Hello from Bremerton, WA!
Why Bremerton? Because I live here and I felt like rambling before I even started my usual ramble. Ha! Did you know it was listed as the most livable city in 1990? Useless factoid for you. Sorry in advance if this post is rough. Lost some of my edits before posting.

Monkey Bill Allowed
In a chickenshit move, Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam allowed House Bill 368 – the so called “monkey bill” – to become law without his signature on April 10, 2012. This bill does not expressly tell teachers to talk about the “weak science” behind evolution, cloning, or global warming. But, it seems to keep the staff and administrators from doling out some reprimands for teaching things that fly in the face of scientific understanding. Just another bill in a long line that seem to be a part of the “wedge strategy“.

You might have noticed my calling Governor Haslam a chickenshit. I did this because he took the wussie way out by not taking a stand one way or the other. During his 15 months in office, this is the first bill he has not signed but allowed it to become law. Granted, the legislature might have overridden his veto, but we’ll never know now. Quoting the NCSE article,

Probably contributing to Haslam’s unwillingness to sign the bill were the protests from state and national civil liberties, educational, and scientific groups, the editorials against the bill from the state’s major newspapers, and the petition effort organized by Larisa DeSantis of Vanderbilt University, which garnered thousands of signatures calling for a veto of HB 368.

There was a lot of public pressure from people who know what they are talking about to get Haslam to veto it. Just wait. In the near future when this bill gets struck down, Haslam will try to spin this. Saying he did not want the bill to pass. But he allowed it to go through since it was a reasonable assumption that HB368 would have been pushed through anyway.

Let’s hope there are some reasonable teachers that will take it upon themselves to teach the nonexistent science behind other “sciences” like homeopathy, creation myths, crystal healing, and so many others. If they are allowed to teach the controversy, then by all means, teach it.

When a Negative is a Positive
Anne Graham Lotz is an evangelist preacher and the daughter of Rev. Billy Graham. When she speaks, (15 or 20) people listen. In a panel discussion on Meet the Press, Lotz made it clear she would not vote for any atheist. She backed it up with scripture – of course. Both her flat rejection of atheists as candidates and using scripture to back it up, make me smile for three reasons.

Not voting for a candidate based solely on lack of belief. Look at Sean Faircloth as an example. When he was in office, he accomplished a great deal. It would almost be better to not vote for him because he is short and reeked of fried onions than his lack of belief. (Not that he reeked of fried onions when I met him – he is kinda short though). I’d vote for any candidate that best fits my values, is in touch with the real world, and does not integrate his beliefs into his policy.

Scripturally, you can justify almost anything you like with almost any holy book. As Lotz decries the atheist threat, she uses up her credibility with her audience. This reminds me of the boy who cried wolf. The more you shout hate when all evidence is to the contrary, the less people will believe. It might take time – a lot of time – but it will happen. We need to help make it happen by coming out.

Lastly, her non-endorsement of any candidate is a clear violation of federal law. The 1954 Johnson Amendment prohibits churches and other 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations from engaging in political campaign activity in support of or opposition to any candidate for public office. There are many secular theists that take great issue with any person crossing that boundary. Anyone familiar with her AnGeL ministries?

With the entire Graham family malcontent, it makes me smile. Billy, Franklin, and Anne’s public denunciation of atheists, agnostics, nonbelievers, and secularists is just what we need in the long run. In fact, I’d be worried I was doing something wrong if they did agree with me or candidates I liked. It would be like Charlie Manson or the KKK coming out with a public endorsement in favor of something I was championing.

It takes time to get accepted by the population. It might be painful. But, we owe it to ourselves and the world. I know that sounds dramatic. It is. No less true. As the most religious & powerful country in the world, we secularists have a duty to pull our nation up by our bootstraps and into the 21st century. Get to it! =)

Coming to the Defense of a Friend
I’m sure many people have seen Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s recent video on BigThink asking if he is atheist or agnostic. Most people that are familiar with Neil know he calls himself agnostic but only if he is forced to give voice to his beliefs. Neil has taken a lot of heat from many people for not calling himself atheist – but I don’t understand why. Every video of his that I’ve watched where religion comes up, he announces his agnosticism. Even his wiki page gets edited to atheist – which he promptly changes back to agnostic. I did not want to further the needless flack Neil was getting (hello elevatorgate) so I did not post about it before.

Michael Shermer – skeptic, atheist, and all around good guy – came to the defense of his friend. Michael helped to define the word agnostic. Quoting Thomas Henry Huxley coined the word ‘agnosticism’ to define his beliefs:

When I reached intellectual maturity and began to ask myself whether I was an atheist, a theist, or a pantheist? I found that the more I learned and reflected, the less ready was the answer. They [believers] were quite sure they had attained a certain ‘gnosis’, — more or less successfully, solved the problem of existence; while I was quite sure I had not, and had a pretty strong conviction that the problem was insoluble.

Neil can call himself an upside-down banana cream cake for all I care. Before anything else, Neil wants to be thought of as a scientist. That’s not much to ask. I am just glad that he is on our side – the side of rational thought. His contributions to everyone should afford some good will… Especially when he and his minions need to get donations to fund the Hayden Planetarium. Many of those contributors I bet are not amenable to anti-theistic people / causes. Show the guy some love. Let him be a scientist and do sciencey things.

~Wesley