Politics and Pucks

It's New Year's Eve, and many people celebrate it with friends. For those who find themselves working in food delivery this New Years Eve, I'd just like to make sure to put out this PSA:

Futurama
Millennium Man
www.comedycentral.com
Funny Jokes It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia Ugly Americans

The moral of the story is that you don't want to end up like Fry. If you must deliver a pizza to someone named I. C. Weiner, just make sure you don't get stuck in their lab. Otherwise, you might be missing out on New Years with your friends for say...the next 1,000 years.

Happy New Year 2011! Be safe if you plan on going out tonight, and think before you get behind the wheel.

Jennifer McCreight has posed the following question on her blog: Who was the most influential female atheist in 2010? Although arguably, You can vote up to 3 times, and there's an opportunity for write-ins. Although every woman listed in this is deserving of this title, and this blog post is meant with no disrespect to anyone listed. It was difficult to narrow down, and wish I could pick all of them, but this is who I chose:

Aayan Hirsi Ali

This woman has done something that is very difficult for anyone to do. She has left Islam and has been avidly vocal about it. She doesn't get enough attention sometimes, and I think she is a very intelligent person and writes pretty eloquently. I can't imagine what it would be like to have left Islam in the way that she has. She has been intellectually critical of Islam in a way that has been rarely seen in this country. She understands the politics of Islam better than almost every other public atheist figure. Might I add, that she is also a political scientist for the American Enterprise Institute.

Debbie Goddard

Debbie Goddard is the outreach director for the Center for Inquiry in Amherst, NY. She also is the director for the council of African Americans for Humanism. This summer at the Secular Student Alliance (SSA) national conference, she spoke about the need for diversity among non-theists. It's important that there is outreach, because as she pointed out non-theists are overwhelmingly white and privileged. By the law of averages there has to be individuals within minority groups around the country who are non-theists, but may be afraid to say it. Debbie Goddard has made a really strong case for diversity, and I think that she deserves votes for her commitment to this cause.

Lucy Gubbins (Write-In)

Lucy Gubbins is not included on the list, but should be! She is the president of the University of Oregon's Alliance of Happy Atheists, and they're a fairly new student group. In January 2010, she wrote a very polite op-ed response to the local newspaper for an article that was more or less a hate fulled rant about non-believers. Most of all, I admire her calmness in this situation. She was able to turn the issue into something positive. The Alliance of Happy Atheists won the 2010 SSA award for Best Community! This group defies almost every negative stereotype of atheists, and Lucy Gibbons helped put them on the map.

I would have instantly voted for Jen, but it seems kind of awkward to choose the person doing the poll as the winner of her own title. Good luck to everyone in the poll, and I can't wait to see who ultimately wins this title.

I'd like to publicly respond to a recent comment from a post earlier this summer:

How is the tea party to "purge (itself) of these elements" when you have people on the left purposefully infiltrating it so as to show it is is "racist"? Remember the guy who had a website designed with the intent to get people to show up to tea parties with racist signs?

There is no racism in the tea party. Most of the signs you show on your video are obviously photoshopped. I admit, there is a nut case in any crowd of thousands, but to dismiss the entire movement as racist because of some photo shopped signs, leftist infiltrators and select pictures proves nothing.

The tea parties message is simple and it seems hard to disagree with:

1. Constitutional government and the rule of law.
2. Spending within our means.
3. Liberty and freedom for every individual in America.

What do you disagree with?

Or do you just have a chip on your shoulder and everythings racist?

Dear Tea Party Nation,

First of all, I have little to no experience in Photoshop. I think if those images were altered, it was done pretty well.

Clearly, you don't read this blog enough to know that I've actually attended a few rallies and meetings. I even watch Glenn Beck and read Tea Party oriented literature and blogs. I've been to enough of these events to know that the majority of the audience is in fact white and generally older than 45 in age, and I have heard quite a few racial slurs at these events. I even heard that Jews who entered this country illegally in the 1930s and 1940s shouldn't have been let in because they should have gone through Ellis Island. The history you're forgetting is that often Jews were deported back to countries they originated from, so sneaking in was a risk that some saw as worth attempting to escape persecution.

So are there racist and bigoted elements in the Tea Party? Absolutely, as a political scientist it would be impossible for me to dismiss this hypothesis without further testing that there is some racist element that exists. I am more upset that the movement has defended itself on countless occasions without taking action at times. I think its constant defense that it is not a racist movement is something that makes the movement look paranoid and creating useless rhetoric.

So what do I not agree with, within your main stands: none of it. The government is already operating under the rule of Constitutional Law. Freedom and Liberty have always been priorities. Spending has not always been the country's strong suit in either of the major parties. The difference I have with the Tea Party Movement is the means in which those goals are achieved. The Tea Party plan is to hack and slash at government programs that are necessary for government to function. I personally think that some of the Tea Party members may have a great knowledge of the Constitution, but they lack a knowledge in political science or how the state actually works. Many of the promises that its members are making will not be kept. For example, if you read Morris Fiorina's Congress: The Keystone of the Washington Establishment, Robert Lowi's The End of Liberalism, David Mayhew's Congress: The Electoral Connection or even Robert Dahl's A Preface to Democratic Theory you will see that the rhetoric the Tea Party is speaking is neither new, nor something that hasn't been attempted before. There are many other books I could list, and could suggest, but I'm sure you're going to pass off these as "too liberal". Might I mention that there are authors within the ones I just mentioned that identify as conservative. The Tea Party winners will fall into the same old traps as other politicians, and that they will be bought off by special interest groups (if they haven't been already).

I understand that government spending is too much, and that we should be cutting funding. So, what would I cut? Defense spending to a degree. We have more military capability than the next top 15 militaries combined. I keep hearing we're in a down-trodden economy and everyone should be tightening their belts, so why isn't the military? I'm not hating the troops if I'm asking to scale back on their spending. Just enough so we can still maintain the best military, but not by sinking a good portion of the economy into it. Why does Congress need to appropriate $30 million airplanes that the military elites and strategists openly don't even want? I call that waste spending. One day, our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will be over, and the economy will tank.

How about imposing a tax on churches and all other religious centers that are currently tax-free? I bet that you wouldn't like it, but it would raise enormous revenues. Or are churches "taxed enough already"?

I'll tell you where I think the money should be spent.

You make think it's useless to upgrade railroads, but I could tell you that we haven't really updated it since the 19th century. Europe has a high-speed rail system that allows citizens to travel at low cost. I don't see a problem in developing this, because we will all see a direct, positive impact.

I also would like to see more money focused on education because this is an area that we lack severely in. Many of the kids are not even prepared for college. You may see this as my attempt to send your kids through liberal elites, but I see it as an opportunity to learn about the professions that they dream of partaking. Think about the average CEO in this country: most of them have college degrees (even the conservative ones). Plus there should be a standard nationally, because local standards won't take into account for changes in the world. Local standards make our education uneven. You also shouldn't limit funding to fields you don't agree with. Political science, and biology are two fields that have findings that may come off as too "liberal" or too "secular". If I was in charge, I would allow for theology funding, because there's value in having research into it. I may be atheist, but I see value in having religion research programs at institutions of higher education if people believe in it in the greater society. It shouldn't dominate education however, and be the guidance for everything.

I think you're also being paranoid that everyone is out to get you, and that everyone opposing you is somehow a liberal plant or communist. Glenn Beck is feeding his audience the same information that Alex Jones has been feeding the public for years. The same old New World Order is being planned so that there will be a unitary currency and your guns will be confiscated if you disagree with it. Not to mention that there will be FEMA camps to kill off the dissidents. This is as true as a staged moon landing, because it's not in anyone's best interest to eliminate all competition for a free market to work.

Additionally, I do take offense to the Tea Party's message for the non-Christian citizens of this nation. Last time I checked, there are Jews, Muslims, other religious minorities, and non-theists. Sure, Christians are the majority, but it doesn't mean you have to tyrannize. That's right I said "you". Why? Most of the members of the Tea Party movement are following Christianity, and want people like me to shut up. Not all Christians actually buy into your brand of Christianity, but you don't think they're real Christians anyway. Well, I will respectfully continue to disagree as my Constitutional right. I'm still going to push against your unconstitutional enforcement of religion on Americans. I'm sure I'll be compared to Mao, Stalin, and most inaccurately to Hitler. You'll put on a show that you're being oppressed, but it couldn't be more ironic.

Speaking of economic incentives, I think your ideas about taxes are very nice in theory, but not realistic. Think about this, if you get rid of income tax the focus will just shift. Instead of paying income tax, you'll just pay more everywhere else. This makes buying goods, owning homes, cars, etc. a lot more difficult. If you're so concerned about preserving the American Dream, then why are you going to increase the income gaps? Why are you so interested in the estate tax? If you just don't like taxes, then I expect you to stop supporting the troops. Your tax dollars support their causes, and your additional money helps them get things the government cannot provide them because you don't think veterans should have health benefits.

So do I have a problem with the Tea Party? Maybe on their policy and ideological stands, but I'm willing to work with them as long as they can compromise. Although I'm not going to join you, hearing your ideas is something I'm willing to do. Compromise is something that has been lost in this country, and unfortunately, the Tea Party reinforces the concept that there are no compromises. When Congress can't accomplish anything, this lack of compromise is one of the major reasons. The Tea Party sounds like a bunch of whiny brats who think that the country is being overtaken by imaginary threats. I have pointed out clearly, my objections to the Tea Party, and if you have read this, you can tell that it is mostly on ideological and not racial grounds. So do I have a chip on my shoulder? Absolutely not, but I do wonder if you're open minded enough to understand that the world doesn't work in a conservative vacuum.

Sincerely,
Mike

Everyone this time of year has their obligatory "year in review" post or TV special. Well, I felt like writing one, and reflecting back on 2010. In the over 350 posts I have written this year, there have been a lot of interesting moments. It was difficult to narrow it down to 10! So here's my top 10 most memorable moments of the past year:

10. History will be Made
The NHL sponsored Playoffs commercials in 2010 were incredibly powerful. They highlighted key moments in NHL Stanley Cup history and ran them backwards to piano music. It was a great ad campaign, and it was so well received that it became a meme. Some of the parodies were very funny, and I posted about them.

9. The Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell
Don't Ask Don't Tell was repealed after 17 years. It was not a great policy, and took a lot of work to get it repealed. This repeal will only strengthen the military, and not cause a confidence crisis. I wrote about this historic victory for LGBTQ Americans.

8. Boobquake
Boobquake was an event that was a result of Jennifer McCreight's response to an Iranian cleric about women. It has boosted her to a lot of popularity and prestige within the atheist community. She's a great friend, and it was a great way for her to end her time at Purdue. I really enjoyed the "epicenter" event because of the message: that the religious should not claim they are scientists, unless they actually are scientists.

7. Pastor RJ Turner: conservative troll
In August, California's controversial Prop 8 amendment with regards to same-sex marriage was overturned by a federal judge. I was so ecstatic that I wrote a post about it. As I woke up the next morning, I noticed that there was a conservative blogger named RJ Turner who left me a rather lengthy message. It was somewhat standoffish, and something I needed to address. I decided to respond in a post where I took apart his argument. RJ again left a lengthy response, and then I responded again a little more personally. I've been told the final post, was one of the funniest I had written.

6. The Wingnuts of "Burn a Quran Day"
Burning a Quran captured national attention amidst the discussion of an Islamic center set to open in New York City in September 2011. In the weeks leading up to this, major bloggers and individuals in the atheist community were advocating that burning all books was okay. In this post I discussed my rationale for why I oppose book burnings in any instance.

5. Glenn Beck
Glenn Beck has been a topic of conversation on the blogosphere for the past 2 years or so. I explored his 8/28 rally, his supporters, and even his guests' stances against atheists. He's a very interesting and intriguing character in American politics. I don't agree with him, but I will continue to explore the implications of his ideas and actions of his followers.

4. The Local Tax Day Tea Party
In my growing interest about the Tea Party movement, I attended the local Tax Day Tea Party rally. I learned a lot, and ran into a scuffle with the John Birch Society. It was a very interesting day, but I think I learned a few things: the Tea Party is not exactly unified and the demographics reported by Quinnipiac in March are mostly correct. I have attended a number of events, including John Behney's campaign stop at Purdue and Donn Brown's events (which I will address in a moment). I will continue looking into stories and events about the Tea Party in the next year. I think the Tea Party saga is not over yet, but the end is closer than they would like you to believe.

3. Purdue Non-Theists
It was a fantastic year for the Purdue Society of Non-Theists. The group experienced Greta Christina, Jon Weyer, and Darryl Ray. The Purdue Non-Theists won the 2010 award for "Best Service Project" from the Secular Student Alliance, for Send an Atheist to Church. I was elected Secretary, and we've made great strides already this year. We may have had a change in leadership, but the club is still going strong! It's been a great year to be a non-theist at Purdue, and next year is shaping up to be no different.

2. My Donn Brown encounters
Donn Brown (R) is the local Tea Party organizer who challenged Indiana State Rep. Shelia Klinker (D) in the 2010 election. I attended a variety of his events. His first event I attended was a speech about the evils of liberals. He mentioned in that meeting that we should bring back public hangings. Yep, he was a winner alright. He also held an immigration forum where I had an old lady tell me that my Jewish grandmother should have gone through Ellis Island because that was the moral thing to do. I also attended his boring lesson on Constitutional states rights. He also no-showed on a scheduled event, which prompted me to write to the Journal and Courier.

Donn Brown ended up losing the election by nearly 20 points. I should mention that Donn looked freaked out whenever I was at his events and avoided me when possible. More importantly, he was an embarrassment for the local Republicans. I've heard there's a rumor he may be running for a seat for the Lafayette city council in 2011. Either way, I don't think we've seen the last of Donn Brown, and his lunacy.

1. The Creation Museum and Bill Cunningham (January 29)
The first big post of the year was a post about the Cincinnati Cyclones and their "Bill Cunningham bobble-head night" back in January. I mentioned the Creation Museum in the post a few times, and got a response from co-CEO Mark Looy telling me I was unfair to the museum. I actually wasn't saying anything specifically about it, other than it exists in the greater Cincinnati area. I think Mr. Looy only commented because he was defending one of their high-profile donors. I wear this attack as a badge of honor, and say to Mr. Looy and Mr. Ham: bring it on, because I'm not afraid to criticize your pseudo science. If it means anything to you social science is a hell of a lot more real than theolo...I mean creation science.

Although we still have a few more days in 2010, I don't think anything can top these 10 moments. It's been a great year, and I'm really looking forward to next year. Early in the year, I'll hit my 500th post. I also will start blogging with the Thomas Society, and there's a lot of other great stuff I have planned! Thank you for a being a part of this blogging experience, and I hope you'll join me in 2011!

A great *insert your favorite holiday greeting for Christmas*!

I know the Star Wars holiday special was awful, but could you imagine this one?

The 1982 Tron Holiday Special from Rip Taylor

(Via Roger Ebert's Journal)

So today I'm getting a tooth pulled. I've been a bit nervous about it for the past couple of days, because I've never had any procedure that has required me to be "unconscious". I figure that other people out there are also stressed, so I think I'd post something that could be a bit of a stress relief:

I feel relaxed now. Well, off to my procedure! I'll let you know how it goes.

EDIT (2:11 PM): I'm home now, and have been watching TV. I have not had to delve into the "fun stuff" yet. I'm feeling pretty good actually.

The other day Glenn Beck showed a clip where David Barton had some thoughts about progressives and the Constitution

Firstly, you can definitely substitute the word "conservative" with "progressive" and it would mean about the same. Both sides nominate judges that lean in certain directions, because they can leave a lasting impression on the court. It can always backfire, though.

Secondly, I can't believe that Glenn Beck is completely upset with the 17th Amendment. All the tea baggers cite the 16th Amendment as unconstitutional because it says that the federal government can levy taxes. Of course the rationale is that taxation is slavery, which is a terrible argument. Anyway, back to the 17th Amendment. For those who do not remember what the 17th Amendment guarantees, it is the amendment where the Senate is elected directly by popular vote. Without it, the Senate was an appointed body by our elected state officials. Now we can choose our Senators, and I am actually happy we can do so. It's just like saying that there should be no primaries in presidential elections. The danger in that is a repeat of the 1968 DNC riots, which I definitely would like to avoid.

For someone who seems to want to have less government and more transparency, I can't believe that Glenn Beck and David Barton would want to do away with the 17th amendment. If we're supposed to have a government for the people, by the people, I would hope we would elect our Senators. While there are good arguments to having Senators appointed, this argument is a terrible one.

(Via Media Matters)

In December 2003, the United States forces captured Saddam Hussein. This was perceived as good in almost a unanimous fashion by both Democrats and Republicans. In the time since, some of the relics from Saddam's reign have been preserved, including his Quran that is inscribed in his blood. It took nearly 24 liters of blood donated over a few years. Now the dilemma is what to do with it. Martin Chulov writes:

"I knew this would be much sought after and we made the decision to protect it. But to see this now is not easy. There are three keys and none of them are held in the one place. I have one, the police chief in the area has another and there is a third in another part of Baghdad. There has to be a decision of a committee to let you in."

Other relics have been much easier for the government to deal with, such as the Saddam statue that was toppled by US marines in April 2003, and copper busts of Ba'athist leaders that were erected all over the country. Their removal was straightforward, like lancing boils, say the men who run the country now.

As Iraq slowly assembles its fourth government since the fall of Baghdad in 2003, attention is now turning to the more difficult issues - what to do with the landmarks and relics that are unique to the Saddam regime but which have also become synonymous with Iraq. Some, like the crossed swords that bookend Saddam's former military parade ground in central Baghdad, are as identifiable to the capital as the Hagia Sophia Mosque is to Istanbul, or the Old City to Damascus.

All I have to say is holy shit Saddam Hussein was one crazy guy. I mean seriously, how devoted do you have to be to an idea to have a book inscribed in your own blood? I mean I can't see someone who isn't religious utterly fanatic about an idea do something like this. I don't know what to think about this to be quite honest other than its disgusting.

(Via The Guardian)

I was at DT Kirby's yesterday evening celebrating a friend who received a Masters of Science from Purdue. All of a sudden a guy with a Wal-Mart lanyard and Purdue sweatshirt comes up to Ryan and congratulates him on graduation. He goes on about how he graduated some years ago in Political Science. Ryan, similar to others at the table, then referred him to me. Seeing how he was talking to Ryan, I knew I was in for a treat.

So he comes and sits down and starts telling me about how great Purdue's political science department is, and starts telling me his life story. He was from the Carmel, IN area (near Indianapolis) and worked for Baron Hill for 8 years, and was paid for political stuff since he was 18. He worked on the Hillary campaign, and for other state reps and senators. He seemed like he was in his early to middle 40s, and had the distinct strong odor of mouthwash on his breath.

Let me just say he was talking very, very fast and didn't let me say anything. I also thought it was in my best interest to keep my mouth shut. So he asked me how I felt about Obama, and I said I like some things, I don't like others. He then went into a diatribe how he had worked in politics and thinks that the Republicans were somewhat crazy, and I just nodded in agreement. Okay, so at this point he seemed just a little crazy and I was not sure where this was going. He then asked me if I ever figured out the political leanings of my professors. At this point, I was starting to think things were going to take a weird turn (and they did).

He gave me a really awful way to sit down in a professor's office and get their political opinions. I stressed to him that getting the political opinions of my professors was not my business. He kind of pushed a little bit on that point, and started to go off on how being libertarian is better than being liberal. He then specifically started talking about the New World Order. At this point I was intrigued and put my hand over my mouth to hide the fact I was giggling. He told me how George H.W. Bush was speaking of a New World Order, and President Obama was making it even quicker. Then he brought up a meeting he had with George Soros and claims to have a list of 185 organizations that Soros donated $1 Million to. I actually knew that Glenn Beck released a list with roughly the same number of organizations. He then went on a whole "George Soros was evil" rant. I kept giggling. Here's the punch line though:

Weird Guy: You have heard of Fox News, right? There's this guy Glenn Beck.
Me: I'm familiar with him.
Weird Guy: He's a really smart guy, and he's saying a lot of things I have been thinking, but won't say out loud. I think with your political science education, you are smart enough to understand him.
Me: Listen, I'd like to get back to being with my friends, I feel like I'm being a bit rude.
Weird Guy: Oh, I'm sorry, I figured you're a smart guy and would understand what I'm talking about. God Bless! You will do well, and be a great teacher! You deserve straight As and you will get your degree.

After he left the table I got up for a minute. Then came back and ordered another beer. I then realized, I had been lectured to by a Tea Partier who said I was smart enough to listen to Glenn Beck. I don't know where he got the sense I had this great mind for political science for just listening to him. Little does he know, I do watch Glenn Beck from time to time, but I don't agree with almost anything he says. I just find it funny how someone sees brilliance in me, and I didn't say much in the conversation. I think I've possibly been crowned a genius by a Tea Partier.

The The Price is Right is helping to promote the NHL's annual New Years Day outdoor showcase: The Winter Classic. Here's the footage from the show:

First of all, I think Jeremy Roenick was more a distraction than anything. He'll probably be at the game in the broadcast booth, but I don't think as many Americans (who don't watch hockey) know who he is exactly. Drew Carey probably introduced him earlier in the show though. Jeremy Roenick a character, and loves the spotlight, and that showed through the clip. The bigger suggestion I would make though is that the NHL try to promote the game with someone that Americans may know. How about Mario Lemieux? He might have ownership in the Penguins, but he was a household name, and many non-hockey fans at least recognize that name.

Secondly, I think the Ovechkin and Crosby bit was cheesy. Of course this will be, it's The Price is Right! It's sometimes hard to get around Crosby's robotic responses, and Ovechkin's occasionally thick accent. Despite this, they both did fine. Also, why was Crosby wearing his shoulder pads? Ovechkin wasn't wearing his, with a similar backdrop. I just thought that was kind of strange.

Overall, it actually sounded like a pretty cool package of gifts to win. I'd love to be able to go to a Winter Classic game, and have jerseys, not to mention the car too. I'm looking forward to the game!

(Via The Washington Post)

Today, there has been another victory for LGBT Americans! The Senate has voted 65-31 to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy that the military has upheld over the past 17 years has finally been overturned given President Obama signs the bill (which he will). It is about time that this be overturned. LGBTQ individuals are no more dedicated to their country as anyone else.

Opponents of the repeal of DADT say that this will endanger our military's fighting men and women. They also are telling the American people that the debt is more important, or this issue is irrelevant. I firmly disagree. LGBTQ individuals are as productive to society as anyone else who enlists. There is no agenda being pushed here, other than LGBTQ individuals would like to have equal rights. To tell LGBTQ that they are unfit for service, is synonymous with telling someone they are less than human.

My hope is that the US Military will apologize to and reinstate those who have been discharged by the military. Additionally, I imagine that infrastructure will be put in place to protect and uphold the repeal. The military will have 60 days to fix the infrastructure to be able to create infrastructure. It would be wrong to not do so, because there have been many families hurt by this policy. Over 13,500 individuals had been dismissed as a result of this policy.

I'm excited for this victory. This is a victory for equality, because the US Military now cannot discriminate against anyone for their sexual preferences. Arguably, the military has just grown stronger, because able-bodied men and women will be able to serve. Straight or gay, you can be all that you can be!

Today is a great day for LGBTQ students and faculty at Purdue. The Purdue Board of Trustees voted without opposition, to expand the nondiscrimination policy to include "gender identity and expression" and "genetic information. Back in October, the Purdue Student Government recommended this measure to the Purdue Board of Trustees unanimously. The policy now reads:

Purdue University prohibits discrimination against any member of the University community on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin or ancestry, genetic information, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, disability, or status as a veteran

The Purdue Queer Student Union has worked very hard to get this measure adopted, indicating the inequality gap with the previous vague language. President Nicholas Goldsmith stated: "I am proud to see Purdue move closer to being an inclusive community for all." Purdue now will protect the rights of LGBTQ individuals, and will not tolerate bigotry on this front. This is a major step forward for Purdue in diversity, and will be consistent with the city of West Lafayette's discrimination policy. It is about time that student rights for discrimination are now consistent and clear!

Bill O'Reilly is calling this year a victory for the Christians in the war on Christmas. Here's O'Reilly claiming this while talking to comedian Dennis Miller:

As ridiculous as the idea of the war on Christmas is, isn't it about a week too early to be calling victory? I mean Christmas isn't until next week, and there's still a week of "horrors" that could happen. As Yogi Berra said "It ain't over until the fat lady sings." As Bill O'Reilly points out, Japan has Christmas too. I guess secular Americans can save their money that some of us don't have in that case.

Additionally, I really don't see how O'Reilly or Dennis Miller could call this one in favor of the Christians, either. If there is actually a war on Christmas, I think the Christians took a giant blow this year. The Freedom From Religion Foundation has created a large ad campaign that has Christian groups very upset, especially the American Catholic league. In Fort Worth, TX, a group put up a bus ad and a church countered with an ad on a truck. As a result, the Fort Wayne Transit Authority has banned all atheist or religion-laced advertising. By the way this is constitutional, because it's a private firm.

In addition to these scuffles, I would also say that the atheists also have an advantage in the press right now. The President of American Atheists, Dave Silverman was in the media everyday for 3-4 weeks, not to mention a number of appearances on Fox News. I'd say that this was successful for a few reasons. For starters, Mr. Silverman's appearances only gives his organization more exposure. Secondly, if Mr. Silverman was still appearing in the media well after the billboard is released the billboard is a national topic of discussion. This was the intent after all, and the reactions from the religious groups have played right into a trap. People who want to be non-religious (but haven't come out because of fear), see this craziness and it validates their grievances. It's brilliant.

This ban in Fort Worth brings up an interesting question of First Amendment rights. Hemant Mehta of the Friendly Atheist stated:

...if you reject all religious/non-religious ads because a harmless one caused this much attention, where do you draw the line? What happens when a commercial product draws protests? Are all meat advertisements going to be banned if PETA protested an ad for chocolate-covered bacon?

It's a very good point. If we want to live in a society that truly values First Amendment rights, we need to respect people who are different. As much as I might dislike Fox News, I am not advocating that they be shut down for bias (I think people need to be mindful of this when they watch it though). It's very different if it's hateful, but the intent here isn't hateful. The advertisements are only bringing awareness to the existence of groups that don't believe in God(s). When offended Christians react this way, they only further the stereotypes they have from non-believers.

As for the war on Christmas, I think it's best to say it hasn't been decided...ever. Why? Well as Sun-Tzu would tell us, you can't win a war where you cannot identify a victory condition.

Rep. Michelle Backman (R-MN) is the leader of the Congressional Tea Party caucus. As promised, she has decided to hold Constitution classes for the incoming Representatives and Senators. Guess who is invited to come speak? Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia will be speaking at this Conservative Constitutional Seminar about the separation of powers. This raises a few questions to me about Judicial activism.

If judges are supposed to be neutral, how is this ethical? For starters it is a conservative seminar, which is not neutral. Supreme Court Justices should never participate publicly in political advocacy out of respect for their appointed post. Of course Justices still have the same political rights as any other citizen, but the Supreme Court's image is tarnished by public political advocacy, because it gives the image that the court is biased. I would say the same thing if Justice Kagan attended a pro-choice rally, Justice Alito joined an anti-abortion protest, or if Justice Kennedy attended a Green Peace rally. By doing things like this, Justice Scalia is soiling the prestige of the Supreme Court's image.

The Supreme Court is one of the most important institutions in this country. I think it is unethical for the Tea Party caucus to solicit Justice Scalia's services in this manner. By doing so, he will be publicly advocating political agendas. Isn't this exactly what conservatives were whining about during the confirmation hearings for Justice Sotomayor and Justice Kagan? I think the Congressional members that have said that Scalia is a very fair judge, have some explaining to do.

What do you think?

(Via Politics Outdoors)

I have some very exciting news!! I will be writing for The Thomas Society as their atheist editor starting in January. The Thomas Society is a ministry at Ohio State that is run by Jon Weyer and focuses on communication between atheist and religious communities. The Thomas Society has done a fantastic job building bridges between the two communities at Ohio State. I should also mention that Jon is also the only Christian minister on the Secular Student Alliance speakers' bureau. The Thomas Society blog has been great, and this re-boot is sounding like it will be even better! I will be posting and editing on Mondays. So come over and check it out! Rest assured, I am by no means changing the content, or leaving behind this blog.

The reason I am excited about this opportunity, is the opportunity to try to build bridges between the atheist and religious communities. Even here at Purdue, we're talking to the religious groups and individuals in a somewhat peaceful manner. The Society of Non-Theists have done events with the Episcopal Student Association, and plan on doing more in the future. I am also frequently hearing compliments for the Non-Theists to be one of the most tolerant groups on campus, even with our occasional activism!

I'm really looking forward to this opportunity! It will give me an opportunity to help strengthen relations between non-theist and religious communities. If it's anything like the Purdue Non-Theists, we'll have great conversations and hopefully make new friends! I hope you'll come over to the site and check it out!

If you have ever wondered why atheists are not huge fans of the Tea Party movement, here's why. The Colorado 10th Amendment Center believes that the Tea Party movement is divinely motivated.

PZ Myers had something to say about this:

Yeah, this is the fourth Tea Party movement: the first was after the death of Solomon, the second was led by Jesus Christ himself, the third was the Boston event, and the fourth was begun by a ranting overprivileged ass on the Chicago stock exchange, which makes Rick Santelli some kind of prophet, apparently.

By PZ's logic, I think that Newt Gingrich would also be a prophet for his work with "Contract with America" in 1994.

So let's investigate this claim: how is the current Tea Party movement divinely inspired? Let us open our bibles to Amos 8:4-8 (NIV):

4 Hear this, you who trample the needy and do away with the poor of the land,
5 saying, “When will the New Moon be over that we may sell grain, and the Sabbath be ended that we may market wheat?”— skimping on the measure, boosting the price and cheating with dishonest scales,
6 buying the poor with silver and the needy for a pair of sandals, selling even the sweepings with the wheat.
7 The LORD has sworn by himself, the Pride of Jacob: “I will never forget anything they have done.
8 “Will not the land tremble for this, and all who live in it mourn? The whole land will rise like the Nile; it will be stirred up and then sink like the river of Egypt.

Slavery I presume (possibly shirking behavior)? I'm sure these teabaggers know that slavery was legal at the time of the Boston Tea Party, and that rebellion had very little to do with slavery as an institution. We didn't want to be under the King, and we decided to protest by throwing tea into the Charles River. The only slavery we were fighting was to be independent nation from Britain, not to set slaves free (which was not done until the 1860s and 1870s).

Taxes are not slavery. Taxes help the government do basic functions. Without taxes the potholes in the middle of the street would never get fixed because no one would want to do it. No one in a capatalist society does anything out of the goodness of their hearts. As much as the Teabaggers would like to say that the 16th amendment is slavery, they're wrong. Federal taxes will exist as long as there is a working Congress in the sense that it exists and that elections still occur. Many of these Teabaggers voted and they got their way this time, so what about before when they weren't voting? While I don't feel represented by the Tea Party candidates, they're still our representatives. So until your voting rights are seized, which they won't be, the 16th Amendment is not going anywhere.

I'm concluding that this organization's definition for Tea Party is more or less "fight the slave masters". Slavery is illegal, so I guess the Tea Party can stop playing Nostradamus for now.

(Via The Daily Dish)

Now that the weekend is over, and the bulk of my work for finals week is finished, I'm ready to get back to blogging. I'm right now waiting for my first of two finals to start. This one was a take home final and a debrief session, so it was relatively easy. I have one more final tomorrow and then I'm done for a few weeks. Just to let you all know, I'm just about ready for it.

So in the meantime, here's a great video I found that talks about how news stories are shot (slightly NSFW for language).



Even though that was for BBC, that formula is just about correct for almost every news outlet.

(Via JT Eberhard)

The next few days are going to be busy. For all intents and purposes, I will be taking a short break from blogging while my finals are taking place. I have 2 finals: one that I am starting after I post this due Monday morning, the other one is on Tuesday morning. I have a lot to do between now and then, and I'm trying not to freak out too much, as I near the end of my first semester of grad school. I need a break and I'm finally getting one!

So in that case, I present to you the "Periodic Table of Irrational Nonsense"!



(Via Reddit)

Yesterday, Tucker Carlson said this:

With the direction this argument is going, it's sounding like Tucker Carlson is living in 1979. It isn't news that Tucker Carlson is a dunce, but just wait until you hear what he had to say next:



Really? It's irrelevant? A repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" doesn't help the economy? Arabic translators or not, the military is throwing citizens out of the military on the account of sexual orientation, and are otherwise fit to serve. Not to mention the Department of Defense has said it is okay to repeal it. I'd argue that the repeal would actually take openly LGBTQ individuals who are wanting to serve could go into military careers, which actually would create jobs. I should also mention that Israel allows openly LGBTQ into their military, since the conservative media tends to worship this country. If you'd like to model our security after the Israelis, I suggest you also advocate for the implementation their policies for LGBTQ individuals.

Just because Tucker Carlson doesn't wear a bow-tie anymore, doesn't make him any smarter.

The other day I heard about a "controversy" regarding the 2010 Tulsa Holiday Parade of Lights in Oklahoma. The reason why it's so controversial is because they aren't using the word Christmas anymore. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), a former mayor, said he will not participate this year, because Christ was removed. This is just silly, and I think Jon Stewart put it perfectly:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
The Gretch Who Saved the War on Christmas
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor The Daily Show on Facebook

Seriously, Christmas is still December 25 and everyone (including myself) still calls that day Christmas. It is Hanukkah right now, and I don't hear the Jewish people yelling that the holiday is being defiled because we're saying happy holidays. Some people (*cough Bill O'Reilly and Sen. Inhofe*) just need to calm down.

The Israel-Palestine conflict has sunk to a new low within the United States. A pro-Palestinian group at Princeton University has gotten a ballot initiative to remove Sabra Hummus from the campus. Why? The Sabra Dipping Company has been making donation to the Israeli Defense Forces. While this is not something I exactly approve or disapprove of, I'm not sure if I'm ready to commit to a boycott of it.

This call for boycott is starting to grow too:

But thousands of students from colleges far beyond Princeton are taking issue with that stance, and condemn the committee’s propagation of anti-Israel sentiment. The Facebook event “Save the Hummus! -- Vote Against the Sabra Hummus Boycott,” created by members of the campus group Tigers for Israel, has more than 2,600 attendees -- compared to 181 attending "Boycott Sabra Hummus." The pro-Sabra group says the referendum unfairly singles Sabra out of numerous companies with ties to Israel, and is “based on a convoluted claim that the company supports human rights violations against Palestinians.”

While I support neither Israel nor Palestine on this issue, you just can't screw around when it comes to hummus. Some of the American hummus is just awful, and Sabra's hummus is that good. Not to mention one of their bigger competitors, Tribe, is also a "pro-Israeli" product.

So, no hummus then? How can you enjoy pita bread then? With Israeli salad and no hummus? How can we make Palestinian cultural food without hummus? I mean some bananas might fund drug lords, but I don't hear everyone wanting to boycott bananas because they could be supporting coke addictions. Chick Fil-A is still in business and they're closed on Sundays, which means that they could be anti-Semitic? Seriously, this Glenn Beck-like logic makes my head hurt.

Just out of spite, I think I'll go to the store and grab myself some delicious hummus. Maybe I'll just grab one from each company there, just in case.

(Thank you to Mark for the tip!)

Aren't they adorable?

By the way, I'm in the final editing stages of my last paper of the semester!

This is who the Tea Party Movement would like to emulate.

(Via Kirktoons)

This post is by Benjamin Stonier, a Canadian blogger who is also a hockey and politics fan.

Like most Canadian hockey fans, I didn’t have a very high opinion of NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman for a long time. Mr. Bettman was always seen as an American running a Canadian game; a basketball lawyer who weaseled his way into the top job at the NHL, picked by the owners not for his love of the game but for his desire to turn the NHL from a hockey league into a successful business. You will often hear Bettman booed when he gives his speech at the end of the NHL season and presents the Stanley Cup to the victorious team, and his public image (the man who locked out the 2004-05 season, the man who inserted a salary cap, the man who moved away Winnipeg and Quebec) never seems to change. I certainly didn’t think that it would.

Then I started listening to the NHL Hour, available on Sirius/XM (whatever it’s called now), www.nhl.com, and as a podcast on the iTunes Store. I’ve been working my way through the show’s history, and my opinion of Gary Bettman, at least the guy today, has changed.

A lot of Canadians, especially, don’t trust Bettman, and it’s easy to see why. However, one thing that I have learned from listening to his radio show is that he is a hockey fan, whatever else he might be. I expected to learn a lot about the business side of hockey, and I have, listening to the Commissioner. But I was also impressed to hear that he knows the game of hockey too - that he can give opinions on what happens on the ice as well as any other fan, Canadian, American, or other, who watches the rubber dot on the white sheet.

As a fellow who grew up in New York, I fully expect that Bettman is a secret Rangers fan, but he has been very vocal about not supporting one franchise over another on his show. I wouldn’t begrudge the man a secret fist-pump or hushed noise of happiness in, say, 1994 when the Rangers won, but I think that publicly he does a good job being neutral. I like one of the things he said about being the man who presents the Stanley Cup, “It’s not to us to win the trophy, but to present it.” Always the keepers, never the holders. In professional sports, that must be both a distinction and a bit of torture, and the NHL remains a class organization.

Canadians, especially, seem united in their dislike for Bettman. After all, during his tenure, he moved both Quebec and Winnipeg to Colorado and *shudder* Phoenix respectively. The League has resisted additional moves to bring a team back to Canada under his watch, and Canada hasn’t seen a single Canadian team hoist the Cup in that period. I know I felt much the same, but I believe, now, that Bettman has actually been pretty good for hockey in Canada - or at least, he hasn’t been as bad as he could have been.

When both Winnipeg and Quebec were moved within a year of each other, the NHL tried to figure out why these areas were failing, and were concerned that other NHL teams were going to move. The answer was threefold: small markets, a weak Canadian dollar in an era of soaring salaries, and poor arenas. So the NHL began the Canadian Assistance Program and transferred funds to Canadian teams like Edmonton and Vancouver, and probably saved both franchises. Four of the six Canadian teams built new arenas in the 1990s, including the largest barn in the NHL, the Bell Centre in Montreal.

Bettman has helped other franchises stay in town. We all curse when we see a team like Phoenix getting help from the NHL, but not too many people complained when the NHL’s power was used to pressure Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania into building a new arena for the Penguins. Sidney Crosby almost ended up playing in the hockey hotbed known as Kansas City, and would have done so if it wasn’t for Bettman and the NHL. Similarly, he’s helped the Devils and has tried to help the Islanders get new places to play. Edmonton is next on the proverbial list, but the Canadian government is fighting hard.

But most importantly, Bettman pushed for a salary cap and a game revamp. The salary cap hurts big-spending teams like Toronto, New York, Colorado, and even Montreal, but boy, has it helped our game. The idea of superstars being spread throughout the league, of a small-market team like Tampa Bay or LA or, yes, Edmonton gathering superstars like Steven Stamkos, Drew Doughty, Taylor Hall, and being able to keep them for a long period of time is an incredible one.

Bettman knew he had to give the players something back - he and Brendan Shanahan and the players also reworked the game. I haven’t heard a single person say “I prefer pre-lockout hockey.” I doubt I ever will.

Whether or not you agree with his business decisions, maybe you don’t think he worked hard enough to keep the North Stars in Minnesota or the Whalers in Hartford, but in the end, Bettman has helped to keep franchises in hockey places, and he has changed our game for the better. He’s not going anywhere, and we in the hockey world would be better off dealing with it rather than hating. Hockey’s a game of class, not anger, and it should start at the top.

We have gotten our first snowfall of the winter season. Today, we are in the middle of a winter storm that's dropped somewhere around 3 inches of snow. We may get another inch or two, depending on how much longer this lasts.



On a side note, I still need to go to campus for a variety of reasons, and driving in this is going to be interesting. Luckily the apartment complex's roads and sidewalks are mostly clear. Be careful if you plan on driving today, I know I will. Also if you have any awesome photos from this storm you'd like to share, post a link in the comments!

The past few weeks have been very busy, and intense with school work. I just handed in an exam that was about basic statistics in theory, and I don't know how I feel about it. I probably did better than I'm giving myself credit for, but that's besides the point. It's going to be crazy until this semester ends for me in less than 2 weeks.

Anyway, there's been a big fuss about an atheist billboard on the side of the New Jersey turnpike.



Personally, I like the idea. I think the wording is provacative, and it's encouraging for atheists, to know that we live in a country where there is a freedom to not believe. Now, of course anytime an atheist ad goes up, Christian groups feel threatened and eventually responded (similar to an insecure schoolchild who thinks the big bully stole his baseball mitt, but really it was at home the whole time). So Bill Donahue and the American Catholic League responded with this ad:



This story has gotten popular enough that it was mentioned on last night's episode of The Colbert Report:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Blitzkrieg On Grinchitude - Atheist Billboard & Capitol Christmas Tree<a>
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election March to Keep Fear Alive

Wow, who knew a tree could Twitter, but I digress.

I can understand why the Catholic league would be upset with the atheist ad. However, I think the Catholic League was "hoist by its own petard". They legitimize the position of a closeted atheist with this "counterpunch" ad. An unpopular statement made by someone had genuinely was questioning belief is told that they're 100% wrong makes anyone in that position upset. If anything the Catholic League has become a bully pulpit which was probably not their intent. This will lead a non-believer to further question the Catholic Church. The next step may be, "the Catholic Church is so desperate to cover up child molestation and decreasing attendance that they have to use fear and guilt to keep their people in line". For some that will work, for others it won't. However, having been in that position of questioning before, I know that will be helpful to at least someone questioning it.

There is a downside to this though. Some atheists don't want to associate with the larger groups because of stuff like this. They also say that these groups are no better than the religious. I see their point, but I think they don't realize this helps them (involved or not). If you're a non-believer not in a group you're not a lesser individual, but the overall stigma of being an atheist will be lessened over time which benefits someone not in these groups. I find this to be okay. Not everyone has to be a part of a group, but for those who want to seek this out, it's usually difficult to find unless you advertise. That's the intent of this whole ad campaign. This is bringing this issue to the forefront, and I think this is just further illustration of how insecure the religious zealots are in this country.