Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
The Nullifidian Volume 2 Number 07
############################################################
############################################################
______
/ / / /
/ /__ __
/ / ) (__
/ / (__(__
__
|\ ( ) ) / /
| \ | / / . _/_ . __ / . __ __
| \ | / / / / ) / ) / / ) __ ) / )
) \| (__(__(___(__(__(___(__(__(__(__(__(__/ (__
===========================================================
*The*E-Zine*of*Atheistic*Secular*Humanism*and*Freethought**
===========================================================
############################################################
###### Volume II, Number 7 ***A Collector's Item!***#####
################### ISSN 1201-0111 #######################
####################### JUL 1995 ###########################
############################################################
nullifidian, n. & a. (Person) having no religious faith or
belief. [f. med. L _nullifidius_ f. L _nullus_ none +
_fides_ faith; see -IAN] Concise Oxford Dictionary
The purpose of this magazine is to provide a source of
articles dealing with many aspects of humanism.
We are ATHEISTIC as we do not believe in the actual
existence of any supernatural beings or any transcendental
reality.
We are SECULAR because the evidence of history and the daily
horrors in the news show the pernicious and destructive
consequences of allowing religions to be involved with
politics or government.
We are HUMANISTS and we focus on what is good for humanity,
in the real world. We will not be put off with offers of
pie in the sky, bye and bye.
Re: navigation.
Search for BEG to find the beginning of the next article.
Search for the first few words of the title as given in the
table of contents to find a specific article. I try to
remember to copy the title from the text and then paste it
into the ToC, so it should be exact. Search for "crass
commercialism:" to see what's for sale. Subscription
information, etc is at the end of the magazine, search for
END OF TEXTS.
############################################################
############################################################
============================================================
/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Book review: The Unredeemed Captive
2. The Necessity of Atheism, by Percy Bysshe Shelley
Part II
3. Short letter from ron.reightler@maf.nasa.gov (Ron
Reightler)
4. When I'm gone Phil Ochs
5. Speech to the Humanist Association of Canada, June 23,
1995, Dr Henry Morgentaler
===========================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===========================================================
Book review: The Unredeemed Captive, A family Story from
Early America, by John Demos, Alfred A Knopf, New York, 1994
ISBN: 0-394-55782-4
This is an illuminating book. I firmly believe that a well
chosen, detailed and narrow focus can often be more
illuminating than a broad examination of everything at once.
This book is an illustration of that truth. It illuminates
Puritan culture, colonial relations between Puritans and
Catholics and between Europeans and Native Americans. The
specifics contradict much of what you may think is true
about these subjects.
The incident which is the focus of the book is an Indian
raid on Deerfield, Massachusetts in 1703. That statement
begins to show our limitations, as one of our faults is to
consider that all Indians were essentially the same. In
fact, each First Nation was unique, although some shared
language and culture.
The raiding party this day was under French command and
consisted of about four dozen French soldiers and officers,
plus 200 allied Indians. The Abenakis were interested in
avenging an earlier English raid which had devastated half a
dozen Abenaki towns. The Hurons and the Kahnawake Mohawks
considered themselves allies of the Abenakis and dependent
allies of the French. Back in Europe, England and France,
and their allies, were fighting over the Spanish Succession,
so this spilled over into the colonial hinterlands. The
English were holding a French prisoner, a privateer known as
Captain Baptiste. The French wanted to take an English
prisoner equally valuable in order to arrange an exchange.
They zeroed in on the Reverend John Williams of Deerfield,
which says something about early 18th century Massachusetts
society.
On the night of Monday, February 28, 1703 the town of
Deerfield went to sleep, worried about the possibilities of
raids, but with no specific knowledge that across the river
a virtual army is waiting to attack. Despite
reinforcements, a palisade, and a watch (apparently asleep),
the town was completely surprised by the attack.
The French achieved their objectives. The Rev. Williams was
captured, much of the town burned. Some townsfolk escaped,
some were left behind. Generally, children and infants who
were not considered likely to survive the forced march were
killed outright. About 39 Deerfield residents were killed,
the attackers lost about 40 killed and 40 wounded. 112
villagers were now captives.
Some of the villagers did not complete the journey. In
particular, John Williams's wife, recently delivered of a
child, (their two youngest were killed during the attack)
could not keep up. "in passing through the abovesaid river,
she fell down and was plunged over head and ears in the
water; after which she travelled not far, for at the foot of
this mountain the cruel and bloodthirsty savage who took her
slew her with his hatchet at one stroke."
Fairly soon, negotiations began. The Massachusetts colony
put up funds for ransoming captives. Many were redeemed
fairly quickly. Where the French authorities had
jurisdiction the negotiations were swift and businesslike.
But to the Puritan's dismay, the French insisted on treating
the savages as allies, and negotiating with them rather than
ordering them to turn over hostages. There is not one
Puritan reference to the Indians as other than "heathen
salvages." As a matter of fact, virtually all of the First
Nations in the area had been converted to Christianity long
since; the problem for the Puritans was that they were
Catholic.
I felt a certain understanding as to why people living with
such life and death uncertainty, as well as having to deal
with the realities of abduction, torture and sudden death,
might find relief in a fantasy world of a caring god and
answered prayers.
As interesting is that, whereas in the first few years, most
captives were glad to return, the longer they stayed with
the Kahnawake Mohawks, the more likely they were to remain
there voluntarily. In particular, women were much more
likely to decide to stay in Kahnawake than were the men.
And specifically, the Unredeemed Captive of the title was
the Reverend Williams' daughter.
Esther Williams had been adopted into the Mohawk nation.
After the passage of years, she was, like any adult Mohawk,
free to go anywhere she wanted. But despite travelling on a
few occasions to visit her Puritan relatives (although by
that time she spoke nothing but Mohawk), she completely
frustrated the people of Massachussetts by firmly and
repeatedly choosing to remain a Mohawk and a Catholic.
In a little sidelight illumination of history, there is a
diary entry (from one of Reverend Williams's sons, who
carried on the family profession) about hearing a powerful
sermon by one Jonathan Edwards. This was one of the first
deliveries of "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." He
liked it.
=========================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
=========================================================
"The time appears to me to have come when it is the duty of
all to make their dissent from religion known."
[John Stuart Mill]
===========================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===========================================================
The Necessity of Atheism, by Percy Bysshe Shelley, part II
ON A FUTURE STATE
It has been the persuasion of an immense majority of
human beings in all ages and nations that we continue to
live after death -- that apparent termination of all the
functions of sensitive and intellectual existence. Nor has
mankind been contented with supposing that species of
existence which some philosophers have asserted; namely, the
resolution of the component parts of the mechanism of a
living being into its elements, and the impossibility of the
minutest particle of these sustaining the smallest
diminution. They have clung to the idea that sensibility and
thought, which they have distinguished from the objects of
it,under the several names of spirit and matter, is, in its
own nature, less susceptible of division and decay, and
that, when the body is resolved into its elements, the
principle which animated it will remain perpetual and
unchanged. Some philosophers -- and those to whom we are
indebted for the most stupendous discoveries in physical
science -- suppose, on the other hand, that intelligence is
the mere result of certain combinations among the particles
of its objects; and those among them who believe that we
live after death, recur to the interposition of a
supernatural power, which shall overcome the tendency
inherent in all material combinations, to dissipate and be
absorbed into other forms.
Let us trace the reasoning which in one and the other
have conducted to these two opinions, and endeavor to
discover what we ought to think on a question of such
momentous interest. Let us analyze the ideas and feelings
which constitute the contending beliefs, and watchfully
establish a discrimination between words and thoughts. Let
us bring the question to the test of experience and fact;
and ask ourselves, considering our nature in its entire
extent, what light we derive from a sustained and
comprehensive view of its component parts, which may enable
us to assert, with certainty,, that we do or do not live
after death.
The examination of this subject requires that it should
be stripped of all those accessory topics which adhere to it
in the common opinion of men. The existence of a God, and a
future state of rewards and punishments are totally foreign
to the subject. If it be proved that the world is ruled by a
Divine Power, no inference necessarily can be drawn from
that circumstance in favor of a future state. It has been
asserted, indeed, that as goodness and justice are to be
numbered among the attributes of the Deity, he will
undoubtedly compensate the virtuous who suffer during life,
and that he will make every sensitive being, who does not
deserve punishment, happy forever. But this view of the
subject, which it would be tedious as well as superfluous to
develop and expose, satisfies no person, and cuts the knot
which we now seek to untie. Moreover, should it be proved,
on the other hand, that the mysterious principle which
regulates the proceedings of the universe, to neither
intelligent nor sensitive, yet it is not an inconsistency to
suppose at the same time, that the animating power survives
the body which it has animated, by laws as independent of
any supernatural agent as those through which it first
became united with it. Nor, if a future state be clearly
proved, does it follow that it will be a state of punishment
or reward.
By the word death, we express that condition in which
natures resembling ourselves apparently cease to be that
which they are. We no longer hear them speak, nor see them
move. If they have sensations and apprehensions, we no
longer participate in them. We know no more than that those
external organs, and all that fine texture of material
frame, without which we have no experience that life or
thought can subsist, are dissolved and scattered abroad. The
body is placed under the earth, and after a certain period
there remains no vestige even of its form. This is that
contemplation of inexhaustible melancholy, whose shadow
eclipses the brightness of the world. The common observer is
struck with dejection of the spectacle. He contends in vain
against the persuasion of the grave, that the dead indeed
cease to be. The corpse at his feet is prophetic of his own
destiny. Those who have preceded him, and whose voice was
delightful to his ear; whose touch met his like sweet and
subtle fire: whose aspect spread a visionary light upon his
path -- these he cannot meet again. The organs of sense are
destroyed, and the intellectual operations dependent on them
have perished with their sources. How can a corpse see or
feel? its eyes are eaten out, and its heart is black and
without motion. What intercourse can two heaps of putrid
Clay and crumbling bones hold together? When you can
discover where the fresh colors of the faded flower abide,
or the music of the broken lyre seek life among the dead.
Such are the anxious and fearful contemplations of the
common observer, though the popular religion often prevents
him from confessing them even to himself.
The natural philosopher, in addition to the sensations
common to all men inspired by the event of death, believes
that he sees with more certainty that it is attended with
the annihilation of sentiment and thought. He observes the
mental powers increase and fade with those of the body, and
even accommodate themselves to the most transitory changes
of our physical nature. Sleep suspends many of the faculties
of the vital and intellectual principle; drunkenness and
disease will either temporarily or permanently derange them.
Madness or idiocy may utterly extinguish the most excellent
and delicate of those powers. In old age the mind gradually
withers; and as it grew and was strengthened with the body,
so does it together with the body sink into decrepitude.
Assuredly these are convincing evidences that so soon as the
organs of the body are subjected to the laws of inanimate
matter, sensation, and perception, and apprehension, are at
an end. It is probable that what we call thought is not an
actual being, but no more than the relation between certain
parts of that infinitely varied mass, of which the rest of
the universe is composed, and which ceases to exist so soon
as those parts change their position with regard to each
other. Thus color, and sound, and taste, and odor exist only
relatively. But let thought be considered only as some
peculiar substance, which permeates, and is the cause of,
the animation of living beings. Why should that substance be
assumed to be something essentially distinct from all
others, and exempt from subjection to those laws from which
no other substance is exempt? It differs, indeed, from all
other substances, as electricity, and light, and magnetism,
and the constituent parts of air and earth, severally differ
from all others. Each of these is subject to change and
decay, and to conversion into other forms. Yet the
difference between light and earth is scarcely greater than
that which exists between life, or thought, and fire. The
difference between the two former was never alleged as an
argument for eternal permanence of either, in that form
under which they first might offer themselves to our notice.
Why should the difference between the two latter substances
be an argument for the prolongation of the existence of one
and not the other, when the existence of both has arrived at
their apparent termination? To say that fire exists without
manifesting any of the properties of fire, such as light,
heat, etc., or that the Principle of life exists without
consciousness, or memory, or desire, or motive, is to
resign, by an awkward distortion of language, the
affirmative of the dispute. To say that the principle of
life may exist in distribution among various forms, is to
assert what cannot be proved to be either true or false, but
which, were it true, annihilates all hope of existence after
death, in any sense in which that event can belong to the
hopes and fears of men. Suppose, however, that the
intellectual and vital principle differs in the most marked
and essential manner from all other known substances; that
they have all some resemblance between themselves which it
in no degree participates. In what manner can this
concession be made an argument for its imperishabillity? All
that we see or know perishes and is changed. Life and
thought differ indeed from everything else. But that it
survives that period, beyond which we have no experience of
its existence, such distinction and dissimilarity affords no
shadow of proof, and nothing but our own desires could have
led us to conjecture or imagine.
Have we existed before birth? It is difficult to
conceive the possibility of this. There is, in the
generative principle of each animal and plant, a power which
converts the substances homogeneous with itself. That is,
the relations between certain elementary particles of matter
undergo a change, and submit to new combinations. For when
we use words: principle, power, cause, etc., we mean to
express no real being, but only to class under those terms a
certain series of coexisting phenomena; but let it be
supposed that this principle is a certain substance which
escapes the observation of the chemist and anatomist. It
certainly may be; thought it is sufficiently unphilosophical
to allege the possibility of an opinion as a proof of its
truth. Does it see, hear, feel, before its combination with
those organs on which sensation depends? Does it reason,
imagine, apprehend, without those ideas which sensation
alone can communicate? If we have not existed before birth;
If, at the period when the parts of our nature on which
thought and life depend, seem to be woven together; If there
are no reasons to suppose that we have existed before that
period at which our existence apparently commences, then
there are no grounds for supposing that we shall continue to
exist after our existence has apparently ceased. So far as
thought and life is concerned, the same will take place with
regard to us, individually considered, after death, as had
taken place before our birth.
It is said that it is possible that we should
continue to exist in some mode totally inconceivable to us
at present. This is a most unreasonable presumption. It
casts on the adherents of annihilation the burden of proving
the negative of a question, the affirmative of which is not
supported by a single argument, and which, by its very
nature, lies beyond the experience of the human
understanding. It is sufficiently easy. indeed, to form any
proposition, concerning which we are ignorant, just not so
absurd as not to be contradictory in itself, and defy
refutation. The possibility of whatever enters into the
wildest imagination to conceive is thus triumphantly
vindicated. But it is enough that such assertions should be
either contradictory to the known laws of nature, or exceed
the limits of our experience, that their fallacy or
irrelevancy to our consideration should be demonstrated.
They persuade, indeed, only those who desire to be
persuaded.
This desire to be forever as we are; the reluctance to
a violent and unexperienced change, which is common to all
the animated and inanimate combinations of the universe, is,
indeed, the secret persuasion which has given birth to the
opinions of a future state.
**** ****
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat
censorship.
**** ****
The Bank of Wisdom is a collection of the most
thoughtful, scholarly and factual books. These computer
books are reprints of suppressed books and will cover
American and world history; the Biographies and writings of
famous persons, and especially of our nations Founding
Fathers. They will include philosophy and religion. all
these subjects, and more, will be made available to the
public in electronic form, easily copied and distributed, so
that America can again become what its Founders intended --
The Free Market-Place of Ideas.
The Bank of Wisdom is always looking for more of these
old, hidden, suppressed and forgotten books that contain
needed facts and information for today. If you have such
books please contact us, we need to give them back to
America.
**** ****
Bank of Wisdom
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
15
=========================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
=========================================================
"Trying to find God is a good deal like looking for money
one has lost in a dream." [Lemuel K. Washburn, _Is The Bible
Worth Reading And Other Essays_]
===========================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===========================================================
Short letter from ron.reightler@maf.nasa.gov (Ron Reightler)
Hello, Mr. Erwin,
I just recently ran across your wonderful magazine on the
internet and I wanted to tell you congratulations on a
terrific job. I have read every word. As an
atheist/humanist I was very pleased to find some good
information that I can use when confronted by the religious
right down here in the DEEP South. I currently live on the
Mississippi Gulf coast where the bible belt is pulled
especially tight.
Although I have been rather frank about my philosophical
leanings over the years, I have only found one other person
who can relate to the humanist way of life. All others are
steeped in religion to some extent or another... . Do you
know of any humanist/atheist groups in the south Mississippi
or south Louisiana area? It would be a pleasure to be able
to associate with some like minded individuals for a change.
I would be surprised if there are any, but I figure I'd ask.
Thank you for any information you can supply. I can be
reached by e-mail at:
ron.reightler@maf.nasa.gov
Again, thank you and keep the Nullifidian in publication.
The public needs this valuable resource.
Ron Reightler
Comment: I did send some phone numbers and addresses of
what looked like contacts, but if anybody else knows some,
contact our friend, as well.
This kind of thing validates the psychological lab finding
that partial reinforcement is often the strongest and most
lasting behaviour modifier. If I get a letter every few
months like this one, it's all I need to keep going.
--Greg
=========================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
=========================================================
They were allowed to stay there on one condition, and that
is that they didn't eat of the tree of knowledge. That has
been the condition of the Christian church from then until
now. They haven't eaten as yet, as a rule they do not. --
Clarence Darrow
===========================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===========================================================
When I'm gone Phil Ochs
There's no place in this world where I'll belong
When I'm gone
And I won't know the right from the wrong
When I'm gone
And you won't find me singing on this song
When I'm gone
So I guess I'll have to do it while I'm here.
And I won't feel the flowing of the time
When I'm gone
And all the pleasures of lovin will not be mine
When I'm gone
My pen won't pour a lyric line
When I'm gone
So I guess I'll have to do it while I'm here.
And I won't breathe the bracin air
When I'm gone
And I can't even worry bout my cares
When I'm gone
I won't be asked to do my share
When I'm gone
So I guess I'll have to do it while I'm here.
All my days won't be dances of delight
When I'm gone
And all the sands will be shifting from my sight
When I'm gone
Can't add my name into the fight
When I'm gone
So I guess I'll have to do it while I'm here.
And I won't be runnin from the rain
When I'm gone
And I can't even suffer from the pain
When I'm gone
I can't say who's to praise and who's to blame
When I'm gone
So I guess I'll have to do it while I'm here.
And I won't be laughing at the lies
When I'm gone
And I can't question how or where or why
When I'm gone
I can't live proud enough to die
When I'm gone
So I guess I'll have to do it while I'm here.
There's no place in this world where I'll belong
When I'm gone
And I won't know the right from the wrong
When I'm gone
And you won't find me singing on this song
When I'm gone
So I guess I'll have to do it while I'm here.
--Words and Music by Phil Ochs (c) On the "Requiem" album
(out of print) also, done by Kristin Lem available from the
Freedom From Religion Foundation in Madison, WI.
=========================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
=========================================================
"Everywhere in the world there are ignorance and prejudice,
but the greatest complex of these, with the most extensive
prestige and the most intimate entanglement with traditional
institutions, is the Roman Catholic Church.." [H.G. Wells]
===========================================================
|| BEGINNING OF ARTICLE ||
===========================================================
Speech to the Humanist Association of Canada, June 23, 1995,
Dr Henry Morgentaler
When I was invited to give the opening address to this
meeting of H.A.C. I accepted with alacrity. Only later did
I realize the enormous size of the task, but consoled myself
that I need only to collect a few pearls of wisdom and
present them in an acceptable form to my fellow Humanists in
a personal way to express some of the ideas and values I
have been immersed in over a lifetime.
I believe Humanism to be a philosophy of life or a
lifestance which is meaningful, positive and relevant to our
present-day knowledge of ourselves and the world and as a
framework of values to live by. It is a philosophy based on
reality as perceived through our knowledge based on the
scientific method and all of the information resulting from
it. It permits us to transcend that reality by the
realization of the enormous potential of humankind to be
creative and to use this creativity to build a meaningful
life for ourselves and society.
It is clear to all those present here that Humanism is more
than the absence of faith in the supernatural. To be an
agnostic or an atheist only means that one does not believe
in God or one does not know if God exists. Obviously, in a
society where children are still brought up to believe in
God and punished or ostracized if they express doubts or use
their intelligence to ask probing questions, it is a process
of liberation to throw away a system of beliefs not based on
anything else but superstition, immaturity and a need to
have a powerful father-figure (or mother-figure) in Heaven
who will take care of us and protect us against the
inevitable vicissitudes and dangers of life.
In fact, what I reproach most (among many other things)
about organized religion is that children are deprived of
the full use of their intelligence when they are
indoctrinated into particular beliefs, when they are
forbidden to ask probing questions or when they are given
answers that do not make sense to them. So, to reiterate:
to be an agnostic or an atheist is a tremendous step forward
for someone who has been brought up indoctrinated into a
particular religion, and may be a tremendous step forward in
personal development and in self-affirmation. However, it
is not enough. I think it is a first step towards becoming
a Humanist. The fact that I do not believe in God does not
provide meaning to my life nor does it give me any ethical
guidelines. We therefore need not only a good grounding in
the scientific method and the adoption of an attitude of
sceptical inquiry ("prove it") but also a framework of
positive values which when practiced should have meaningful
consequences in our personal lives and in the community at
large.
Much has been written already about this. We have seen many
Humanist manifestos, with declarations of Humanist values
appropriate to our times. They are remarkable documents and
my be a source of information and inspiration. But just to
read them is not enough. They have to be acted upon in
order to have value in our lives.
The same of Humanist ethics. We have a certain number of
wonderful edicts and definitions of Humanist ethics. The
ones that come to my mind immediately are:
Bertrand Russell: "The good life is based on love guided by
reason."
Erich Fromm: "What is good is what increases human power,
what is bad is what decreases human power." power in the
sense of human potential to realize fully its possibilities
to become mature and productive and be able to relate well
to others and the universe. Or the Golden Rule: Do not do
unto others what you would not like them to do to you.
Humanists know that life after death is an illusion
propagated by some religions without any evidence to support
it. Consequently we know that this life is the only one we
have and that it is subject to illness, handicap, loss and
death. Humanists therefore have to figure out how to live
life well, how to make it meaningful and enjoyable, how to
live as fully as possible in spite of whatever handicaps are
imposed on us by society, in spite of accidents of birth or
illness or loss of loved ones. We do not deny that tragedy
and loss exist; we accept the tragic dimension of life which
can not be avoided, but we must aim towards the FULLNESS OF
LIFE.
HUMANISM AIMS AT THE FULLEST REALIZATION OF HUMAN POTENTIAL
Easy to say -- hard to do!
Each one of us was born with a certain genetic potential,
into a family which was more or less functional, into an
environment over which we had no control, subject to
maternal and paternal influences which may have created and
shaped our personality, further influenced by particular
religions or dogmas, habits or beliefs, and subject to
accidents, of loss of parents at an early age or other
traumatic experiences.
We know from data from psychology that all these factors
have a profound and determining influence on our
personality, especially with in the first few years of
childhood when fundamental attitudes are laid down which may
last a lifetime. Take the attachment theory of Winnicott
and Guntrip which emphasizes then quality of mothering a
baby receives, the attachment to the motherfigure and the
love and the nurturing the baby is offered. It is clear
that babies and children who are wanted, desired and offered
love, affection and good nurturing are more likely to grow
up emotionally stable and able to relate well, and mature to
become responsible members of the community. Whereas babies
and children not given good nurturing or abused or cruelly
treated might grow up neurotic, enraged or handicapped in
their emotional development. Much of modern psychology
stresses the importance and the effect that the quality of
nurturing a baby and a child receives, has on its future
personality development. Notable among the psychologists
who have described the bad effects of poor nurturing or
cruelty or abuse is Alice Miller, as Swiss analyst, who has
written a number of books on the subject which I highly
recommend to anyone interested in the development of the
human personality.
Alice Miller describes how harmful ideas from Western
religion have over the years played havoc with the
development of children. She also explores the concept of
"original sin," the idea that every person born is tainted
with this affliction and that therefore babies are born
"wicked and bad," and that it is up to parents and the
educational system to inculcate virtue into them and keep
them on the narrow virtuous path. Alice Miller points out
how religious educators in Western Europe advocated corporal
punishment and strict disciplining for every transgression
made by a child. The result was that children would be
deprived early of every ounce of spontaneity and joy and
made into obedient robots to any authority, be it parental,
ecclesiastic or of the state.
Nowhere was this practiced more vigorously than in Germany
and it is no wonder that many of Alice Miler's books have
not found publishers in Germany. What she claims is that
the natural spontaneity of the child, when repressed and
stifled, becomes an inner rage that is unconscious and
usually finds expression in later life in acts of aggression
or hate against whatever target is at hand, in abuse of
children or women or minorities. This kind of unconscious
rage present in too many people can easily be mobilized
against national or religious minorities.
It is no wonder that Adolf Hitler could mobilize so much
hatred against the Jews in Germany and use his power and
willing accomplices in his country to destroy every Jewish
man, woman and child his sadistic hordes could find in all
the countries he had overrun.
Alice Miller, in the book "For Your Own Good" has a
biography of Hitler which I believe explains best his
homicidal mania. Hitler was an abused child. His father
used to beat him mercilessly. His rage against his father,
which could not be expressed in the culture of his time, was
diverted to hatred of all Jews. Hitler easily discovered
that hatred of Jews was politically wise and could tap into
the collective hatred of Jews in Germany and all across
Europe where 2,000 years of Christian vilification of Jews
had created a climate where Hitler's diatribes found fertile
ground.
Jews throughout the Christian era were the main religious
dissenters. As such they were often persecuted and used as
scapegoats for whatever went wrong, whether it was the
plague or an epidemic, or famine due to a bad harvest or
exorbitant taxes by feudal landlords. The Christian hatred
of the Jews is based not only on the fact that Jews had
resisted the blandishments of the new religion to convert.
It was also based on deliberate slander of a Jewish
conspiracy in the crucifixion of Jesus.
For a logical person it is hard to understand why the events
of the crucifixion and the supposed resurrection of Jesus --
which are the cornerstone of the Christian religion and
manifestly willed by God the Father who presumably gave his
son Jesus to the people of the world to atone for
everybody's sins for generations to come -- why should
Jewish people be blamed for events that brought about this
sacrifice and its religious meaning since presumably God
directed the whole show?
The main Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke
and John were written 30 to 110 years after the presumed
birth of Jesus. In the Roman Empire where Christians wanted
to convert Romans to their faith, it became expedient
politically to blame the Jews for what happened to Jesus,
not the Roman Governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, who thought
that Jesus was a rebel against Roman rule and condemned him
to be crucified as such, the preferred Roman brutal
punishment to be meted out to criminals and rebels.
When the Gospels were written and propagated it was
necessary for Christians who adopted much from the Jewish
religion to dissociate themselves from the Jews who had
risen up against the Romans in bloody rebellion a few times
and were mercilessly crushed. Thus, it was politically wise
for Christians to denigrate Jews and to show Romans that
they were in no way associated with rebels against Roman
power. The anti-semitic passages in the Bible have been
used for two millennia to fuel hatred against Jews as
Christ-killers, people who could be singled out as
scapegoats for whatever miseries the population suffered.
I have always been fascinated by the influence on our lives
by events that happened a long time ago, before we were even
born. As a Jewish boy who grew up in Poland I experienced
myself the ravages of anti-semitism propagated by the Polish
Catholic church.
On my way home from school occasionally I was surrounded and
beaten by Polish boys who would accuse me of having killed
Christ. To this day this accusation is still hurled against
Jews. Up to 1946 French-Canadian Catholic texts for
children referred to Jews as a "deicidistic" people (God-
killing). I believe that without this kind of hate
propaganda against Jews by the Catholic church and some
Protestant churches (Martin Luther was similarly anti-
semitic) the Holocaust would have met much more resistance
among the people who had become accomplices to this
wholesale organized and methodical genocide.
Let's get back for a moment to the upbringing of children
and what we know about it and draw some conclusions. For a
child to grow up well, to fully develop its potential, to
mature, to use his or her intelligence, to relate well to
others, to be able to love and develop friendships, to work
constructively, it is necessary that such a child be given
good nurturing, be given love and affection, and a good home
and respect for him or her individuality. It sounds like
ideal conditions and maybe it is beyond the capabilities of
most parents nowadays to provide all that. However, even if
not all of these conditions exist, it would be better than
the opposite, a child that is rejected or abused or cruelly
treated. Hitler is not the only example. Stalin was also
an abused and beaten child. What they both had in common
(in spite of ideological differences) was that they did not
care for others; they had no compassion for the millions of
people for whose death and suffering they were responsible.
This lack of compassion for others is true of many people
who have been victims of abuse. After a certain amount of
time being subjected to abuse, they thirst for revenge
against society, or somebody they eventually come to blame
for all the cruelty they have had to suffer themselves.
When I was in jail about 20 years ago I received a letter
from a warden of an American prison. In it he wrote an
interesting analysis of the criminals he had watched for
over 30 years. He said that what distinguished them from
the general population is that they had lost the capacity to
care for others and even for themselves.
It is clear that if we want a better society it is important
that we have more persons who are caring and responsible.
It is therefore not accidental or fortuitous that Humanists
have been active and sometimes in the forefront of the
battle for responsible parenthood, family planning and the
rights of women to abortion. It is not only because we want
women to be able to utilize their potential as full human
beings and not be slaves to their reproductive capabilities;
not to be victims of illegal, clandestine or self-induced
abortions; we want to give them and the men in their lives
the means to plan their childbearing at a time when they can
provide the best care for their children. Such care should
be there not only in the sense of providing the material
comforts of shelter, food and education, but also the
emotional sustenance of love and affection which every child
needs for its development.
It is as a result of my Humanist convictions that I
undertook the fight for legalized abortion in Canada in the
name of the Humanist movement. Now that we have
accomplished enormous gains in Canada for women's right to
safe, legal abortion and to access to such across the
country, it is proper to acknowledge the contribution of the
Humanist movement towards achieving this goal.
Women no longer die of clandestine abortions in Canada.
Medical abortions have become the safest surgical procedure.
Maternal mortality has become one of the lowest in the world
at around 10 per 100,000 deliveries, and neonatal mortality
is also one of the lowest in the world at 6 per 100,000.
women in Canada no longer have to live in fear of unwanted
pregnancies or of the consequences of illegal abortion. All
these are real and great accomplishments. However, they are
in danger of being eroded by a virulent opposition coming
mainly from traditional fundamentalist religions.
And here we have an issue that is clearly showing the
difference between a Humanist attitude or Humanist
philosophy of life, and that of traditional religions,
notably the Catholic church.
Humanists care for the welfare of people and are willing to
base their positions on real knowledge of the facts. They
can draw conclusions from these and can adopt positions
which seem reasonable and would promote the welfare and
well-being of people and permit them to utilize their full
potential. The Catholic church, while professing high
ideals of brotherly love, is so bound up in dogma and
tradition that is has taken positions that are harmful to
millions of people. The Catholic church has been in the
forefront in the battle against legal abortion and effective
contraception across the world. Only recently the Pope came
out with a new encyclical "the Gospel of Life" which harshly
condemns abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide. I just
recently read this encyclical. It is interesting reading
for a Humanist. The Pope bases his authority on the
mythical Jesus (who never spoke out against abortion) and on
biblical texts which by no means are specifically condemning
abortion. He is not embarrassed by facts. According to the
WHO, 100,000 to 200,000 women die every year in the world as
a result of botched, illegal or self-induced abortions. The
Pope is not swayed by this. He does not even mention it.
While he admits that some women choose abortion because of
difficulties in their life, this does not seem to be enough
of a justification for their choice. He talks of "taking
innocent human life" and the sanctity of human life from
conception on as if an undifferentiated embryo could be
considered already a child. He talks about abortion as
murder and urges his followers to practice conscientious
objection to abortion. While he does not advocate violence
to stop abortion, he does not explicitly condemn it either.
He continues to create a climate of opinion where,
unfortunately, continued violence against abortion providers
may be with us for quite some time. He has strengthened the
hand of those fundamentalists and given moral legitimacy to
religious fanatics like Randall Terry whose slogan is "If
you think it is murder, act as if it is."
The Pope declares that even when democratically elected
Governments declare abortion legal this is not valid because
it goes against the law of God as interpreted by him in his
capacity as religious leader of all Catholics. We have here
a good example of how dogma and tradition are harmful to the
well-being of humanity. Nowhere in his encyclical does the
Pope mention the dangers of overpopulation, such as
pollution of the environment, increasing conflicts about
resources resulting in wars or massacres etc.... He even
mentions the Biblical injunction "be fruitful and multiply"
with apparent approval as if such a recommendation valid
maybe 3,000 years ago when life was precarious and short is
still valid nowadays with an ever increasing world
population, famine, poverty and social dislocation.
Equally unforgiving and unrelenting is the Pope towards
euthanasia or assisted suicide. For a Humanist the problem
is quite clear. People who are suffering greatly from an
incurable illness and wish to die with dignity should have
the right to do so. Those who are unable to do so should be
able to be assisted by doctors or others if they express
such a wish. Most reasonable people, I think, would agree
provided certain safeguards are put in place to eliminate
the possibility of abuse. However, in the Pope's opinion,
God gives life and therefore only God can take it away, even
if some people have to suffer horribly for a long time
against their own will.
The Pope had identified what he calls the "Culture of Death"
in our society, referring to abortion and euthanasia. I
think he is completely mistaken and is using this as a well-
sounding slogan for his reactionary policies. In fact, the
"Culture of Death" has existed for centuries as a result of
religious conflicts and religious persecutions and the
Catholic church has been one of the main culprits and
perpetrators. Remember the Holy Inquisition? How many
millions of people died as heretics to the only faith? How
many millions of women were burned in Europe as witches,
condemned by the Inquisition? How many people died in the
terrible religious wars that ravaged Europe for centuries?
How about the Albigensians who were put to death, men, women
and children, in order to save their souls and to preserve
the purity of dogma of the holy Catholic church? It seems
that the Holy Father has forgotten these shameful incidents
of death inflicted in the name of his religion. How dare he
talk about a "Culture of Death" when the aim of safe, legal
medical abortion is to protect the lives of women? How dare
he pass in silence the hundreds of thousands of women who
are victims of laws against abortion enacted at the
insistence of his own church in many countries!!
Against the so-called "Culture of Death" the Pope proposes a
"Culture of Life." What does he mean by that? He means
that if a woman gets pregnant, regardless of the
circumstances, she has to continue with that pregnancy. It
does not matter whether she is too young, too old, too sick,
too emotionally distraught or simply unwilling to become a
mother at the time. She has to, against, her will, continue
with her pregnancy. Here is a recipe for reproductive
bondage for women, for being enslaved and at the mercy of a
biological accident of sexual activity even when it was not
engaged in for the purpose of procreation.
Fortunately for all of us, Catholic doctrine is in decline
among the more educated Catholics around the world and not
many Catholics in Canada, the United States or Europe follow
the Pope's edicts on sexuality, abortion or other ethical
issues. I would venture to say that an enormous gulf has
developed between the edicts of the Vatican and its
conservative agenda and the majority of Catholics, and that
the evolution of humankind does not favour the Vatican.
Unfortunately the solution to many world problems might be
delayed or temporarily scuttled by the attitude of the
official Catholic church.
Indeed it is the revival of fundamentalism in other
religions which is equally dangerous to the world at the
present time, e.g. fundamentalist Muslims with their
oppression of women and of free thought, fundamentalist Jews
in Israel who are the main obstacle to a peaceful settlement
in the conflict with the Palestinians. In the Western world
where we live, we have achieved a great deal of tolerance
for differences of religion, philosophy and lifestyle. We
as Humanists should strive to maintain an open society with
freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and freedom from
religion. We might have to work with liberal minded
religious people to maintain and protect civil liberties
against those fundamentalist who would like to impose their
values on the whole community by laws or state interaction.
In Canada we have achieved a lot but much remains to be
done. It is a travesty of justice and an anachronism that
to this day in Canada, in Quebec and Ontario, the State
favours one religion over all the others by providing a
Catholic school system out of general taxation. To this day
religious institutions are exempt from paying taxes even
when they engage in business activities with possible
profit.
Dr. Wendell Watters in his remarkable book, _Deadly
Doctrine_ has documented well the harmful effects of
religion on the emotional development of children and the
lasting harmful effects on individuals and society. We have
seen examples of wrong-doing by religious institutions
against native people in residential schools. The time has
come to call for taxation of all the churches and religious
institutions. People who wish to practice their religion or
philosophy should obviously be allowed to do so as their
democratic right, but without being subsidized by the state
and by people who do not share their dogmas or beliefs.
Humanists should be in the forefront of a campaign to better
the educational system, to remove from it authoritarianism
and learning by rote and to encourage the teaching of the
scientific method and the principle of free inquiry.
There are many issues that Humanists can adopt as worthwhile
in order to contribute to a better, more free and more
tolerant society. We need to get better organized and to
spread our message more widely. We have important things to
say and we should be able to say them. Our voice should be
heard.
As for our personal lives we should all try to do our best
to enjoy them as much as possible, to the best of our
abilities and to lead constructive lives. Many of us may
have difficulties in our personal lives due to past traumas,
immaturities remaining from childhood or tragic experiences.
I think it would be important and worthwhile to create
communities of Humanist fellowship or friendship circles
which would provide fellowship and community in a society
where many people feel isolated, especially if they are non-
believers and do not necessarily follow the crowd.
Finally, I want to say a word about spirituality. Yes, this
is the only life we have. Humanist spirituality to me means
the full enjoyment of this life, the shared communion with
others in love and joy. Let us give to each other the love
we are capable of instead of reserving it for some illusory
Deity which does not exist or a mythical Jesus or other such
idol. We have to find meaning in this life, and possibly
transcendence in working for a good cause with other people.
=========================================================
|| END OF ARTICLE ||
=========================================================
'...the Bible as we have it contains elements that are
scientifically incorrect or even morally repugnant. No
amount of "explaining away" can convince us that such
passages are the product of Divine Wisdom.'
-- Bernard J. Bamberger, _The Story of Judaism_
==========================================================
|| END OF TEXTS ||
==========================================================
Atheism is the world of reality, it is reason, it is
freedom, Atheism is human concern, and intellectual honesty
to a degree that the religious mind cannot begin to
understand. And yet it is more than this. Atheism is not an
old religion, it is not a new and coming religion, in fact
it is not, and never has been, a religion at all. The
definition of Atheism is magnificent in its simplicity:
Atheism is merely the bed-rock of sanity in a world of
madness.
ATHEISM: An Affirmative View, by Emmett F. Fields
=><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><==
|| Begging portion of the Zine ||
==><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><==
There is no charge for receiving this, and there is no
charge for distributing copies to any electronic medium.
Nor is there a restriction on printing a copy for use in
discussion. You may not charge to do so, and you may not do
so without attributing it to the proper author and source.
If you would like to support our efforts, and help us
acquire better equipment to bring you more and better
articles, you may send money to Greg Erwin at: 100,
Terrasse Eardley / Aylmer, Qc / J9H 6B5 / CANADA. Or buy
our atheist quote address labels, and other fine products,
see "Shameless advertising and crass commercialism" below.
=><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><=
|| End of Begging portion of the Zine ||
=><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><====><=
Articles will be welcomed and very likely used IF:
(
they are emailed to:
((ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA; or,
godfree@magi.com), or
sent on diskette to me at the above Aylmer address in
any format that an IBM copy of WordPerfect can read;
) and
they don't require huge amounts of editing; and
I like them.
I will gladly reprint articles from your magazine, local
group's newsletter, or original material. There are
currently about 140 subscribers, plus each issue is posted
in some newsgroups and is archived as noted elsewhere.
If you wish to receive a subscription, email a simple
request to either address, with a clear request
for a subscription. It will be assumed that the "Reply
to:" address is where it is to be sent.
We will automate this process as soon as we know how.
Yes, please DO make copies! (*)
Please DO send copies of The Nullifidian to anyone who might
be interested.
The only limitations are:
At least clearly indicate the source, and how to subscribe.
You do NOT have permission to copy this document for
commercial purposes.
The contents of this document are copyright (c) 1995, Greg
Erwin (insofar as possible) and are on deposit at the
National Library of Canada
You may find back issues in any place that archives
alt.atheism. Currently, all back issues are posted at
the Humanist Association of Ottawa's area on the National
Capital Freenet. telnet to 134.117.1.22, and enter <go
humanism> at the "Your choice==>" prompt.
ARCHIVES
Arrangements have been made with etext at umich. ftp to
etext.umich.edu directory Nullifidian or lucifers-echo.
For America On-Line subscribers:
To access the Freethought Forum on America Online enter
keyword "Capital", scroll down until you find Freethought
Forum, double click and you're there. Double click "Files &
Truth Seeker Articles" and scroll until you find Nullifidian
files. Double click the file name and a window will open
giving you the opportunity to display a description of the
file or download the file.
And thanks to the people at the _Truth Seeker_, who edited,
formatted and uploaded the articles to the aol area.
/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\
Shameless advertising and crass commercialism:
\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/
Atheistic self-stick Avery(tm) address labels. Consisting
of 210 different quotes, 30 per page, each label 2 5/8" x
1". This leaves three 49 character lines available for your
own address, phone number, email, fax or whatever. Each
sheet is US$2, the entire set of 7 for US$13; 2 sets for
US$20. Indicate quantity desired. Print address clearly,
exactly as desired. Order from address in examples below.
Laser printed, 8 pt Arial, with occasional flourishes.
[NOT ACTUAL SIZE]
<-------------------2 5/8"---------------------->
_________________________________________________
|"Reality is that which, when you stop believing |/\
|in it, doesn't go away." [Philip K. Dick] | |
|Greg Erwin 100 Terrasse Eardley | 1"
|Aylmer, Qc J9H 6B5 Canada | |
| email: ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA | |
|________________________________________________|\/
_________________________________________________
|"...and when you tell me that your deity made |
|you in his own image, I reply that he must be |
|very ugly." [Victor Hugo, writing to clergy] |
|Greg Erwin 100 Terrasse Eardley |
|Aylmer, Qc J9H 6B5 Canada Ph: (613) 954-6128 |
| email: ai815@FreeNet.Carleton.CA |
|________________________________________________|
Other quote in between the articles are usually part of the
label quote file. Occasionally I throw in one that is too
long for a label, but which should be shared.
Other stuff for sale:
Certificate of Baptism Removal and Renunciation of Religion.
Have your baptism removed, renounce religion, and have a
neat 8" x 11" fancy certificate, on luxury paper, suitable
for framing, to commemorate the event! Instant eligibility
for excommunication! For the already baptism-free:
Certificate of Freedom from Religion. An official atheistic
secular humanist stamp of approval for only $10! Pamphlet on
"how to get excommunicated" included FREE with purchase.
Poster 8x11: WARNING! This is a religion free zone!
All religious vows, codes, and commitments are null & void
herein. Please refrain from contaminating the ideosphere
with harmful memes through prayer, reverence, holy books,
proselytizing, prophesying, faith, speaking in tongues or
spirituality. Fight the menace of second-hand faith!
Humanity sincerely thanks you!
Tastefully arranged in large point Stencil on luxury paper.
Order from the same address as above.
/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\_/=\/=\
============================================================
Neat books available from H.H. Waldo, Bookseller! Books by
Ingersoll! Heston's 19th Century Freethought Cartoons!
Holy Horrors, An Illustrated History of Religious Murder and
Madness, by James A. Haught..........................$21.95
Christian Science, by Mark Twain.....................$15.95
(reprint of original attack)
Deadly Doctrine, by Wendell W. Watters, MD...........$27.50
(Psychological damage caused by Christianity)
Leaving the Fold, Testimonies of Former
Fundamentalists, by Edward Babinski..................$32.50
and many, many more. Ever changing inventory. Friendly
letters and news from Robb Marks, Proprietor.
add $2 postage/handling for first book & 0.50 for each
additional book. (All prices US$)
Send 2 first class stamps for H.H. Waldo's current catalog.
(Use international reply coupon, or get hold of US Stamps)
TO:
H.H Waldo, Bookseller
P.O. Box 350
Rockton, IL 61072
or phone 1-800-66WALDO !!!
tell 'im: "that nullifidian guy sent me!"
Once again: ISSN: 1201-0111 The Nullifidian Volume Two,
Number 7: JULY 1995.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The problem with religions that have all the answers is that
they don't let you ask the questions.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
(*) There is no footnote, and certainly not an endnote.
--
-- Greg Erwin, vice president, Humanist Association of Canada.
'I saw a person wearing a T-shirt that said "Question Authority", so I said
to him, "Who are *you* to tell *me* what to do?"' --Marshall Deutsch
