The Second Coming of J.C.

After almost two months of being on hiatus, The Word of J.C. is back!  Now that life has settled down a little bit, and I have more time to write again, keep on the look out for new posts, which will be coming out at least every two days, throughout the summer.  For now, let’s review a few of the top stories that were missed during the break:

In April, Catherine and Herbert Schaible were charged with third degree murder, after losing their second child to a preventable illness.  For those of you who don’t remember them, the Schaibles were charged with involuntary manslaughter and placed on probation in 2009, after another of their children died from pneumonia. The couple had refused to seek medical attention for him, opting for prayer as treatment, which eventually led to the child’s death.  This time, another of their children, an eight month old infant son, suffered through two weeks of diarrhea and breathing problems while the couple once again refused to take him to a doctor, watching and praying as he wasted away.

Sylvia Browne, the widely acclaimed psychic, was once again exposed as a fraud this month, after Amanda Berry was found and rescued from her captor’s house, where she had been abused and held prisoner for a decade.  Browne told Berry’s parents that Amanda was dead and “on the other side” in 2004, during a taping of the Montel Williams Show.  This is not the first time that Browne has wrongly predicted the death of a missing child.

Pat Robertson told a female caller to his show, last week, that cheating is a “tendency of man,” and to stop focusing on her husband’s transgressions.  He continued, telling her that it was her duty to “make a home so wonderful that he doesn’t want to wander,” implying that her husband’s infidelity was the result, not of his own choices, but of her inadequacies.

So far, over forty people have been killed in Myanmar, as a result of religious violence between Buddhists and Muslims.  Around 1200 Muslims are now taking shelter in a monastery, while the government attempts to quell the violence.

In Louisiana, lawmakers have voted to uphold a bill that requires creationism to be taught in any school that includes evolution in its curriculum.  A move to repeal the bill, which has been on the books since the 1980s, was shot down, despite the fact that the Supreme Court has determined it to be wholly unconstitutional, as it requires religious ideals to be taught in public school classrooms; a clear violation of the establishment clause.

These are just a few of the many examples of religion, science denial, and charlatanry causing direct harm to both individuals and society as a whole that have occurred in the short time that I have been on break from this blog.  This, more than anything else before, has convinced me that humanists, secularists, skeptics, and all of their like MUST continue to speak out on a regular basis about the dangers posed by those who would choose to hold religious and supernatural ideas in higher regard than scientific advancement, the good of others, and the protection of constitutional principles. It is time that we as a society stop tolerating injustice and death on the grounds that we cannot infringe upon the beliefs of others. These are not issues of freedom of belief or religious liberty, but issues of safety, health, and law, and they must be addressed as such.

-J.C.

Two Infants Contract Herpes After Barbaric Circumcision Ritual

On Monday of this week, it was reported that two infants in New York had been confirmed as having contracted type 1 herpes, after being subjected to an ultra-orthodox Jewish circumcision ritual.  CNN reported on the details:

In the ritual, known as metzitzah b’peh, after removing the foreskin of the penis the person performing the procedure places his mouth briefly over the wound, sucking a small amount of blood out, which is discarded.

To begin with, let me say that this is a barbaric, repulsive ritual that has no place in modern society.  Aside from the disturbing implications of an adult engaging in mouth to genital contact with an infant, this ritual is known to be extremely dangerous, carrying a high risk of disease transmission to the unwilling infants involved.

The health department says the procedure is dangerous because the contact with the mouth could transmit diseases such as herpes.  Most adults are infected with the herpes simplex virus type 1, and while they may have no symptoms, the virus may be present in their saliva, according to the health department.

To make matters even worse, this is not the first time that infants have contracted herpes as a result of being subjected to this ritual.  Many other cases have been documented in the past, some of which even resulted in the deaths of the infants involved.

Since 2000, there have been 13 reports in New York City of infants contracting HSV-1, two of whom died from the virus.

CNN also reports that the New York Department of Health has enacted measures to attempt to alert parents to the risks of the ritual, although it has faced opposition from Jewish groups.

The DOH passed a regulation in September requiring all those who perform the ritual to get parental consent on a form stating that the procedure can lead to health risks. Several Jewish groups and three rabbis filed a lawsuit in federal District Court in Manhattan arguing that “the government cannot compel the transmission of messages that the speaker does not want to express — especially when the speaker is operating in an area of heightened First Amendment protection, such as a religious ritual.”

So, not only are these groups supportive of a procedure that is known to carry serious health risks to infants, but they are attempting to stifle the dissemination of information regarding those risks.   This reaction shows an even more atrocious lack of regard for the lives, health, and safety of others than their condoning of the ritual in the first place.

Dr. Thomas A. Farley, commissioner of the city’s health department, claimed the consent requirement was “lawful, appropriate and necessary” in a September press release. “The city’s highest obligation is to protect its children; therefore, it is important that parents know the risks associated with the practice,” he said.

While I applaud Mr. Farley for his support of informed consent, I can’t help but call bullshit on this statement.  If the city truly considered the protection of its children to be its highest obligation, then the health department would outlaw these practices altogether.  Mr. Farley’s next statement serves to prove this:

“There is no safe way to perform oral suction on any open wound in a newborn.”

The fact that these dangerous practices are allowed to continue, out of tolerance for religious belief, says that the appeasement of religious groups gets a higher priority than the protection of the innocent, unwilling children who fall victim to them.  And, to those who might say that outlawing the ritual would violate the freedom of religious practice, I call bullshit a second time.  While circumcision may take its roots from religion, it is a medical procedure, and should be treated and regulated as such.

The point to all of this is that when we allow religious tolerance to take precedence over protecting the health and safety of those who cannot protect themselves, it is a massive failing of society.   Just as we don’t allow communities to stone women who have premarital sex or children who curse their parents to death, because the bible commands it, neither should we allow a child’s health and life to be put in jeopardy, simply to satisfy the requirements of an ancient religious ritual.

-J.C.

Weekend Posting

Just a heads up, eveyone: posts will most likely be few and short for a few days. There was a death in the family, and I will be spending the next few days on the road, and with family. I will try to get a short post up over the weekend, and things will be back in full swing by Monday or Tuesday.

In the meantime, I will use the Twitter feed to comment on anything interesting that I come across. Make sure to subscribe!

-J.C.

Kansas Set to Pass Anti-Abortion Law that Promotes False Science and Fails to Protect Victims of Rape and Incest

A new law that was passed by the Kansas State Senate this week could open the door to redefining the legality of abortions in the state.  In addition, it will put into place many new guidelines regarding abortion funding and sex education.  Although Democrats have stalled it for a short time by having it sent back to the House for the approval of technical changes, it is expected to clear the House for the final time this week, and Governor Brownback has already stated that he will sign any anti-abortion legislation that is sent his way.

The bill has several key points.  First, it defines life as beginning at conception.  Secondly, it attempts to prevent taxpayers from inadvertently supporting abortion by banning medical clinics that provide abortions from receiving any type of state funding or benefits, prohibiting organizations that offer abortion services from providing sex education in schools, and restricting women from claiming abortion service related costs as deductions on state income taxes.  Finally, it gives specific guidelines regarding what information abortion providers are required to give to patients, prior to performing an abortion.

Let’s take a look at the first point.  The Wichita Eagle reports:

The bill at hand, House Bill 2253, makes several changes in state abortion and tax laws, including defining life as beginning at the moment of fertilization…

Here, we run into the first problem with this bill: the idea that a fertilized egg, or zygote, constitutes a human life.  While it is undeniable that the cells contained within a zygote are alive, the idea that it is a human being is ludicrous.  In no way, other than on the most basic genetic level, does a zygote even resemble a human.  In fact, a human embryo is almost indistinguishable from that of many other species until around the fifth or sixth week of pregnancy.  Put simply, a zygote is not a human being in the same way that an egg is not a chicken, and an acorn is not a tree.

All of this is not to mention the alarming fact that defining a fertilized egg as a human life opens the door to granting it legal personhood, which would completely redefine the legal status of abortion in the state.

Next, there is the fact that the bill directly promotes false scientific assertions about health risks related to having an abortion.

Another fought-over provision establishes a statutory mandate that abortion doctors must provide controversial medical information to women who are seeking an abortion, specifically of a link between abortion and breast cancer.

This supposed link has been heavily debunked and dismissed.  The American Cancer Society’s website cites 3 major studies that found there to be no relationship between abortion and a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer.  In addition, they list several expert groups that have issued reports dismissing any alleged correlation between the two.  One of the groups, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecologic Practice, even criticized the earlier studies that claimed to have found such a link:

“Early studies of the relationship between prior induced abortion and breast cancer risk were methodologically flawed. More rigorous recent studies demonstrate no causal relationship between induced abortion and a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk.”

The bill also launches an attack on sex education programs in Kansas:

In addition, the bill:

• Prohibits paid agents or volunteers connected to abortion providers – including Planned Parenthood – from providing any information on human sexuality to students in public schools.

To shed some light on the kinds of programs that this part of the bill will eliminate, let’s look at a statement from Planned Parenthood’s website about their educational programs:

PPHS provides free medically accurate, age appropriate, sexuality education presentations and workshops to our communities.  Our educators look forward to working with your community group, youth group, faith based organization, human services department, school, or individually.

So, this bill will effectively ban groups like Planned Parenthood from providing FREE sex education in public schools.  Here are a few facts to put this into perspective: 1. The Kansas educational system is already strapped for cash.  2. Several studies have shown that comprehensive sex education is effective in reducing teenaged pregnancies.  3. Teenaged pregnancies account for 17% of all abortions in Kansas.  At the very least, these facts would seem to suggest that this measure will do nothing to reduce the number of abortions in Kansas, and it could even be argued that it has the potential to have the opposite effect.

Additionally, HB2253  makes no specific exceptions for women who are victims of rape or incest.  Although Democrats in the Kansas Senate attempted to insert an amendment that would protect women in those situations, Republicans staunchly opposed it, and it was not included in the changes that were made.  One Republican claimed that she opposed the exceptions because they could also affect other abortion laws in Kansas, such as the ban on abortions after 22 weeks.  An article from thinkprogress.org, though, explains why this is untrue, and points out that these types of exceptions already have overwhelming support in the U.S.

In fact, such an amendment wouldn’t “undo” state-level abortion restrictions at all. Exceptions in the cases of rape, incest, and preserving the life of the woman are still extremely narrow, and don’t change the fact that restrictions on reproductive care are still imposed on the majority of women. Those small exemptions have become somewhat of a national standard. The federal government, 32 states, and the District of Columbia all offer exceptions in the cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest in their bans on public funding for abortion. Americans also overwhelmingly support abortion access for victims of rape and incest.

In short, HB2253 is a vile piece of legislation that not only has the potential to impact the future legal status of abortions in the state of Kansas, but also promotes unscientific ideals, limits teenagers’ access to comprehensive sex education, and fails to provide protection to women who need it the most.  More than any to come before it, this bill makes me ashamed to be a Kansan.

-J.C.

Pat Robertson Blasts Science, Education, and Skepticism, Glorifies Blind Faith in Less Developed Countries

Well, Pat Robertson is at it again, this week.  On Monday’s episode of The 700 Club, a viewer posed a question about miracles.   Rightwingwatch.org uploaded a video clip of the episode, and I still haven’t decided which was worse: the question, or Robertson’s response.

Caller: “Why do amazing miracles (people raised from the dead, blind eyes open, lame people walking) happen with great frequency in places like Africa, and not here in the USA?”

Now, my first instinct is to wonder if this guy is for real. I’m not completely convinced that this wasn’t a masterfully executed exercise in trolling, especially considering that Monday was April Fool’s Day.  For now, though, let’s ignore the ridiculousness of the suggestion that Africa, many parts of which are poverty stricken, riddled with conflict and facing an AIDS crisis, is a continent that has been blessed with an abundance of miracles, and take a look at Robertson’s response:

Robertson: “Because those people overseas didn’t go to Ivy League schools.”

If you’re waiting for the punchline, there isn’t one.  Robertson was dead serious.  He continued:

Robertson:“Well, we are so sophisticated, we think we’ve got everything figured out, we know about evolution, we know about Darwin, we know about all these things that says God isn’t real, we know about all this stuff.  In many schools, in the more advanced schools, we have been inundated with skepticism and secularism.”

There you have it.  The age old attack on science and skepticism that religion has been forced to keep up over the ages, as science has consistently shown it to be false.  Because, when the answer to a question isn’t what you want people to believe it is, the only way to keep them from finding out is to convince them that it’s a bad thing to ask the question, in the first place.  Here’s a tip, folks: any time that someone uses the term “skepticism” with a negative connotation, your bullshit-o-meter should be setting off an alarm.

Robertson wasn’t about to stop at vilifying science and critical thinking, though.  He went on to glorify the more widespread blind faith and unquestioning acceptance of those in less developed countries, saying that:

“Overseas, they’re simple, humble. You tell ‘em God loves ‘em and they say, ‘Okay, he loves me.’ You say God will do miracles and they say, ‘Okay, we believe him.’ And that’s what God’s looking for. That’s why they have miracles.”

So, a famous televangelist tells people that science and skepticism are bad, and blind faith is good.  Pretty much par for the course, right?  Well, I suppose, but that’s exactly why it raises my ire so much.  When charlatans like this man are able to dupe millions of viewers with their science denying, ignorance glorifying nonsense, its effect is the retardation of the social and intellectual evolution of our species.  He and people like him should be exposed at every turn as the harmful frauds that they are, until the large scale promotion of ignorance is no longer considered just an everyday occurrence, but an offensive act of harm against humanity.

-J.C.

Here is the video clip of the episode, courtesy of rightwingwatch.org:

New Study Further Debunks Anti-Vaccine Claims

A few weeks ago, as my Composition II Honors classmates and I were discussing ideas for an upcoming research paper, the alleged link between vaccinations and autism was brought up.  Over the next ten minutes or so, as I tried to shed a skeptical light on the issue, I was subjected to a slew of skewed information and anecdotal evidence by the three other members of the class, and even the instructor, who all supported this ridiculous notion that childhood vaccinations and cases of autism have a direct correlation.

The anti-vaccination movement found its beginnings when Andrew Wakefield published a report, claiming there to be a link between the MMR vaccine and the development of neurological disorders, specifically autism.  Despite this study being thoroughly debunked long ago, the idea still persists, with its adherents launching campaign after campaign against childhood vaccinations.  Now, a new study has come out, which sheds even more light on the supposed link between childhood vaccinations and autism.

A large new government study should reassure parents who are afraid that kids are getting autism because they receive too many vaccines too early in life.

The study, by researchers at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, found no connection between the number of vaccines a child received and his or her risk of autism spectrum disorder. It also found that even though kids are getting more vaccines these days, those vaccines contain many fewer of the substances that provoke an immune response.

This study deals a heavy blow to one of the latest claims to come out of the anti-vax movement: that getting large numbers of vaccines in the same day, or in the first years of life, has a causal connection with autism.

To find out if that was happening, DeStefano led a team that compared the vaccine histories of about 250 children who had autism spectrum disorder with those of 750 typical kids. Specifically, the researchers looked at what scientists call antigens. An antigen is a substance in a vaccine that causes the body to produce antibodies, proteins that help fight off infections.

“The amount of antigens from vaccines received on one day of vaccination or in total during the first two years of life is not related to the development of autism spectrum disorder in children,” DeStefano says.

Aside from the most obvious harm to individual children, vaccine denial carries some serious potential consequences.  for example, in the last few years, we have seen a strong resurgence of diseases like measles and pertussis (whooping cough), which could be linked to a loss of herd immunity.  On top of this, Ellen Wright Clayton, a Vanderbilt University Professor, points out that the focus on researching and debunking the link between vaccinations and neural disorders has hindered research on disease prevention.

“The sad part is, by focusing on the question of whether vaccines cause autism spectrum disorders, they’re missing the opportunity to look at what the real causes are,” she says.

Breaking News: North Korean Tensions a Result of Supreme Court Hearings on Same Sex Marriage. God is Pissed!

Rick Wiles, the Trunews broadcaster who has called President Obama “a devil from hell,” conducted an interview with Southern Baptist Convention President, Fred Luter, on Wednesday.  In it, Wiles and Luter suggested that recent tensions with North Korea are a result of god’s anger over the Supreme Court hearings on same sex marriage.  Not only that, but they even went so far as to say that the United States is likely to be destroyed, just like the biblical cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, should the Supreme Court rule in favor of it.  Let’s take a look at some excerpts.  (Along with a bit of commentary from yours truly, of course.)

Wiles: You know at precisely the same time the Supreme Court is hearing these arguments on same-sex marriage in Asia a crazy man in possession of nuclear weapons, Kim Jong-un, is openly saying: I have ordered our military to position our rockets on US targets in Hawaii, Japan, Guam and the mainland of the United States.  He has gone into a full state of war this week.  I don’t know, Pastor Luter, I don’t know if anybody is — I know they’re not — they’re just not putting this together.  You got this happening over here and you got this happening over here: could the two be connected? Could our slide into immorality be what is unleashing this mad man over here in Asia to punish us?

Luter: It could be a possibility, I’m not that strong in prophecy but I would not be surprised that there’s not a connection there simply because of the fact we’ve seen it happen in scripture before. I would not be surprised that at the time when we are debating same-sex marriage, at a time when we are debating whether or not we should have gays leading the Boy Scout movement, I don’t think it’s just a coincidence that we have a mad man in Asia who is saying some of the things that he’s saying.

This is the same old load of disgusting garbage that we hear spewing from the mouths of evangelicals, every time that there is a major disaster, or threat of one.  “We made God angry, so he’s punishing us.”  Aside from the offensiveness of the idea that affording equal rights to all people is a punishable offense, you would think that, after thousands of years of accumulating knowledge on what ACTUALLY causes natural phenomena and human behavior, we could move past this ridiculous, primitive notion that everything bad that happens is the result of some fictional, cosmic bully’s displeasure.

Wiles: I have to admit I’m at a loss to understand the complacency and apathy of tens of millions of American Christians who are standing by, twiddling their thumbs while their nation is transformed into a socialist, homosexual, anti-God, anti-biblical morality cesspool.

Well, what can I say, Rick?  Witch burning, heretic torturing, crusade waging Christians are just getting harder and harder to come by, these days.  About your comment that the U.S. is becoming an “anti-biblical morality cesspool,” though, I think I’m pretty ok with that.  That’s probably because I am ABSOLUTELY anti-biblical morality, just as any reasonable person who has ever actually read the bible would be.  Because, anyone who has knows that “biblical morality” includes murdering children who disrespect their parents, as well as women who aren’t virgins on their wedding nights, forcing rape victims to marry their rapists, endorsing slavery, genocide and infanticide, and a whole slew of other unsavory things.  With all of that put into perspective, I think that it’ safe to say that anyone who has actually read the bible, and still supports the idea of “biblical morality,” is either engaging in some astonishing cognitive dissonance, or is completely insane.

Wiles: If the Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage is a constitutional right, what are the ramifications for this nation?

You mean, other than gay people being able to get married, and our nation taking a long overdue step towards affording equal rights to all people?  Hmmm…I’m having trouble thinking of any, at the moment.

Luter: Oh man I would hate to think of it. You talked about Sodom and Gomorrah in your introduction and I can just see that happening man, it would be like America is pointing its finger at God and saying: ‘I know what your word says God, I know what the scripture says but we want to be our own king, we want to do things our own way.’ The last time a nation did that they were destroyed, Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed. I just see things getting consistently worse in America because of our decisions that we’ve made to just get farther and farther away from God and God’s word.

“The last time a nation did that they were destroyed, Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed.”  Actually, there are plenty of more recent instances of citizens actively deciding that the bible doesn’t dictate their moral laws, many of which took place right here, in the U.S.  For a few examples, see: abolition of slavery, legalization of interracial marriage, affording of equal rights to women, criminalization of marital rape, oh, and not to forget the establishment clause, and that first line in the Treaty of Tripoli, which begins: “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion…” Of course, these are only a few out of numerous examples.  So far, I haven’t seen this mass destruction of our nation that you claim inevitably results from things like this, Fred.  Is your god just taking it easy on us?  That seems a bit out of character for him, all things considered.

Wiles also urged Christians to stop going to work, as a form of protest against the United States’ immoral ways.

Wiles: The country, the economic system would be on the verge of collapse if ten million productive Christians… simply said ‘we’re going to sit things out until this craziness stops,’ I think it would be over in a couple days.

Ahhhh, I see your reasoning, here, Rick.  Obviously, the best way to stop a nation from descending into a pit of chaos would be to cripple its economic system.  Genius!

Luter: That would be powerful, that would be a phenomenal statement to America and I think also to the world. The challenge would be getting those ten million Christians together to make it happen.

Wiles: Apparently they don’t believe the Gospel enough.

So, you’re saying that people value their livelihoods and ways of life more than a ridiculous, immoral code of ethics that was thought up by primitive men, in the bronze age?  Oh, the tragedy of it all.

Luter: I agree, we need about ten million Rick Wileses in the world, it would be radical.

Wiles: That would be a scary thought.

On that, Rick, we most certainly agree.

-J.C.

PA. Republican Attempts to Stifle Church/State Separation Lawsuits by Introducing Legislation that Would Prevent Plaintiffs from Remaining Anonymous

The man in the photo above is Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Tim Krieger.  Apparently, Rep. Krieger doesn’t like the idea of citizens using anonymity to protect their safety and identities, when filing lawsuits that they fear may cause public backlash upon them and their families.

Yesterday, the Pennsylvania House Republican Caucus website reported on the introduction of House bill 922, which would prevent plaintiffs in lawsuits pertaining to the display of religious symbols on public property from remaining anonymous, unless they can directly prove that they would suffer physical injury as a result of appearing in court.

GREENSBURG — Rep. Tim Krieger (R-Delmont) announced today the introduction of his legislation to guarantee public transparency in litigation impacting the expression of religious liberties in public places (House Bill 922).

Passage of House Bill 922 would require that the party bringing any lawsuit designed to suppress, remove or inhibit the display or use of religious symbols in public locations would not be allowed to proceed anonymously, unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the primary litigant(s) would suffer serious physical harm due to appearing in court.

There are so many things wrong with this, I almost don’t know where to begin.  Let’s start with Krieger’s rationale behind this bill:

“Religious expression in public places has been part of our nation and Pennsylvania for generations, from the founding of the Commonwealth by William Penn and onward to modern times,” said Krieger.  “Even inside our state Capitol, religious symbols are still prominently displayed in both chambers of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, as well as through a mural of Moses receiving the Ten Commandments adorning the chamber of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.  A troubling practice has emerged in recent years where private parties file anonymous lawsuits to attack the display of religious symbols in public places.”

So, apparently Mr. Krieger finds the enforcement of church/state separation “troubling.”  Do you know what I find troubling?  The fact that we have state representatives who oppose the enforcement of and adherence to one of our most basic constitutional principles: that no government body may endorse any religion in any way.  Whether the practice of public religious displays has been traditionally allowed or not has no bearing on its legal status.  The fact is that the establishment clause makes it an unconstitutional practice.  Period.  This constitutional ideal has been upheld and reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in case after case, yet we still have elected officials who directly ignore, and even fight against it.

“Passage of House Bill 922 would guarantee that no individual or organization will be able to use our state courts as a weapon to attack the right of Pennsylvania citizens to display religious symbols in public places while hiding in the shadows,” said Krieger.

The right of citizens to display religious symbols in public places?  I don’t remember reading that in the constitution, Mr. Krieger.  Could you point it out for me, please?  Because, as I’ve already said, I’m pretty sure that the establishment clause, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, says something very different.

As far as his comment about the plaintiffs in these cases “hiding in the shadows,” this is nothing more than an attempt to vilify a minority who has every reason to want to remain anonymous in these cases.  This is illustrated by the huge precedent of harassment and threats that has been seen in the past, when individuals have publicly identified themselves in lawsuits such as the ones that this bill is aimed at.  Through cases like those of Jessica Ahlquist,  Vashti McCollum and many others, we have repeatedly seen the plaintiffs in such lawsuits and their families subjected to a variety of attacks, including verbal harassment, community shunning, threats of violence and death, actual violence, the online publishing of home addresses and more.  The fact that Mr. Krieger wants to do away with the only real protection that future plaintiffs have against this type of backlash is both angering and sickening.

When we have elected officials who directly oppose the enforcement of constitutional principles, it should be a red flag.  When those same officials attempt to introduce legislation that is aimed directly at discouraging citizens from pursuing the enforcement of those principles by taking away their only means of guaranteeing their safety in doing so, the citizenry should be sounding the alarm so loudly that those officials can’t hear themselves think.

So, I’m issuing a call to action for all secularists and other supporters of the establishment clause: let Rep. Krieger know that we will NOT tolerate this attack on citizens’ ability to safely fight for church/state separation.  You can find Rep. Krieger’s office contact information below.

-J.C.

Representative Tim Krieger
57th District
Pennsylvania House of Representatives
101 Ehalt Street
Greensburg, PA 15601-2300
Phone: 724-834-6400
E-mail: Tkrieger@pahousegop.com

Outcome of Battle Over Fraudulent Therapy Practices Still Undecided in NJ. Leader in Fight Warns that Gay Rights Advocates Still have a Long Road Ahead.

As the debate in Washington over gay marriage heats up, some gay rights advocates currently fighting other battles point out that there will still be a long way to go, even after marriage equality is achieved.  Troy Stevenson, the director of Garden State Equality, spoke about the issue with The American Prospect:

“The marriage-equality movement gets a lot of press [because] it’s viewed as the glass ceiling, that once we get that done, we’ve achieved equal rights. But that’s not the truth,” Troy says. “In many ways, these smaller battles are more important because they are less understood.” He points to the history of the women’s rights movement as evidence that full equality for homosexuals will not come with the stroke of a pen or a single Supreme Court decision. “After Roe v. Wade, a lot people declared victory and dropped out of the [women’s rights] movement, and now 40 years later they’re fighting the same battles again,” he says. “This is not something that we want to happen in the LGBT community.”

His comments stem from another current fight in in the gay rights movement, over the use of “gay conversion,” or “pray the gay away” therapies.

Gay rights advocates, including the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), are targeting the practice of conversion therapy on the grounds that by perpetuating the belief that homosexuality is a treatable mental disorder, it helps to legitimize discrimination against LGBT people.

Not to mention the fact that these kinds of therapies have been discredited by every major medical, psychiatric, psychological and counseling organization in the U.S.  Aside from having been shown to be ineffective, many even consider these therapies to be psychologically damaging and harmful.  Despite these facts, the practice has been allowed to continue.

Homosexuality was removed from the American Psychiatric Association’s list of pathological disorders in 1973.  But for decades, an ideologically motivated fringe industry has quietly carried on the work of trying to “cure” gay men and women.

Last year though, a bill was introduced in New Jersey that would take a major step towards ending these harmful and fraudulent practices:

Garden State Equality has been coordinating with New Jersey lawmakers to advance legislation that would ban conversion therapy for minors under the age of 18. The bill was introduced last fall by Democratic state Senator Ray Lesniak and is modeled on a similar law in California currently being challenged by proponents of conversion therapy.

The position of the charlatan “therapists” who are spearheading the opposition in California is that the ban violates their right to freedom of speech.  Lesniak points out, though, that this argument doesn’t really have a basis in reality.

“There is no scientific basis for this treatment—it’s akin to a chiropractor saying they can cure cancer by manipulating your spine,” he says. “Free speech does not mean anyone licensed to practice therapy can engage in fraudulent speech without being subject to a penalty.”

I couldn’t have possibly put it better, myself, Ray.  This is NOT an issue of freedom of speech.  It’s an issue of one group of people selling a service that is ineffective, at best,  to another group of people, based on a fraudulent claim: that homosexuality is a mental illness, and that it can be “cured.”

Still, gay rights opponents in New Jersey, including the organization  Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing, or JONAH, quickly geared up to make a fight of it in their state, too, enlisting the aid of attorney Charles LiMandri.  You remember him, right?  He’s the anti-gay attorney who has committed such disgusting displays of public bigotry as calling homosexuality “destructive and pathological,” and threatening a second civil war if same sex marriage becomes legal.

They have been unsuccessful in their opposition to the bill, so far, as it was passed by the New Jersey State Senate last week.  Governor Chris Christie still hasn’t signed it, though, saying that it is a complex issue that has him divided:

“I’m of two minds just on this stuff in general. No. 1, I think there should be lots of deference given to parents on raising their children,” Christie said at a news conference Wednesday afternoon. “I don’t – this is a general philosophy, not to his bill – generally, philosophically, on bills that restrict parents’ ability to make decisions on how to care for their children, I’m generally a skeptic of those bills. Now there can always be exceptions to those rules, and this bill may be one of them.”

Here’s my last thought on the issue: these “therapies” are nothing short of psychologically abusive.  Sexual orientation is NOT a choice, and therapy practices that maintain that it is, and try to force people to change it do nothing but heap shame, guilt and emotional trauma upon people who have NOTHING WRONG WITH THEM.  So, while parental choice issues may be a complex topic, Governor, abuse of minors is not.  Stop pretending that it is, just so you can continue toeing the political line.

-J.C.

Proud to be Intolerant

I’m extremely busy today, so this post will be short.

In recognition of the Supreme Court hearings on the issue of same sex marriage, I’d like to make a few comments about intolerance and oppression. Both are issues that are central to gay rights, but they have also recently become rallying cries for fundamentalists and others who oppose them.

When coming from that sector, the general claim is that gay rights supporters are being intolerant and oppressive of those who believe that homosexuality is a sin and that homosexuals should not be entitled to equal rights, due to that fact.  Most gay rights supporters (in my experience) counter this argument by pointing out that it is the other side who is being intolerant of homosexuals, and that affording other people equal rights is the opposite of oppression.  I see things a little differently.

I say that, in my case at least, the gay rights opposition is absolutely correct.  I am intolerant.  I am 100% intolerant of bigoted, discriminatory beliefs, based on ancient, outdated moral codes.  I am intolerant of those who would hide behind those beliefs to justify their own bigotry and hatred towards those who are different than they.  I am intolerant of any who would oppose the affording of equal rights to all people.  And, call it oppression if you will, but I will continue to speak out and fight against all those who embrace such ideals.

So, there you have it.  On this issue, I am intolerant, and I am proud of it.

-J.C.