I often wonder why people are so gung ho about getting prayer in school. Shouldn’t we be worrying more about edumacating the kids?
Of course, I could write reams about this, but I won’t bother: Saganist nails it.
I remember when I was in high school and there was some talk about putting prayer in the schools. I had an agreement with a friend what we would do if it passed. We would both stand up together during the prayer time, take our left arms and put them over our heads to touch our right ears, stand on one leg, make rapid random movements with our right arms, and scream "Aglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglagla!!" as loudly as we could.
If the teacher tried to stop us, we would say our religion demanded that we do this. I sometimes wish that the anti-Constitutional forces in the area had gotten their way. What fun we would’ve had…
June 30th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
I was going to high school in Georgia when fundamentalists tried to back-door prayer into public schools by mandating a daily “moment of quiet reflection” about fifteen years ago.
A number of students, including myself, tried to subvert or parody the idea. My home room teacher had a big mirror on the inside of one of the cabinets and when the principal would come over the loudspeaker and declare the moment of quiet reflection a half dozen of us would all flock around the mirror and stare at ourselves.
I would occasionally offer lewd trivia questions to be considered during the moment of silence or see what antics I could pull to see if someone would laugh.
Luckily my homeroom teacher didn’t think much of the moment of silence and was a good sport about it. Other kids in the school got in quite a bit of trouble for similar things.
June 30th, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Funny enough, Georgia is an odd place when it comes to religion. We have some laws that PREVENT religion from being used at all. Like, you can’t have anything on your official license plate that indicates religious preference. Hence why they can never pass a mandate to make a plate with “In Jesus We Trust” on the plates here as a custom plate.
But, we seem to have more mega churches per square meter than anywhere I’ve seen in my travels.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
We had a voluntary (really, actually, voluntary, with only partial participation) release from elementary school classes for religious education in the basement of the conveniently-located church across the side road from school. (The classes were Christian–non-denominational *I think*.)
For me, it didn’t “take”. I don’t think it drove me away, either.
The 1940s were a different time. The “under God” crept into the pledge while I was in school–I mouthed that part except when leading. I don’t think that change damaged me, either.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Don’t be silly, Phil. Only government-approved religions qualify for inclusion.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Derek Colanduno,
Here in Indiana last year the BMV issued an “In God We Trust” car plate. A stink started to waft because the Bureau had an aggressive campaign to get people to choose that plate, which included giving drivers a significant break on the price of that particular one. I was not amused.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
No doubt, Phil, you’d have gotten yourself beat up by an outraged, righteous christian linebacker on the football team. And trust me, the linebacker would not have seen any violation of his christian principles in beating you up. So much for living one’s religion.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
I remember having a discussion with some very religious friends about prayer in school during high school (mine never did it, but a lot of people wanted it). It was amazing how unenthusiastic some of my Southern Baptist friends became about the idea when I casually mentioned that, for fairness’s sake, we should of course include Muslim prayers, Catholic prayers, and others. They asked for an example and I recited the Hail Mary. I looked up to shocked faces (it sure sounds different from they prayers they were used to!) and they never mentioned the idea again. I suppose that people just assumed that the prayers would all be what they heard on Sunday.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
Ahhh, reminds me when I was a young Atheist in my Catholic High School. On the upside on Holy Days of Obligation, class was shorter because we had to spend an hour and a half at Mass. On the downside, teachers would normally ruin a perfectly good nap by informing me I had sit, rise, kneel when everybody else did.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
@ Derek Colanduno: Apparently you’ve never been to Salt Lake City. The Mormons have built more cult-houses…er…temples here than fire stations. There seems to be a new temple opening every month or so.
One of the more amusing (nauseating) aspects is their “open house” tours. Non-Mormons can tour the newly-built temples for a couple weeks before they are “blessed” – after the “blessing” you have to be a “Mormon in good standing” to be allowed inside the temple. Like the building somehow physically changes once their “prophet” speaks a couple of words aloud.
Don’t get me started on the lack of separation of church and state. That concept is completely foreign here. Children in the public schools can actually take a church-run “class” (for credit) that excuses them from studying actual FACTS. The boys and girls are then segregated so that they can each learn their “proper places” in the world. You know, women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, etc.
June 30th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
In his Cairo speech, Obama mentioned Jesus (in the story of Isra). At the Notre Dame commencement, Obama also spoke of Jesus, saying “It was through this service that I was brought to Christ” mentioning the good works he had seen performed by Christian groups. He also specifically mentioned Jesus a month prior at a speech on his economic policies at Georgetown.
Hope and change!
June 30th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Floating around on the intertubes, there’s an article written by an Evangelical minister on his experience of visiting Hawaii where he and his wife attended a football game.
When the pre-game prayers were announced, up stood a Buddhist minister and lead the crowd in a Buddhist prayer. Naturally, the Christian was very shocked by this and felt most uncomfortable. He concluded from this that mandating public prayers in schoolswas a bad idea – but NOT because it was divisive and exclusionary. But because some future non-Christian administration would use the law to force people like him to engage in pagan rituals!
June 30th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
We actually do have religion classes in public schools here. I think I never actually liked those once I understood that the Bible should be treated as a fable.
June 30th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
I got sent to the principles office for irking the a teacher by replacing the “Pledge of Allegiance” section “One nation under God…” with “One nation next to Canada.” I think the realy sticking point for my sentence to the priciples office was when taken to the corner was my snarky responses to his questions “Why do you hate your country?” I responded “No I like this country, but is Canada not our neighboring country?”
June 30th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Aside from the obvious problems I have with these potential violations of Church and State I think there is also the problem of actually pulling off prayer in a public school.
When I went to High School there were a lot of different faiths being practiced and from what I observed some of them contain important rituals that prevent just praying on the spot.
I don’t see how its even possible to hold something like that.
June 30th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
You can’t imagine how happy I am to live in a country where Education and Religion are two separate things ( France). 1905 is my personal “most important year in our History”, just before 1789 ( the year when the separation of Church and Politics whas voted).
Anyway, your personnal prayer is hilarious. Pythonesque, I must say!
Regards from South of France, Your website is excellent and I hope for a french translation of your book sooner or later
June 30th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Prayer in the south may never leave. Just recently ,in my Texas town, a Jewish women objected to prayer opening school board meetings. She was subsequently run out of town. Christians here are all about tolerance…until you try to “take away” their prayer.
In fact, I believe some of that Christian rationale was added as a comment to link, Phil. Amazing.
June 30th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
I recently attended the graduation of my niece from a public school in North Carolina, and was surprised when the valedictorian of their class led the crowd in a over the top christian prayer. (in jesus’ name and all that nonsense) It was so eerie for me to look around and see so many bowed heads, as I met the eyes of the (relatively few) other non-christians sitting around me. To say I was shocked and angered is a huge understatement.
Is this kind of thing allowed if a student leads the prayer? I would like to complain, but I don’t even know how to go about that.
June 30th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
@fizzyb
This is common practice (at least in the south). I am a teacher here and our annual convocation is lead by a school board member praying in Jesus’ name.
Objecting to it is professionally hazardous.
June 30th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
fizzyb:
Yes. It’s okay if the student does it. In fact, if they restricted the student from doing it, it is establishment going the other way.
Schools are currently more afraid of Christians than atheists/agnostics/skeptics.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Hey! Thanks for the link, Phil! I’ve also never quite understood all the furor about getting Christian prayer in public schools. Aren’t these Christian parents teaching their kids to pray at home? Do they really need to get prayer in the school, too? Schools are for education, not religion.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
@JoeSmithCA
You were probably sent to the office for this:
http://www.duffgardens.net/images.php?pic=Framegrabs/Vocations/PDVD_298.jpg
June 30th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
LOL.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
I did high school at a Catholic School. It was very iluminating to see the guys that allways participated in mass, reading the bible and giving very “christian” comments when asked about some matter, being the ones that behaved the worst, were the most back stabbing of all and the ones that always bullied the weak. Some priests were really good teachers and persons, but many others just looked creepy and as hypocritical as the mentioned pupils.
My atheist life began here.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Myself, I’ve always wondered why organizations such as the Fellowship of Christian Athletes (which students don’t even have to be athletes to join) are allowed on the campus of public schools to do recruitment/brainwashing drives and cult ceremonies (they call it “praying at the flagpole”). Despite the activities ostensibly being led by students, they still have a faculty member as a sponsor, which gives them a legitimacy that they should not have. Perhaps we should invite someone to start a corresponding Muslim organization?
June 30th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
“We would both stand up together during the prayer time, take our left arms and put them over our heads to touch our right ears, stand on one leg, make rapid random movements with our right arms, and scream “Aglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglaglagla!!” as loudly as we could.”
You know what would be even funnier? Go to a church funeral and, at strategic moments, stand up, wave your arms, roll your eyes, and shout something like “Booga Booga, Woo, Woo! He be gwiiiiinnnne to de debbil!’ Something similar could easily be done during weddings, christenings, or whatever . . . . .The thing is, everyone present would be so impressed with your wit and sophistication that they’d immediately become atheists.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
And everyone is so impressed with your intolerance of secular spaces that they’ll immediately become Christians.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Federal courts disagree with you on this, since they have consistently ruled this sort of behavior is unconstitutional.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
23. Big Fat Earl:
The answer to that is in laws about student groups. You can’t (or are not supposed to) ban one student group from using school property if you allow others to do so. So, technically at least, the school could not prevent the Muslim organization from doing the same thing unless they abolished all school sponsored student groups all together. Sadly, I’ve heard of a school doing just that not too long ago, but I don’t remember enough specifics to find a link.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
@TomInAk
Awwww, did somebody make fun of prayer?
June 30th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
@ TomInAK: Of course, since requiring prayer in a mandatory, public, government-run institution on government-owned land is identical to prayer at a voluntary, invitation-only private event on private property.
June 30th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
@17 fizzyb: I’m in the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area of North Carolina. Because of the universities, the tech jobs, and all the transplants, it’s a very different place than other parts of North Carolina. We’ve got a couple of mosques and three Hindu temples, including a big brand-new purpose-built one. On the other hand, we’ve got an abundance of private “Christian” schools (someone needs to write a good book about what is really taught in these places), including one at which a teacher was caught a couple of years ago teaching that slavery was a good thing. Even here, though, it is the unexamined assumption of many people that everyone they meet is just another conservative fundamentalist. When I moved here several years ago, people who had no idea of my own religious notions freely volunteered that I’d get to know some nice people as soon as I joined a church. Some even pitched their own church.
So, the notion that a high school kid can get up and lead an audience in a Christian prayer obviously stems from the also unexamined notion that everyone in the audience is the same kind of Christian. We can only imagine the consternation that will ensure when the valedictorian tries to lead everyone in an Islamic, Jewish or Hindu prayer.
June 30th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
@Ty–
“Awwww, did somebody make fun of prayer?”
Nah–BA just demonstrated how sophisticated his sense of humor is. One hopes that his funnybone has evolved beyond this adolescent level.
And @purplevelvet #15, I wouldn’t crow too loudly about France’s separation of church and state, given that for almost 1000 years, the two were rather intimately entwined. It will be interesting to see how your country deals with the ever-increasing Islamic influences that it faces.
June 30th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
@TomInAK: why, yes, that did in fact make me laugh.
June 30th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Weird that this topic came up, since I actually mentioned the following in reply to the Tyson quote earlier…
I moved to Trenton, Ontario in my late teens and went to Trenton High School to get the last credit I needed for graduation. I took a couple of extra courses, one of them being accounting.
The accounting teacher must have had a bug up her butt about religion because when I declined to stand for the Lord’s Prayer (in a Canadian public school of all things, I’d never encountered this in any other school I went to) she threw a fit, and threw me out of class.
The vice-principal was pretty angry at me as well but I said a couple of things to him regarding my being 18, and how if I had to stand for a Christian prayer then every other religion in the place better get it’s proper respect too, he turned purple (that was neat to watch) and backed down.
I actually think the proper respect for religion is no respect, but I didn’t want to exacerbate things at the time.
I do wonder if they still try to force kids to take part in the prayer though.
Religion has no place in a learning environment. It stifles the quest for knowledge at it’s best, and is deadly to things it doesn’t understand at it’s worst.
We’ve seen what theocracies do. Before Mohammed and his mob, the middle east was a place of great science and discovery. Europe’s domination by religion is now known as The Dark Ages.
Etc. etc. etc.
I guess it’s enough to say I strongly support the separation of church and state, and follow that up with the separation of church and everything else
June 30th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
@30 David D.
It’s not so much an inherently immature sense of humor. The maturity of the joke was simply matching, if not exceeding, the maturity of the beliefs that it ridiculed.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Wondering if anyone has seen the latest news about a group of paleontologists, attending an international conference in Cincinatti, decided to visit the Creation Museum in Kentucky. Apparently, their consensus on the exhibit was one of horror. Lol! The paleontogists from other countries were rather perturbed. I have to say I am embarassed for the state of science education in our country.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
@34 Mike Wagner–
I think you may have misread your history. It was actually after Mohammed and his mob that the Islamic world was a leader in science and knowledge, not before. And your description of “The Dark Ages,” with the Church suppressing learning and knowledge, is rather cliched and dated, and is not supported by more recent historical research. I admire your stance on the separation of church and state, but your historical understanding is misinformed.
June 30th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Gary Miles,
Science-ed in the U.S. may be due for an overhaul, but the Creation Museum can’t be used as an example. The Museum is a one-of-a-kind place, customized for a particular interest group. It doesn’t represent a randomized sampling of popular sentiments.
June 30th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
A classic cartoon, by David Horsey:
click on cartoon to visit Horsey’s website.
J/P=?
June 30th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
David:
I have to admit I should have been more skeptical in my readings then. I had originally read that the mathematical and science enlightenment in the middle east was happening in the heyday of the Roman Empire, but I dug deeper and you are correct. They were strongest in those fields after the 8th century, which is a discrepancy of several centuries.
That will teach me for not being as skeptical in regards to some documents as I am in others
June 30th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
9. Zyggy Says: “Salt Lake City…the lack of separation of church and state.”
In Utah, the separation of church and state is about a quarter mile. I have a shot I took on my last visit there where you can see the state capitol through the spires of Temple Square.
- Jack
June 30th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
This brings to mind two things from my elementary school days. We were forced to open the day with prayer, and coming from an agnostic family it was years before I understood the real words to “Our father, named Art in heaven – Halloween be thy name” I was praying to Art Halloween!
By the fifth grade I was curious enough about religion to start a few discussions about it with my schoolmates. One particularly memorable lunch time I said to a friend “Prove to me that God exists” when suddenly from out of nowhere my bombastic teacher appeared armed with one of those yard-long rulers – and whackety-whackety-whackety-whack – she smacked me over the head with that thing again and again – while bellowing “YOU WILL NEVER SAY THAT AGAIN!”. Yep, I learned my lesson alright. Don’t bother to try and talk about this with the already fully indoctrinated – penance will be exacted on earth.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
As to a student leading a prayer: Absolutely against the law. Supreme court ruled on that a few years ago, in regard to prayers at football games in Texas. Essentially, if the event is an official school event, and if there is taxpayer money being used, no prayers may be said. Of course, if you are in the bible belt, you you would have a difficult time getting this enforced.
At our graduation, one or another of the valedictorians usually credits his/her deity for inspiration, but it is not a prayer. We have had science teachers get up and walk out of the ceremony (and file grievances) over this issue enough that the speeches are carefully vetted ahead of time.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:26 pm
@ 22. OtherRob Says:
“One nation next to Canada.” LOL.
Hey senor, what about Mexico? Si?
June 30th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
@ 25. TomInAK :
You know what would be even funnier? Go to a church funeral and, at strategic moments, stand up, wave your arms, roll your eyes, and shout something like “Booga Booga, Woo, Woo!
(Emphasis added.)
Tom, the point you are missing there is the difference between a church which is a place specifically set aside for religion voluntarily attended by willing believers (& sometimes their guests) – and a school which is a place set aside for educating children of all religions and none.
In a forced school prayer where the child is compelled to voice sentiments s/he may not believe the BA’s gesture would be an entirely appropriate gesture of defiance and standing up for his principles. *
If OTOH the BA chooses to attend a religious ceremony at a religious venue whose beliefs he does not share – presumably out of respect to another individuals choice – then such a gesture would be very much inappropriate and disrespectful.**
There is a time and a place for religious worship. That place is church, mosque, temple, Stonehenge for Druidic ceremonies, etc ..
That time and place is NOT in school. School the time and place for education and teaching children to think.
—————-
* Thinking principles why do the over-zealous Christians that insist on compulsory school prayers NOT recognise that they are effectively advocating and insisting on hypocrisy here? They want even non-Christians to mouth along and respect what they don’t believe in. Yet Jesus himself I gather was very opposed to the such hypocrisy. The word ‘Pharisee’ ring a bell much?
** Speaking personally, I am an outspoken atheist who has no respect for organised religion. However, I have also got many good friends who are devoutly religious and I personally have attended a number of religious weddings and funerals. On such occassions I (rather uncomfortably admittedly) bite my tongue and, where necessary, sing along going through all the rites and doing all that is asked of me without complaint. This is NOT because I respect the religion or believe but because I respect the individual and/or people who are involved. I imagine most other atheists incl. the BA and his friend do the same.
July 1st, 2009 at 1:45 am
Being Jewish at a private Methodist school in Australia, it used to drive me crazy being forced to go to chapel every two weeks. I wouldn’t have minded as much – after all, it *was* private school – if it weren’t for the fact that you could get into trouble for not singing along to the hymns, or refusing to stand at certain points in the service. I learned early on to mouth the words and tune out most of what was happening. It did make me wish though, that there was an option to refuse to attend – many of the students were not Christians, and we would have liked to have been able to leave the chapel services to those who were.
July 1st, 2009 at 2:23 am
[...] on your official license plate that indicates religious preference. Go here to see the original: Praying Allah carte | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine Posted in Jesus Will Answer | Tags: Compass, Gift, islamic, magnetic, needle, plaintive, Plates, [...]
July 1st, 2009 at 2:59 am
“I have to admit I should have been more skeptical in my readings then. I had originally read that the mathematical and science enlightenment in the middle east was happening in the heyday of the Roman Empire, but I dug deeper and you are correct. They were strongest in those fields after the 8th century, which is a discrepancy of several centuries.”
I don’t recall the name of the author, but about 30 years ago I read a book on the history of
pi in which the author more or less judged civilisations based on how much progress they
made with respect to pi. The Romans didn’t fare too well.
They get a lot of good press today, for some reason, but essentially Rome was a fascist
state. (Yes, it was efficient, but so were many other fascist states.)
July 1st, 2009 at 7:40 am
It would be nice if that was the case, but depending on the poll and the exact wording between about 45% and about 55% of the U.S population agrees with the general message of the creation museum (god created the world either in 6 days or within the last 10,000 years). It is not some fringe group, it is the most popular opinion in the subject in the U.S. right now.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:08 am
@48
Fascist, really?
Rome did exist as a political entity for, depending on who you ask, between 1000 and 2000 years, so there’s a lot of room in there for a lot of different political systems.
I know that it is certainly popular to crack on Rome, and the system was staggeringly unfair, with the distribution of wealth and power skewed to a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of the population. That said: did their beliefs adhere particularly closely to fascism as created in the 20th century, in a more real way than, say, Alexander and the Macedonians, or the Parthians, or Sassanid Persians, or the Achaemenids, or the Ptolemies?
Considering that the pace of imperial expansion slowed to nearly nothing after Augustus (Britain, Dacia, and an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to Ctesiphon?), and that Augustus himself specifically discouraged imperialist adventures in his will, it might not necessarily be the most apt comparison. Also: the zeal with which the Roman elite pursued Greek culture would have made Mussolini blush.
I would put Rome–under the empire–into the category of absolute monarchy. I’m curious what evidence you would cite as proof that Rome was particularly fascist, aside from that they invented the tool that fascism is named for.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:21 am
@Robert E, #28
A couple of years ago, a group of students in a north Georgia high school wanted to form a gay students club. Reaction was about what you’d expect and the school decided to eliminate all student groups instead of allowing this one. Sigh.
@Flying sardines, #45
I”m more of an agnostic than an athiest and when I find my self in such situations, I just close my eyes and think nice thoughts about the universe. It’s an awfully nice one.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:22 am
time in school should be spent educating kids, not praying. however, if schools don’t start serving pasta with a nice ragu for every lunch, the flying spaghetti monster will grow irate and un-create mountains. that would sure ruin any ski-vacation plans.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:38 am
Friends,
Thanks for the interesting discussion here (I especially like the article that “Saganist” wrote and which is linked to at the start), and I would encourage everyone to consider a few more points:
1. Does a positive or a negative personal experience with a religion prove its truth or falsity?
2. Would you be comfortable if your statements here were referentially turned around (if someone on the “other side” said the same thing or expressed the same attitudes about you)?
3. Many “fundamentalist Christians” do not think that there should be mandated prayer in public schools because they believe that forced prayer is no prayer at all and that it breeds contempt rather than devotion, AND that they don’t want their children forced to participate in the prayers of other faiths, which would happen in our pluralistic culture. I encourage us to be cautious in the width of our paintbrushes.
4. It is very easy to judge a person, concept or practice based on how it has impacted our lives. In many ways that is an appropriate thing to do; however, sometimes the way a person, concept or practice reaches us has been filtered and manipulated through in so many different means that it bears little resemblance to its original order. Christians are sometimes idiots (it’s a human condition, and I speak from the “being one myself” personal experience) and sometimes people who claim to be Christians aren’t (God knows, but I can’t accurately judge). I would suggest that many people reject Christianity because of Christians rather than because of the Christ, or Jesus if you object to the title (since “Christ” is not Jesus’ last name but rather a title with the meaning, very roughly, of “anointed leader”). If you’re content with that surface rejection, fine, but if you wish to dig deeper, to be “scientific” about it, you might wish to read the Gospels in the Christian Bible. You might still think that Jesus is a crock, but at least you’ll have had several layers between him and you removed, and you’ll be able to judge more competently.
As always, I enjoy this blog site. Thanks to Phil and all for dealing with important issues of our day.
–Michael Burkley
p.s.: If you’re at all interested here is an outline of Genesis 1+ in the Bible that outlines Creation as a 2nd Millennium BC hearer/reader might have seen the Creation story. Check out the relationship between the “Days” if you wish.
Day 1 Day 4
Day 2 Day 5
Day 3 Day 6
….Day 7
July 1st, 2009 at 9:41 am
Gary Mile:
I did. I like this quote at the end of the NY Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/science/30muse.html?_r=1&ref=science
July 1st, 2009 at 10:11 am
As a seeker of knowledge, throughly immersed in the scientific method, for the likes of david and tom I have one piece of advice,,,there is one way to know the truth of your assertions re: your religion: try to experience Death. The easiest way to do that is by triggering a grand mall seizure, either thru deprivation(wandering in the desert), various toxic substances(such as rattle snake venom) direct electrical stimulation(say, by getting hit by lightening), or various psychoactive drugs(which, by the way, is probably the “safest” method).
Unfortunately, all of these methods have the unfortunate propensity to randomly stimulate either the left or right temporal lobe and depending on which lobe has priority you will experience either heaven, god, angels, connectedness or hell, devils, demons, dissolution of the self, etc. Finding your way back from these extreme hallucinations to the real world is a task best served by a rigorous adherence to the scientific method. Faith alone will only leave you wandering in a gray mist of uncertainty, sleeping under bridges and crying in your beer.
It’s been said that the major difference between a psychotic and a saint is that the saint is quite happy with his hallucinations and in my experience, that is an accurate assessment.
GAry 7 (he who has gone where angels are too smart to tread)
July 1st, 2009 at 10:13 am
TheBlackCat Said:
“It would be nice if that was the case, but depending on the poll and the exact wording between about 45% and about 55% of the U.S population agrees with the general message of the creation museum (god created the world either in 6 days or within the last 10,000 years). It is not some fringe group, it is the most popular opinion in the subject in the U.S. right now.”
Well, firstly, I didn’t really say what I think the popular view is; I just said that the Creation Museum in isolation isn’t a proper gauge. Secondly, current polling may indicate a distribution of sentiments; but how does that distribution compare with distributions at times in the past? In other words, have people tended to think all that differently as a group over long eras?And is it realistic to expect a population as large and widespread as it is in the U.S. to see the world as you and I perhaps do? Religion is a well-established mode of thought. Like it or not, it’s here to stay.
And it’s not as if science and its fruits are hard to come by in this country. Personally, I have open access to more scientific knowledge today than ever before in my 50 years of life. The laboratories, the observatories, the museums and the libraries aren’t on the verge of becoming extinct.
July 1st, 2009 at 10:56 am
First, yes the creation museum is a pretty good gage, considering the place cost a small fortune to build and they had to get their money somewhere, plus I am under the impression it has had very good attendance.
If I recall correctly, these polling numbers have been fairly stable for several decades at least.
As for how people in the country seeing things as I do, of course not. There are going to be small groups believing all sorts of bizarre things. This is not a small group, though. Around half the people in this country reject practically everything we know about the universe, including the very principles that their modern lifestyles are based on. What is more, countries and regions far larger and more diverse than ours have no problem with evolution. In fact, outside the U.S. and a few Islamic countries acceptance of evolution is nearly universal. There are of course minority groups in many countries that reject evolution, but no where near half the population.
And as for laboratories not being in any danger, you apparently have not been paying attention to what has been happening in places like Florida, where the legislature thinks a good way to fund handing out checks to everyone in the state is to close entire science departments in their schools.
July 1st, 2009 at 11:36 am
TheBlackcat,
I asked how today’s demographics compare to how they’ve been throughout history. I don’t know the precise answer to that; do you? It’s plausible that there’s never been a time, even in America, when the majority weren’t ignorant of what a few had made known. And just because certain other countries have different distributions of worldviews doesn’t tell me (or you) exactly why that’s so. Are the people being indoctrinated to their views by their educational systems? In my experience, most people who ostensibly accept, for example, Darwinian evolution have very poor understandings of exactly how evolution works. It’s very much the same for almost any other topic. Most people just accept things that they’re told, including evolution. Even among those with real interest in learning a sophisticated subject don’t all understand equally well, because not everyone is as innately intelligent, and not everyone has been studying for as long (everyone has to start out ignorant and climb the ladder; some are better climbers, some have been climbing longer). And of course, most people get their science education from pop-sci articles and cable TV.
My bottom line is that [1]- I refuse to think of knowledge as official truth, and [2]- I refuse to reduce science to just another contender in a popularity contest. I’m interested in freedom of thought and speech, the very engine of science.
July 1st, 2009 at 11:36 am
@TheBlackCat:
“Around half the people in this country reject practically everything we know about the universe, including the very principles that their modern lifestyles are based on.” Do you have evidence of this claim (which is quite different from a belief in creationism), or is this your opinion?
You are correct in that some polls do show (unfortunately) that a fair number of people in this country believe that the earth was created in six days, or at the very least, that God somehow guides evolution. I can’t find many recent polls. Also, if I remember correctly, I saw a poll that suggested that just over half of scientists believed in evolution, and that a large number of them also believe in evolution guided by God’s hand.
You mention that outside of the US and Islamic countries, acceptance of evolution is almost universal. While this may be true, this may reflect deeper social and cultural issues rather than the poor state of science education.
There are other measures of science education other than polls on this one focused and narrow issue (like science scores on national exams, or perhaps numbers of students entering college and graduate-level science programs).
July 1st, 2009 at 12:25 pm
59. David D:
Is this the source for your contention that a bare majority of scientists are believers in a naturalistic evolution(w/o gods)???
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm#earth
I note the contention that people tend more toward religion as they age, which MAY have as much to do with increasing attendance to church organizations as a social replacement for loneliness and isolation,ie, the more you hang around those who are adamantly religious, the more likely you are to be influenced by those points of view,,,which is one reason I tend to avoid old people,,,
Remember this old story:
“Poppa, why does Grandpa spend all day reading his bible?”
“AH, Son, He’s just cramming for His final exams,,,”.
My feeling is, if you’ve lived a decent life, you have no need to believe in anything. It will all work out,,,in the end. If you’ve been a jerk, I have confidence that, in the end, you will either cease to exist or payback will be a bitch,,,
Gary 7
July 1st, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Re: Michael R. Burkley,
1) For the purposes of this discussion the truth or falsity of a particular religion is irrelevant. Even if your religion is right, that does not give its adherents the right to force others to follow its rituals. The answer to your question is, of course, no.
2) If the statements were turned around, and Christians talked about how it’s wrong for them to be forced to publicly recite a declaration of God’s non-existence every single day under threat of various official and unofficial punishments, then I would agree on principle. If such a thing actually happened, I would be right there with them in protesting it. Of course, they would never dream of reciprocating, but I have my moral obligations regardless.
3) I would encourage those fundamentalists to speak up. I’m sure the reaction (including threats and quite possibly violence) that they would likely receive at the hands of their fellows would be an enlightening experience for them. It certainly was for me.
4) Quit assuming that non-Christians are ignorant of the principals of Christianity. And again, this has no relevance to the discussion at hand, which is about forced adherence to religious ritual and not the truth/falsity of any particular religion.
July 1st, 2009 at 2:22 pm
@Ken B,
Comparing the Creationist Museum to Disney? That’s blasphemy! How dare they insult Disney like that!!!
July 1st, 2009 at 2:27 pm
@Na,
My wife and I are Jewish also. For awhile, she taught at an all-girl’s Catholic school. Besides being quite the education for her in how Christianity works (she had no idea how many masses there would be) and besides becoming the “staff Jew” (to whom any questions about Judaism were asked), she found out that students who didn’t observe religion could opt out of certain religion classes. For masses, however, they had to sit through it.
July 1st, 2009 at 2:30 pm
An online friend of mine is Wiccan. Whenever a “Prayer In Schools” topic appears, he always comes out in favor of it (tongue in cheek, of course) and graciously offers up a goddess prayer that can be said. It is quite funny how the other people in favor of prayer in schools try to reject that prayer while still supporting prayer in schools. No one really supports “Prayer In Schools.” They just support “Prayer Of The Kind I Always Practice In My House Of Worship In Schools.” Unfortunately for them (and fortunately for us), public schools are not houses of worship and can’t be treated as such.
July 1st, 2009 at 2:35 pm
@justcorbly,
I recently visited South Carolina for a wedding. (Italian Catholic guy marrying Wiccan girl on Halloween!) One of my more memorable moments was during a tour of an old plantation house. The woman giving the tour was telling us how the place thrived until slavery was ended. Then they tried to run it as a cooperative but failed. She spoke of slavery as if it was a purely economic concept with no moral or human repercussions. It was quite interesting (and a little scary) to listen to.
July 1st, 2009 at 4:33 pm
As a potential comparison, when I was in the states as a child one teacher I had for a while (replacement thank goodness) insisted that I say the Pledge of Allegiance, most teachers were willing to just let me stand quietly. He just oculdn’t understand that a New Zealander not wanting to pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America was not actually being ‘unpatriotic’.
July 1st, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Dear JT,
Thanks for your reply. I’m glad to see that we agree, in broad, in the areas you responded to. Apparently I didn’t make myself clear in one (dealing with your last comment), for which I am sorry.
We would agree that it is not right to force anyone to follow any religion based on the ability to do so. The reason I put that comment in was that some appeared to argue the point “I don’t like religion, I’ve had a bad experience with religion, etc.; therefore it can’t be right.” I would argue that the rightness or wrongness of something is not based on anyone’s feelings about it. I’m glad that you would agree with that (though, of course, that doesn’t make us right!)
In regard to your second statement that Christians would never dream of defending your right to freely express (without threat of punishment) your ideas of God’s non-existence: I don’t think that you’re right. I know of at least one who would do so: me (and many others, but I’m speaking personally here). I strive for a “level playing field” where I listen to your ideas and you listen to mine and then we go hammer and tongs at them to refine them both until we at least understand and respect the others position even if we don’t agree with it. I applaud your determination to speak up for the downtrodden. I wish others would follow your lead.
In regards to your comment #3 I’m glad that you would encourage “those fundamentalists” to speak up. I would agree. Perhaps there might be violence against them (I hope not), but I suspect that some would be willing to pay the cost. Ridicule happens (see the example in regard to the Evangelical preacher above who was advocating against official school prayer) as you know. I’m sorry that it happened to you. I apologize to you for that, since it was probably Christians who did it, and I’m a Christian.
In regard to your comment #4: It was not my intention to assume that non-Christians are ignorant of the principles of Christianity. I know that many are very informed of Christian thought and yet reject it (Robert Heinlein for one). I am sorry that I gave you that impression. I was attempting to point out that many of the people identifying themselves here as non-organized-faith-based people (how’s that for a category!) came to that point not out of a rejection of Christian principles or doctrine but out of a rejection of specific behaviors on the part of specific people. Such behavior should be rejected, because it is wrong. I was attempting to point out that if offensive behavior was the cause of ones rejection of Christianity that one might do well to examine Jesus and his teachings, basing their rejection or acceptance of Christianity on him rather on his all-too-fallible followers. I thought that this was relevant to the discussion simply because it was the “forced adherence to religious ritual” that cause several here to reject Christianity. Perhaps if its practice wasn’t forced, if there was a level playing field of thought, there might be more who would find it a relevant explanation of life, and then again, perhaps not.
Thanks again for your comments.
– Michael Burkley
July 1st, 2009 at 8:12 pm
@ 66 Cairnos :
LOL. Or SAS (Smiling Away Silently) anyway.
You should have tried a personal modification – Something like :
“I plege allegiance to the two islands of New Zealand, Aotearoa, and the British Queen that oddly still rules us along with Australia, Canada, etc …”
@ 51. OtherRob :
@Flying sardines, #45 On such occassions I (rather uncomfortably admittedly) bite my tongue and, where necessary, sing along going through all the rites and doing all that is asked of me without complaint. This is NOT because I respect the religion or believe but because I respect the individual and/or people who are involved. I imagine most other atheists incl. the BA and his friend do the same.
I”m more of an agnostic than an athiest and when I find my self in such situations, I just close my eyes and think nice thoughts about the universe. It’s an awfully nice one.
Yes, I do that too – I generally focus on the people and reason I’m there for, reflecting on my relationship with & respect for them.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:17 pm
@ 53. Michael R. Burkley :
I’m afraid you are missing the point here & offering only irrelevant non-sequiteur questions. Still I’ll answer them anyway.
1. Does a positive or a negative personal experience with a religion prove its truth or falsity?
No. But it does provide certain indictations esp. in regard to the hypocrisy and inconsistent even contradictory ethics of its practitioners.
Eg. Religious folks claiming they want people to pray sincerely & whole-heartedly rather than being insincere and essentially lying by saying words without meaning them yet compelling people to pray when they don’t believe what they’re saying shows they’re not serious about this.
2. Would you be comfortable if your statements here were referentially turned around (if someone on the “other side” said the same thing or expressed the same attitudes about you)?
If they have reason & not just prejudice on their side then yes. I’m happy for them to make their case vigorously – if it is valid. If, OTOH, they cannot back up their claims with evidence and logic and are merely name-calling then, well, not so much.
3. Many “fundamentalist Christians” do not think that there should be mandated prayer in public schools because they believe that forced prayer is no prayer at all and that it breeds contempt rather than devotion, AND that they don’t want their children forced to participate in the prayers of other faiths, which would happen in our pluralistic culture. I encourage us to be cautious in the width of our paintbrushes.
Good – I’m not so worried by these people although I still think they’re wrong. However, there are other fundamentalist Christians that aren’t so tolerant of others and do wish to impose their religion by force or law or “shoving it in everyone elses faces” and these are the ones that I really object to and oppose.
4. It is very easy to judge a person, concept or practice based on how it has impacted our lives. In many ways that is an appropriate thing to do; however, sometimes the way a person, concept or practice reaches us has been filtered and manipulated through in so many different means that it bears little resemblance to its original order. Christians are sometimes idiots (it’s a human condition, and I speak from the “being one myself” personal experience) and sometimes people who claim to be Christians aren’t (God knows, but I can’t accurately judge). I would suggest that many people reject Christianity because of Christians rather than because of the Christ, or Jesus if you object to the title …
Quite probably but so what?
(since “Christ” is not Jesus’ last name but rather a title with the meaning, very roughly, of “anointed leader”).
I always thought the “Christ” title meant “messiah” but that’s bye-the -bye..
If you’re content with that surface rejection, fine, but if you wish to dig deeper, to be “scientific” about it, you might wish to read the Gospels in the Christian Bible. You might still think that Jesus is a crock, but at least you’ll have had several layers between him and you removed, and you’ll be able to judge more competently.
Many atheists – including myself – have done exactly that. I have read the whole Bible and have been through a religious phase myself.
BTW. What has all this got to do with compulsory prayer in school other than you broadly admitting its not such a good thing anyway?
July 1st, 2009 at 10:49 pm
@ 69 Flying sardines :
Dear Flying sardines,
Thanks for answering my questions even if you see them as “irrelevant non-sequiteur questions.” Much of my response to your comments would duplicate what I wrote to JT. I’ll try not to repeat them, but I refer you to those comments (#67, I expect, through the post hasn’t been moderated as of yet).
I would agree completely with your reply to my comment #1.
In regard to your answer to my question #2: I agree with what you wrote; however, I was asking people to consider their own personal comments. I thought I had seen comments that were more “merely name-calling” here. In re-reading them again I think the comments are more remembrances of actual hurts than name-calling. Still, I think it a good rule of arguing to argue a point in a way that shows respect for an opponent. Then they might listen to you, and you might win!
I also worry about “fundamentalists” (my question #3) who “wish to impose their religion by force or law or ‘shoving it in everyone elses faces….’ I just worry about a broad category of fundamentalists, since I find them on all sides of practically every issue. But since this discussion is about official prayer in public schools (and worrying about “edumacating the kids”) finding fundamentalists isn’t all that on topic.
In regard to my question #4: Yes, “Christ” does mean “Messiah,” the first a term in Greek the second in Hebrew. Both mean “The Anointed One,” but what in the world does that mean? I figured replacing “One” with “Leader” might get the meaning across more clearly. But you’re right, it’s not all that pertinent to the discussion except to give people a bit more info if they wish to have it (I guess I am “forcing” them to read it).
I’m glad that you’ve read through the whole Bible. Most people have not (including Christians). Some parts of it are tough going! We’ve come down of differing sides of this discussion, but at least you’ve gathered original rather than secondary source material, formed a hypothesis (I assume) and reached a conclusion based on that material (and others). I could argue with you about that conclusion, but at least it would be a good argument.
In regard to your last question, “What has all this to do with compulsory prayer…?” I wrote about that in my reply to JT.
Thanks again for your comments,
Michael Burkley
July 2nd, 2009 at 12:00 am
@ Michael R. Burkley
If you’re content with that surface rejection, fine, but if you wish to dig deeper, to be “scientific” about it, you might wish to read the Gospels in the Christian Bible. You might still think that Jesus is a crock, but at least you’ll have had several layers between him and you removed, and you’ll be able to judge more competently.
Now that Flying Sardines has brought it up what do you mean Michael R. Burkley? Are you implying that by reading the Xian Bible I should have had some sort of moment that would illuminate god’s holy plan or something. Seriously, I got more out other fantasy books. The Lord Of The Rings comes to mind.
Slightly OT rant follows… The problem with christianity, and some other evangelical religions, is not the evangelising it is the the fact that they won’t allow live and let live. It is their way or… their way. As soon as they gain some political power they must enact laws based on their beliefs because they know The Truth(tm) and because we aren’t able to see The Truth we have to brought kicking and screaming into the fold for our own good. There is no compromise.
Thank the FSM that most of the western democracies have some kind of separation laws in spite of the majority christian desires.
July 2nd, 2009 at 3:02 am
Not to go entirely off topic I’m not sure what kind of “truth” we are talking about here.
To answer question #1 I say yes, a positive reaction with ones faith does prove its truth. However I’m a philosopher and not a scientist so when I see truth I don’t assume it to be empirical truth.
The thing with personal validation is that its essentially what we all do. There are situations where no amount of logical discourse can really solve anything. The only option is to take a path that feels right because there are no objective means to classify the situation.
I don’t think this is anything too out there or crazy, this is essentially what Sartre talked about on occasion and he viewed Existentialism as the natural train of though for atheist thinking.
If a religion attempts to make claims that fall within empirical truth then yes science and logic prevail but aside from that I think its a matter of personal opinion as to the validity of it.
July 2nd, 2009 at 8:04 am
@71 shane:
As soon as they gain some political power they must enact laws based on their beliefs because they know The Truth(tm) and because we aren’t able to see The Truth we have to brought kicking and screaming into the fold for our own good. There is no compromise.”
Gosh–that kind of sounds like the Democratic Party and Obama!
I think you have stereotyped Christians with a very broad brush. Here you are responding to Mr. Burkley–where are you getting that “won’t allow live and let live” vibe? Granted, his reasonable comments may not represent what you may be familiar with in your interactions with other Christians, but I don’t see some rabid, intolerant follower of God at all. Perhaps you are not as broad minded as you think.
July 2nd, 2009 at 9:43 am
@ 71
Shane,
I’m getting lots of replies to my message. Thanks for taking the time to reply. Am I “implying that by reading the Xian Bible should have had some sort of moment that would illuminate god’s holy plan or something”? No, I’m not implying that you should but that it would give you information to make a reasoned decision. After all, I did start out with “If you’re content with that surface rejection , fine, but if you wish to dig deeper….” It’s all about the voluntary education journey we’re on. BTW, like the LOTR, too.
In regard to your self-recognized “Slightly OT rant” you do seem to be absolutizing here with a pretty wide brush. I think the fact that most “western democracies have some kind of separation laws in spite of the majority christian desires” shows that perhaps Christians don’t always force people to do it their way.
It seems to me that you also have a sense of “Truth.” Most people here (me included) think that it is not a wise decision to require officially sponsored prayer in public schools. That, I assume, is an outgrowth of the “live and let live” principle you seem to advocate. We think that is “True” and not just an opinion. If you thought your attitude about school prayer was just an opinion then why advocate for it? It’s just an opinion after all. But if you hold it as a truth based on the dignity of human beings and the importance of freedom without coercion (with limits like laws against murder, libel, stealing, etc. – to be decided in the marketplace of society) then you fight for it. Good! We agree. One test of our freedom is how we mediate those conflicting ideas of Truth. You and I both agree that the best way to achieve that mediation is not by dragging the opposition into our corner by force (overt or covert). That’s why I would oppose officially-led school prayer, mandatory or not.
Thanks for promoting the dialog,
–Michael
p.s.: Renée (#72) I’d love to talk more about “Truth” and personal validation of it, but it’s probably not on topic, so alas, I won’t. But thanks for responding to my comments. I was the one who brought it up in the first place! “Mea Culpa!”
p.p.s.: David D. (#73) Thanks for the complement!
July 2nd, 2009 at 2:21 pm
I attended high school in Canada during the late 80’s, and at that time, both the National Anthem and the Lord’s Prayer were played over the PA system every morning. All students were expected to stand in respectful silence while this happened. I was a straight-A honors student who had never been sent to detention, but one day I decided that I was no longer going to stand for the Lord’s Prayer. My homeroom teacher noticed my rebellious moment and asked me why I wasn’t standing. I responded that I wasn’t a Christian, so I felt the Lord’s Prayer didn’t apply to me. I soon found myself in front of a puzzled vice-principal, who noted that I was the last student he ever expected to cause trouble, and told me if I didn’t stand for the Lord’s Prayer, I would get detention.
Bzzzt – wrong move.
I replied that not only would I not stand for the Lord’s Prayer from that day forward, I felt that forcing students to stand for it was religious discrimination, so unless the administration was prepared to consider alternatives, they could expect a call from my lawyer. I didn’t have one – it was a complete bluff – but I knew a Muslim teenager had won a discrimination case in Toronto earlier that year for the same thing (not standing for the Lord’s Prayer), so my 16 year old brain figured I was in a great bargaining position.
I did get detention that day – the only hour of detention I ever spent in high school – but the next day, I was shuffled into the principal’s office, and it was crowded. The vice-principal, the principal, a guidance counsellor, and a guy in a suit who I assumed was a lawyer. Awesome – they were going to intimidate me into conceding. What they didn’t know was that I had gone to the library the previous evening, found the news article about the Muslim kid’s case on microfiche, got a copy of it, and had it nicely folded in my back pocket. They were still a bit off-balance, since I really was the last kid they ever expected to cause trouble. So I told them about the Muslim kid’s case, brought out the news article, and then told them what I wanted.
- The requirement of all students being forced to stand for the Lord’s Prayer must end.
- Instead of having the Lord’s Prayer recited every morning, I suggested a rotating mix of various religious and philosophical writings. One day it could be a passage from the Koran; the next day it could be a poem by Thoreau; the next an excerpt from Plato’s Republic.
To my great surprise, I got what I wanted. I was really only expecting to be given permission to sit during the Lord’s Prayer, but I must have scared the bejesus out of them, because they implemented my suggestions the very next week. Shrewdly, they spun it to their advantage by telling the local paper it was their own idea – I didn’t care, they could take the credit if it meant keeping to their word.
I visited the school a decade later, and I found that what I had started was still going strong; in fact, it had expanded to include famous quotations and passages from favorite books. I learned that one person can make a difference, but it had to be the right person at the right time.
July 2nd, 2009 at 7:00 pm
re 75 Grrbear Says:
Congratulations on making a difference by standing up for yourself and others. I even expect that it helped some to appreciate their prayers more by taking them out of the realm of the routine and expected. Everyone got a bit more education out of it by listening to the other literature as well.
–Michael
July 2nd, 2009 at 7:21 pm
@David D
Michael R. Burkley was entirely reasonable in his comments that is why I said that the my next bit was a “Slightly OT rant”.
I consider myself fairly broadminded. I accept that people have beliefs that do not match mine and I have no problem with people holding those beliefs. I will not accept the imposition of those (religious) beliefs on secular laws and government.
I think we have separation laws to a large extent in spite of Christians. Perhaps a majority of christians are like a majority of people in general in their apathy to such matters and it is only the noisy minority that agitate for change? We have a church here in Oz, Hillsong, that has a political representation far in excess of their numbers for example. The church has a maybe 20000 members but the leaders of the political parties fall over themselves to speak to or gain favour from this church.
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:58 am
Personally, I believe that there should be no place whatsoever for religion in schools. It’s at best inappropriate, and at worst extremely dangerous.
A couple of anecdotes to illustrate the point:
1. In the UK, it’s compulsory for all state schools to teach “Religious Education” – but not compulsory for children to attend them; parents have the right to exempt their children from the lessons. The idea of this is to teach children ABOUT religions, plural – i.e. this is what Christians believe, this is what Muslims believe, etc. – rather than to indoctriniate them in any specific religion.
A friend of mine has a 12-year-old son, who is already a committed atheist. During an RE lesson, his teacher asked the class, “What could we do to make the world a better place?” My friend’s son replied, “Do away with all religions!”
The teacher then reprimanded him in front of the class, and gave him detention! This was completely out of order; it isn’t a teacher’s place to impose her own religious beliefs onto children, and what the lad said was a perfectly valid and reasonable point of view. Surely, any reasonable and impartial teacher would have asked him to explain his comment, and opened it to the class as a point of debate.
2. Many years ago, I had a friend, in his late 20’s at the time, who had been brought up as a Catholic, but had rejected it in his teens, and was, like me, a committed atheist.
We were both naval reservists at the time. Each weekly drill at our unit began with the ceremony of “Divisions” – attendance of which was compulsory – and this included the Chaplain saying prayers. ( This was something to which I strongly objected, as naval regulations specifically state that attendance of religious services is NOT compulsory – but they were effectively making it exactly that. Years later, at another unit which did the same thing, I was responsible for getting the practice changed, as I was simply the one person who thought to protest about it. )
Every time, when the Chaplain said the “Blessing”, my friend would “cross himself”, as Catholics do. Knowing that he was an atheist, I once asked him why; he said, “Every time, as soon as I’ve done it, I think, ‘WHY did I do that?’ – but I can’t help doing it!”
As a young child in the 1960’s, he had been sent to a strict Catholic school, where obedience was literally beaten into him. He had been so brainwashed into the practice of “crossing himself” when a priest said the “Blessing”, that it had become an involuntary reflex, and had left him psycholgically scarred for life.
They had, quite literally, turned him into a human Pavlov dog.