another major
structural molecule.
Collagen and elastin molecules are normally long and fibrous in shape. In young
persons these molecules are able to move
freely past and around each other. The skin,
therefore, is elastic and resilient. When
pinched, young skin will immediately snap
back into shape.
As a person ages, however, his collagen
and elastin molecules become progressively
oriented parallel to each other, very much as
though they were crystallizing. The older
one becomes, the more these molecular fibers become welded together, side-by-side,
as a result of oxidation-induced crosslinkage. Thus the skin of old people becomes inelastic, deformed, wrinkled, and
leathery. As a matter of fact, tanning, the
process whereby skin is turned into leather,

Page 27

is actually an artificial process which causes

cross-linking of collagen. If we could find a
way to prevent excessive cross-linking of
just these two molecules (some cross-linking
is necessary, unless one is a jellyfish!), we
could eliminate almost entirely the cosmetic
debilities of old age.
The "forty winters," the "deep trenches,"
and the "deep-sunken eyes" which Shakespeare bemoans all relate to the oxidative
cross-linking of collagen and elastin, accelerated by the harsher environment of Elizabethan England. Ironically, it was not the
forty winters which dug the trenches, but
rather the forty summers with their freeradical-producing ultraviolet rays. Suntanning is not just a color-producing process: Sun-tanning is tanning in the leathermaking sense as well!
.
Most readers will agree that preventing
the appearance of old age would itself be a
significant achievement. But I am confident
that the true effect of the process would be
more than "skin-deep"! As mentioned
above, many cells are surrounded by a
wrapping of collagen, or else they must
receive their nutrients from blood vessels
which are wrapped with collagen fibers. In
the young body, nutrients easily pass
through these barriers into the cells, and
wastes easily pass out of the cells into the
blood. When the collagen is not excessively
cross-linked, materials pass in and out of the
cell as easily as Olympic runners leaping
hurdles on a track. But as the collagen ages,
the course becomes more and more tortuous. Runners have to pass through what
comes to be more and more like a junglegym. They may get through to the finish line,
but they won't win any races. The cells
become more and more choked off from
supply sources, and metabolism slows
down. Fewer and fewer biochemical deadlines are met, and disorder increases. Regulatory processes become progressively imbalanced, and death ensues. If we could
prevent just the cross-linking of collagen and
elastin, a lot of derailed biochemical trains
could be put back on their tracks, and we
should be able to double our life-expectancy.
Fortunately, we don't have to wait until
the year 2000 to be able to slow down, prevent, or perhaps even reverse the excessive
cross-linking of collagen. There are steps we
can take right now to help stall The Reaper.
A number of antioxidant materials are
known, many of which are naturally occurring substances such as vitamins and minerals. Not only is there evidence they can slow
down the aging (cross-linking) of collagen
and elastin, there is evidence they may have
prophylactic value against both cancer and
coronary artery disease - two major impediments to the attainment of even the traditionallife-span of three-score years and ten.
Free-radical mechanisms have been impli-

Page 28

cated in the build-up of plaque in artery walls

- a primary factor in hardening of the arteries and coronary heart disease. In the case of
cancer, free-radical processes seem to be
involved whether or not the cancer is being
induced by tumor viruses or carcinogenic
chemicals.
Not only is there evidence that some of
the natural antioxidants can reduce the risk
of developing heart disease and cancer,
some of these nutrients are known to stimulate the immune system - a system which
tends to be one of the major casualties in the
battle between the body and its oxidizing
environment. Unfortunately, too great a
consumption of antioxidants may interfere
with one link in the chain of immune
defenses, the process whereby certain white
blood cells consume and digest (phagocytize) foreign cells such as bacteria or tumor
cells. It is a disturbing irony that these cells
produce free radicals as a chemical defense
against microscopic invaders. Too many
anti-oxidant molecules in the vicinity of
these immune cells can neutralize their
attempts at chemical warfare.
The two most important of the natural
antioxidant vitamins are vitamins that are
already being consumed in enormous quantities by health-minded Americans and
Europeans: vitamins C and E. Vitamin C is
water-soluble and helps to defuse free radicals in the water compartments of the cell
and in body fluids such as blood and urine.
Vitamin E is a fat-soluble vitamin, and it
helps prevent free-radical damage to cell
membranes - sandwich-like structures
comprised oflipids (fatty molecules) covered
above and below by protein molecules.
Since lipids are good electrical insulators,
they make up a very large fraction of the
molecules found in the brain, where electrical processes are of critical importance. It is
in the brain's lipid structure that vitamin E
may be of great value in preventing the buildup of fatty oxidation products such as lipofuscin and ceroid - metabolic garbage that
accumulates in nerve and other cells until
the cells are killed by the metabolic equivalent of suffocation.
Interestingly, vitamin C is also of great
importance in the brain, where vitamin C
levels exceed one-hundred-fold their levels
in circulating blood. Ever since Nobel laureate Linus Pauling published his book
Vitamin C and the Common Cold, a large
number of people (including the author)
have been consuming a gram or more of this
vitamin per day - not only for its antiviral
effect but for its antioxidant and, possibly, its
anti-aging effect as well.
Lest my readers rush out and start taking
megadoses of vitamins on the premise that
"if a little is good for me, a lot is better," I
must caution that with vitamin C as well as
with other vitamins and minerals, there may
be definite cases in which megadoses are

October, 1985

harmful. Persons suffering from certain

metabolic disorders such as diabetes and
parkinsonism, and particular types of cancer
such as melanoma, may actually be harmed
by megadoses of individual vitamins. For
example, very large doses of vitamin Care
thought by some scientists to be able to
inactivate the insulin molecule by breaking
the sulfur bridges that hold it together. In
persons with parkinsonism, large doses of
vitamin B-6 may counteract the L-dopa
commonly used in treatment.
Another antioxidant vitamin is vitamin B5, calcium pantothenate, Durk Pearson and
Sandy Shaw, in their bestseller Life Extension (Warner Books, 1982), cite a rather old
experiment in which this vitamin - one of
the active ingredients in honeybee "royal
jelly" - increased the life expectancy of
mice twenty percent when fed to them in
dosages roughly equivalent to one gram per
day for a human. I am unaware of any recent
confirmation of this study, but if it is valid
and can be extrapolated to humans, it would
appear that humans taking megadoses of
pantothenate could increase their life-expectancy by about fourteen years!
A number of people have asked me for my
opinion of the Pearson-Shaw book, having
seen copies of Life Extension on sale at
health-food and vitamin stores. My reaction
is ambivalent. On the one hand, I recommend that people read it, since it summarizes an enormous volume of technical
research, expresses it clearly, and does a
responsible job of cautioning the reader
about contraindications and dangers associated with various substances being used in
life-extension self-treatments. On the other
hand, the book oversimplifies a number of
things and I recommend that after having
read the book, readers get second opinions
by reading other books such as Prolongevity
II, by Albert Rosenfeld (Knopf, 1985) and by
checking out the primary literature in medicalor science libraries.
One of the maddening features of the
Pearson-Shaw book is that it is very difficult
to check their sources, since the copious
references at the end of their big book are
related in only the loosest fashion to particular pages and chapters in the text. The picture of Durk Pearson standing in the altogether using a surfboard as a fig-leaf also
could be dispensed with - with no decrement in scientific rigor. Nevertheless, it was
rather exciting to read the book and to discover that a number of predictions I published in newspaper columns back in 1973
have now been confirmed experimentally. It
was also exciting to see independent confirmation of experiments I had my college
biology students do in the early '70s.
In feeding experiments employing both
natural and artificial antioxidants, students
raised fruitflies on various diets and found
that vitamin E and BHT - the antioxidant

American Atheist

put in cereal boxes - measurably increased

life-expectancy _ Moreover, the BHT appeared to be better than the natural vitamin,
Pearson and Shaw believe that people can
be helped by adding BHT to their yogurt.
Needless to say, a lot more research must be
done before I willendorse that idea. Nevertheless, I have an open mind. The fact that
something is "unnatural" is not necessarily a
strike against it. After all, naturalness inexorably leads to the death of everyone!
Readers may be disappointed by the fact
that I do not, at this point in my essay, list all
the nutrients and drugs known to have antiaging effects or life-prolonging activity.
Although many such substances are known,
and although I originally had intended to do
so, I decided that it would be irresponsible to
list them all without a discussion of the ways
in which they can interact with each other
and with the body. Obviously, this cannot be
done in the space of a magazine article. People who want to live forever willsimply have
to start reading books!
While we wait for science to map clearly
the pathway to the fountain of youth, what
can we do to keep alive? What can we do to
"stall the Reaper"? For readers expecting to
be told to sleep in magnetized pyramids facing Stonehenge, most of my suggestions will
sound disappointingly like common sense.
Nevertheless, here they are.
First of all, avoid suicide. That is, don't
give yourself lung cancer by smoking anything. Marijuana depresses not only sexual
potency, but the immune response as well.
Avoid cirrhosis of the liver by shunning
excess amounts of alcohol, but drink a glass
of wine a day (unless you are predisposed to
alcoholism or suffer from certain metabolic
disorders), since moderate consumption of
wine correlates with reduced rates of atherosclerosis. If you are overweight, shed the
excess fat (caution! burning fat produces
lipid peroxides and increases your need for
antioxidants) and engage in moderate exercise. Walking and swimming are fine. Avoid
excessive exposure to the sun. When you
have to be in the sun, use a good sunscreen.
Reduce the amount of fat in your diet.
Both animal and vegetable fats peroxidize
easily, and they can become carcinogens.
Frying and baking are especially hard on fats
and render them more harmful. Vegetable
fats are more likelyto be unsaturated - that
is, they contain less hydrogen per carbon
than do saturated fats. The greater your
consumption of unsaturated fats, the greater
your need for antioxidants - a fact often
overlooked by nutritionists who wisely
counsel reduction of animal fat consumption. Since cooking involves heat, and since
heat accelerates free-radical formation,
avoid over-cooking. (But be sure you cook
your pork long enough to kill the trichina
worms!)
Avoid table sugar (sucrose) as much as

Austin, Texas

possible. Many artificial sweeteners are far

safer. Cholesterol, the villain in atherosclerosis, becomes elevated in the blood not so
much from excessive consumption of cholesterol as from metabolic conversion of
sucrose and other sugars. Honey and brown
sugar are no safer. In fact, brown sugar may
be more dangerous, because of the impurities which give it its color! Increase the
roughage content of your diet.
Begin a life-extension program involving
carefully chosen antioxidant vitamins and
other substances. This willrequire the help
of a good physician. Since most Americantrained doctors have almost no knowledge
of nutrition at all, and since most spend
more time studying accounting than the
physiology of aging, finding a good physician
to help you may very well be the most difficult, and most vital, task facing you. But if
you want a crack at real immortality (the
kind where you get to keep your brain and
genitalia) you will not give up until you find
one. European doctors tend to know more
about preventive medicine than do American doctors, who tend to think only in terms
of crisis-intervention, but the situation seems
to be improving.
The most important advice I have to offer
is use your head. Read! Read everything you
can on the subject of life-extension and
aging. Unless you are a scientist, you will
have to begin with the popular literature at
first. But once you have mastered the specialized vocabulary, start reading the scientificjournals and scholarly books devoted to
the physiology and therapy of aging. It is
absolutely essential that you proceed be-

October, 1985

yond the popular literature, lest you be

taken in by quacks. There will soon be just
as much money in the rejuvenation scam as
in the religion scam. Be forewarned!
With reasonably good luck and careful
management, you can survive to the year
2000. Ifyou can livethat long, scientific progress in the interim should have advanced to
the Point where it can keep you going until
you're 140. If civilization still exists at that
time, and ifscience has not been eclipsed by
religion, you should be able to renew your
lease as often thereafter as you wish. To an
extent far greater than you may have dared
to hope, it's up to you. You don't need help
from the man who wears high-pointed hats
and lace-fringed dresses. Barring accidental
causes of death, immortality is within your
reach.
In the next, and final, installment, we shall
contemplate "the first immortals." ~
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Formerly a professor of biology and
geology, Frank R. Zindler is now a
science writer. A member of the
American Association for the
Advancement of Science, the
American Chemical Society, and the
American Schools of Oriental
Research, he is also co-chairperson of
the Committee of Correspondence on
Evolution Education and Director of
the Central Ohio Chapter of American
Atheists.

Page 29

POETRY

THE PRICE OF OUR PEACE POLICY

I don't say we should disarm now
"The arms race pays" they say
But I think we should be aware
The price we have to pay
It means that some willsurely starve
It drains funds from our schools
It guarantees tomorrow's young
Will have a lot of fools

AUTUMN
How rare the beauty to behold
As Summer's days sift down
While Nature paints with perfect hues
Of red and gold and brown

It makes it hell on old folks

And they'll never make ends meet
And it dooms both kids and adults
To our crime-filled city streets

How rare the comfort there to feel

Soft breezes gently ease
The sweltering ways of summertime
All creatures now to please

It means most can't afford a house

It means worse public health
It means our politics are based
On war production's wealth

How rare the qualities of life

Within our northern clime
As fertile Earth outdoes itself
At Autumn harvest time

It wrecks our whole environment

As men that we elect
Keep their eyes on other matters
And we're poisoned by neglect

How rare indeed would be the man

Unhappy to recall
The many pleasant treasures of
The Equinox of Fall

The safety of destruction

("We can wipe out all their huts")
Has no guarantee from error
Or a leader who goes nuts

Gerald Tholen

I don't say we should disarm now

"The arms race pays" they say
But I think we should be aware
The dreadful price we pay.
John B. Denson

DEFIANCE
These walls intersect walls
whose windows reflect my window.
I follow the steeple's rising to where
a yellow stunt plane circles in blue,
doing barrel rolls and loop-the-loops
in the coffin-shaped slice of sky
these walls allow me to see.
I turn away, feeling religion press
against me with a gravity
exceeding that on the stunt pilot
high above the church.
I drop my Bible and walk
out the front doors into the warm
drone of the stunt plane.

THUNDERBIRD
Have you heard about the new religion
You can purchase at the school
To save your soul you simply burn a book
And crucify a fool.

JesSimmons

Tom James

Page 30

October, 1985

American Atheist

REPORT FROM INDIA / Margaret Bhatty

ALLAH IN THE DOCK

country has its laws of censorship
Every
- some more benighted and others dif-

fering only in degree. No matter how rational

these laws appear on paper, no government
has yet devised their rational application.
Censors anywhere in the world are a strange
breed. Our Customs Act gives the government powers to ban, absolutely or partially,
any foreign publication which goes against
the security of India, the maintenance of law
and order, friendly relations with other
countries, communal harmony, standards
of decency and morality, in order to prevent
the contravention of any law in force and for
any other purpose conducive to the interests of the general public. All this - to see
that we remain tolerant, patriotic, and pure
in our thinking.
Within the country, state governments
have examiners who scan publications and
ban them ifnecessary. These usually include
works of authors who refuse to toe the officialline. It is also the censor's duty to see
that we do not have access to literature
which might work us into a communal
frenzy. A ban can also be imposed on writing
which is likely to hurt the feelings of a particular community. Recently, the Maharastra
state government banned a book by an
Indian author on the Aga Khans. It told of
the beginnings of this family from a small
petty Afghan chieftain, something of a freebooter, who wheedled a pension from the
British and then went on to found his fortunes by exploiting his followers: Now, every
gossip column in the Western press must
have featured the fast lifeof this line of semidivine tycoons, but the government did not
want to have the feelings of the Khoja Muslim sect hurt by its publication in a book.
When Time-Life publications' "Great Cities" series brought out Bombay there were
protests by certain sections of citizens that
they had been misrepresented by the author
of the text. One political group burnt a copy
after a noisy demonstration. Certain orthodox Parsis objected to references to their
custom of exposing their dead. When I
bought the book I was disgusted to find that
some witless creature had been made to sit
down with a felt pen and ink over the offending references. A photograph showing attendants carrying a corpse into a Tower of.
Silence was also inked out, along with part of
the caption saying it would be placed on a

Austin, Texas

platform "there to await the attention of the

vultures." The paper has now, however,
absorbed the ink and the print is clearly
readable through it. A portion of the blackedout text tells of the controversy within the
Parsi community about this method of
exposing the dead. Reformers claim that,
"Bombay's vulture population is declining
and that corpses are therefore sometimes
simply left to putrefy. Residents of the new,
high-rise apartment blocks nearby also
complain that occasional undesirable pieces
are dropped on their balconies by the
vultures."
This is a fact, and it was reported in the
papers - but orthodox Parsis protested
their feelings were hurt by its publication in a
book. This "closed" mentality operates at all
levels among us. Short stories about a particular community willraise a riot. The portrayal of a community's marriage or divorce
traditions in a filmwillsend the pious scurrying to law courts to stop it from being
screened. A couple of years back a history
textbook for twelve-year-olds introduced in
this state brought Muslims and Catholics
into the streets in protest.
The Muslims were "hurt" over the use of a
word which, when translated into English,
implied the Prophet "ran" (chickened out)
from Mecca rather than made a more dignified and less hasty "departure." Also, they
said a reference to the enmity between Shia
and Sunni would not help promote communal harmony and a respect for all religions.
The Christians took out processions in the
streets protesting that the divinity of Christ
had been called into question in the chapter
on their religion. The Board bowed to popular pressure and changed the text.
In a multi-religious society such as ours,
with every community exhibiting this kind of
"siege mentality," we must have laws to protect us from our own follies and from any
other likely source of victimization. Under
Section 95, Criminal Procedural Code and
Sections 153 A and 295 A, Indian Penal
Code, any publication can be immediately
banned which vitiates communal harmony
by hurting the religious feelings of anyone
community.
Earlier this year, in May, these laws were
put to the test. Two Hindus moved a petition
in the Calcutta High Court demanding a ban
on the Islamic holy book, the Koran, be-

October, 1985

cause it clearly promotes hatred and communal enmity.

As it happens, West Bengal is the only
state which has an elected Marxist government, but even our Marxism is unlike anything found elsewhere. The woman justice
who heard the petition asked the West Bengal government to file an affidavit explaining
its stand on the matter. She later explained
that the reason why she didn't throw the
case out was because "It is my duty to listen
to every petitioner who comes to my court.
He may be a madman, but I must give him a
chance."
She was widely condemned for her action.
The Marxist Chief Minister called the entertainment of the petition a "despicable" act,
saying it should never have been admitted.
The bar association of the Calcutta High
Court passed a resolution expressing their
deep concern "at an attempt to make a holy
scripture a subject matter for dispute in a
court of law and/or to make the same
justiciable. "
Meanwhile small fires spread to our Islamic neighbors - Pakistan and Bangladesh
- arid angry protests were lodged with our
embassies there. The whole scenario looked
suspiciously like a deep dark conspiracy to
discredit the Muslims and their scriptures
and whip up more hatred in impressionable
Hindu minds. We were not told just what
motivated the petition. It was probably more
mischievous in spirit than an intellectual
exercise to test the existing laws.
The petitioners made a "request for the
forfeiture of the Islamic book, Koran,"
because it contains words and sayings which
promote hatred and ill-will between communities. According to the law, any book
which does so is liable to be banned by the
government whether it is a classic or an epic,
religious or secular, ancient or modern.
The fourteen-page submission quoted
chapter and verse as proof. Those of us
familiar with the implacable hatred urged
upon followers of the Bible will find many
parallels:
"Mohammed is Allah's apostle. Those
who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." Surah 48
Ayat 29
"When the sacred months are over, slay
the idolators wherever you find them. Arrest
them, besiege them and lie in ambush every-

Page 31

where for them." Surah 9 Ayat 5

"The true believers are those who have
faith in Allah and His apostle and never
doubt, and who fight for His cause with their
wealth and persons." Surah 49 Ayat 15
Quotations proved that the Koran hurts
and insults Christians saying "Unbelievers
are those who declare Allah is the Messiah
(i.e., the Christ, the son of Mary)." Surah 5
Ayat 17
"Unbelievers among the People of the
Book (Christian and Jew) and pagans shall
burn forever in the fire of Hell. They are the
vilest of all creatures." Surah 98 Ayat 6
"Garments of fire have been prepared for
unbelievers. Scalding water shall be poured
upon their heads, melting their skins and
that which is in their bellies." Surah 22 Ayat
19
Further, the Koran urges Muslims to
strike off the heads of non-Muslims and kill
them on the battlefield in the name of Allah.
They are assured of direct admission into
paradise.
In reply to these charges, a well-known
Muslim politician-cum-scholar immediately
rushed into print to set the record straight.
This was after the case was dropped. Said he
in a magazine article, "I find that certain
verses from the Koran have been cleverly
taken out of their context and shown as if it
advocated enmity towards Christians, Jews,
pagans, etc. These verses, torn out of context, out of their historical background, can
create this impression, particularly, that the
Koran preaches violence against the nonMuslims. Hence a proper understanding of
their contents and the contexts is necessary: It will remove the cobwebs and clear
the air." (Do you hear that, Ayatollah
Khomeini?)
Next the author turned up the same old
chestnut - the Koran cannot be translated.
It must be read in Arabic to be correctly
understood. The attitude of the Koran to
those of other religions is one of respect, he
said. It recognizes all the other prophets,
known and unknown, and declares that
there is no land to which god did not send
them. "The judgment is of Allah only. He
knows the truth and he is the best of
deciders."
The idolators who were to be slain,
arrested, besieged, and ambushed were
pagans of those times who had sworn to kill
the Prophet. Islam identifies two categories
of people worthy of contempt - kaJirs who
do not accept the monotheism of Allah and
mushrikhs who associate other gods with
Allah. I would think both these cover Hindus, Christians, Jews, and most other religious sects. But instead the writer guns for
another group and latches onto Atheists.
"Atheism is the eternal foe of Islam and has
to be fought unto the last."
Idolators, unbelievers, and pagans mentioned in the Koran are not Hindus in twen-

Page 32

tieth century India, but Arab pagans of preIslamic Arabia. Well, there you have it Islam loves everybody and it's the Atheists
who alone deserve its fire and brimstone.
Readers might be interested to know what
the Koran promises them, in addition to all
that is assured to them by the Christian
religion.
For starters you have "the curse of Allah
and of angels and of all men together." "The
possessions and the children of those who
disbelieve shall not avail them at all against
Allah. It is they that are the fuel of Fire. You
shall surely be vanquished and gathered
unto Hell."
Believers are advised not to take disbelievers as close friends for whom severe punishment is reserved in this world and the
next. "Make not, therefore, friends with any
of them until they emigrate in the way of
Allah. Ifthey turn away, then seize them and
kill them whenever you find them."
In conclusion: "Those who disbelieve shall
have a drink of boiling water."
Islam's bloody history and the zeal with
which it has carried the Koran and the sword
is matched only by the Christian religion.
Hindus in this country, with a memory of
Muslim rule, know who is meant by idolators, pagans, and unbelievers. It was this
same religious hatred which forced upon us
the vivisection of the Indian sub-continent
on a basis of religion.
Had the case in question gone ahead we
would have had more bloodbaths. The central government in Delhi, alarmed at the
possible fallout, rushed the law minister to
West Bengal and had the whole matter
quietly dropped. The state government had,
however, already prepared its defence as
the sole respondents and it made sure that
this statement got full publicity.
I am giving some extracts from this written application for two reasons: It emanates
from a Marxist government presumably
made up of Atheists who are promised hellfire and boiling water to drink. I find that
amusing. And this government, through its
spokesman, makes astonishing claims on
behalf of a non-existent being without a
shred of evidence in support. Says he:

Quran, the Bible, the Geeta, the

Granth Sahib, etc., or their translations cannot be the subject-matter of
adjudication in a court of law. AllHoly
Scriptures are immune from judicial
scrutiny.
I submit that this Honourable Court
has no jurisdiction to pronounce a
judgment on the Quran, the Holy
Scriptures of the Muslims all over the
world, each and every word of which,
according to Islamic belief, is unalterable.
With our incredible propensity for doublespeak and double-think, sometimes I think
we Indians go around dressed most gaudily
in the emperor's new clothes!! ~
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
In the year 1978, your editors, assisted
by Joseph Edamaruku, editor of an
Indian Atheist publication, combed
India seeking writers who would
consistently offer an interpretation of
Indian religious events. Margaret
Bhatty, in Nagpur, a weD-known
feminist journalist, agreed that she
would do so in the future. She joined
the staff of the American Atheist in
January, 1983.

I state that according to the Islamic

belief the Holy Quran is a Divine
Book. It contains the words of God
Almighty revealed to His last Prophet
Muhammad. The verses of the Holy
Quran were revealed on the happenings of particular events and its each
and every verse has a connotation of
its own on different and separate
background.
I further state that as the Holy
Quran is a Divine Book no earthly
power can sit upon judgment on it and
no court of law has jurisdiction to
adjudicate it. The Holy Books like the

October, 1985

American Atheist

HISTORICAL NOTES

100 Years Ago ...

The Ninth Annual Congress of the
National Liberal League was held on October 9,10, and 11, 1885, in Cleveland, Ohio.
Three hundred individuals were in attendance, including forty from Alliance, Ohio
and twenty from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Such freethought luminaries as Robert
Ingersoll, Charles Watt, Samuel P. Putnam,
Eugene MacDonald, and John E. Remsburg
addressed the Congress. Others who sympathized with the goals of the League (which
changed its name at this convention to the
"American Secular Union") were unable to
attend but sent messages of comradeship.
One such individual was Elizabeth Cady
Stanton, who wrote to Samuel P. Putnam as
follows:
"Dear Sir:
"Your letter asking for the manuscript of
my speech, partly prepared for Albany, to be
read by you at Cleveland, is at hand.
"I am always thankful to get my thoughts
before the people, and would gladly send
that address to you ifit were in shape for you
to read; but it is not, and I am so busy just
now giving the finishing touches to a book to
be published at the holidays that, with constant writing and proof reading, I have no
time for anything but the imperative work
this involves; hence I cannot write out and
arrange what you desire. If I can find time to
throw the substance of it in a letter to the
Congress, I willtry to do that.
"Religious liberty for woman, which would
necessarily involve civil and social liberty,
would be the most momentous revolution
the world has ever known. It would be in fact
the upheaving of the state, the church, and
the home, as they are all based on the subordination of woman - a triple power that
has thus far crucified the mother of the race.
"Respectfully yours,
"Elizabeth Cady Stanton"

60 Years Ago ...

The Haldeman-Julius Monthly was often
the platform for particularly beautiful criticisms of religion and splendid enunciations
of Atheism. The October 1925 number was
no different. What follows are the concluding paragraphs of the essay "The Poor
Man's God" by E. Haldeman-Julius, the
journal's editor.
"There is no room for God in a full life.
There is room for superstitions and unrealities in the empty, hopeless, starved, cheated, stunted life. The joys of life do not provide the right kind of soil for the cultivation of
a religious state of mind: it is on the rocky

Austin, Texas

hillside acres, in the poorer fields of life, that

religion has its rankest weedlike growth.
God looks bigger to the narrow view: he
shrinks and evaporates in the wider, sunlit
view that beckons indeed to other views and
fields. Skepticism, agnosticism, atheism is
the mental attitude of health and sanity and
joy. Religion is the gloomy product of poverty and ignorance and despair. God is an
escape from reality, a substitute for solid
thoughts and things, a pathetic effort of
compensation.
"'Faith,' according to the definition of the
Apostle Paul, 'is the substance of things
hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.'
And man, practically if not philosophically a
materialist at heart, discovers in the substance and evidence of life a better employment and feeding of his faculties than in the
stale, flat, and unprofitable faith of religion."

30 Years Ago ...

A couple of decades later, the Congress'
addition of "In God We Trust" to all U.S.
currency would become a rallying point for
Atheists in the United States. But the
October 1955 Progressive World had only
this short comment under the title "Hypocrisy Triumphant!" on the June 1955 change:
"Congress has passed and the President
has signed into law a bill requiring the
inscription 'In God We Trust' to be put on all
United States currency and coins."

25 Years Ago ...

The Freethinker, the voice of Great Britain's National Secular Society, offered this
tidbit in its October 28, 1960, edition about
an article in a popular magazine:
"The November issue of Men Only contained an excellent article by John Graham,
'Does it matter if you don't believe in God?'
in which he 'set out to discover what handicaps, if any, an atheist or an agnostic has to
suffer in Britain today,' and found quite a
number in connection with teaching, child
adoption, nursing, politics, broadcasting,
and law. Mr. Graham sought and reported
the views of the Ethical Union, National
Secular Society, and Rationalist Press Association, and summarised his findings thus:
'If someone told you that one person in
every five was being forced to keep his
mouth shut about his beliefs, and perhaps
would only get a better job by lying - by
abandoning his principles - you might be
reluctant to believe it. You might change
your opinion, however, ifyou did not believe
in God.' Mr. Graham's article was followed
by a short review by Mr. Fenton Bresler, of

October, 1985

laws affecting unbelievers. Blasphemy, it

pointed out 'has been a crime ever since the
time of the Tudors,' but for 'the spreading of
atheistic views to become blasphemy, there
must be such abuse or ridicule as was likely
to exasperate the feelings of others and lead
to a breach of the peace.' "

10 Years Ago ...

The October 1975 issue of the American
Atheist reprinted an interview of Woody
Allen from the Los Angeles Times in which
the comedian said:
"I would define my position somewhere
between Atheism and Agnosticism. I vacillate between those two positions frequently.
"I was raised religiously and never really
took to it very much. It was more or less a
forced religious background. But I found
over the years the things that interested me
most were philosophical themes because, I
guess, they are genuine interests or obsessions."

5 Years Ago ..
The October 1980 American Atheist featured an analysis of religion by Jon Garth
Murray titled "Wishing Won't Make It So."
Here are two particularly timeless paragraphs from it:
"Essential to all god theories is 'wish fulfillment.' The 'coming true of a dream.' Adherents of all religions strive toward their 'wish'
coming true, but they strive hypnotically.
They do not work toward a reasonable goal.
They cogitate in endless circles about their
'wish,' hoping that tangible results will be
forthcoming. This circular cogitation is like
an S.O.S. being given out by a buoy in the
sea in the hopes that someone willhear and
provide aid. In the same way the religionist
runs over and over the same 'wish' in his/her
mind hoping that something 'out there,'
some place, will hear and fulfill.
"The whole scheme is very egotistical. It
places the individual in a position of centrality to all things around him/her. He and his
'wish' are of utmost importance. Sending
out the endless signals for fulfillment of the
'wish' comes first. So, essential to all god
theories is a personal centrality, a feeling
that each religious man is the central figure
and all that goes on around him is separate
and secondary to his wish fulfillment. So,
man has always been billed as the center of
the 'universe.' Man is then supposed to be
the 'special reason' made only to float in the
sea of reality and to be intent only in putting
out the constant signal to be saved. Saved
from what? Why, reality, of course."

Page 33

AMERICAN A THEIST RADIO SERIES / Madalyn O'Hair

AN INQUIRY ABOUT GOD'S SONS

When the first installment of a regularly scheduled, fifteen-minute, weekly American Atheist radio
series on KTBC radio (a station in Austin, Texas, owned by then-president Lyndon Baines Johnson) hit
the airwaves on June 3,1968, the nation was shocked. The programs had to be submitted weeks in
advance and were heavily censored. The regular production of the series ended in September, 1977,
when no further funding was available.
The following is the text of American Atheist Radio Series program No. 147,first broadcast on June
14,1971.
n March 6, 1876, the editor of Truth
Seeker magazine in New York CityO
a magazine for Atheists - received the following letter:
West Amboy, N.Y., March 6, 1876
Mr. Editor:
May I ask you a few questions? I
have looked fruitlessly for some of
your contributors to touch upon the
subject which I willhere allude to.
In Genesis 6 we read that "The sons
of God saw the daughters of man that
they were fair, and they took them
wives . . . and they bare children to
them, the same became mighty men
which were of old, men of renown."
Now I wish to know if that hybridbiped mule-race has become extinct,
or the God qualities only imperceptible from the extensive dilution since
then?
Was the Cardiff Giant one of these
mighty men petrified? And if the experiment was deemed successful, why
was the practice discontinued? Was it
because God had got out of sons, and
his wife Mary having died he was
forced to yield his parental prerogatives, as far as propagation, being content to step-father us all, or take to
himself another wife?and you know a
burnt child dreads the fire.
Also, was his celestial wife, mother
of the aforesaid sons, dead, or was he
guilty of Beecherism* in his connections with the Virgin Mary?
Respectfully yours,
Jennie Leete
D. M. Bennett, who was then the editor of
that magazine, replied as follows:
Reply. - This is probably one of the
"mysteries of godliness" which the
Christian clergymen tell us so much
about. It is indeed an interesting sub-

Page 34

ject, and it is a pity that the good

divines who receive such munificent
salaries to impart information pertaining to God are not able to throw more
light upon this very important business. As we are assured the Bible is
the source of all truth, and as it explicitly states that the sons of God took
the daughters of men for wives, and
that they bore them children who
became mighty men of renown, we
have no resource left but to believe it
was just so. If God had sons in those
olden times he must also have had a
wife or wives, for those sons necessarilyhad to have mothers, as no son has
ever had an existence but through the
office of a mother.
It is not a little singular that, in the
inspired accounts of those early transactions given in the book which our
Christian friends so greatly revere,
some description of the mothers of
those boys is not given? We are left
entirely in doubt whether they were of
celestial or terrestrial existence;
whether God in his family and procreative functions confined his operations up in the heavenly regions, or
whether that branch of his divine
works was conducted on this little
obscure planet. Allwe know is, that he
had sons, and that they fellin love with
the daughters of men and married
them, and had children by them. They
must have been material, or at least
very thoroughly materialized, to have
succeeded so well in such a material
line of business. It is very probable
they inherited their father's character
and disposition, and as they were all
attracted by the charms of the daughters of men, it is very reasonable to
suppose that their father before them
was also susceptible to the charms of
female loveliness. At all events, at a
later date we have another account of

October, 1985

his engaging in the procreative business with a fair Jewish maiden, and
thus begetting a son, who was destined by an ignominious death to save
thousands of millions of his half brothers and sisters from the torments of
the hell his father had prepared.
We are sorry we are unable to
inform our fair friend more fully upon
this vital and delicate subject. We
would like to be able to tell her all
about the mothers of these earlier
sons; where the sons were born, what
their occupations were, what their
advantages
were for education,
whether they assisted their father in
running the affairs of this little world
and the rest of the Universe; whether
they treated their mothers well,
whether they ever had to be punished
for truancy, disobedience, or disrespect; whether the social relations of
the entire family were always of a
pleasant and happy character. We
would much like to be able to give the
complete biography of the mothers of
those sons - whether they were
female gods or goddesses; whether
they were created, or whether they
always had an existence as far back as
the head of the family. We would be
glad to state where they resided, what
their duties and occupations were, if
any, besides bearing sons to their
husband and companion; whether
they bore sons only and no daughters,

*Refers to Henry Ward Beecher (18131887), American clergyman. In his late years
his career was darkened by a lawsuit
brought in 1876 by Theodore Tilton, who
charged Beecher with having sexual relations with his wife. Beecher's reputation as a
clergyman and a man of honor was seriously
impaired by the lawsuit.

American Atheist

and if they bore daughters, why those

daughters did not answer for the
wives of the sons, and thus render it
unnecessary for the sons to take the
daughters of men for wives. We would
like to state authentically where those
daughters of God - the full sisters of
his sons, if they had an existence, found their husbands. Ifthe sons took
the daughters of men, whether it
would not have been equally as proper
for the daughters to take the sons of
men for husbands; but unfortunately
the sources of our information upon
this subject are deficient. If we meet
Mr. Moody [Dwight L. Moody (18371899), American evangelist] soon,
perhaps we may ask him how it was.
We think it safe to conclude that
those sons of God were not the children of one mother, inasmuch as we
have the evidence of the holy book
that God's favorite patriarchs, prophets, anointed princes and rulers in the
good old times when he talked face to
face with his chosen people, and concerned himself much more with the
affairs of men than he seems to do of
late years, used to indulge in the luxury of a plurality of wives, and that
some of them carried on this business
to a very great excess. We have no
account that God ever disapproved of
this plurality business; and we find,
too, at the present day, that some who
claim to be specially appointed prophets of God, have numerous wives; and
we see that a very considerable
number of the large class of men
styled "shepherds," "divine teachers,"
"God's servants," "expounders of
God's will," etc., are not willingto be
confined to one wife, and very frequently indulge in the godly and patriarchal practice of holding sexual
intercourse with more women than
one. From these data, with the facts
before us, we must come to the decision that, as there were many sons,
there must also have been many
mothers.
Yes, we would be glad to inform our
friend about the after career of those
sons and their mothers, where they
made their abode, whether they still
exist, and what they are about. We
would be glad to explain why one of
those sons could not have answered
for the great propitiation for the world
in appeasing the anger of the father,
without subjecting God to the necessity, four thousand years later - with
the co-operation of a young Jewess
who was betrothed to an honest carpenter - of begetting another son for
this special purpose. (Perhaps,
though, he didn't mind the extra

Austin, Texas

labor.)
We would be pleased to be able to
state positively whether the sons of
God mentioned in Genesis, were the
same sons who, some two thousand
years afterwards, assembled together
. on two certain occasions, spoken of in
the book of Job, when Satan, another
son, also assembled with them, but we
are unable to state with any degree of
certainty whether the second lot mentioned were the same as the first, or
whether they were an entirely different progeny and from a different
mother or mothers. It is to be regretted that the book said to be sent from
heaven to give us all information and
all truth should maintain such an ominous silence upon this very interesting
theme.
We would be glad also to be able to
answer the enquiry as to whether the
children of the sons of God and the
daughters of men possessed the
power to propagate offspring, but this
is likewise a dark subject. Our private
opinion, however, is that as they were
hybrids, half god and half man, like the
hybrids we now see - the offspring of
two distinct races, (for instance,
horses and asses) - they could not
beget offspring. The fact that no
beings are now found on the earth half
god, or a quarter or an eighth god,
goes far to corroborate the hypothesis that the children of the sons of God
did not transmit any offspring, that the
race long since became extinct and
that the sons of God who cohabited
with the daughters of men have withdrawn from the earth to continue
operations in the heavenly regions.
It cannot be doubted that those
sons of God referred to in the olden
scriptures were his sons bona fide duly begotten as all sons are - how
else could they be called his sons?
This hypothesis, it cannot be denied,
however, gives rise to a slight difficulty
or contradiction, for the later son was
said to be "the only begotten son of
God." We must conclude that this
slight discrepancy was one of those
errors of transcribers or translators of
which there are so many instances in
the good book, or that the later writers had forgotten what the earlier
ones had written. If neither of these is
the case, we are left to suppose that
the older sons were not regularly begotten as the younger son was, but
that they inherited their share of divine paternity by some such process
as the classes of animals called protozoans and radiates propagate their
species by the process known as
gemmation or budding, or by parts

October, 1985

being detached or disjointed, as starfish, jelly-fish, coral, polyps, etc.,

which have no sexual organs. But this
theory cannot work, either; for those
sons of God not only possessed sexual organs, but they used them too,
and this would seem to establish the
fact that they came into existence by
means of the sexuality of their parents, in the same way the younger son
did. Besides, we see it is only the very
lowest orders of animal life which
propagate without sexuality, and that
all the higher forms propagate by the
means of sexual organs, and as the
sons of God must be supposed to be
the highest form of life this planet has
witnessed, we can only conclude that
they conformed to the general and
higher laws of life. This subject is,
however, intricate, and evidently
needs some greater divine than we are
to make it clear. We will try and see
Mr. Moody, and duly report.
We willnot further call attention to
the fondness that all the gods the
world has known have exhibited for
the daughters of men, but only suggest that this very fact may account
for the ruling motives and practices of
the special favorites of God in olden
times, the men after his own heart,
and those whom he endowed with
great wisdom, his kings and his
prophets, and equally the holy priesthood of the present day who minister
at the altars of these gods.
We hardly think the Cardiff Giant
was a petrified specimen of the ancient sons of God, though the artist up
in the interior of this State who got
him up, may, in his imagination, have
taken one of those ancient sons for a
model.
If we have failed to impart the
information our fair friend wished, and
if our ignorance upon the subject is
too apparent, we beg leave to state by
way of explanation, that the patriarchGod spoken of, who had wives and
such a multitude of sons, and who
insisted that his most beloved son
should be cruelly and ignominiously
executed to allay his own anger and
vindictiveness, is not the god we worship, and this may account for our
want of knowledge touching his family
duties and relations.
The simple answer given by D. M. Bennett
is as good today as it was almost a hundred
years ago. ~

Page 35

BOOK REVIEWS
Falwell
Before The Millennium
A Critical Biography
by Dinesh D'Souza
Chicago, IL: Regnery Gateway
205 pages, $14.95

his is a 9Y4" x 6Y4" hardback laudatory

T
exposition of the fundamental goodness and godliness of a god-hawker certain
to lead humankind to a reunion with J.e.
One can only imagine what the righteous
expect after the millennium if this book
represents what should be, and its hero,
before the millennium. The price for the slim
book is as outrageous as its contents.
The author writes for the crazy National
Review, put out by William F. Buckley and
all his relatives and in-laws; as well as for
several less-than-rational religious magazines currently foisted upon the mindless.
While giving a puffed and flattering "critical" biography of the minuscule intellect
under discussion, the author also gives more
insight than he perhaps intended.
Since no Atheist in his right mind would
spend $14.95 on such garbage, certain facts
need be given here. For example, did you
know that the "dainty eleven-seater" ministry plane which carries Falwell to his many
engagements cost a mere $3.5 million and is
Israeli-built? And why not? For U. S. News
and World Report named Falwell as one of
the twenty most powerful people in America
in 1982. That alone tells anyone what is
wrong with the country.
Our non-hero starts off quickly on page 20
of the book being credited with having done
more than any individual in the United
States (except Phyllis Schlafly) to defeat the
Equal Rights Amendment - a diabolic leftwing anti-family piece of legislation. Seeing
this, Ronald Reagan immediately (page 22)
"signaled his awareness of Falwell's power
by consulting with Falwell about appointing
George Bush as his running mate. He also
phoned Falwell to explain his appointment
of Sandra Day O'Connor to the Supreme
Court."
The reason for Falwell's greatness is that
the mantle of "fundamentalism," a joyous
force of Christian love existing for over the
length of the history of the nation, has now
come into its own carried lightly on those
willing,strong, all-American shoulders.
Falwell started his life as a rich kid, whose
boozy father owned most of the bus lines in
Virginia and much of the real estate in

Page 36

Lynchburg, the family's resident city. The

father was an Atheist who permitted a
daughter to die, unnecessarily, of appendicitis, who shot and killed his brother in a
duel, who kept Black servants to drive his
kids (named after movie stars) where they
wanted to go, who bought his drinking, belligerent, bully sons (members of the "Wall
gang") out of the troubles of youthful destructive and life-threatening "escapades,"
and who lied about their ages in order to get
them driver's licenses for their own automobiles when they were just thirteen. Naturally
- all Atheists, we know, are made of such
unfeeling, selfish stuff.
When young Jerry accidentally met and
got the hots for a builder's religious daughter, Marcel Pate, he suddenly found "the
Lord" calling him. And when a rift developed
in Marcel's congregation, Falwell had family
money to purchase a building, start a new
church for the break-off flock, and to begin a
radio and television ministry. In 1956, for
religion thirty minutes of air radio time sold
for seven dollars and television time went for
ninety dollars per half-hour. The wife's
father being a builder, enlargement of the
church was the wholesale cost of building
material only.
And Falwell hardly needed a weekly wage
when he was wallowing in his family's money. He immediately waded into coercive
measures against the unsuspecting inhabitants of the town, with a fundamentalist barrage on radio and television, door-to-door
canvassing, distribution of tracts and Bibles
in shopping centers, holding of rallies and
prayer sessions in public places - all the
bully-type tactics which had helped him in
his youth. He also managed to keep any
Blacks out of his church for over twelve
years, and, by 1969, had badgered 2,640
persons into his congregation so that it was
then the ninth-largest church in the U.S.
The tactics, however, were such that the
Securities Exchange Commission filed suit
against his church in 1973 charging "fraud
and deceit" in its financial operations. And
Falwell felt the need to become political- as
five local businessmen were given the financial management of his church.
Daddy's bad boy immediately sought larger grounds. The Roe v. Wade decision
which permitted abortions was handed
down in the same year. Seeing this as more
repugnant than the Brown u, Board of Education decision which had let "darkies" into
the public schools, Falwell opted for a battle
against the demon: sex. The natural product
of sex - pregnancy - was the lord's way of
laying it on the female of the species who
screwed around. She could grin and bear

October, 1985

the child and the ignominy.

As Jerry sided with the Roman Catholics
on the abortion issue, that church provided
him with thirty percent (page 32) of the
membership of his new group.
The United Nations declared 1979 to be
the "Year of the Child" but Jerry opted for
the fetus's right to be born and threw in with
the National Christian Action Coalition, the
Conservative Caucus, the Religious Roundtable, and Richard Viguerie to conquer
America for Christ.
He decided then to marry fundamentalism with patriotism and began touring the
country with "I Love America" rallies on the
steps of legislative buildings in each state,
with the Soviet Union and godless communism as the featured evil enemy and the
United States, capitalism, and 90d as the
good guys.
There are chapters on the political influence of the combined Religious Right and
Jerry's commanding leadership role in it,
interspersed with ardent apologetics for
those instances when he did not support this
issue, missed the significance of that issue,
or did not realize that something else was an
issue until it had been established.
But as the time for the millennium nears,
the author sees Falwell as setting the agenda
for politics in the country which by and large
has to do with "moral issues." The nation
needs to fear, the author opines, what is
locked in Falwell's computers: twenty-five
million Americans in eight million families the largest and most influential voting bloc in
the United States, Falwell claims. This does
not take into consideration that the Roman
Catholic Church calmly counts fifty-eight
million in its ranks and has never been
approached in its political machinations by
any other group.
'Tis true that Falwell is a populist conservative, which is an indictment against the
majority of people in our nation that so casual a non-thinking position can dominate. In
regard to Atheism. "Falwell suspects ... that
liberalism is the guise in which atheism prefers to appear in our time and sees atheism
dressed as liberalism as much more dangerous than atheism standing nude."
Perhaps there is some safety for the Atheist there ... but that's doubtful as the book
closes with Falwell's statement, "According
to George Gallup, there are enough of us
(fundamentalists)
to turn this country
round. By God's grace we are going to do it."
If this book is a "critical" one, as the title
boasts, one could only be dismayed by an
"uncritical" one. The continuing accolade
for Jerry is not worth its 7 a page - $14.95
for the 204 page book. 00

American Atheist

ME TOO
"Me Too" is a feature designed to
showcase short essays written by readers in response to topics recently covered by the American Atheist or of
general interest to the Atheist community.
Essays submitted to "Me Too" (P.O.
Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117)
should be 600 to 800 words long.
n the "Ask A.A." feature of the August,
I1985,
issue, the American Atheist discussed the banning of eight "Star Trek" episodes by the Christian station KXTX-TV in
Texas. This should not be surprising to
"Star Trek" fans, as it is obvious the series is
permeated with not only anti-Christian
themes, but also ideas harmful to religion in
general. Because, as a rule, religion opposes
any reflection upon the validity of its ancient
teachings, or the origins thereof, "Star Trek"
is a prime target for opponents of thought.
Who likes to consider the proposition that
Christ will not have reappeared by the
twenty-third century? And perish the
thought that mankind may just be getting
along fine without him - as well as intelligent aliens from all parts of the galaxy!
In addition to the various episodes noted
in the August issue, one excellent example
of "Star Trek's" oil for the rusty Christian
brain is the program aptly titled "The
Apple," wherein a landing party from the
Enterprise discovers a planet, the primitive
inhabitants of which worship a computer
housed in a building suspiciously resembling
an Earthly pagan idol. This computer, being
as loving and fatherly as it is, plans and
directs the various harvests, and even goes
so far as to supply its subjects with information 'on reproduction in the event of an occasional death. In return for this service, the
computer-god demands "food," which the
high priest regularly sacrifices during ceremonies much like those described in the
Old Testament.
Prime Directive Number One notwithstanding, Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock take
it upon themselves to free this enslaved flock
and, using their handy communicators,
instruct the orbiting Enterprise to destroy
the god once and for all with the ship's main
phaser banks. The computer idol subsequently melts, an event which induces a crying spell among the loinclothed worshippers.
But Kirk happily reassures them all, especially the high priest, that now they can be
taught to fend for themselves, to build
schools and cities, to reason and progress!
And if that is not enough, as the Enterprise leaves orbit - Kirk and Speck now

securely back aboard, another adventure

successfully concluded - Kirk wryly remarks that Spock does look like Satan, does
he not? The implication is that one day the
story of the rejection of this god may possibly be written down as a myth about a Satanlike character (sorry, Spock fans) who
induced early ancestors to eat of the fruit of
the Tree of Knowledge - hence the episode's name, ''The Apple."
In "For The World is Hollow and I Have
Touched the Sky," the Enterprise encounters a gigantic ball floating in space, a ball so
huge that even the Enterprise is dwarfed by
it. And what do we find aboard this ball
which, by the way, is on a collision course
with a meteor? Why, a mini-society ruled by
a high priestess who takes her instructions
from a computer-god, which in turn is programmed by "The Book."
After some rational investigation (which
inhabitants of the ball are prohibited by their
god from conducting), Kirk and Spock
uncover the following facts:
1. "The Book" was written by
ancestors of the inhabitants of the
ball.
2. The ball is a spherical spaceship
launched by the ancestors of its inhabitants, and the current crew is descended from the original crew_
3_The current inhabitants have no
idea that they are indeed aboard a
spherical spaceship, believing instead
that they reside on a regular planet
like the rest of us.
4. When the ball gets to its intended
destination as programmed by the
ancestors, a real planet (a goal now
made more difficultby the presence of
a meteor), "The Book" is supposed to
provide instructions on setting up a
society there.
So what do we find in this setting? First, it
seems that all newcomers to the world must
be "saved" (though this term is not actually
used in the program) by having implanted in
one's head a device by which the computergod can monitor one's thoughts at all times.
Second, it is heresy to discover and inform
others that the world is indeed a spherical
spaceship, and it is a cardinal sin, as one
character manages to do, to climb up and
touch the ceiling/sky. (Some reminders here
of our own history, Earthlings?)
Unfortunately, the all-wise ancestors who
wrote "The Book" with all the answers failed
to take into account the presence of meteors
in the universe (certainly not the one now
menacing the ball), and Kirk and Spock try

desperately to get hold of "The Book,"

which is jealously guarded by the computergod, in order to determine how to alter the
course of the ball and thereby avoid striking
the meteor. After a fight in the chapel of this
god, with just moments to spare before
meteor collision, Kirk and Spock succeed in
unlocking the vault and removing "The
Book." Every rerun of this episode conjures
up a bellylaugh when Kirk frantically asks
Spock: "Is it indexed?"
Spock, having previously seen similar hieroglyphics on another planet, deciphers
the appropriate passage (without an analytic
concordance) and saves the day by redirecting the course of the ball. The story ends
happily, the people freed of their god, ready
to set up a society based on reason and not
the ancient writings of their ancestors.
In another episode, "A Piece of the
Action," which is the only "Star Trek" show
specifically intended to be a comedy, we see
what happens when another book, this one
from Earth dated circa 1920s or 1930s, inadvertently falls into the hands of some people
on another planet. They blindly base their
entire belief system on "The Book," as they
call it, resulting in a comic, gangster-ridden
planet with territories ruled by "bosses"
sporting machine guns, wearing hats, and
smoking cigars. And to make matters worse,
whenever a question regarding proper mode
of behavior arises, rather than using reason
to find an answer, members of this society
habitually consult "The Book," thus reinforcing their gangster behavior.
In "Who Mourns for Adonis?" the Enterprise crew discovers a planet on which
resides a being called Apollo. It turns out,
after some dialogue with this creature, that
he was at one time' actually the Apollo
known in Greece! But, alas, he was forced to
leave Earth eons ago after humankind had
no more "need" for a god! Incidentally,
Apollo lets Kirk and Spock leave his divine
presence only after the latter convince him
that humanity has become too "mature" to
willingly worship him. Apollo is left sad,
deeply craving worship; but he understands
and bids his human friends farewell.
In "This Way to Eden," some hippies take
over the Enterprise (one must remember
that this show was produced during'the '60s)
and hijack it to the "promised land," specifically a planet called "Eden" which is alleged
to be a paradise. When hippies and crew
finally arrive at Eden, it turns out that all the
vegetation - indeed the entire planet - is
seeping with acid. The hippies, upon landing
thereon with bare feet, burn themselves. So
much for the promised land called Eden.
In "All Our Yesterdays," Kirk is thrown
(Cont'd on page 40)

Austin, Texas

October, 1985

Page 37

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

tively. After all, it should be pointed out he

started off writing his first work to refute
Christianity as a fraud. He ended up becoming a believer.
If we are to be reasonable and openminded, we cannot simply ignore what this
man has written!
Jim Spina
Arizona
Mr. McDowell is a minister scholar.

I would like to respond to Mr. Buckley's

letter (August, 1985) that implores us not to
reject Jesus without having first obtained
objective information.
Obviously he has not researched his own
religion. Here are a few of Christianity's glaring problems:
1. Translations from the original Greek
texts have been corrupted.
2. The Bible was rewritten many times,
and numerous passages are obviously later
insertions.
3. Jesus did not teach that he was God's
son or that he was the Christ. These were
the ideas of Paul.
I recommend that Christians redeem
themselves from ignorance by reading more
than just the Bible. A good place to start
would be with The Life of Jesus by Dr. Marcello Craveri, published by Grove Press,
Inc., of New York, in 1967.
Rene McGuire
Oregon
I must say I absolutely agree with Philip
Buckley's letter (August, 1985) challenging
you to research the question, "What do you
do with Jesus Christ?" Either we accept him
as lord and saviour - or he was some sort of
stark-raving lunatic.
I have been hearing much hoopla lately
over the books by Josh McDowell: Evidence
That Demands A Verdict; Reasons Skeptics Should Consider Christianity; Jesus: In
Defense Of His Deity; and The Resurrection
Factor. McDowell is offering (although I
haven't read these publications) supposed
proof positive claiming Christ was indeed
who he claimed to be. We must face this
evidence he presents and look at it obiec-

Page 38

not a

I have since the beginning of the year, at

the conclusion of the successive monthly
readings of your journal, evaluated each edition on an old-fashioned criterion of "excellent" to the lowest depreciation of "poor." I
enter the Atheist Center with this letter giving an appraisal of excellent to your current
July issue. Specifically, but not exclusive of
other Atheistic material printed in the issue,
I was enlightened and heartened by the subject matter perspicaciously presented in the
three articles formulated by Mr. Philip
Adams and by the editorial contribution by
Mr. Murray - a lucid coverage of federal
judgeships, enlarging my knowledge in that
judicial scope.
My intent of apprising you at this time of
my high regard for the calibre of your journalism is to lend at least a modicum of thrust
to the morale of your publishing staff.
Elenora S. Stahn
Minnesota
The article "The Poison of Prudery" in the
June issue of American Atheist hit the nail
on the head when it called sex the Christian
taboo.
A taboo is the very heart of a sect - the
one thing thought about most because it's
the subject which CANNOT be mentioned
- the mysterium tremendum, the inner and
esoteric core charged with supernatural
power.
''The church reeks of sexuality because it
is the one thing intentionally and obviously
absent, the one thing definitely concealed,
and thus the one thing really important."
Alan Watts, Beyond Theology: "...
the
church's intensely negative fascination with
sexuality acts as the context and stimulus
for a prolific erotic life."
Dean Thompson
Colorado

October, 1985

Thank you, Juli Franklin (American Atheist magazine, July, 1985) for sharing your
introspective remarks on Atheism in your
essay, "My Atheism." It is refreshing to
know a young vital mind has chosen intellectualism over the stagnant traditions of
Christianity.
lance brought a female friend to a meeting of the Orange County Chapter of American Atheists, and she was surprised to see
both young and old in attendance, as well as
what she referred to as "nice people, not of
the radical bent." I think it is important for us
as Atheists to project a positive image. A
step in that direction would be to follow the
advice of Ms. Franklin. I stand taller and am
prouder to say I am an Atheist after having
read her account.
Gerald P. Lunderville
California
I do not know if this is meant as a letter to
the editor or just as a general bitch about the
subtleties of religion that we are guilty of
complacently accepting.
The enclosed news clipping concerning
the Boy Scouts' expulsion of an Atheist
prompted this letter.
I have always (subconsciously) felt that
Boy Scouts were "good kids." Does one
have to believe in god to be a good kid?
Now to the complacency factor. I am a
member of several organizations: The American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars,
Elks, Eagles, etc. I just received my renewal
notice for the American Legion. I signed it,
wrote a check, and mailed everything the
same day without a thought. Now, a week
later, after reading the article about the Boy
Scouts and thinking this is absurd, I suddenly realized that I had signed an American
Legion renewal form on which I affirmed my
belief-in god.
After this fact penetrated
my selfindulgent, complacent haze, I checked my
other memberships and found I had been
routinely signing my name to forms swearing
or affirming that I believe in god and! or a
supreme being. As a matter of fact, the first
four words of the Preamble to the Constitution of the American Legion are: "For God
and Country."
There is no intent to denigrate the American Legion - only to point out that I cannot
be the only member that fought for his country without believing in a god.
One last comment: If this type of viewpoint is published in American Atheists
magazine, it willbe read only by people shar-

American Atheist

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

ing similar views. Why can't we have some
thought-provoking
ads in nation-wide publications? (All the above mentioned organizations publish magazines, and from the contents they seem to accept all types of
advertisements.)

J. F.

Boldt
Florida

NOTICE
"Letters to the Editor" must be
either questions or comments of
general concern to Atheists or
Atheism. Submissions should be brief
and to the point. Space limitations
allow that each letter should be two

hundred words, or preferably, less.

Please confine your letters to a single
issue only. Mail them to:
American Atheist
P.O. Box 2117
Austin, TX 78768-2117

If you would like a sample puzzle with answers and

explanations
of clues, send a self-addressed,
stamped
envelope to Steve Bratteng, Division of Biological Sciences, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712.

Cryptic crossword puzzles are not like the puzzles

seen in most American publications; they are much more
devious. The clues are almost never what they seem to
be. Some of the clues are anagrams of the word sought;
these are indicated by clues with an indication such as
"sort of" or "crazy." Some clues are puns giving an
association of sound or meaning. Charade clues are built
up by definitions of parts of the answer word. In some
cases the answer is actually hidden among the letters of
the clue. Punctuation can be used to obscure clues and
change the apparent meaning.
In general, the cryptic clue consists of two parts. One
part is a definition of the word sought, and the other is the
cryptically constructed
part. The fun and challenge of
this sort of puzzle is to figure out which part is which.
Often the relationship between clue and answer is a
humorous one or one that presents a peculiar view of the
world of words.
The numbers in parentheses are the numbers of letters
in each word of the answer.

ACROSS
1. Sort of flea associated
with another jumpy little
sucker. (4,6)
8. Pre-Exxon standard? (4)
10. Might such a factor be associated with a box elder?
(6,4)
11. Does a bone become so when charred? (4)
13. Cats are around before German plays. (7)
15. One such may go to pieces. (6)
16. Stalks pests I see in disguise. (6)
17. Grammarian might seek to, hopefully, find one here.
(5, 10)
18. Here's one hundred to make what some propose. (6)
20. Poor dears! First find a hundred such conifers. (6)
21. Impaled such red peas? (7)
22. This sort of diet just comes and goes, perhaps. (4)
25~ Short run on TV? (I hear it's about Mickey's companion.) (4, 6)
26. Becomes deaf? (Does it go gradually?) (4)
27. One like Butch Cassidy. (4,6)
DOWN
2. The ayes have it without much difficulty. (4)
3. Did Freud lose right to have such with opponents?
(4)
4. Not your lady even in Havana! (3, 3)
5. 0 Word! Do not fail us now for we seek the answer in
you! (15)
6. Sort so sorts so sits. (6)
7. Time automatically cures them of being such. (10)
9. Not at the top of form. (3-7)
12. What Aldo echoed is perhaps what Luke should have
been in cinematic communication
failure. (4-6)
13. They snap and the play begins. (7)
14. Wild-type dipterans without an indication of pattern
seen on Mephitis mephitis. (7)
15. Is it elemental or just something related to machine
talk? (5, 5)
19. National head trapped in wild grips of something not
found in digital watches. (6)
20. Sort of care the French show for grain. (6)
23. Strange craving for this type. (4)
24. Sounds like I'll find water all around. (4)
(Solution on page 40)

Austin, Texas

October,

1985

Page 39

AMENDMENTI

CONGRESS

SHALL MAKE NO LA W RESPECTING

"If a person does not have belief in a Supreme

Being, then they cannot be a member of the Boy
Scouts of America."
- Ben H. Love
Chief Scout Executive