| Minutes
of the 154th meeting of the Freethought Association of West Michigan.
January 28,
2004
Our regular
meetings are held on the second and fourth Wednesday of every
month, beginning at 7PM, at the Yankee Clipper Library, 2025 Leonard,
N.E., G.R. Those who wish to, gather after the meeting at Vitale's
Italian Restaurant, west on Leonard for further socializing.
We are completely
funded by the generous donations of our membership for all expenses
including equipment, meeting space rent, accommodating special
guest speakers, and other related expenses of running a vibrant
group. Expenses are itemized and made public for perusal by our
membership. Since we are officially recognized as a 501(c) 3 non-profit
organization, checks may be written and are tax deductible.
Visit our
website to locate links related to freethought, check out book
recommendations, make suggestions, learn how to volunteer for
various duties in our organization, sign up to be on our e-mail
discussion list, read past meeting minutes, keep up with events
of interest to the freethinking community and much more. www.freethoughtassociation.org
or info@freethoughtassociation.org.
Our next Freethought
Movie Night will be on February 8, at 7PM at Jason Pittman's house.
For details call (616) 634-2471 or e-mail at jpittman@backpacker.com.
Please note that the movie nights are now the Sunday prior to
the Wednesday meeting, rather than following the meeting date
as they had been last year.
Michael Moore,
outspoken social critic, documentary film maker (“Bowling
For Columbine”, “Roger & Me” etc.), author
and formerly of TV Nation, will be speaking at Fountain Street
Church this Saturday, January 31, at 6PM on the topic of the same
title as his most recent book: “Dude, Where's My Country?”
Fountain Street
Church will also host an event featuring George McGovern on February
21. More detailed information will appear in subsequent meeting
minutes.
Our next meeting,
on February 11, will regard the life of Charles Darwin. “Dogma,
Doctrine, & Deduction; Darwin's Life of Discovery” is
the topic that Gregory Forbes will be presenting on the day before
Darwin's birthday (groups of a similar nature to ours celebrate
“Darwin Day” on Feb. 12). Dr. Forbes is Professor
of Biological Sciences at GRCC; Education Director for the MI
Evolution Eduction Initiative; Science Education Center Director
and FAoWM member. This meeting will have a more festive approach,
complete with a birthday cake to celebrate Darwin's birthday.
Please remember
to donate books for sale for our Used Book Sale that will take
place before and after the February 25 meeting. A box for book
donations is available at our meetings. This is a fund raiser
and a good opportunity to purchase books of interest at low prices.
Help make it a success.
We thank Josh
& Amanda for their generous and reliable work in supplying
the coffees from Mainline Coffee for our meetings. They have also
agreed to provide the snacks for our February meetings. Jan Van
Oosterhout will provide the cake for the Darwin's birthday celebration
meeting. As snack coordinator, I thank the couple who agreed to
provide snacks for the two meetings in March, too.
We are still
looking for someone(s) to visit the ill and shut ins of our membership
and someone to transport a long-time FaoWM member, who now uses
a wheelchair, to our meetings from his home in the Wyoming area.
See Jeff about this and for other volunteer needs. Thank you!
We thank Gordon who has volunteered to run our audio-video equipment
to capture our meetings in a format that can be televised and
preserved.
Our highly
active member, David Cleveland, recently returned from the “Progressive
Action in Regressive Times” conference held in Tampa, FL.
It was sponsored by the Humanists of Florida Association &
the Institute for Humanist Studies. He brought back with him a
great deal of literature that he displayed on tables at the meeting.
The conference focus was on humanists having a place at the table
of our democracy, getting heard, effective strategies for being
recognized and other related items that are now even more vulnerable
to being undermined than ever, due to current policies and agendas.
This last
item segues nicely into our topic for this meeting: “'What
church do you belong to?' An Atheist Runs for Office in Grand
Rapids.” Our presenter was Kathryn Lynnes, Democratic candidate
for the 3rd District U.S. House of Representatives seat in 2002,
who reminded us of the Michigan Democratic caucus being held Saturday,
February 7.
Lynnes knows
well what it is like being in a repressed minority. She was a
declared atheist before her seventh birthday, trained as a civil
engineer in an almost completely male-dominated field, where she
was not supposed to handle the equipment, until she had to—to
show the men how to operate them correctly, ran as a Democrat
and has been heavily involved in that party in a largely Republican
area, was a feminist when this was quite scandalous, an environmental
activist when this was a marginalized and maligned position and
an attorney, one of the last remaining vocations or ways of being
that “political correctness” does not shield one from
being sniped upon.
She brought
to our attention the recent spate of articles in the Grand Rapids
Press, a paper that often gets her blood pressure up, regarding
State Representative, Joanne Voorhees and her comments associating
being a decent citizen with Christianity. When other faith groups
chimed in, taking her to task for this elitist and narrow viewpoint,
she tried to amend her remarks but couldn't help herself from
soldiering on down the same lines of “reasoning.”
Ironically, in the Press the very next day, there was a Public
Pulse letter from Voorhees, trying to say again that she meant
no disrespect to other religions, but which contained the closing
line: “I trust people with a world view based on faith and
am privileged to serve them.” As our speaker noted, Joanne
just doesn't get it. When one represents all of a community, group,
state, nation, etc., then one indeed represents all of them. Certainly
all of the represented population who are law-abiding, tax paying,
contributing members thereof. This includes people of NO faith.
Ms Lynnes
shared with us a number of personal anecdotes about experiences
she has had living in this community. One time a letter carrier
hissed at her and angrily slammed a copy of the magazine The Progressive
down. Another time she was looking through books and came upon
one with page margin manuscript by none other than the late Duncan
Littlefair. When she remarked delightedly upon this find she was
wheeled upon by four other women, similarly browsing among the
books, spitting out how he was not a Christian and they wouldn't
even touch that book. Further, they saw fit to inform her that
she would likely burn in Hell. Lynnes marvels at how four total
strangers can feel so at ease in attacking someone who admires
another person whose only “crime” was not being an
ideal representative of intolerant, dogmatic Christianity.
Here, it is
a given that you belong to a church—hopefully the “right”
one! Hence the title of Ms Lynnes' presentation. And there seems
to be a sort of assumed checklist for one's entire belief system...one
votes for a certain political party, believes one way about a
woman's right to choose, and on and on, in a cookie cutter fashion.
While she has personally suffered many overtly vituperative attacks
(and seen such hurled against other people and groups) stemming
from her life stances that were often at variance to the larger
community, she regards this animosity as resulting in part from
our failure, as non-theists, to promote ourselves well as representatives
of a viable and worthy alternative to the standard hard right
religiosity endemic in this area. We have not stood up for our
rights as citizens of a country that has a Bill of Rights and
Constitution set up for protection of the minority. We have allowed
ourselves to be pigeon-holed and labeled as members of a reviled
and untrustworthy group. A sitting president can say with impunity
that a person who does not believe in God cannot be a good American.
The myth of our country being a “Christian Nation”
persists; a claim often backed up by how our pledge of allegiance
and coins bear references to being “...under God”
and in trusting in God. They seem to feel this was part and parcel
with the founding of our nation, rather than fairly recent insinuations
into godless pledges and coins for a country with a godless Constitution,
framed mostly by Deists.
When she was
asked to run against Vern Ehlers, Lynnes was often asked what
church she belonged to and her stance on abortion rights. When
she honestly responded to these queries, she was pleaded with
to “pretend” she felt otherwise. She noted that here
there is simply no context for exploring other alternative beliefs.
We have to be more vocal, she asserted.
George Bush
is replacing scientists on commissions with those biased toward
his religious beliefs, halting stem cell research, tearing down
the wall of separation between State & Church, and undermining
our rights and freedoms and Constitutional guarantees at an alarming
rate. His disregard of the environment, his misuse of his position
to formally declare what constitutes a family and even more frightening—what
constitutes a “patriot”--i.e. one who believes as
he does, is coming down upon us largely unopposed.
The rate of
the current administration's assault upon our freedoms has increased
dramatically, she contends, with the September 11 tragedy. The
rhetoric that emerged from this disaster only reinforced the righteousness
of our Christian Nation, the biblical concepts flew thick and
fast, and made it easier to for those in our “God- blessed”
America to look at the godless with greater suspicion. The misnamed
Patriot Acts were on greased tracks. No other group could be so
casually attacked as the non-believer. There would have been a
major backlash if “Jew” or “African American”
etc. had been inserted in place of “atheist” in the
role of punching bag for our nation's angst. When people of reason
were placed alongside other minority groups, it was always all
the others who were championed, while there was, by contrast,
a deafening silence regarding the non-believer. Many in the public
eye bent over backwards to speak of Islam as a religion of peace
in the wake of 9-11 and called for more religiosity and tolerance
for faith groups. Of course this did not extend to the rationalist.
She sees the
wrong headedness of faith- based initiatives, with its entanglement
of Church and State, where organizations can discriminate against
those of other belief systems, can proselytize and propound ineffective
therapies without having licensed professionals in their staff,
and so on-- all with government funding and with little to no
oversight or accountability. Still, she is avowedly not anti-religious.
In fact she herself volunteers her time and otherwise supports
religiously- based organizations that truly do good work.
Lynnes gave
us a verbal Rogue's Gallery of notorious Religious Right personages.
One she mentioned was Pat Robertson, who she heard in an interview
talking about the “true” Christians (his brand, in
other words) and conversely bemoaning the “evil” religionists
including Hindus who bath in rivers as part of a ritual religious
cleansing. He was asked if this was analogous to baptism? No,
of course not! That's different. Another was the obstinate Judge
Roy Moore. She echoed this writer's exact sentiments when she
spoke of how a courthouse is among the very worst of public places
to sport a several ton, stone decalogue. While supposedly representing
a place serving equal justice for all, it shuns all but the adherents
to that icon.
Having worked
in politics, our speaker advised that in dealing with controversial
issues, to try to find common ground for agreement rather than
going straight for the most contentious elements of the topic.
An example she gave was in the abortion debate, to focus on good
care for the children, and assistance for the families, already
here.
The response
drawn by J. Voorhees' comments, mentioned earlier, Lynnes sees
as an opportunity to show just how problematic it is to mix religion
and politics. She talked of how lambasted Jennifer Granholm had
been when she supported the law of the land (Roe v. Wade) even
though she is a Catholic. People should look at this as a shining
example of separating one's personal religious views with one's
official responsibilities. President Kennedy was feared by many
Americans before taking office, for how he might bend to the dictates
of the Pope. He too, was Constitutionally directed as an elected
official, not a puppet to any religious doctrines publicly. Current
day politicians might want to heed his lead in this regard.
When asked
about her religion, she is wont to say “Doing good is my
religion.” The non-theist, who sees this as the only life
we have, holds it as more precious. Regarding our fellow human
beings in the here and now and the help we can provide them is
her passion, not looking to angels and gods in some ethereal realm.
Kathryn suggested
that we might consider putting on a public forum that illuminates
the dangers of mixing politics and religion. Real history can
be presented, rather than letting the pervasive myths stand unopposed.
In this light, she mentioned how rarely those who propose measures
to entangle the two, realize that when the government supports
“religion” the religious sect or group supported will
not always be one they agree with. And if these groups are providing
mental health services without having to show credentials, have
professionals in the field, have approved protocol, etc. then
not only will they serve as little more than government subsidized
proselytizing centers but the legitimate treatment facilities
are likely to inherit their caseloads of un- or ill- treated patients.
And when budgets are stretched so tightly, there is less money
to go to places that do real-world work.
Specific facilities
were mentioned, including one notorious local Christian mental
health services provider. There was discussion of how some treatments
are withheld due to their religious bias, or the patient is seen
as having a pathology stemming from his/her feminist or atheist
persuasion! Others are regarded as demon possessed, or if progress
is not being made in recovery—they are simply lacking in
sufficient faith. Sometimes illnesses are not seen for what they
are, but rather as the result of sin. When Lynnes asked one person
with this viewpoint, if diabetes was a sin, the individual replied
in the affirmative: the sin of gluttony! Often it is hard for
such places to separate their public health mission from their
religious one.
We talked
about how insular this area was, even in comparison with other
West Michigan towns. People who grow up here, are home schooled,
go to Calvin for college...this is all they know—they don't
get their familiar world view shaken or challenged. Knowing there
are other ways of thinking “out there” just promotes
the fear factor and uneasiness of venturing forth into a more
diverse and complicated world.
Quote from
Kathryn Lynnes at this meeting, regarding the frustration in trying
to get through to some of those with entrenched biases in Grand
Rapids, while accommodating them by somewhat submerging her feminist
ideals: “I shaved my legs for THIS?”
Secretary:
Charles LaRue
|
