“REASON’S GREETINGS”! from The Center for Inquiry Community of Southern Arizona

1. “REASON’S GREETINGS”! from The Center for Inquiry Community of Southern Arizona

2. The text of the lecture will be available on our website: www.centerforinquiry.net/saz later this week.

3. Question By a show of hands,

4. Who would rather I scrap this God, faith and religion lecture and talk about my real expertise: Fungal toenails and bunions!

5. This is the third of six…free… two hour lectures in a course titled “No God, Now What?” It was created by Jim Gressinger (retired newspaper publisher), Dr. Stephen Uhl (former Catholic Priest, now retired psychologist) and yours truly. The goal of the curriculum is to make the case that Secular Humanism is a worldview that, if universally adopted, would make this world a much better place in which to live.

6. God, Faith and Religion: Houses of Cards Built on Quicksand …hoping to rescue reason from minds run amok Lecturer: Gilbert D.Shapiro Lecture III of Secular Humanism Course: No God. Now What?

7. A priest, rabbi and atheist are asked when life begins: The priest says, “At conception” The rabbi says, “At birth” And the atheist says,…………….

8. “When the kids leave and the dog dies!”

9. My intent in the next series of slides is to briefly address and highlight the influence of many Christians in our country. This singling out is because of their increasing numbers and their stated intent to place their theology into public life in various ways.

10. What is occurring in our culture that has prompted the need for a course titled, No God. Now What? ? 1) Christianity, by far, is the religion with which most Americans identify (~80%) 2) 71% of Americans are absolutely certain God or some other universal spirit exists. 3) 17% say they are fairly certain. 4) 5% flatly do not believe.

11. Christians are scripturally directed to practice, proselytize and place the tenets of their faith into the public sector. They have certainly had their say on matters such as: Gay rights, abortion, sex education, stem-cell research, end of life issues, the pledge of allegiance, prayer in schools, teaching creationism in schools, Bible courses, the dispensing of contraceptives, the public display of Ten Commandments etc.

12. In other words, many Christians do not see their religion (or their religious obligations) as being confined to their homes and churches. For many, their goal is for America to become a Christian society or at minimum, a society based on Christian principles (?).

13. I am unaware of anytime in history when the co-mingling of state and religion has been successful at optimizing a society’s ability to best care for its citizens.

14. Disclaimer: Secularists are fully aware that not every Christian feels that their faith should reach over the boundary of the home and church. The problem, as we see it, lies in the assertiveness, if not aggressiveness of those Christians who “want to take back America for Christ”.

15. Although it is to this latter group that this talk is primarily addressed, secularists would urge Christian moderates to challenge the thinking of their more fundamentalist and evangelical brethren.

16. Indeed, in his campaign for President, former Gov. (and Pastor) Mike Huckabee stated, "[Some of my opponents] do not want to change the Constitution, but I believe it's a lot easier to change the constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God, and that's what we need to do is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards,”

17. To wit: Perhaps Mr. Huckabee should be reminded that the First Amendment of our Constitution separates (neutralizes)religion from state. And perhaps he should be reminded that Christians have no reason or right to any higher moral ground than anyone else.

18. Starting especially with the Reagan administration and coupled with Rev. Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority (in the early ‘80s), and followed by Rev. Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition (1989) there have been overt (government condoned) incursions---some would say bulldozing--- of religion into an otherwise secularly based society. For example, former Surgeon General Carmona was not rehired primarily because he wanted public health policy to be guided by science, not faith.

19. As surgeon general, he was "muzzled" on scientifically based recommendations on matters such as stem-cell research, abstinence education, sexual health, abortion and emergency contraception. What was not stressed was that this administration's moral and ethical guideposts were uniquely religious. President Bush and many of his fellow Christians insisted their selective biblical interpretations on these and similar issues should be the underpinning of public policy. They assured us their dogma is true because their dogma giver is infallible.

20. They assumed entitlement to automatic respect and special dispensation from rational inquiry. This mentality of "play by my religion's rules" was troubling to those of us who thought we were governed by a secular Constitution and its Bill of Rights, by which decisions are to be based solely on common sense for the common good.

21. Religion is divisive in areas where cohesion is paramount. Atheist and non-Christian U.S. soldiers have been unfairly and unconstitutionally proselytized and harassed. Were it not for tight oversight by civilian investigators, our military would become a decidedly Christian favoring enterprise.

22. Watch for “code words” in policy statements! “The Center for Arizona Policy is one of the leading organizations in Arizona actively standing at the legislature and in the media for conservative, traditional views on these issues.“ “The Center for Arizona Policy is part of a state-based family policy council network. The councils are independent entities with no corporate relationship to each other but their purpose is uniform: to serve as a voice for the family and to assist advocates for family values in recapturing the moral and intellectual high ground in the public arena.”

23. Center for Arizona Policy Our Mission The Center for Arizona Policy is a nonprofit research and education organizationcommitted to protecting and defending the family by influencing policy, communicating truth, and equipping citizens to promote timeless family values. • The Center for Arizona Policy(CAP) works to: • Inform policymakers by providing research and factual information on vital issues affecting the family. • Communicate truthon family issues through the media. • Equip concerned citizens and churches to be persuasive advocates for the family. • The Center for Arizona Policy was established in 1995 as a nonprofit organization dedicated to strengthening Arizona families through policy and education. We accomplish this by actively educating Arizonans on issues like: • Sanctity of MarriageSanctity of Human Life    Religious Freedom • Parental Rights      Education       Harms of Gambling

24. Christians, who want to “Christianize” America, must understand that they cannot, at the same time, assert their ideas based on their theology and not expose themselves to investigation, inquiry and criticism (in those same two areas) by the secular community

25. To repeat: The secular community would urge Christian moderates to challenge the thinking of their more fundamentalist and evangelical brethren.

26. Switching gears

27. Atheism & Secular Humanism: Is there a connection? Atheism implies nothing more than disbelief in gods. It is basically a statement of what one is “not”. Unfortunately, the terms atheism and atheist, have been negatively received (to say the least) by the public.

28. Secular Humanism, is a philosophy that gets many atheists’ attention because of its positive approach to life. Secular Humanism is a philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice. It specifically rejects the supernatural and the spiritual as the basis of moral reflection and decision-making.

29. Like other types of humanism, secular humanism is a life stance focusing on the way human beings can lead good, happy lives.

30. The Secular Humanist, after careful reflection and consideration, finds no compelling evidence for gods, angels, demons, karma and ancestor spirits but chooses rather to adhere to an ethical model based on our common humanity and on common decencies. All people are considered as moral equals. All human beings have the inborn capacity for reason, courage, and empathy.

31. How can secularists, freethinkers, atheists, agnostics, non-believes, rationalists etc. challenge the religious (Christian) right’s stated intentions to infuse their particular brand of dogma into a nation governed by a secularly based federal Constitution? Although there no sure-fire answers, our course on Secular Humanism provides two approaches for your consideration.

32. APPROACH #1: The first approach is expressed in the insightfully brief, yet probing question served up by author and atheist Christopher Hitchens: What positive statements or actions, said or done by a believer, could not be said or done by a non-believer? (He claims he has yet to receive any answers that make sense)

33. Indeed, what are so unique about Christian principles? Aren’t positive statements and good actions (we call them “common human decencies”) beneficial in their own right? Don’t we all hold to them? Why complicate the simplicity of those beneficial ideas with supposed divine inspiration? I.e.: Why add God to the mix?

34. Indeed, good morality has been investigated thoroughly and has been determined to be the fruit of human growth and experience over many thousands of years. Morality is determined by our biology and culture. Common human decencies (a secular humanist term) came first and were much later codified into various scriptures. Were murder, stealing, adultery, lying etc not known as bad behaviors prior to the Ten Commandments?

35. Atheists do the right thing because it is the right thing to do. Do religionists really think they will “go wild” if their God is not watching their every move? Do they fear they will all of a sudden murder those who work on the Sabbath, homosexuals, non-virgins on their wedding night or their disrespectful teenage children?

36. Fortunately, humans have always made moral judgments (absurd-dogma overrides) independent of divine dictates. This gift from thousands of years of human development has kept most of us out of prison.

37. Secularists must also challenge, as I have noted before, the influence, incursion (some would say bulldozing) of public policy based on religious dogma. We need to point out that research clearly indicates that secularly-based societies fare better is all categories related to standard of living parameters than do religiously-based ones. Confirming this assertion and justifying approach #1 will be a large part of this course.

38. APPROACH #2: The second approach, it to challenge the theology itself. If the theology is found to be unsupportable then so too are its emanations, pronouncements and directives espoused in its name. That will be the primary goal of today’s presentation.

39. THE SCOPE OF THIS PRESENTATION; • Part one: The concept of a personal God (and therefore theism) is incoherent and that atheism is the rational response to God claims. • Part two: Reason, not faith, is the valid and reliable pathway to knowledge. • Part three: “Religious-speak” (ie: “Christian-speak” in the United States) undermines clarity of thought, and makes purposeful conversation impossible.

40. Why are these three objectives important? Secular Humanism is predicated on the rejection of god, faith and religion. The purpose of this lecture is to justify those rejections.

41. Current worldwide dilemmas: A significant percentage of our population believes the unbelievable. Worse, they act on those bad beliefs. Wishful thinking has replaced critical thinking. God, faith and religion, on balance, have been divisive and repressive to local, national and international societies.

42. For atheists and agnostics, I hope my talk will give you further insight and justification for your position; • For seekersof an understanding about God, faith and religion, I hope my talk will point you in the rational direction of atheism; and • For theists….BUCKLE UP!...this will be a rough ride! 

43. My personal beliefs: Atheistic to a personal God….credible evidence for such an entity is nil and credible evidence against such an entity is overwhelming and highly compelling. Agnostic to the answer to the ultimate question as to whether or not there is a “force out there” beyond my ability to understand and/or beyond my capacity to ever contact. I think it reflects a deserved humility “hardcore” atheists should seriously consider.

44. BACKGROUND; I was born in New York City in 1948. After receiving my Bachelors (French/’70) and Masters Degrees (French/education/’73) from the City University of New York, I completed pre-medical sciences at Columbia University. I went on to graduate from the California College of Podiatric Medicine (BS/DPM ’78) and finished a two-year podiatric surgical residency in Chicago (’78-80).

45. In 1980, I assumed the 30 year old practice of a retiring Tucson podiatrist. I joined the Center for Inquiry Community of Southern Arizona three years ago. I currently serve on its board and as one of its spokespersons.

46. Like many of you, I have found the need to search for the answer to (in my view) the ultimate question that anyone can ask: What is it all about? Perhaps it is better that I am not a highbrow philosopher or theologian. They, it can be argued, do not relate well to the common man.

47. Me, I deal with life (as a podiatrist) from the ground up, relating to the common man’s most common complaint: His fallen and painful “soles”. I’m your man. I rest my case!

48. So, you are going to listen to someone who has done his fair share of reading and research on the subject matter of God, faith and religion. In the time allowed, I will offer to you what I have concluded are the best arguments to support the non-believer’s contention that God, faith and religion are, based on the most credible evidence, sadly but truly, nothing more than “houses of cards built on quicksand”.

49. This is not meant to be a mean spirited or sarcastic presentation. IMPORTANT: This particular lecture’s timing, at this special part of the year for so many, is sheer coincidence. It is certainly not meant to offend, insult or demean people whose right to believe and friendship I hold dear.

50. It is rather, meant to inform those who chose to attend (from whichever camp you may belong)… ….and to be of some comfort to those in the secular community who should welcome some much needed camaraderie (i.e. "talk from a kindred spirit”) at this time of the year!