Miscellanea Agnostica

The Washington Post reports on the ACLU trying to end the U.S. Naval Academy’s practice of forcing midshipmen to pray in order to have lunch:

The American Civil Liberties Union is threatening to sue the U.S. Naval Academy unless it abolishes its daily lunchtime prayer, saying that some midshipmen have felt pressured to participate. …

The Naval Academy rejected the ACLU’s request that the prayer be eliminated.

“The academy does not intend to change its practice of offering midshipmen an opportunity for prayer or devotional thought during noon meal announcements,” the university said in a statement. It said that some form of prayer has been offered for midshipmen at meals since the school’s founding, in 1845, and that it is “consistent with other practices throughout the Navy.”

This reasoning is fallacious. Just because things have been done one way for a long time, does not make them right. If the Naval Academy really wants to do things the way they were done in 1845, they’d have to remove all the women who attend, since they weren’t allowed in 1845. For that matter they’d also have to reinstitute slavery, since that was also the law of the land back then. Are these people really sure they want to roll the clock back to 1845? Somehow I doubt it. They’re just reaching for a rationale to justify the immaturity that drives them to proselytize.

Among the litany of stories on Senator Obama’s faith, I saw an interesting little tidbit in Newsweek, which no doubt many will see, but few will realize how wrong it is:

Obama calls his mother “an agnostic.” “I think she believed in a higher power,” he says. “She believed in the fundamental order and goodness of the universe. She would have been very comfortable with Einstein’s idea that God doesn’t play dice. But I think she was very suspicious of the notion that one particular organized religion offered one truth.”

Obama seems to think that “agnostic” means “lukewarm believer,” however that’s not what it means at all. Someone who truly “believes in a higher power” cannot be an agnostic. An agnostic takes the position that the existence of a deity cannot be known. Such a person cannot “believe” in a deity (or “higher power” or whatever euphemism one may apply).

Obama also misuses Einstein’s comment about dice and the universe, which was not an admission by Einstein of religious belief, but rather a disparagement of quantum mechanics — an area of science he later would accept, if grudgingly, meaning that he eventually changed his mind on the matter.

Lastly Obama refers to “organized religion,” as though his mother’s objection had been merely to “organized religion” rather than “religion” generally. This does not, however, make her an agnostic or any other kind of non-believer. It just means she was a believer in non-organized religion. Creating a distinction between “organized religion” and other things (such as “spirituality”) is common, often used to separate the objectionable aspects of religion from more acceptable parts. Unfortunately, such a distinction does not actually exist. Religion can be organized or not. All “spirituality,” or whatever alternative term one uses, is still “religion.” There is no difference!

Yep, those creationist types in Kansas just aren’t going to let the matter of teaching their religion in Kansas public-school classes die. The Wichita Eagle reports on a renewed effort to water down teaching of evolution in that state:

With five seats on the State Board of Education up for grabs this year, education advocates say how children learn about evolution hangs in the balance — and who voters choose could affect Kansas’ national reputation.

A frequent flip-flop between moderate and conservative majorities on the 10-member board has resulted in the state changing its science standards four times in the past eight years.

Conservatives have pushed for standards casting doubt on evolution, and moderates have said intelligent design does not belong in the science classroom. …

This year, none of the three moderates whose seats are up for election are running again. Only one of the two conservative incumbents is running for re-election.

It’s funny to note that these creationist-types haven’t yet figured out a way to process the ruling in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, in which a conservative evangelical Christian appellate-court judge — appointed by George W. Bush himself! — declared the “intelligent design” movement a ruse designed to drive religion into public schools in violation of the law and Constitution. It seems they’re ignoring that and pressing the matter … having done so successfully in Louisiana they’re resuming the same battle in Kansas (where they’ve lost several times already). It’s bad enough these people are willing to break the law in order to proselytize … but now that their lie has been exposed, and everyone knows them for the liars they are, they continue it! Just how desperate can they be?

Two words leap to mind … “childish” and “asinine.” When are these people going to grow the hell up and stop imposing their religion on others?