Chapter Six; RELIGION AND POLITICS IN AMERICA part eighteen

Recently, Nevada United States Senator John Ensign had a 'consensual affair' with a campaign staffer who was “married to an official Senate staffer,” the statement from his office said.i Ensign who, like me, was a member, of the Christian men's movement Promise Keepers, said that, "I deeply regret and am very sorry for my actions." Somehow when the term consensual affair, I don't really think the woman's husband was consenting to the affair.


Ensign was one of the vocal republican Senators calling for Senator Larry Craig of Idaho to resign after Senator Craig was arrested in a Minneapolis airport men's room sex sting in 2007, which Craig plead guilty to. Ensign also figured prominently in the book The Family, by Jeff Sharlet. ii


Craig was also a vocal Republican . In 1998, he called for the resignation of President Bill Clinton after news of his liaison with Monica Lewinsky was revealed. Ensign has not resigned his senate seat but resigned his leadership position in the Republican party. Ensign's wife, Darlene, is standing with him and has said, "I love my husband," in statements, “and that the affair has made their relationship 'stronger.'”


While the affair is bad enough, one would conclude that it reflects a serious ethics violation in as much as the woman, he had the affair with, was the wife of one of his campaign staff. Yet even with this the biggest issue is the hypocrisy of this man.


The same scandal with a Democrat would still admit the issue, but the career of a Democrat is much less likely to be destroyed. Bill Clinton survived his scandal and ended his term in office with high approval ratings. Other Democrats have similarly been able to overcome the sex scandals and either keep their office, and at times even been reelected. The point, of this example, is to show the hypocrisy of this party that reflects the values of the American religious right. Time and time again they fall prey to their own natural human desire. These people lead the charge for traditional American values yet time and time again are the worse of violating the values that they say they support. Not to mention that traditional American values doesn't really mean anything to begin with. It is a slogan to help polarize and separate one group of Americans from other Americans. So the honest way to look at traditional American values is that these value followers seek to attack and criticize people they see as different from their key talking point.


Getting back to Sen. John Ensign, I do not fault Ensign for being human. I do fault him for not realizing that humans cannot be held to a unrealistic standard of behavior imposed by religious dogma and promoted by political parties. His calls for the resignation of both Bill Clinton and Larry Craig should serve as his own standard of conduct. Anything less shows the continued double standard that the Republican party and its religious right holds for violation of certain ethics.


Non-believers have an advantage over religious adherents in that they can be trusted. Most non-believers are non-violent. They do not wish to fight or kill others. Non-believers also have a desire or quest for facts, or as I call it, truth. Therefore, their motives are usually clearer.


So, I ask, Why would a non-believer be a candidate for someone to be more trusted? Surely this runs counter intuitive to conventional wisdom. Or does it? As I have mentioned through the earlier definition, non-believers do not have a dogma, in which they subscribe to, so they only have the natural world to base their motives and actions on. You will not see an atheist trying to limit the rights of a group based on two or three lines in an ancient book. To be honest,an atheist my actually disagree with a person’s particular view but still be supportive of their right to have the view.


An atheist cannot justify killing , more than 3,000 people in a single day attack, to follow the belief of a religion. They surely wouldn't dream of a gift of several virgins after the attack. And if they survived the attack, they would expect nothing less than to be put persecuted to the fullest extent of the law.


You will not see an atheist sequester scores of followers that feel they are obeying the words of a supernatural being. You will not find an atheist using dogma as an excuse , to have young girls married off to older men just because the men say they have reached “womanhood”. Religion cannot motivate an atheist to blow up trains or buses or strap bombs to their chest, walk into crowed shopping areas and kill innocent people. Any religion that asks its adherents to subject their will to the dogma of religion is not worth following. There is a common good for all people. Society works best when we follow these ideas. These need not be dogma, only rules of social behavior.


That doesn't excuse bad behavior or non-believers from violent acts. People's motives that are not directly dogma-based can cause violence and oppression. Clearly, as I viewed the smoke coming up April 19, 1995, at the Murrah bombing that killed 168 Americans, I could not have believed it was directly, religiously motivated. Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh were, however, ideologically motivated by a segment of belief, which is dogmatic. Just seven years before that April day, I took my oath of enlistment into the United States Army by a former Air Force officer roommate, after going through the MEPS processing in the Murrah building. I have seen first hand the vile poison that comes from the radicals from the right of political thought. Not to say that left political radicalism is any good either but the idea is that the right seems much more indoctrinated into the idea that violence is a action that is a viable option. Taking up arms against the “enemies” of freedom can even result in patriotic pride and the previously mentioned polarization and separation from mainstream society.


When a group removes oneself away from opinions that can calm, challenge provoke, educate, and moderate their points of view, they will soon find that the path that their thoughts lead them too is one of self destruction and possibly harm to others.


The same can be said about the April 20, 2000 , Columbine School shootings in Lakewood, CO. I was not in Colorado, when that happened. The same deeply held belief and distortion of reality motivated the shooters in that tragedy. The point is that the belief in a supernatural dogma adds to the likelihood that otherwise “good” people will do bad things. If one is not willing to question what they believe, then they can be manipulated into doing things they cannot believe they would otherwise do.


Every atheist I have talked to feels strongly that we, as humans, must do what we can to better ourselves and help our fellow man. If there was anything like dogma for an atheist, this would be the one and only thing I think that would qualify. Oddly enough, most of the religions that support the right to life would be surprised to find that abortion is really a non-issue to most atheists. By that, I mean that it is a split topic among atheists. The main idea is that if abortion is legal, it should be safe and accessible. People, like admitted murderer, Scott Roeder, arrested and convicted for shooting Dr. George Tiller, act as if the law was insufficient to deal with his preferred issues and he took the law into his own hands. This is another example of how removal from socializing and moderation of different points of view can lead to radical and deadly actions.


One point of view on abortion is, is that is that since humans have one time to go around in this life. A woman should not have an abortion since that is a life that can add to the advancement of humanity. Another point of view, is that as humans (women) have the means and the right to decide what happens to their bodies. I find both points valid. The main difference is that as non-adherents, we do not have to satisfy a religious dogma to deal with the situations of issues. We can do what serves the best result in the situation. Of course this can be viewed as self serving. But, it can also let a person act best for the situation, instead of relying on a dogma. If a woman is raped, should she be punished? This is the dogmatic view of some religions and right leaning politicians. Are you “sinning” if you speed? Some think this is a sin against God and that an incentive to not get a speeding ticket is not enough. Is having an intimate relationship with someone of the same opposite sex any persons business, but the two adults involved? Many religions have strong views, although I would contend they are based upon prejudice and false information. There are millions of people having sex everyday all day long and not only do I not know about, other than by understanding about statistics, I really could careless as long as it doesn't endanger my health or safety.


If one can understand this , then you can get insight as to what being a non-believer is all about. Dan Barker, of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, said,in his biography that near the end of his time as a Christian pastor he was going through the motions. Ostensibly, since announcing he was an atheist would basically end his occupation. After giving even, what he felt, was a half hearted message, people would still come up to him and tell him that the Holy Spirit moved them through his message. When I heard this, I understood what he was talking about. I found the same hypocrisy in religion as well. Barker said that he now could understand how religion worked. It was not only him, as the preacher, that helped set up the false world of religion but also the followers, who were party to supporting the messages they heard. It is a truly self-fulfilling prophecy.iii It was a seed planted many years ago, when my friend Dave, as mentioned earlier, told me that you could use the Bible for any purpose you wished. In our society we certainly do that.


We have a series of marketed religions in the United States, since the state doesn't sponsor, support of endorse a religion. [Or so we try to keep it from doing.] Basically, for any perspective one has, there is a church already in place in America to serve that view. If not, one can easily be made to fit that image. An example of this ranges from churches that allow multiple wives, such as the Yearning for Zion cult in Texas, to Unitarian Universalist congregations found in many cities throughout the county.iv The UUs, as they call themselves, say you can believe any dogma or none at all. It is as close to an atheist church with a remnant of dogma as I have heard of. Of course, a totally non-religious church would be The Ethical Society.v They call their Sunday morning gatherings platforms instead of a service or sermon.


To go on , I have met very liberal, non-believers and very conservative non-believers. One of the more famous atheists is Christopher Hitchens. He has many views that I disagree with. It is interesting to listen to him on a talk show and be in total agreement with what he is saying about how religion ruins everything. Next, he is defending President George W. Bush. But, that is the point I want to make. It isn't a dogma that an atheist has, it is the lack of dogma that makes us the people that we are. I also have the feeling that I could convince Hitchens to the validity of the points we disagree on. While he has reason that can be disputed, he would likewise listen to logical arguments. If he felt I made a valid point he would accept it. Like me, he has no dogma to defend. It doesn't change his strength of character, to admit he is wrong or to adopt another point of view. I do not lose my faith if something I currently believe in is show to be false. I just adapt a more accurate point of view. But faith is so manically that if a tentacles of faith is shown to be wrong that the person can see this is a valid reason to doubt their entire system of viewing the Universe. It can truly be quite disturbing and even dangerous for someone to face the fact that a thing they believe may not be as true as their faith as assigned meaning to it. This all by itself is a strong enough reason to take a stand against religion.


This helps explain the motivation of non-believers. Non-believers do not have to “spread the word” to every human on the planet , for a heavenly fireworks display to take place and we can do the inverse bungee jump to heaven. We do not have to make a long distance journey to walk around a rock in a black box. We do not need to have a messianic cartographer make our map for us. Then kill those that he says are on our “promised land.” We can be happy on any suitable piece of land as long as it provides what we need. It is more likely that a non-believer will act in his or her own self interest or the interest of something tangible, than the delusional dogma of a religious adherent.


The religious adherents often have to remind themselves of what it is they believe and why. It is not at all uncommon to find a Christian bookstore in a small town with many books on a variety of subjects and other items of interest to the believer. They will buy books, t-shirts, music, paintings, stickers, rings, and other items to help them remain blinded as much as possible to the possible “evil” influence of the “world.” But, it is hard for me, or other like minded people, to walk into a store and find books on the subjects of disbelief and fighting the influence of religious dogma. To be quite honest, most major authors on these subjects range from preeminent scientists, to former pastors, to journalists, to doctors and other career fields. Due to the approach of being a secularist, the diversity of topics can range from dealing with medical aspects of homeopathy and psychic surgery, to aspects of the nature of life and The Universe , to political ramifications of a religious groups’ actions. This can cause the books written by such people to be in many different sections of a mainstream bookstore. Quite different from a Christian bookstore indeed.


Walk into a Christian book store , the theological thinking has been done for you. Rarely will you find any book that will challenge the faith that brought you into the business, initially. The thing is a Christian bookstore is very deceptive. They are not really Christian at all but they are actually denominational book stores. This means it is easy to be immersed in the familiar and friendly ideas that do not threaten your way of thinking. But try looking for topics that do not fit their dogmatic point of view and you will be looked at as if you just stepped off the mother-ship. But if you go to a secualr bookstore you will have the ability to find books that might actually challenge your knowledge and help you to become a more intelligent person. I am glad I have to look for books and items that I wish to read. It certainly can be eye-opening. But of course many adherents seeking out a book on a topic are not so much interested in seeking an opposing view as they are to shoring up the view that they think shores up the view they think the Bible hold already. After all there is no reason to challenge a faith that is well grown and well entrenched.

xxivhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/16/AR2009061602746.html

xxvhttp://jeffsharlet.com/

xxvihttp://www.ffrf.org/legacy/books/lfif/

xxiixhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/16/AR2009061602746.html

xxixhttp://theethicalsociety.com/

Coming next time: Chapter Six; 

HERE IS YOUR SIGN part nineteen

Chapter One; TWO WORLDS CONVERGE part three

In both of science and religions areas of my life, I have many more experiences that added to both my understanding of the natural world and understanding about Christianity and religion. In high school, I was fortunate to take almost every science class that was offered. I even became a science proctor, [that is a teacher's aide or assistant]. The classes I took included: General Science, Biology,(two years) Chemistry, Astronomy, Physics, and Zoology. The only two classes I didn't take that I could have were Geology and Botany. During my time of taking all that science never was the concept that science was incompatible with religion come up. Of course there was the part in Biology about the disproving of spontaneous generations using the concepts of frogs being “made” from mud and that rotten meat produced maggots. But through careful study and experimentation these concepts which were in support of creation soon were proven incorrect. Frogs hibernate in the lake and stream beds and come out n the warmer weather and if you keep meat covered and flies away from it, it will rot but no maggots will be produced since the flies cannot lay their eggs in it.




It was during this time, Easter of 1982, when I became what some call “born again” or “saved”. A person I met invited me to their church and I decided I wouldn't mind going. The pastor’s sermon stirred me deeply. I felt that while Jesus was hanging on his cross he was thinking of me personally and gave his life for my actual specific sins. It was the emotional appeal of the message that moved me more than the logical presentation of the evidence. I mean, after all, there really wasn't a logical appeal to the sacrifice of Jesus. It did really strike me as reasonable plus I did have a motivating desire to posses the “insight” that my other friends from church had. It was about time I got me some Jesus in my life to.

It was truly a euphoric feeling. I felt that a sacrifice like that from Jesus was enough to make me believe in Him and accept Him as my personal savior. While it was by no means a straight path forward in my religious education, I was certainly on the way. No hard proof was offered for my conversion. I accepted the anecdotal story as sufficient proof for me to accept this story as totally factual and reliable as any other fact in the world. After all, these people couldn't all be wrong, could they? There were so many of them.

I was in high school at the time I was saved. As I said before, I took most of the science classes that were offered. For 13 consecutive weeks, while studying physics, our class would go to the library every Friday and watch the most amazing science show I had seen: Carl Sagan's Cosmos: A Personal Journey. Until this point, none of these concepts had been presented in such a clear and understandable format. In addition to science in the classroom, I attended field trips to the Kansas Cosomosphere, Wichita Omnisphere, Lake Afton Planetarium, Kirkpatrick Planetarium and other museums. This all comprising a strong background of the natural and physical world.

It was during my junior year in high school that I helped to start the science club. All my friends were either science or math geeks. We spent much of our free time talking about science and matters of logic and reason. I even bought and read the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 62nd Edition, for leisure. Those familiar with the book should have seen me lugging that book around. But, reading that book, I learned about some of the similarity of the chemical structures and the process of naming molecules. Also , I learned about some of the characteristics of the elements and so many more concepts.

A humorous view of the world was disguised as a science-fiction radio play, in The Hitchhicker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams. That made for some great thinking while listening to the radio, alone late at night, at the age of 13. Adams had the knack for making the reasonable seem curious and the unusual seem common in his stories.

It was a story that remained with me. I purchased various versions as I came upon them, including the books, the audio books, the TV show and movie. I seriously doubt that if it hadn't been for his tangential humor, I may not now look at things as oddly as I tend to do now.

Unbeknownst to me, these two world views would not agree with each other. I felt at the time, like I am sure many do, that these two world views were totally compatible with each other. Nothing in my religious education was clearly stated as being at odds with the world of science. The same can be said about my science education. We live in the physical world. What could be incompatible with the ideas of the God that made The Universe and the science that explains it?

In college I didn't study too well, on my first attempt. After three semesters, I found myself out of school and needing a job. This opportunity lead me to the Air Force. I did my job skills test and scored high. I decided I wanted a vocation that would provide me with a skill after I got out of the service. So, I selected a plumbing job. It was actually the job that had the highest score requirement and would allow me to start right away without a college degree or spending months in training.

After going through basic and advance training, I was stationed at Tinker AFB, near Oklahoma City. This is where my intense Christian training began, with a Christian group called The Navigators.

Being a typical 19 year old airman, away from home, with plenty of money, I had enough free time to do other things. I had a few girlfriends; went out with the guys; went to concerts, and did my job. One Monday in the summer of 1985, there was a knock on my door. Two young men stood in my doorway and asked me about my relationship with Jesus. The first question they asked, was, “If you were die Today, do you know for sure that you are going to heaven?” [Where was my knowledge of logical fallacies then?] I said yes. I did know and that I would go. So began my association with The Navigators. From then, on every Tuesday at the base religious education building anywhere from two to twenty people would gather to sing some songs, have a Bible study, and then go out to eat. [I think it is vital that an organization have food at their gatherings in order to get followers.]

During this period, I learned much about Christianity and memorized many scriptures. I must have gone to at least a dozen conferences and retreats, in a three year period. Some were as far as 600 miles away. My primary church at that time was the Air Force Base Chapel. Most of us, in The Navigators group, attended the Chapel, too. Even though the group was made up of enlisted and officers, we had the overall connection with Christianity, and the fraternization policy was largely overlooked. There were even enlisted and officers dating in the group. After a year or so, our Navigator leaders advised us to go to our home churches off base. The reason, for this, was to be an influence in our home churches. I guess it seemed that we were becoming too much of a click. But, looking back, it seems that they were trying to spread their influence to more denominations and infiltrate, looking for people that might be willing to take a leadership role in the various denomination. The main slogan is, “To know Christ and to make him known.” So, each man or woman was asked to work with three other men. One would be his mentor; one would be his peer and one would be his student. This involved an elaborate structure of different areas; each under a higher leader until reaching the district level, to the head of The Navigators, who at that time was Lorne Sanny.

I met several Christians who referred to The Navigators as a cult. Their term, for what they called what they did, was “sheppardship.” To be quite honest, decisions usually quite personal, such as: who to date, where to work and what to buy would often come under the discussion of The peer or mentor, if not a small group of fellow Navigators. Just like Jeff Sharlet describes in his book, The Family, these discussions were about how to make Jesus more real in your life and to pray without ceasing. The purpose was to bring more men into the group. Women were welcome, but not that common. The nickname for the group of guys I ran with was The Neverdaters, as a play on the name of the group The Navigators. Few of us ever had girlfriends or dates. The mere logistics of getting a girlfriend in the group was a wrenching process. You couldn't go out as a single, one-to-one, male-to- female, for the first few dates. Outings had to be group dates. Keep in mind, we are referring to adult men and women, in their early to mid-twenties. Yet the restrictions we placed upon ourselves were worse than what most parents do to their Junior High and High School children. Man what a happy group.

While the men involved in The Family are usually older, I could definitely see parallels between the two groups. I do wonder how much time these men in The Family actually spent trying to study the Bible, as opposed to just “knowing Jesus.” It can be a very scary thing, following the Bible to get your beliefs, but to leave the Bible behind and become a “follower” of what you think Jesus is, only to become disconnected from reality. Could also be their goal? Nothing a person can say or reveal to the “followers” of Jesus , that would have any weight with how these groups perceive the reality of the world, are able to change their beliefs, though they will say, every step of the way, is all part of the will of Jesus. That is to say that their beliefs will overcome the facts of reality.

My “home” church was the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. I began going to that church in Midwest City, OK. However, it didn't seem to fit in with my view of how I now understood scriptures. The dogma of that church seemed to misinterpret the Bible, according to my beliefs about what the “facts” of scripture taught. I spoke to the Pastor. He confirmed my perception and soon was looking elsewhere. I felt there was a clear case for salvation, to be assured, but the Lutheran Pastor told me that a person was able to loose their salvation. I felt this was in error and used my scriptures to support my side; just as he used his scriptures to support his view. In the end, I chose a different Church to attend.

While I was going through my issue with the LCMS, most of my Air Force friends began attending the Covenant Community Church, located about 21 miles away from the base. I attended that church a few times, but didn’t feel like I fit in. On the other hand, I liked the local Christian Rock radio station, KOKF. Their songs and programs captured my attention and personal perspective. This was part of my self-imposed, separation from the secular world.

One time, KOKF had a contest. I called in with the correct answer and won the prize. When I went to pick up my prize, (I do not recall what it was), the General Manager, Greg Griffin, said I had a good voice. I asked him if I could volunteer, should they need help. He agreed. I began the next weekend as a prayer counselor and assisted the on-air DJ. This radio station was affiliated with a pentecostal church and I started attending that church's singles group. Soon I was attending the church's regular Sunday services that hosted the singles group. One could say at that point I was deeply involved with religion and moving up fast.

I was soon engaged with my full duties in the Air Force and going to the far side of the city to do my radio shift, on the weekend. During this time, my “home” church became the pentecostal mega church, Cathedral of Praise World Outreach Center. The pastor, Ron Dryden, owned the radio station. It made sense to make it my weekly spiritual home. I really enjoyed the people at the Cathedral of Praise World Outreach Center and quickly got involved, where I was growing in standing and respect. I am certain, if circumstances would have been different, I might be writing a Christian book instead of an atheist to me Today. I am quite pleased to be writing what I am.

The church encouraged speaking in tongues, or a prayer language [a biblical loophole for speaking in tongues], as well as spiritual and physical healing and all manner of expressive worship to display the power God really manifested in the actions of the people. Dancing in the isles was as common as getting a hamburger at McDonald's. It was not the Holy Spirit that moved the people though; it was their desire to be a follower of Jesus and express what they felt was his power in their life. Each Sunday, the service went through very predictable cycles. After the time passed for the service to start, the “worship leaders” [aka singers] would grab their specifically colored mic and begin to sing. One used a tambourine while the musicians accompanied them. The words of the music would politely be put on the overhead screens for those that didn't yet know the words. Normally, by the second verse, people would begin dancing in their aisle with neighboring congregates. Soon, one or two people would slip out and go up to the front of the auditorium and begin dancing. There seemed to be a hierarchy of dancing. Certain people had an implicit leadership role; they would dance out in the open first, then others would follow. Rarely during this time would anyone bother to speak in tongues, which occurred after the music began to slow down. One of the church leadership would take the stage for announcements or some sort of greeting, “in the Lord,” as they would say.

When I spoke in a “tongue”, it was not under the power of the Holy Spirit. It was to be like the other people in the church whom I associated with. Peer pressure was a powerful thing in this group. The sounds, the colors, the lights and the feeling of being together for the glory of God is a powerful feeling. It is a delusional feeling, but a good one none the less. I remember recalling trying not to sound like the other people that repeat the same sound over and over again.

“Everyone can tell that isn't really a language of any kind,” I would think to myself. I at least made sure my speaking in “tongues” sounded somewhat like a language.