Don Ardell's Wellness Perspectives on Sex, Religion & Politics

House Concurrent Resolution 131 (H. Con. Res.131) directs the Architect of the Capitol to engrave the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and the national motto of "In God We Trust" in the Capitol Visitor Center. This is estimated to cost the taxpayers around $100,000. According to its Web site, the current mission of the Visitor Center at the U.S. Capitol is to provide "a welcoming and educational environment for visitors to learn about the unique characteristics of the House and the Senate and the legislative process as well as the history and development of the architecture and art of the U.S. Capitol. Like the words carved in marble in the Visitor Center's Exhibition Hall, 'Out of Many, One,' the visitor experience will be an intellectual and emotional encounter . . . that will inform and inspire those who come to see the U.S. Capitol." H. Con. Res. 131 would pollute that experience with a divisive agenda having nothing to do with the values enshrined by our Founders in the Constitution. The Pledge of Allegiance and the original national motto, E Pluribus Unum ("out of many, one") were unnecessarily altered during the 1950s in an ill-conceived effort to make religious minorities feel like outsiders to the national community. "Do we really need to spend another $100,000 to present a distorted image of America’s secular heritage?”  All Americans, including the non-religious, have a right and obligation to participate fully in our nation’s politics.  Both phrases represent an unmistakable attempt to confuse religious belief with patriotism, and exclude the non-religious from public life. This bill is a distraction from the important agenda facing Congress and the American people. Instead of devoting time to divisive and unnecessary political posturing, Congress ought to focus its energy on the myriad pressing issues facing the nation, from health care to global warming. Please urge your representatives in Congress to vote no on H. Con. Res. 131. REAL wellness flourishes best, in my view, in a secular democracy, not a theocracy. Thus, when the pious cross the church/state lines of separation, it's the duty of all citizens to speak out in support of protect one from the other.

Why America Should Support A Gay Agenda To Help China Resolve An Unprecedented Demographic Crisis

If we read in the annals of China that several thousand years ago, five thousand people were fed on one sandwich, and that several sandwiches were left over after the feast, there are few intelligent men who would credit the statement. But many intelligent people, reading a like story in Hebrew, or in Greek, or in a mistranslation from either of those languages, accept the story without a doubt.

Robert G. Ingersoll, Myth and Miracle, 1885

If we today exhibit the same skepticism toward news out of China as Ingersoll credited to the men and women of his time regarding a certain miracle account, we will readily dismiss a news item about China concerning gender imbalance. However, unlike the mind-boggling claims for multiplying  fish sandwiches from Hebrew and Greek sources, the tale I’m about to reveal is quite demonstrably true. After all, it appeared not as an urban legend e-mail, but as a front-page story in the Wall Street Journal!  (See Mei Fong, "It's Cold Cash, Not Cold Feet, Motivating Runaway Brides in China," Wall Street Journal, June 5, 2009, A1.)

Here is the basic story. According to Mr. Fong, an Asian sector reporter for the WSJ, there are 32 million more males under the age of 20 in China than females. A large number are in or near marrying age. The guys are looking around and finding slim pickings. The figures reported are based upon the 2005 China census, and were published in the May edition of the British Journal of Medicine. What this means is that a horny young male surplus approximately the size of Canada's entire population is getting mighty restless, and cold showers can only go so far in relieving tensions, if you get my drift. These people are thinking about their future and their families are adding to the pressure by asking questions, such as “Why don’t you find yourself a mate? Are you planning on living at home forever?”

In short, a gender crisis due to the country’s Draconian 30-year one-child policy has created a serious problem, one that adds to the nation’s many other problems. (These include but are not limited to an impending nationwide water shortage, high unemployment due to mass migrations from rural to urban centers, poor grain production, wide income gaps, excessive energy consumption, wasting of natural resources and environmental pollution—plus the fact that the government remains a totalitarian dictatorship blocking personal freedoms and abusing human rights.) The population control policy, combined with the fact that cultural norms in China highly valued male babies, created the disastrous social perturbation now tormenting young Chinese males.

So, what is China to do?

Before offering my gay agenda solution, I should mention that a new profession has opened up for ethically-challenged young women—that of bride for a week or so. It seems that the traditional dowry paid by the groom’s family has skyrocketed in value. The going rate for a bride is now about $5,500—that’s 38,000 yuan, enough to lure cartels of bride traders into existence to prey on the smitten husband marks.

The solution is to go around the predatory females. This is simple enough if the Chinese are willing to overcome their prejudice against homosexuality. All they have to do is embrace what the Family Research Council in this country has called “the hidden gay agenda” since 1992. Others, such as U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (in a dissent in “Lawrence v. Texas”), call this nefarious conspiracy simply as “the homosexual agenda.” Either way or some other way (term), this entails (among other things) “eliminating the moral opprobrium traditionally associated with homosexual conduct.” Well, I’m all in favor of that—who needs opprobrium associated with anything involving people engaging in whatever it is they want to engage in that is no business of others, and that affects none other? That seems like a good thing to me. If the Chinese males can find happiness among themselves without any of that opprobrium nastiness following them around, well, who could object? Does China have a population of Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson/James Dobson/Rick Warren troglodyte types?

Other goals that our own Christian Right attribute to this nefarious agenda are universal acceptance of the gay lifestyle, discrediting of scriptures that condemn homosexuality, muzzling of the clergy and Christian media, indoctrinating children and future generations through public education and securing all the legal benefits of marriage for any two or more people who claim to have homosexual tendencies. I think all of these agenda items are highly desirable. Don’t Christian and other sectarian schools indoctrinate children? If the gays want to have a go at trying to do what religions have always and continue to do, well, that seems fair enough. I certainly favor an agenda, gay or otherwise, in this country, China and elsewhere, that seeks to
promote acceptance of any lifestyle one chooses—that’s the kind of thing you expect in a free society. I definitely favor discrediting of scriptures that condemn homosexuality and I would love to muzzle violations of church/state separation by the clergy and Christian media. Finally, I want everyone to have the kind of equal rights that are enshrined in our own Constitution, including the young males (and those two-timing, absconding young females) in China. 

These supposed scary aspects of the boogeyman “gay agenda” sound pretty good to me, and I’m not even gay, not that there’s anything wrong with that, as we learned watching Seinfeld a few years ago.

So, my Well Infidel recommendation to Chinese youth: Consider switching teams. After a while, those inflated dowries will come down in cost and the brides may decide to stick around, if there are any young Chinese males still interested in them.

Be well.

Let's Offer Education In The Fundamentals of Reason As A Focus Of Foreign Aid

Americans believe many foolish things, and are in no position to urge people in other nations to think sensibly, develop respect for and a basic understanding of science and avoid grotesque forms of superstition. But, we should do it anyway, at least with respect to the beliefs and practices of many tribes that inhabit the continent of Africa. This is so important it should be a focus of our foreign aid offerings.

I believe our president, as he prepares to leave America for a visit to Africa, should address these issues as part of the continuing war on religious extremists who terrorize and destroy. American foreign aid should be used to promote reason as part of assisting the poor in backward nations to become better humans.

Much of reason education could advance common decencies and secular ethics. We should offer substantive alternatives to those who, caught up in centuries of extreme ignorance, engage in and tolerate atrocities occasioned by belief in witchcraft, superstition, and malevolent magic. Such cultural norms continue to block social and economic progress throughout the African continent.

American foreign aid can counter and help dispel these tragic African cultural practices with social as well as economic development assistance. We must teach rational thought, reason, modern science and sound secular experience.

There is a private group already doing this kind of thing, but our national government could do so much more. The Center for Inquiry, an international organization dedicated to education, reason, and secular ethics (based in Amherst, New York), is leading the way to promote this agenda.

The Center has launched a campaign consisting of educational seminars, protest marches, communiqués and meetings with African and other officials, letter-writing movements and aggressive widespread consciousness-raising efforts. Their work deserves support.

One of the Center’s educational workshops is set for Cape Town, South Africa from August 29-30; another is scheduled in Lilongwe, Malawi on September 4-5. Both will highlight humanism as an alternative to witchcraft.

Norm R. Allen Jr., executive director of African Americans for Humanism and the Center for Inquiry/Transnational Programs, is a key figure in these campaigns. He has been quoted as follows in Center literature:

"What African humanists and skeptics are doing is uncompromisingly challenging these harmful ideas and offering a humane and rational alternative, drawing upon humanistic ethics and an appreciation for scientific methods of investigation.

"It is clear that “superstitions—including belief in witchcraft—are based on fear, magical thinking and inadequate education, and are regularly exploited in Africa by unscrupulous individuals in positions of influence. Through the centuries, superstitious beliefs in Africa have been—and continue to be—used to oppress women, abuse children, support racism and xenophobia, justify torture, murder and genocide, and to exploit the poor, the weak and the aged. Those decrying accused ‘witches’ still orchestrate death and destruction of lives and property for the benefit of their own power. These unfounded beliefs are being used as a tool to incite hatred and cause division and conflicts in families and communities across the continent. In Angola, Malawi, Nigeria, Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, those accused of witchcraft have been murdered, tortured or banished by their communities—often by their own families. Left unchallenged, the harmful, dark and destructive effects of superstitious belief have become common and recurrent problems in Africa.”

It was not so long ago that a candidate for Vice-President of the United States was associated with the machinations of a demon-chasing preacher practicing an African form of witchcraft. Hard to believe but true.

The appearance at the Wasilla Assembly of God in 2005 of Thomas Muthee from Kiambu, Kenya was marked by prayers for (and over) Palin. Muthee called upon Jesus to propel Palin into political office (governor of Alaska). Muthee also called on Jesus to protect Palin from "the spirit of witchcraft." How ironic. Muthee gained fame with Palin’s religious congregation by claiming to have defeated a local witch in his African region, one “Mama Jane,” in a great spiritual battle, and in the process liberated the town from sin while putting out a welcome mat to the spirit of Jesus.

We should probably divert some of the educational foreign aid designed to fight witchcraft and promote rational thought, reason, modern science and sound secular experience to small towns in Alaska, like Wasilla.

For more on the Center's campaign against witchcraft, superstition and the like, contact Leo Igwe at skepticleo@yahoo.com, skepticleo@yahoo.com or humanistleo@hotmail.com or nallen@centerforinquiry.net.

The Society for Women and AIDS in Africa can also provide assistance.  Visit the Center for Inquiry website at http://www.centerforinquiry.net/.

Speculating On The Future Of Religion - Animated By A Bit Of Wishful Thinking

Recently, Daniel C. Dennett and I have been pondering the future of religion. Will the influence of organized religion grow or will it die off, at long last, as wishful thinkers in the free-thinking communities have hoped for ages?  Or, might some other scenarios come to pass. Dr. Dennett's musings have been, of course, more creative, profound, thorough and deservedly attended than mine, so I'll summarize a few of his observations on the topic for your consideration.  All of the ideas noted in this summary are taken from his acceptance speech at the annual Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) awards dinner held in Chicago on October 10, 2008. 

Dr. Dennett sketched five possibilities: 

1. A religious fervor will sweep the planet.  When this happens, say goodbye to Enlightenment values, especially if one religion gains sway over all the others.  I wonder what would be worse - universal Christianity, or the Caliphate dream come to pass for Islamists?  That's like asking what's worse - being shot in the butt or hung by metal hooks - upside down?  I'd prefer a few additional, gentler choices (e.g., left alone).

2. The end of religions.  Dennett suggested St. Peter’s Square and the Vatican could be transformed into the European Museum of Roman Catholicism.  He mentioned Mecca becoming the Magic Kingdom of Allah.

3. Religions transformed as harmless sports teams.  The teams would have no dogmas, creeds or claims to know anything - but they would have cheerful songs, colors, symbols and pageantry.

4. Religions as cults - basically bad habits of an underclass, something like the way smoking is viewed today. As Dennett noted, "it will be considered bad form to draw attention to the fact that somebody is religious."

5. Judgment Day appears out of nowhere!  The fundamentalist crazies were right - here comes the Rapture.  All is lost - we're all toast.

Dennett termed three of the scenarios quite benign. The fifth he called "a nonstarter. We don’t have to worry about that."
The worry related to this preposterous scenario is, in reality, the behavior of those who want to make Armageddon happen.

Naturally, nobody knows what will happen, though change for better or worse is likely.  However, it's always wise to encourage everyone "to look under the hood of religion to see what makes it tick, so we can better think about what steps we might take to get the outcome we most want."

What does Dennet want?  He favors the study of religion to be taken as seriously as the study of other real and present dangers to the future of the planets inhabitants, such as global warming, the global economy, water and energy problems and all the rest.  

Key issues related to the future of religion that Dennett addressed included:

*  The very great need to persuade those who study religion and write about it to stop doing so with a "hyper-diplomacy, hyper-reverence, hyper-respect..." We don't do that with any other industry.  The deference must end. There should not be a free ride for religions. They should be scrutinized firmly and calmly - and honesly.

*  More research is needed.  For starters, how about a theory of religion?  What is it, how did it arise, how has it evolved, what it is today, what are the parts and how do they work?  Such questions have not been objectively answered by dispassionate investigators using modern tools of analyses. 

*  Introducing into the educational system a 4th “R.”  He wants compulsory religion, that is, compulsory education about world religions for children in public and private schools and in home schooling. This will inoculate our children to brainwashing into any one religion and lead children to critical thinking, since it will be clear that all religions can't be true and lead to doubt, skepticism and open inquiry.

*  A review of evidence that religion is not so much strong today as it is desperate. The leaders can no longer control education and access to information, as in the past.  Cell phones, transistor radios and the Internet have breached the natural barriers. Around the world, people and cultures are being flooded with western ideas, with American ideas, with American technology and all the ideas that come with them. To us, its all harmless but to the control agents of religion, its toxic - the new communication technologies are wreaking havoc. In this fashion, they are starting to overturn ancient cultures.

*  "People are not ready to have their religion subjected to careful, calm, objective analysis and scrutiny. But we should change that, one step at a time."

It was a great speech, in which the above and a lot of other ideas were fully developed.  The entire talk is available at the FFRF website. 

Be well.

Mr. President, Build Up That Wall!

The pervasive violations of this country's long tradition of church/state separation under President Bush were unconstitutional then and remain so today. Alas, President Obama is expanding, not eliminating, government funding for "faith-based initiatives."  This is a great disappointment, as was his invitation to the gay-bashing, fundamentalist preacher Rick Warren to pray at the secular ceremony that marked the inauguration of our 44th president.  Any praying at this civic event in the life of our non-theistic Republic is inappropriate; the prayer by this particular god-talker was outrageous.

The faith-based funding is inappropriate because taxpayer dollars are being used to sponsor sectarian religious activities and beliefs. 

Government funding of faith-based programs should eliminated.  If religious organizations want to conduct social service programs, they are free to do so with their own money.

Also regrettable is the fact that religious organizations have access to the White House to lobby for faith-based human service initiatives.

Recently, according to the Center for Inquiry (CFI), a secular organization that supports church/state separation, a meeting took place between representatives of the CFI Office of Public Policy and other church-state separation advocates and senior staff at the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

CFI's reps expressed their concerns and disappointment over the new president's failure to repeal five Bush administration executive orders and numerous agency regulations and rulings that apply to the faith-based office. Those executive orders, regulations, and rulings permit faith-based programs to engage in religious discrimination -- using your tax dollars.

Unfortunately, it seems that President Obama will not act to prevent harmful discrimination by religious organizations that benefit from your tax dollars. Also, his plan for this illegal office fails to prevent the use of public money for construction and renovation of buildings used for religious worship. It does not bar religious organizations from proselytizing in publicly-funded programs.

While President Obama has said repeatedly that he believes in the separation of church and state. Those of us who supported him so enthusiastically might want to work hard to urge him to keep his word.

To learn what you can do, write to CFI c/o srook@centerforinquiry.net or call (716) 636-4869 ext. 427.  For more information about CFI (the source of much of this information), visit http://www.centerforinquiry.net/opp.

Be well.  Protect the wall!

A Wellness Perspective On Religion & Government - Mr. President, Raise Up This Wall Of Separation

The Freedom From Religion Foundation, with more than 13,000 members, is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists and agnostics) in the United States. FFRF has been working since 1978 to promote freethought and to keep state and church separate.

The Foundation promotes freedom from religion with a weekly national radio show, a newspaper, a freethought billboard campaign and other educational endeavors, including scholarships for freethinking students. The Foundation acts on countless violations of the separation of state and church, and has taken and won many significant complaints and important lawsuits to end state/church entanglements and challenge the "faith-based initiative."

The FFRF offers a quiz entitled What Do You Know About The Separation of State and Church?  The quiz consists of 21 questions to test your knowledge of America's vital principle that protects those who choose religion and those who prefer none.  

Here are the questions, reproduced with permission.  Most are multiple choice; some invite true/false selections.  After perusing the questions, go to http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/ffrfquiz.php for a score, assessment and background on each of the questions.  

The average score (correct answers) is 12!  Since October 12, 2000. 28,090th people have taken the test.

Do well.  Think of the test as a learning experience, also, that will boost your awareness of this wonderful constitutional safeguard against creeping theocracy.

1. The U.S. Constitution says that the United States was founded as a Christian nation, based on the sovereign authority of God

2. How many times does the word "God" appear in the U.S. Constitution?

3. How many times does the Declaration of Independence refer to Christianity or Jesus?

4. The US Constitution guarantees religious liberty for

5. Where did the separation of church and state originate?

6. What does the First Amendment say about religion?

7. The phrase "wall of separation between church and state" originated with

8. Which early colonies practiced freedom of religion?

9. The Puritans escaped religious persecution and, in their own colony, allowed religious freedom for

10. ". . . the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"  Where does this phrase appear?

11. By an Act of Congress, U.S. currency has carried the motto "In God We Trust" since

12. The Pledge of Allegiance, first published in 1892, has included the words "under God" since

13. Who made the following statement?  "Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith . . . We need believing people."

14. In 1890, bible reading was outlawed from Wisconsin schools. Who was responsible?

15. The U.S. Supreme Court outlawed student-initiated prayers at high-school football games in 2000. Who were the plaintiffs in that lawsuit?

16. According to the "Lemon test," in order to be constitutional, a law or public act must:

17. All American Presidents have been practicing Christians

18. The U.S. Constitution says there shall be no religious test for public office

19. John Adams declared Christmas to be a national holiday

20. A president, being sworn in, is required to place a hand on the Holy Bible and say "so help me, God."

21. Since the First Amendment deals with "Congress," states are free to advance religion if they wish.

Go to http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/scripts/ffrfquiz_results.php for results.  Be well.

A Wellness Perspective On Religion & Government - Mr. President, Raise Up This Wall Of Separation

The Freedom From Religion Foundation, with more than 13,000 members, is the largest association of freethinkers (atheists and agnostics) in the United States. FFRF has been working since 1978 to promote freethought and to keep state and church separate. The Foundation promotes freedom from religion with a weekly national radio show, a newspaper, a freethought billboard campaign and other educational endeavors, including scholarships for freethinking students. The Foundation acts on countless violations of the separation of state and church, and has taken and won many significant complaints and important lawsuits to end state/church entanglements and challenge the "faith-based initiative." The FFRF offers a quiz entitled "What Do You Know About The Separation of State and Church? The quiz consists of 21 questions to test your knowledge of America's vital principle that protects those who choose religion and those who prefer none. Here are the questions, reproduced with permission. Most are multiple choice; some invite true/false selections.  After perusing the questions, http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/ffrfquiz.php for a score, assessment and background on each of the questions. The average score (correct answers) is 12! Since October 12, 2000. 28,090th people have taken the test. Think of the test as a learning experience that will boost your awareness of this wonderful constitutional safeguard against creeping theocracy. 1. The U.S. Constitution says that the United States was founded as a Christian nation, based on the sovereign authority of God 2. How many times does the word "God" appear in the U.S. Constitution? 3. How many times does the Declaration of Independence refer to Christianity or Jesus? 4. The US Constitution guarantees religious liberty for 5. Where did the separation of church and state originate? 6. What does the First Amendment say about religion? 7. The phrase "wall of separation between church and state" originated with 8. Which early colonies practiced freedom of religion? 9. The Puritans escaped religious persecution and, in their own colony, allowed religious freedom for 10. ". . . the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"Where does this phrase appear? 11. By an Act of Congress, U.S. currency has carried the motto "In God We Trust" since 12. The Pledge of Allegiance, first published in 1892, has included the words "under God" since 13. Who made the following statement? "Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith . . . We need believing people." 14. In 1890, bible reading was outlawed from Wisconsin schools. Who was responsible? 15. The U.S. Supreme Court outlawed student-initiated prayers at high-school football games in 2000. Who were the plaintiffs in that lawsuit? 16. According to the "Lemon test," in order to be constitutional, a law or public act must: 17. All American Presidents have been practicing Christians 18. The U.S. Constitution says there shall be no religious test for public office 19. John Adams declared Christmas to be a national holiday 20. A president, being sworn in, is required to place a hand on the Holy Bible and say "so help me, God." 21. Since the First Amendment deals with "Congress," states are free to advance religion if they wish. Go to http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/scripts/ffrfquiz_results.php">http://www.ffrf.org/quiz/scripts/ffrfquiz_results.php for results. Be well.

A Critical Thinking Wellness Contest: Win A Medal And Worldwide Fame And Help Bring The World To Its Senses

America and the world are besotted with foolish beliefs fostered by cultures that undervalue critical thinking, and I'm not refering only to the popularity of religions. 

Something has to be done about the huge disregard of evidence-based reasoning. I have just the thing in mind, given my own capacity for science and reason--a contest! I think a critical thinking wellness contest will stimulate a mass breakthrough to rationality.  Such a contest can bring the people of this country and elsewhere throughot the world to their senses.

So, I hereby announce a contest. An essay contest. A 1000 word limit. Anyone can enter, including my relatives and employees of this website, college professors, celebrities, high ranking politicians, even Republicans. It's wide open. The winner's photo will be posted at this website for a day and he or she will also receive a medal. The medal will be one of my own medals won in a prestigious race. Maybe merchants will also contribute valuable prizes as word of this contest spreads.

The contest is a simple, two-part process: A) Describe a foolish belief held by a group of people in a civilized jurisdiction (let's not pick on people in underdeveloped parts of the world, like Alabama) and, B) note how such a bizarre belief might be overcome.

Send your 1000 or less word essay for this context by May 1, 2009. Send by e-mail to me at DBA@seekwellness.com.

To get you in the spirit or mood for this, here is an example of what a contest entry might look like. First, I offer an example of whacked off insane thinking, then a solution.

PART ONE: A DESCRIPTION OF A FOOLISH BELIEF

Several major league baseball players and other popular athletes wear titanium-laced necklaces and wristbands. Why?  hey claim it brings them luck. Is there any evidence for this claim? None. Is it possible that they are paid to wear the bands in order that their celebrity-based modeling will lead innocent victims to buy this product, hoping for good luck? It is. More likely, they are not paid—they are just reason-impaired. More than luck is promised or at least held out as a benefit from wearing the titanium products—the necklaces and bands might also "alleviate discomfort, enhance circulation, promote relaxation, stabilize energy flow, reduce stress and soothe tension."

I'm not making this up. See Richard Martins story in the St. Petersburg Times entitled "Wear Titanium, Play Better," April 6, 2009.

The product is touted as a "micro-titanium sphere" and an "energy transport system." It is said (by the Japanese chiropractor who promotes it) to amplify some mysterious "energy management system" and thereby make all cells more efficient. The necklaces sell for $47 and are sold at "reputable" outlets in the US, including Sports Authority.

PART TWO:  HOW THIS NONSENSE MIGHT BE OVERCOME

Anyone seen wearing this bracelet should be showered with love and ridicule. These are not mutually exclusive. Be nice to the person, be courteous and think always of his or her best interests, but have playful fun at the individual for being suckered into buying or just wearing a ridiculous product sold under the most ludricrous of claims. This warmth of loving spirit does not apply to the major league ballplayers and others who might have been paid to model this item that is a blight on human intelligence and an offense against reason. These people should be humiliated, if not prosecuted. They give prostitution a bad name. Even if they are not paid to wear such things.

That's it. That's the contest. I eagerly await your contribution. Be well—and don't buy any necklaces with titanium or you'll be hearing from me—in a loving way, of course. 

I Demand That Wellnessism Be Taught In Science Classes In Texas Public Schools

Along with evolution, germ theory and creationsim, I want wellnessism introduced in biology classes in Texas public schools.  If the first two areas of scientific knowlledge are "just" theories to the school board leaders, well, then let's hear all the theories and let the little children decide what's sensible.  Isn't that what made America great? 
 
Christian Scientists believe disease is caused by sin, spiritual healers believe in the theory of auras, shamans believe in demonic possession, psychic surgeons believe in extracting defective parts without cutting, astrologers in birth periods and constellations and Republicans believe in the theory of small government and great fortunes.  I say let all these theories and wellnessism - the theory that healthy lifestyles will set us free of doctors, drugs and disease, be taught.  "Teach the controversies," I say.  That's what the Christian fundamentalists insist upon in Texas, and if it's good enough for Texas, it's good enough for me.  Yeehaa. 
 
Now I realize there is more going for the germ theory of disease and the theory of evolution, at the present time, than wellnessism.  However, wellnessism has a whole lot more going for it than creationism and the other theories noted above. So, fair's fair.  Teach the controversy, even if we wellnessism enthusiasts have not made a claim yet for our beliefs as theory.  We just want equal times with the intelligent design folks.

Wellnessism explains why people who exercise vigorously, dine more or less in accord with established dietary guidelines, take responsibility for their health and seek added meaning and purpose, happiness, support and all kinds of positive initiatives manage to boost the quality of their lives.  Wellnessism explains a few things and predicts a few others, and even gets it right now and then.  What can creationism explain?  Therefore, we want to be included, especially if the "Grand Wazoo did it" theory gets access to the science classes in Texas. 

Oh, and it's OK with wellnessism supporters if the Texas school board requires educators and textbooks to play up the "problems" with wellnessism, as they plan to do with the theory of evolution, provided they also list the "strengths and weaknesses".of creationism.  Good luck with that.  Who will be asked to provide the strengths of the latter - televangelists?
 
Since the Texas state board of education is composed of at least half a dozen and probably more creationists, I think it only fair to insist that half the board be composed of persons with healthy lifestyles.  It would not do for a group primarily consisting of overweight, chain-smoking rednecks who have no clue about the nature of the wellness movement or the lifestyle it entails to be making decisions that affect the lifestyles of Texas schoolchildren. 
 
Jerry Coyne, author of the best-seller "Why Evolution is True" (Viking), wrote an article entitled "Creationism in the Classroom" (guardian.co.uk, 26 March 2009) which inspired these demands for wellnessism.  In his essay, Dr. Coyne offered this parting observation"

"What happens in Texas doesn't stay in Texas. That state is a sizeable consumer of public school textbooks, and it's likely that if it waters  down its science standards, textbook publishers all over the country will follow suit. This makes every American school hostage to the  caprices of a few benighted Texas legislators.  Our children will face enormous challenges when they grow up: global warming, depletion of fossil fuels, overpopulation, epidemic disease.  There is no better way to prepare their generation than to teach them how to distinguish fact from mythology, and to encourage them to have good reasons for what they believe."

Just so. To show how reasonable wellnessism enthusiasts are, we will remove our righteous demands for equal time if the creationists (and the spiritual healers, shamans, psychic surgeons, astrologers and Republicans) back off and take their "theory" of intelligent design back to their churches. 
 
Not that such nonsense belongs there, either, but it will be far less harmful than introducing "intelligent design" in science classes.

Urge the President To Minimize Religious Interference In The Delivery Of Medical Care

Under the disastrous era of George Bush, religious zealots were able to convince the chief executive to create a provider refusal rule. This rule requires health care institutions receiving federal funds to certify in writing that they would allow health care providers to refuse services on religious and ideological grounds. It was an invitation to sectarian mischief.

Fortunately, it took a while to get into the system, but it has been in place since January 20th.  Already, the new president has directed the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to rescind the provider refusal rule. However, this requires a period of public opinion gathering about the policy - and thus the purpose of this message is to urge you to do just that. Make a comment.

Here is my comment, which I plan to mail to HHS. Consider sending one of your own. You have until April 9th to do so.

Madam Secretary:

I join with other Americans who support the separation of church and state to urge that an end to the rule entitled "Ensuring that Department of Health and Humans Services Funds Do Not Support Coercive or Discriminatory Policies or Practices in Violation of Federal Law."

As many have noted already, this Bush-era directive is driven by extremist religious ideology. It is an invitation to mischief and discord. It is vague and would almost certainly reduces access to health services and information for women seeking reproductive services. It could also lead to an interruption in the ability of anyone to gain assistance for a medical condition about which there is controversy based on religious dogma.

The conscience of a providers should not be given more weight than the health needs of patients. The danger is greatest in remote rural areas where alternative health care providers are few, but the situation would be intolerable anywhere. It is especially distressing in instances wherein a health care facility is funded in part by our own tax dollars.

Abortion is so loosely defined that the rule could tempt religious medical personnel to refuse to provide contraception, treatment for infertility or HIV/AIDS, information about end-of-life care or any medical procedure linked to a religious belief, however primitive.

I join with the Center for Inquiry and hundreds of other secular institutions in asking that you please rescind the provider refusal regulation as soon as possible.

Thank you very much. May the Constitution be our guide.