Defending Freshwater Badly

Today's Mansfield (OH) News Journal contained an editorial accusing the Mount Vernon School Board of singling out John Freshwater for punishment just because he's a good Xian. The editorial, written by Marvin Gassman of nearby Fredericktown, is a collection of the standard evangelical rationalizations for trying to force their religion on public school students; Xians are the majority, their rights of freedom of speech and religion are being violated, the bad guys are trying to eliminate Christianity, blah blah blah. In other words, the fundies should have all the rights and everyone else can literally and figuratively go to hell.

More incongruous is the assertion that although he (Gassman) has been at the hearing every day, he says he's seen no provable evidence that Freshwater has done anything wrong. I suppose if one is predisposed to thinking that proselytising in public schools is doing things right, and that anyone accusing a "Good Christian" of wrong-doing must automatically be a lying bad person, then Gassman's view makes sense. It's almost as if the editorial was written by a fundy preacher, and, son of a gun, it turns out Marvin Gassman is the pastor of the Morrow Bible Church.

The most gratifying thing about Gassman's editorial is that, at this time, all the comments disagree with the article and support the teaching of science without religious views attached. Maybe people are beginning to catch on to the fact that the insertion of religion into science classes is detrimental, as is any teacher who insists on inserting his religion.

How to Shoot Yourself in the Foot

I'm supposed to be packing for a trip to the inlaws' house, so I decided to goof off at the computer instead. Don't get me wrong, I love my mother and father-in-law, but my father-in-law has alzheimers as did my father for the last few years of his life. These men were 2 of the best examples, for me, of what Christians should be; moral, loving, generous men who gave a great deal of time to their churches and communities. They got one hell of a reward for years of faithful service.

An even more graphic example, from my wife's family, is what happened when her maternal grandfather died, survived by a maternal grandmother with alzheimers. Grandma, who lived with them, would, at least once a day, ask where her husband was, and my wife's mom had to explain that he had died, forcing both of them to grieve over his death again and again.

Most Christians, and people of all religions, dedicate great big chunks of their lives to trying to follow the rules in hopes of a reward and fear of punishment, but way too many end up spending their final years in agony. Meanwhile, at least in the US, their efforts to follow the rules of their religion include hamstringing any efforts to solve the problems they face. Organized efforts, especially in the name of Christianity, try to suppress and subvert education, science, and their applications.

Until we can convince these folks that education and scientific research are not biased against them, they'll keep protesting against misunderstood facts being taught in school, they'll continue to view scientific research only as potential for immoral acts, and they'll continue to elect representatives that can't understand that funding fruit fly research IS funding cancer research.

The dogma of religious groups, seem to make them their own worst enemies, and maybe it wouldn't bother me as much if they were only shooting themselves in the feet. They however keep bringing out the blunderbusses and insisting that everyone have a share in the bullet wounds. They can rationalize this by saying, "sure I've got massive trauma in my lower limbs, but my reward's in heaven.", but, to belabor the analogy, they're mostly going around with bandages and crutches for fear that something worse than cancer and alzheimers is awaiting them if they don't subject themselves and everyone around them to unnecessary suffering in this life. You could say Hieronymus Bosch's paintings of hell are why cancer hasn't been cured.

The Facts Are Just an Opinion

I was drawn to the Pew Research Center's website because of their recent survey on public perception of science, but I stuck around to look at some of their other data and, as readers of science and freethinker blogs already know, conservative xians and political conservatives are, on average, less educated, less knowledgeable about science and less trusting of science data. Although I don't have hard data to back this up, it's been my observation that conservatives are also much more inclined toward information bias.

I base this last observation on the proliferation and avid following of right wing TV and radio programs and the greater inclination of conservatives to censor and suppress opposing views in comparison to liberals. This combination of ignorance and information bias makes them the ideal targets for propagandists who want to obscure the facts.

If Rush Limbo says that global warming is a liberal conspiracy to destroy America, then decades of observation and testing become irrelevant and if the pastor says the world is 6000 years old, well you know. What I'd like to know is why is this legal?

We have libel and slander laws to protect individuals from having lies told about them, but if corporations and "think" tanks spend millions of dollars to spread lies that injure scientists, teachers, learning institutions and museums, that's just a difference of opinion and it's protected by our free speech rights.

I suspect that ignorant, fundy politicians and politicians worried about losing fundy votes have a lot to do with this difference in legal protection, but I can't help wondering what would happen if university presidents and museum directors started bringing lawsuits against groups like the Despicable Institute claiming that the plaintiffs' reputation and business were damaged by anti-science propaganda. In a perfect world it would bankrupt the lying scum.