A Journal of Atheist News and Thought

May 1990

/. ...~

$2.95

I RADIO SERIES I

..

ANNIVERSARY
OFTHE
AMERICAN
ATHEIST HOUR

e e e e e

Alerican Atheists, Inc.

is a nonprofit, nonpolitical,educational
organization dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of
state and church. We accept the
explanation of Thomas Jefferson
that the "First Amendment" to the
Constitution of the United States
was meant to create a "wall of separation" between state and church.
American Atheists, Inc. is organized to stimulate and promote
freedom of thought and inquiry concerning religious beliefs, creeds,
dogmas, tenets, rituals, and practices;
to collect and disseminate information, data, and literature on all
religions and promote a more thorough understanding of them, their
origins, and their histories;
to advocate, labor for,and promote
in all lawful ways the complete and
absolute separation of state and
church;
to advocate, labor for,and promote
in all lawful ways the establishment
and maintenance of a thoroughly
secular system of education available
to all;
.
to encourage the development

Life
Couple Life*
Sustaining
Couple*/Family
Individual
Senior Citizen**
Student**
*Include partner's name

and public acceptance of a human tions of authority and creeds.

ethical system stressing the mutual
Materialism declares that the cossympathy, understanding, and inter- mos is devoid of immanent conscious
dependence of all people and the purpose; that It is governed by its
corresponding responsibility of each own inherent, immutable, and imindividual in relation to society;
personal laws; that there is no superto develop and propagate a social natural interference in human life;
philosophy in which man is the cen- that man - finding his resources
tral figure, who alone must be the within himself - can and must cresource of strength, progress, and ate his own destiny. Materialism reideals for the well-beingand happiness stores to man his dignity and his inof humanity;
tellectual integrity. It teaches that we
to promote the study of the arts must prize our life on earth and
and sciences and of all problems af- strive always to improve it. It holds
fecting the maintenance, perpetua- that man is capable of creating a
tion, and enrichment of human (and social system based on reason and
other) life;
justice. Materialism's "faith" is in
to engage in such social, educa- man and man's ability to transform
tional, legal, and cultural activity as the world culture by his own efforts.
willbe useful and beneficial to mem- This is a commitment which is in its
bers of American Atheists, Inc. and very essence life-asserting. It conto society as a whole.
siders the struggle for progress as a
moral obligation and impossible
Atheism may be defined as the without noble ideas that inspire man
mental attitude which unreservedly to bold, creative works. Materialism
accepts the supremacy of reason holds that humankind's potential for
and aims at establishing a life-style good and for an outreach to more
and ethical outlook verifiable by ex- fulfillingcultural development is, for
perience and the scientific method, all practical purposes, unlimited.
independent of all arbitrary assump-

American Atheists, Inc. Membership Categories

-r--r-'

$750
$1,000
$150/year
$75/year
$50/year
$25/year
$20/year

**Include photocopy of ID

All membership categories receive our monthly Insider's Newsletter, membership card(s), a subscription to the American
Atheist, and additional organizational mailings (such as new products for sale, convention and meeting announcements).
American Atheists, Inc.

P.o. Box 140195

Austin, TX 78714-0195

Alerican Atheist

A Journal of Atheist News and Thought

May 1990

American Atheist
Editor's Desk
R. Murray-O'Hair

Director's Briefcase
Jon G. Murray

The answer to the question of "The

papal visit to Mexico: pastoral or
political?" is quite simple, given that
nation's history of anticlericalism and
state/church separation.

The Big Picture - Gipson Arnold

takes the problems religion produces
to the airwaves. - 40
New Age Interview - Chapter
Director Gary Yokie shows that even
twentieth-century spiritualism can be
humorous. - 44

Who's Running This CountryGod or the State?

Madalyn O'Hair

47

In a recent decision, the Supreme

Court found that fervency of belief
was no excuse for breaking the laws of
the land by taking illegal drugs.

Cover design by
Greg Anderson.

Talking Back

58

To the announcement that "Jesus

loves you!" Atheists snap back, "Well,
TellHim to Keep His Hands to Himself!"
- among other replies.

The Houston Radio Series

Volume 32, No.5

Austin, Texas

"The American Atheist Hour," a

weekly radio talk show produced
by the Houston Chapter of American Atheists, celebrates its tenth
anniversary.
Radio's Finest Hour - Gipson
Arnold delves into the birth and
growth of "The American Atheist
Hour." - 22
Earwitness News Report Live at
the Virgin Mary - Poking fun at
furors over junkyard Virgin-sightings
is all a part of the excitement of live
Atheist radio. - 28
The First Ten ~ars of the Houston
Chapter - Three past directors of
the Houston Chapter of American
Atheists discussed the history of the
Chapter on one edition of "The American Atheist Hour." - 30
Election Rhetoric 1988 - Kathy
Diederich and Bruce Senior team up
for a uniquely Atheist look at American
politics. - 38
May 1990

21

Poetry

60

American Atheist Radio Series

Madalyn O'Hair

61

In "Religion and Insanity, Part 1," the

roots of Christianity's inhuman treatment of the mentally illare unearthed.

Under the Covers

64

A believer chronicles "The Minutiae

of Christian Oppression" in a book
about the fate of the West's last
pagans.

Letters to the Editor

66

Classified Advertisements

68
Page 1

Alerican Atheist
Editor
R. Murray-O'Hair
Editor Emeritus
Dr. Madalyn O'Hair
Managing Editor
Jon G. Murray
Poetry
Angeline Bennett
Non-Resident Staff
Margaret Bhatty
Victoria Branden
Merrill Holste
Arthur Frederick Ide
John G. Jackson
Frank R. Zindler
The American Atheist is published monthly
by American Atheist Press.
Copyright 1990 by American Atheist Press.
All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole
or in part without written permission is
prohibited. ISSN: 0332-4310.
Mailing address: P. O. Box 140195,Austin,
TX 78714-0195. Shipping address: 7215
Cameron Road, Austin, TX 78752-2973.
Telephone: (512) 458-1244. FAX: (512) 4679525.
The American Atheist is indexed in IBZ
(International Bibliography of Periodical
Literature, Osnabruck, Germany) and Alternative Press Index.
Manuscripts submitted must be typed,
double-spaced,
and accompanied by a
stamped, self-addressed envelope. A copy
of American Atheist Writers' Guidelines is
available upon request. The editors assume
no responsibility for unsolicited manuscripts.
The American Atheist Press publishes a variety of Atheist, agnostic, and freethought
material. A catalog is available for $1.00.
All Christian Bible quotations are from the
King James Version, unless otherwise
noted.
Dial-An-Atheist is a Registered Trademark
of American Atheists, Inc.

Membership Application For

American Atheists, Inc.
Lastname

First name

Address

City/State/Zip

This is to certify that I am in agreement with the "Aims and Purposes" and
the "Definitions" of American Atheists. I consider myself to be Materialist or
Atheist (i.e., non-theist) and I have, therefore, a particular interest in the
separation of state and church and American Atheists' efforts on behalf of
that principle.
I usually identify myself for public purposes as (check one):

o Atheist

o Objectivist

o Agnostic

o Freethinker
o Humanist
o Rationalist

o Ethical

o Realist
o I evade any reply to a query

Culturalist
Unitarian
Secularist

o Other:

I am, however, an Atheist and I hereby make application for membership in

American Atheists, said membership being open only to Atheists. (Those not
comfortable with the appellation "Atheist" may not be admitted to membership
but are invited to subscribe to the American Atheist magazine.) Both dues and
contributions are to a tax-exempt organization and I may claim these amounts
as tax deductions on my income tax return. (This application must be dated
and signed by the applicant to be accepted.)
Signature

Date

Membership in American Atheists includes a free subscription to the monthly

journal American Atheist and the free monthly American Atheist Newsletter as
well as all the other rights and privileges of membership. Please indicate your
choice of membership dues:

o Life, $750
o Couple Life, $1000 (Please

give both

o Individual, $50/year
o Age 65 or over, $25/year

o Sustaining, $150/year
o Couple/Family, $75/year (Please give

(Photocopy of ID required.)
o Student, $20/year (Photocopy of ID required.)

names above.)

all names above.)

The American Atheist is given free of
cost to members of American Atheists as an incident of their membership. Subscriptions for the American
Atheist alone are $25 a year for oneyear terms only ($35outside the U.S.).
Gift subscriptions are $20 a year ($30
outside the U_S.).The library and institutional discount is 50 percent.
Sustaining subscriptions are $50 a
year.
Page 2

Upon your acceptance into membership, you will receive a handsome goldembossed membership card, a membership certificate personally signed by Jon
G. Murray, president of American Atheists, our special monthly American
Atheist Newsletter to keep you informed of the activities of American Atheists,
and your initial copy of the American Atheist. Life members receive a specially
embossed pen and pencil set; sustaining members receive a commemorative
pen. Your name willbe sent to the Chapter in your local area if there currently
is one, and you will be contacted so you may become a part of the many local
activities. Memberships are nonrefundable.

American Atheists, Inc., P. O. Box 140195, Austin, TX 78714-0195

May 1990

American Atheist
J

Guest Editorial

Who would have thought

and other musings
hange is tumultuous around us. It
has come to other nations faster
than the United States, but still
the ramifications from those changes
have reached our shores. We need wait
only yet a little while until change is fully
upon us and the United States itself
begins to reel. It is presaged everywhere.
External to our nation, but with a neighbor - Mexico - we see the enigma of
a medievalist church coming afresh to
inflictits hopelessly reactionary ideology
upon modern people. In our own nation
our basic laws are being interpreted to
reinforce most repressive - albeit majoritarian - geopolitical ideas. It takes
considerable courage, now, for a cause
organization of any kind to continue
about its business as if it were not in the
middle of a time warp. Yet, in the midst
of uncertainty
American Atheists
continues as best it can, meeting the
challenges full on at the same time it
attempts to hold what ground it has
gained. This month's magazine reflects
all of this.

Who would have thought that Mexico,

with its centuries-old fight against Roman Catholicism, would give symbolical
affirmation before the world that it is
ready to bow its knee again to the Vatican. Always we see the same phenomenon. Some politician wants to invite
the pope to the seat of government, to
the touchstones of history of the country, to the cathedral he personally attends, or to his home, and history is
swept away by that personal desire. It is
done for political advancement, or to
keep the love of a wife, the approval of
a mother, who are imbued with the sectarian principles of Roman Catholicism.
The love of the head of state for one single person, or for his political career,
tests his intellectual integrity with consequential political and social fallout on all
persons in the nation, as he stoops to
conquer.

Madalyn O'Hair
Austin, Texas

American Atheists has often seen human beings torn between emotional desires and intellectual stances. In fact, the
single most devastating problem of the
organization is that of this dichotomous
struggle within a member. Ordinarily it is
posed as "American Atheists must understand and accept Roman Catholicism
- my wife is a Roman Catholic and I
love her." Unable to intellectually confront the loved one, be it spouse, parent,
child, or dear friend, and claim the unmolested right to freedom of thought,
the Atheist willturn on the organization
and both cordially and vigorously hate it
for the rest of his life.
Although the loved one has a right to
choose, practice, and use religion as a
club over the head of the Atheist, the
rules of the game are that the Atheist
cannot (or will not) assert the same
rights.
The pope, firm in his own irrational
convictions, demands that all recognize
them as right, accept them as guidelines
to life, and bow to his dominance.
Conversely, in the United States, we
have the situation wherein a majoritarian religion feels that no minority religion should challenge the cultural conditioning of humankind which it has
wrought.

belief system is tolled by no less than the

Supreme Court of the United States.
There are, it seems, limits to what is
acceptable in our culture and necessarily
the primary onus must be on innovative
ideas. Restrictions must be so thorough
that not even the usual test of "a compelling state interest" competes against
the practice to be proscribed. The government can simply forbid it, under pain
of criminal law.
The limits are set: one must accept
religion, but the religion must be within
the constraints of that which has been
delineated as permissible malleable
mass psychosis lo! these thousands of
years. Oh, one can tinker a bit with
Christianity, so long as the basic precepts rule one's existence. One can, for
example, with impunity proclaim Saturday to be the Sabbath - so long as one
accepts the principle of a Sabbath. One
can argue about total immersion baptism
as opposed to sprinkled baptism - so
long as one accepts the principle Of
baptism. And one can advocate communication with god so long as one is
conscious enough to pray - but to be
unconscious, zonked out completely on
the hallucinogen mescaline (peyote),
and to proclaim that this is communion
with god is beyond the pall.

Who would have thought that the Supreme Court of the United States would
be a naysayer to any fundamental religious claim. If the Roman Catholics
want to accept that bread and wine are
the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, all
must accept this as true religion. When
Oral Roberts, Pat Robertson, and the
Christian Science church state that
there is healing power in prayer, all must
accept this as true religion. When the
entire Christian theocracy declares that
one lives after one dies, all must accept
this as true religion. But when a small,
inconsequential
American religious
group, not of the white race, wants to
embrace an equally psychotic belief on
which to premise its ability to have
communication with god, death for its

Who would have thought that through

this entire last crazy decade the American Atheist Hour would forge straight
ahead. Intent upon its purpose of bringing
the news, views, and opinions of Atheism
to the fourth largest city in the United
States, it would continue as an urban
institution. With persistence it came
into being; with tenacity it has stayed.
Week after week this small voice for sanity is heard abroad in the land. Defiant,
yet delightful, giving its positive view of
hope for humankind, of the wonder,
richne-ss, and diversity of life, it has
defied all of its doomsayers.

May 1990

All three stories are told at length in

this issue - and who would have thought
that could be done. ~
Page 3

Director's Briefcase

The papal visit to Mexico:

pastoral or political?

John Paul II
determines to force
recalcitrant Mexicans
to toe the
Roman Catholic line.

A graduate of the University of Texas

at Austin and a second-generation
Atheist, Mr. Murray is a proponent of
"aggressive Atheism." He is an
anchorman on the" American Atheist
Forum" and the president of American
Atheists.

This month Pope John Paul II made

his second visit to Mexico, the country
where he made the maiden voyage of his
"pilgrim papacy" in 1979,being the fortyseventh foreign trip of his reign and
during which he passed his seventieth
birthday. The trip extended over an
eight-day period, from May 6 through
May 13, and took the pope through a
schedule of stops in ten Mexican cities.'
This second so-called papal pilgrimage

Paul IIto Mexico, a prime example of the

Church of Rome at its geopolitical best.
An opportunity presented itself, at the
time of the 1 December 1988 inauguration of the current president of Mexico,
Carlos Salinas de Gortari, for the church
to reestablish itself in a nation which had
first disestablished it as early as 1833,
and later officially during the waning
years of the Mexican civil wars of 1857
59. This was principally as the result of

to Mexico, which Vatican officials insisted was "essentially pastoral,"2 rekindled

the controversy between the Mexican
state and the Vatican, over state/ church
constitutional relations, that has been
raging for over one hundred and fifty
years.
We have, in the visit of Pope John

the influence of Benito Juarez,3 who

presided over that early formal disestablishment in July of that closing year of
the decade of the 1850s.
Mexico is, of course, but the latest example of modern papal interventionism.
John Paul II, with his second Mexico ex-

!Los Angeles Times, 8 March 1990, sec. A,

Jon G. Murray
Page 4

p.6.

2Washington Post, 7 May 1990, sec. A, p. 13.

May 1990

3Benito Pablo Juarez (1806-72), Mexican

revolutionary and statesman, de jure president of Mexico (1858-60), president of
Mexico (1861-65,1865-67,1867-72).
American Atheist

pedition, has logged 447,864 miles in

forty-seven trips outside of the Vatican
during his eleven and one-half year incumbency.s See sidebar.

The theopolitics
of Roman Catholicism
In order to understand the full ramifications of this year's papal return engagement in Mexico, one must keep in
mind certain truths about the Roman
Catholic church as a global force. The
Roman Catholic church is a survival institution of immense proportions. It has
wielded political, economic, and social
power in virtually every nation during
the course of its rise to world Christian
denominational superiority. Like a chameleon, the church changes the hue of
its mantle whenever outside forces dictate, while its internal dogmatic and subjective premises remain intact. It has a
fierce survival instinct which manifests
itself from the papacy down through to
the least of the laity. The extent of this
church's individual inculcation of cadre
is legendary, exemplary, arid praiseworthy, though not entirely desirable
from an adversarial
perspective.
In
"Communist"
Eastern Europe, for example, the church molded itself, for
years, to work within the existing political structure, until the climate was rife
with just the proper measure of, usually
imported,
revolutionary
sentiment.
Such has also been the case in Mexico,
Central and South America. Whenever,
however, a political opportunity
presents itself (elections;
coups d'etat;
deaths of dictators, monarchs, or incumbents;
revolutions;
etc.) for the
church to interject opinion or provide
monetary "incentive," it does so, but
only as such intervention into matters
political tends to increase its power base
in a particular region. It can be said with
the assurance of historical precedent
that the church does not necessarily

4Fort Worth Star- Telegram, 6 May 1990, sec.

4, p. 12.
Austin, Texas

tailor its interventionism

toward the
benefit of the great masses of laity who
find themselves transfixed by its pageantry and beguiled by its dogmatic
rhetoric. This time-tested modus operandi
has been generously applied in the case
of Roman Catholic church relations
with Mexico.
A preeminent scholar on the Roman
Catholic church, Baron Avro Manhattan
of Great Britain, has this to say about
the methods of that institution. In chapter 16 of his Vatican Imperialism in the
Twentieth Century= which chapter is
entitle de "Vatican's Total War against
Hostile States," Baron Manhattan points
out some realities about the church's
methods which bear directly on its relations, both past and present, with Mexico.
There are cases, however, when
it [the Vatican] can and does advocate open, armed rebellion. That
usually happens when it finds itself
face to face with a hostile government with which it cannot reach a
tacit modus vivendi6 or which,

5Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing

House, 1965.
6"A feasible arrangement or practical compromise; esp: one that bypasses difficulties"
(Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary
[Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster Inc.,
1984]).
May 1990

having banned the [Roman] Catholic Church, tries to enforce to the

letter all its hostile laws. In such
cases a real war, giving no quarter
and usually ending in bloodshed, is
waged.
War cannot break out in every
type of State. It is possible only
when the State concerned is framed
on a democratic basis or, at least,
allows its citizens a certain amount
of liberty. For were it to be fought
under a dictatorship, the Catholic
Church would not be allowed to
gather forces of any kind that
might endanger the existence of
the government. ...
Owing to the very nature of the
civil constitution of a democratic
State, each citizen or body of citizens can oppose the government
by legal means. The Catholic
Church - and, for that matter,
any other party - can take full advantage of this privilege to carry
out its plans of opposition
and
thereby embarrass
the government, to undermine its power, to
organize itself so that it can disregard all the laws it wishes. As far
as Catholic resistance is limited to
legal means it is free to act in any
way desired. Should it, however,
purposely trespass into illegality,
then even a democratic government is compelled to take certain
precautionary
as well as punitive
PageS

"The issue between the Church of Rome and the modern State arises from
the refusal of the State to regard that Church as having a status before the
law differing in any way from that of any other religious society."
- Charles C. Marshall, The Roman Catholic Church in the Modern State

measures to restrain those who

contravene its laws.
When that occurs, such a government is compelled to punish
any Catholic who has obeyed his
spiritual leader's injunctions this is, the hierarchy, the most active members of the laity, and all
those Catholic organizations which
by their actions have placed themselves outside the law.
As, however, no government is
capable of arresting, fining and
punishing individually a great portion of the people it governs, it is
bound to take stricter measures
against the religious and political
leaders of Catholicism, thus creating fresh cause for bitterness and
resentment.
With the intensification of the
struggle, the Catholic Church which in the meantime may have
made underground preparations
for open revolt - might decide
that the moment to overthrow the
government by force has come,
and hence can ask all Catholics to
take up arms.
When the situation has reached
this stage the Church will boldly
declare that Catholics are bound
to disregard the laws of the State
and, besides, that it is their duty to
fight it by every means. Every
means, including assassination. 7

The sovereignty of the state

While keeping in mind what Baron
Manhattan points out about Roman
Catholic church methods, some discussion is needed here concerning the legal
basis of conflict between the authority
of the state and that of the church (any
church, but particularly a church with
the kind of international power structure of the Roman Catholic church)
within democracies.

7Manhattan, Vatican Imperialism, pp. 22223.

Page 6

What we have in general, as regards

the assumed authority of any church
versus that of the state or states in
which it operates, is a basic constitutional conflict over what is called the
"police power" of the state. I would like
to quote, on this subject, the author
Charles C. Marshall from his book The
Roman Catholic Church in the Modern
State This author does a fine, yet succinct, job of extrapolating this legal concept that forms the basis of the rift that
exists between the Church of Rome and
the present government of Mexico. Let
me first say, however, that this author is
no enemy of the Roman Catholic church,
as can be definitely said of Baron Manhattan. As he puts forth in the "Introductory Note" to his book:
The writer owns a profound
veneration for the religion of the
Catholic Church, Greek, Roman
and Anglican, East and West, excepting in so far as it asserts a
church sovereignty by divine right
as an article of faith or unites itself
to the secular State as the religion
by law established.
Now, to what Mr. Marshall had to say
about the "police power" of the state visa-vis the church:
The sovereignty of the modern
State, for which we contend, in its
very nature excludes inherent
rights [emphasis in original] within
it of a religious society. The State
that concedes them surrenders its
own sovereignty. Moreover, when
the State has, as in the United
States, guaranteed the equal rights
of all religious societies, its concession of sovereign rights to one of
such societies over other religious
societies would violate the constitutional guarantees and lead at
once to anarchy .... The issue be8New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1928.
May 1990

tween the Church of Rome and

the modern State arises from the
refusal of the State to regard that
Church as having a status before
the law differing in any way from
that of any other religious society;
whereas that Church claims in inherent right a superior and sovereign status and willnaturally assert
it when it can. This is the issue in
Mexico. [Emphasis added.]
The constitutional authority of
the Modern State over religious
societies and corporations will, in
its fundamental aspect, be found
to be no less than its authority
over other societies and corporations in respect to acts which, in
the opinion of the State, menace
the interests of morality and the
common weal [sic].? Of those acts
the State must, in the modern theory, be sole judge. Thus all corporations, religious and secular, are
subject to the sovereign power of
the State, known as the Police
.Power, in virtue of which, notwithstanding constitutional guarantees, the State may, when it deems
necessary, qualify private rights to
promote the general welfare, attain
its constitutional ends, and prevent
the impairment or destruction of
its sovereignty."
Having made the above general points
about the Roman Catholic church as an
institution, I need to digress here and
talk about the history II of the Roman
Catholic church in Mexico, very briefly

9"Commonweal," usually written as one

word, is an archaic form of the modern word
commonwealth (Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary).
IOMarshall, The Roman Catholic Church,
pp.2013.
llVarious historical facts taken from: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th ed., vol, 18 (New
York: The Encyclopaedia Britannica Co.,
1911).
American Atheist

Had the natives known that Hernan

Cortes and his forces were carrying not
only European infections but the plague
of Roman Catholicism, perhaps they
would have fought the Spanish occupation with even greater fervor.

ish viceroys. During this period, local

governmental logistics were overseen
mostly by alcaldes majores'" and corregidores1s until 1786,both being appointed by purchase - that is, they bought
their office from the viceroy or governor
of the province (not a position for the
"common man"). The corregidores
were established in 1531 principally to
lord over the Indian populations.
The church, naturally, was right on
the heels of the civil oppressors of the
Indians. The Franciscans, one of many
Roman Catholic orders (Benedictines,
Dominicans, and Carmelites being
some of the prominent others), arrived
in 1524 to begin an invasion of such.
They brought with them not only European communicable diseases's but the
Inquisition, which was introduced in
1571;without the pleasantries of either I
am certain the indigenous population
could not have survived. The Jesuits,"

and sketchily (a condensation of 470

years of history), and the events of its
disestablishment. I ask, however, that
the reader keep in mind while taking in
this little history lesson what has been
said by Baron Manhattan and Mr. Marshall, for you will find that both the
general outline of church behavior of
14"... a chief municipal officer with judicial
the former and the legal guidelines of the
powers" (The New Century Dictionary, vol.
latter have been played out over the 1 [New York: P. E Collier & Son, 1936]).
course of time in Mexico.
Is"A Spanish magistrate; esp: the chief mag-

The Spanish invasion

In 1520,with the conquest of territory
that we now call Mexico (and much
larger areas) by the Spanish explorer
Hernan Cortes.P coupled with the
death of the last Aztec emperor (Cuauhternoc}, there came to be established
in the so-called New World the Spanish
colonial empire often referred to by historians generally as New Spain. This
period of Mexican history, as a colonial
empire of Spain, stretched for three
centuries and through sixty-four Span-

12(1485-1547),Spanish conquistador and

conqueror of Mexico.
l3Also Guatemotzin, Guatemoc, or Quauhtemoc (14957-1525),last Aztec emperor of
Mexico, nephew of Montezuma II; captured
and taken hostage by Cortes; tortured,
executed on charge of treachery.
Austin, Texas

istrate or governor of a town in Spain or the

Spanish colonies" (Webster's Third New
International Dictionary, unabridged [Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster Inc., 1981]).
16Although, as what the missionaries might
have termed "divine retribution," the native
peoples were hit hard by what seemed to be
an indigenous infectious disease that did not
attack the Whites. The ancient Maya chronicles spoke of outbreaks of bloody vomiting
or "xekik," one such epidemic hitting Yucatan in 1484, and similar outbreaks of what
was called "matlazahuatl"
in southern
Mexico were known, particularly in coastal
settlements, from pre-Columbian times.
This may have been a form of yellow fever,
though it is not known for certain. (Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. 23 [Chicago: William
Benton Pub., 1%1]).
17"Society of Jesus ....
Originally called
Compaiiia de Jesus [Span. = (military) company of Jesus], when founded (1534-39)by
St. Ignatius of Loyola and six companions"
(The Columbia-Viking Desk Encyclopedia
[New York: Viking Press, 1953]).
May 1990

the Vatican's "special forces" - known

for their activity in foreign missions and
their devotion - followed in 1572. The
natives were, by and large, kept in perpetual tutelage, having been divided up
as chattel along with the land by the conquerors. Although freed from their serfage at a rather early date in Mexican history, they remained strictly controlled
by the friars or the priests. This was, as
one might surmise, simply their punishment for being part of that great mass of
heathen that used to live happily in
abundance before the advent of the missionary system, another of those many
institutions for the supposed betterment of our species brought to you by
the hand of religion.
The power of the church in Mexico by
the mid-1600s can be judged, in part,
from the petition of the ayuntamiento
of [the "state" of] Mexico to Philip IV
(1605-65)of Spain in 1644asking that the
monarch stop the foundation of religious houses, which by then had already
come to hold half the property in the
country, and to suspend ordinations because there were six thousand unemployed priests at the time, and to suppress feast days because there were at
least two being celebrated per week.
When local, municipal government has
to request of a monarch that the growth
of a religious institution be checked, it is
a good sign that the institution in question has more than adequately represented itself.
In the eighteenth century, the Jesuits
were expelled from Mexico, as they
were from all the other Spanish dominions of the period, by Charles III (171688; king, 1759-88).They were arrested
en masse on June 26 of 1767,their goods
were sequestered, and they were deported to Havana, from there to Cadiz
in southwest Spain, then to Genoa in
northwest Italy, and finally to Corsica.

18"Abody of municipal magistrates; a town

council" (The New Century Dictionary, vol.
1).

Page 7

Vicente Guerrero and Augustin de Iturbide (right) fought to free Mexico from
Spain. But together they concocted the
"Plan of Iguaia," which would not only
establish an Mexican state but would
cement that country's subservience to
the Roman Catholic church.

Their expulsion did much to exacerbate

the already growing discontent of the
period for Spanish rule.

The plan of Iguala

It was not until the turn of the century,
though, that the fervor of revolutionary
discontent began to come to a climax in
New Spain. In 1810 the actual outbreak
of revolution against the power of the
Spanish monarchy began through a
series of revolutionist commanders, all
of whom were defeated and executed
over the next seven years after various
conflicts, except Vicente Guerrero'?
who alone remained in the field by 1817.
Guerrero eventually combined forces
with Augustin de Iturbide (1783-1824),
who had been one of the chief generals
engaged in suppressing the revolution.
Together they proclaimed the "Plan of
Iguala,"20 on 24 February 1821, which
laid the basis for a new independent
state. Part of that plan included the
maintenance of the Roman Catholic religionas the state creed and retention of
the privileges of the clergy. The Roman
church had been the state church of
what would become an independent
Mexico for four centuries. It had maintained the Spanish Inquisition until 1813,
for some 242 years after it had been
transplanted to the New World.21
The first Mexican congress then met
on 24 February 1822 and eventually
elected Iturbide emperor, who was
crowned on July 21 of that year. Iturbide
was, however, compelled to abdicate in
April of 1823 and was finally arrested
and executed in July of 1824. The congress by that time had split into two

19(17837-1831) Mexican soldier and political

leader, president of Mexico (March-December
1829), captured and shot, February 1831.
20City in southwest
Mexico, in Guerrero
state.
2IThe Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 10, pp.
262-263, as quoted in Charles C. Marshall,

The Roman Catholic Church in the Modern

State at p. 215 of that text.
Page 8

camps, the Federalist and Centralist,

the former favoring a republic and the
latter a continued monarchy. The Federalists mustered enough strength to
adopt a constitution on 4 October 1824
modeled on that of the United States,
with Guerrero assuming the vice presidency. That constitution of 1824, unlike
our own, contained a clause declaring
the Roman Catholic religion to be alone
recognized as the state creed. So the
"Plan of Iguala" remained, as regards
the church, unscathed.
Spain then sent an expedition to reconquer Mexico in 1829, which was defeated by General Antonio Lopez de
Santa Anna" (a long-time adversarial
acquaintance of Texans during their
fight for independence from Mexico),
but during the invasion Vice President
Anastasio Bustamante'< took advantage of the situation to mount a coup
d'etat which the bulk of the army supported. President Guerrero was deposed
and eventually executed in 1831. A revolt
broke out against Bustamante, however, the very next year, supported by
Santa Anna, making Manuel Gomez
Pedraza" the new president. Between
Pedraza and his vice president (and successor in 1833) and Valentin Gomez
Farias," the exemption of the clergy and
military officers from the jurisdiction of
the civilcourts was placed under attack.
Farias also attempted to put higher education under the direction of laymen instead of ecclesiastical authorities and to
relax the strong bonds of monasticism
over the Mexican people. Santa Anna

22(1794-1876), Mexican general, revolutionist,

president, and dictator; president of Mexico
(1833-36); dictator (1844-45, 1847-48, 185355).
23(1780-1853), Mexican general and politician;
president of Mexico (1830-32, 1837-39).
24(17887-1851),Mexican general and politician;
president of Mexico (December 1832 to April
1833).
25(1781-1858), leader of Mexican liberalism in
mid-nineteenth century; president of Mexico
(1846).
May 1990

took advantage of the diversion afforded

him by this anticlerical movement and
assumed the presidency, eventually becoming dictator and dissolving congress
and the state legislatures on 31 May
1834.
A new Centralist constitution was,
however, established by 1843 which expressly retained the former privileges of
the clergy and the army. The church
was back in favor once again.

Making the clergy

subject to the law
It was not until 24 September 1855,
when General Juan Alvarez> became
president, bringing with him Ignacio
Comonfort-? as minister of war and
Benito Pablo Juarez as minister of
finance, that things began to change
again for the church. It was Juarez who
went right to work by securing the enactment of a law (23 November 1855)
subjecting the clergy and the army,
again, to the jurisdiction of the ordinary
courts. It had been the case prior to this
law that officers and soldiers could only
be tried via courts-martial, and the
clergy, including many individuals in
minor orders who were practically laymen, by ecclesiastical courts. This was
known as "benefit of clergy," a relic of

26(1790-1867), Mexican politician, provisional

president of Mexico (October to December
1855).
27(1812-63), Mexican liberal political leader;
provisional president of Mexico (1855-57);
elected president (December 1857); forced
to flee (1858).
American

Atheist

Benito Juarez was an Atheist who put

his ideas concerning religion into action.
As Mexico's minister of finance, he subjected the clergy to the law of the land
and as president he finished separating
church and state in this country.

the Middle Ages.28 This action roused

such resistance from the clericals that
President Alvarez was forced to turn
over power to War Minister Comonfort,
who sided with the less-Clerical Liber-

28"Benefit of clergy: in English criminal law,

the privilegium clericale, exemption of the
clergy from penalties imposed by law for
certain crimes .... The origin of this privilege
was a claim made by the ecclesiastics at an
early period for the entire exemption of their
order from the jurisdiction of the commonlaw courts." If a priest or "clerk" violated a
civil law he could only be held until the
bishop of the jurisdiction demanded he be
handed over to the ecclesiastical authorities.
This was so until 1275 and the Statute of
Westminster the First, at which time the
cleric charged had to first be indicted by civil
authorities before he could be claimed by a
bishop. Then under Henry VI (1421-71) the
clerical prisoner had to be convicted prior to
being claimed by the church. The test of admission to the benefit was dress and tonsure
("the Roman Catholic rite of admission to
the clerical state by the clipping or shaving
of a portion of the head" [Webster's Ninth
New Collegiate Dictionary]); however, the
statute Pro Clero of 1350 had also extended
the application of the benefit to all "clerks"
and that was later extended to any male who
could read, clergy or laity. Priorto the Refermation women, except nuns, were excluded.
Laymen could only claim the benefit once
and were burned on the hand to foilattempted
repeats. The benefit was "entirely abolished
in England in 1827 (7 and 8 George IV, cap.
82)" (The Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3
[New York: Americana Corp., 1932]). "Benefit
of clergy was abolished in the United States
in the Federal Courts in 1790" (Marshall, The
Roman Catholic Church, p. 217, note 20).
Austin, Texas

alsoEven the new "compromise" President Comonfort then had to suppress a

Clerical uprising in Puebla (state, in
east-central Mexico) in March of 1856
through considerable confiscation of
church property. He went on to sanction
a law releasing church land from
mortmain-" by providing for its sale,
however adding the further proviso that
said sale be for the benefit of the ecclesiastical owners.
Word of the law of 1855 naturally
reached Rome, and on 15 December
1856Pope Pius IX30 issued the following
allocution:
From these lamentable facts,
which we have recounted with
sorrow, you plainly perceive, Venerable Brethren, in what way our
most holy religion has been despoiled and humiliated by the
Mexican government, and what
great injuries have been inflicted
upon the Catholic clergy, its sacred laws, ministers, pastors, and
against our supreme authority as
well as that of the Holy See. Be it
far from us, amid the great confusion in sacred affairs, the oppres-

29From the Middle French marte, feminine

of mort, meaning dead, plus main, meaning
hand; or literally "dead hand," with a
feminine gender: "an inalienable [emphasis
added] possession of lands or buildings by
an ecclesiastical or other corporation"
(Webster's Ninth New CollegiateDictionary).
The church had been able to hold land, by
European tradition originatingin the thirteenth
century, as an imperishable legal body, and
to increase its holdings to the detriment of
the state with regard to its inability to collect
taxes and other dues on those lands or
buildings. Thus the term dead hand, alluding
to the hand of "mother (feminine) Church"
holding onto her lands and buildings, over
generations, with a continued impossibility
for said holdings to be sold (passed to another outside the church) or taxed.
30Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti (17921876), pope (1848-78).
May 1990

sion of the Church, its authority

and liberty, ever to neglect the discharge of our apostolic office!
Therefore, in order that the faithful in that country (Mexico) should
know and the whole Catholic
world should learn that we do earnestly condemn all these wrongs
perpetrated by the leaders of the
Mexican Republic against the Catholic religion, its clergy, sacred ministers, pastors, laws, rights, properties, and against the authority of
this Holy See, we raise with apostolic liberty our pontifical voice in
this most illustrious assembly: we
condemn, we reject, we declare
absolutely void and of no effect all
the aforesaid decrees and other
measures enacted there by the
civil power in such contempt of
the ecclesiastical authority of this
Holy See, and to such great damage and to such detriment of religion, the holy bishops and other
ecclesiastics. Moreover, we most
seriously warn those by whose cooperation, counsel, and order
such acts have been committed,
to bear in mind the penalties and
censures which have been established by the apostolic constitutions and the holy canons of councils, against the violators and profaners of sacred persons and things,
against ecclesiastical liberty and
authority and against the usurpers
of the rights of this Holy See.31

Civil war intervenes

For the next several years Mexico was
split by a civilwar between two rival governments, the Republicans (the former
Federalists) at their "capital" of Veracruz under Benito Juarez and the Reactionaries (the former Centralists) at the
old capital (from the period of the mon-

3lRaulx, Encyclique et Documents, vol. 1,

pp. 396-7. As quoted in Marshall, The
Roman Catholic Church, pp. 217, 218.
Page 9

The new constitution of 1917,

still in effect today, made quite specific and biting,
significantly enlarged upon the deprivations and dispossessions that the
1857 document had levied upon the Roman Catholic church.
archy of New Spain) at Mexico City.
Juarez, as chief justice of the supreme
court under Comonfort, had succeeded
him to the Republican party presidency.
The Reactionary party, on the other
hand, had a succession of short-lived
leaders. The Reactionaries, though generally divided, managed to militarily defeat the Republicans under Juarez, outside of Mexico City, on two occasions,
despite the fact that the latter held all the
chief ports. Finally Juarez was recognized as the "legitimate" governmental
leader of Mexico by the United States
and subsequently allowed to draw supplies of arms and volunteers from the
States. It was at that point, in July of
1859,that he published laws effectively
disestablishing the church by (1) suppressing the religious orders, (2) nationalizing ecclesiastical property (some.$45
millionworth), (3) establishing civilmarriage and registration, and (4) transferring the cemeteries to civil control.
Upon the death of Benito Juarez on
18 July 1872, he was succeeded by
Sebastian Lerdo de Tejada,32then president of-rhe supreme court. Under Lerdo de Tejada more laws were passed, repeating in stronger language the attacks
on the church that had so angered Pius
IX and adding further prohibitions on
monastic life.

The revolution of 1876

In 1876 revolution broke out again,
however, and on November 16 of that
year Lerdo de Tejada was overthrown
by Jose PorfirioDiaz,33who was declared
president on 2 May 1877.Diaz served his
first term through 1880and was temporarily replaced by President Manuel
Gonzalez= until he was reelected again
in 1884to serve until 1910.

32(1825-89), Mexican politician, president of

Mexico (1872-76).
33(1830-1915), Mexican general and politician,
president of Mexico (1877-80, 1884-1911).
34(1833-93), Mexican general and politician,
president of Mexico (1880-84).
Page 10

During the month of September of A clean sweep:

1910,Mexico celebrated the 100th anni- the 1917 constitution
versary of its declaration of indepenThe new constitution of 1917,still in
dence from Spain, but at the same time effect today, made quite specific and
the seeds of new revolution, planted .biting, significantly enlarged upon the
during the Diaz years, bore fruit. The deprivations and dispossessions that
revolution caused such upheaval that at the 1857document had levied upon the
one point, in a single day in February
Roman Catholic church. The preamble
1913,the Mexican presidency changed
of the 1857 constitution had begun "In
hands three times. Gen. Victoriano
the name of God and by the authority of
Huerta," commander in chief of the the Mexican People," but this was deletgovernment forces, eventually emerged,
ed from the document of 1917.That upafter U.S. intervention, as provisional front change, which would have on its
president in November of 1913. The own sent shock waves from coast to
fighting continued, though, with Venus- coast in this country, was just the tip of
tiano Carranza." who had been gover- the iceberg of the astounding document
nor of Coahuila, and a leader of the Con- which followed it.
stitutionalist revolutionaries, setting up
I willnow render pertinent excerpts-"
his government in Saltillo. Huerta could from the Constitution of Mexico of 1917.
only hold on until 15 July 1914,when he
was forced to resign and was succeeded
Article 3. No religious body, nor
a minister of any religious sect, will
by Francisco Carbajal, minister of foreign relations. Carbajal gave in to the
be allowed to establish or direct
Constitutionalists almost immediately
schools of primary education.
and resigned in favor of Carranza on
Article 5. The State cannot authorize any contract, pact or agreeAugust 13,who arrived at the capital on
August 20. The church had supported
ment which has for its object the
the brief incumbency of Huerta, a fact
loss or the irrevocable sacrifice of
which the Constitutionalists would not
the liberty of man, whether through
forget. With the elimination of Huerta,
the cause of labor, education, or
further insurgency by General Pershing,
religious vow. The law, in consecommanding twelve thousand Ameriquence, prohibits the establishcan troops, prolonged fighting until U.S.
ment of monastic orders of any
troops, having accomplished little, withdenomination, whatever may be
drew in July of 1916.Then
the object they pretend to have in
view.
Article 27, II.Religious societies,
a constituent assembly whose
known as churches, of any belief
members were chosen at elecwhatsoever, may under no cirtions supervised by the Carranza
cumstances acquire, possess, or
army met at Queretaro. That asadminister real estate or propersembly made radical changes in
ties, nor mortgages on same;
the constitution of 1857 which
those which they now have, either
were promulgated on February 5,
in their own names or in that of a
1917,and went into operation May
1, 1917.37
35(1854-1916), Mexican soldier and politician,
provincial president of Mexico (1913-14).
36(1859-1920), Mexican revolutionist
and
politician, president of Mexico (1917-20).
37The Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 18, p.

7%.
May 1990

38"These excerpts are from an English translation issued in 1926 by the American Book
and Printing Co., Mexico, DE' Charles S.
Macfarland, Chaos in Mexico, The Conflict
of Church and State (New York and London:
Harper & Brothers, 1935), pp. 66-70.
American

Atheist

This Mexican revolutionary fresco captured the spirit of the

people who framed Mexico's anticlerical constitution. The
cross appears as part of the formula of oppression: capitalist
Christianity plus totalitarianism equals slavery.

third person willpass to the dominion of the Nation, and it

willbe the duty of every person to denounce to the Government any properties known to belong to the churches.
Strong presumptive proof willbe sufficient to declare the denouncement well-founded. The temples destined for public
worship are the property of the Nation, represented by the
Federal Government, who willdesignate which should continue being set aside for the purpose mentioned. The bishoprics, curacies, seminaries, asylums or schools kept up by
religious societies, convents, or any other building which
may have been constructed or intended for the administration, propagation or teaching of any religion, willimmediately pass, by inherent right, to the public service of the Nation,
to be destined exclusively to the public service of the Nation
or of the States under their respective jurisdictions. The
temples of public worship erected in future, willbe the property of the Nation.
Article 37, III.The quality of Mexican citizenship is lost by
compromise, before a minister of a religious sect, or before
any other person, by those who do not observe the present
Constitution or the laws which emanate therefrom.
Article 55, VI. A deputy of Congress may not be a minister
of any religious sect.
Article 59. The requisites of a senator are the same as
those of a deputy.
Article 82. The President ... may not belong to an ecclesiastical body nor be a minister of any religious sect.
Article 130. [Numbering added for clarity and reference.
Not in the original text] (1) Only the Federal authorities may
exercise in matters of religious worship and outward forms,
such intervention as the law authorizes. (2) Allother officials
shall act as auxiliaries to the Federation. (3) Congress may
not enact any law establishing or prohibiting any religion
whatsoever. (4) Marriage is a civilcontract. This and all other
acts relating to the civil status of individuals shall appertain
to the exclusive jurisdiction of the civilauthorities in the manner and form fixed by law, and they shall have the force and
validity given them by such laws. (5) A simple promise to tell
the truth and comply with the obligations assumed shall subject the person doing so in case of failure to fulfillsaid obligation, to the penalties established by law. (6) The law recognizes no corporate existence in the religious associations
known as churches. (7) Ministers of religious creeds are considered as persons exercising a profession and are directly
subject to the laws governing same. (8) Only the state Legislatures may determine the maximum number of ministers
of religious creeds, according to the needs of each locality.
(9) It is necessary to be a Mexican by birth in order to be a
minister of any religious creed in Mexico. (10) Ministers of
religious creeds may not, either in public or private meetings' or in acts of worship or religious propaganda, criticize
the fundamental laws of the country, particularly the
Austin, Texas

authorities, or the Government in general; they willhave no

vote, willnot be eligible to office, and may not assemble for
political purposes. (11) Permission must be obtained from
the Department of the Interior, after the opinion of the Governor of the State in question has been heard, in order to
open new temples of worship for public use. (l2) There shall
be a caretaker in each place of worship, charged with its care
and responsible to the authorities for the proper performance of the laws on religious observances within such
place of worship and for all the objects belonging to same.
The caretaker of each temple, in conjunction with ten citizens of the place, willpromptly advise the municipal authorities as to the person in charge of said temple. (13) The outgoing minister, in company with the incoming minister and
ten citizens of the place, shall give notice to the authorities
of any change. The municipal authorities, under penalty of
dismissal and fine of one thousand pesos for any breach, will
be responsible for compliance with this provision; and subject to the same penalty they shall keep a register of the temples and another of the caretakers. They shall likewise advise the Department of the Interior through the state Governor of any permission to open to the public use a new temple, as also any change in the caretakers. (14)Personal donaMay 1990

Page 11

"No religious body,

nor a minister of any religious sect,
will be allowed to establish or direct schools of primary education."
- Constitution

tions may be received in the interior of the temples. (15) Studies

carried on in institutions devoted
to the professional training of ministers of religious sects may under
no circumstances beratified or be
granted any other dispensation or
privilege which has for its purpose
the ratification of such studies in
officialcourses. Any authority violating this disposition shall be
criminally responsible and all such
dispensation of privilege be null
and void and shall invalidate entirely the professional degree for
the obtaining of which the infraction of this provision may in any
way have contributed. (16)Periodical publications, which either by
reason of their programs, titles, or
merely by their general tendencies
are of a religious character, may
not comment upon any of the
political affairs of the union, nor
publish any information regarding
the acts of the authorities of the
country or of private individuals, if
the latter have to do with public
affairs. (17) Any political association whose name bears any word
or indication relating to any religious belief, is strictly prohibited.
(18) No meetings of a political
character may be held within temples. (19) A minister of any religious sect may not inherit on his
own behalf, nor by means of a
trustee or otherwise, any real
property occupied by any association of religious propaganda, or
for religious or charitable purposes. Ministers of religious sects
are legallydisqualified to inherit by
will from ministers of the same
sect, or from any other person to
whom they are not related by
blood within the fourth degree.
(20) All real and personal property pertaining to the clergy or to religious institutions, in so far as
their acquisition by private persons is concerned, willbe governed
Page 12

of Mexico of 1917

by the provisions of Article 27 of

this Constitution. (21) The infraction of any of the preceding provisions willnever be the subject of a
trial by jury.
To the provisions of the Constitution
of Mexico of 1917,as excerpted above, I
can but say "Hear! Hear!" I can only
regret that the Founding Fathers of our
own nation had not the courage to have
gone beyond the two mere clauses of
but an amendment to our Constitution,
clauses which have been rendered ambiguous by the passage of time and the
propaganda of the church. Our Constitution could but benefit from the addition of more specific language regarding
the separation of state and church. The
Constitution of Mexico of 1917serves as
a fine example of the art of true separation of state and church. The history of
Mexico, as of every other country, is the
history of its struggle to seek freedom
from religion.
In 1926,nine years later, as if the foregoing constitutional provisions were not
a great enough blow to the church in
Mexico, President Calles-? issued a
series of laws amending the penal code
as relating to religious institutions. This
was done to begin enforcement of the
Constitution of 1917that had hitherto
been, despite its thorough disestablishment articles, for all practical purposes
dormant. President Calles's cabinet, at
this time, contained a number of strongwilled individuals determined to put the
laws of 1917into effect. I shall not list all
of these articles of amendment, but
merely a few to give a feeling of their
tone. I have put the penalty provisions
of the articles selected in bold to emphasize the point of their severity.
. Art. 10th. Religious ministers
can never, in private or public

39Plutarco Elias Calles (1877-1945), Mexican

soldier and politician, president of Mexico

(1924-28).
May 1990

meetings, or in acts of worship or

religiouspropaganda, criticize the
laws of the land, the authorities or
the Government in general. Offenders will be imprisoned from
one to five years. 40
Art. 17th. All acts of public worship must be celebrated inside the
religious buildings, and these will
always be under the surveillance
of the authorities.
The celebration of public worship outside of the church edifices
willinvolve the penalty of major
arrest and second class fine on
the organizers and on the ministers who celebrate."
Art. 18th. Religious ministers, or
individuals of both sexes who profess a religion cannot use, outside
the church premises, especial garments or badges denoting their
profession under penalty of five
hundred pesos fine or arrest
not exceeding fifteen days. In
case of recurrence of the offense major arrest and second
class fine will be imposed. 42
Art. 32nd. A municipal authority which permits or tolerates the
opening of a new place of public
worship without giving previous
notice through the Governor of
the state or territory to the Department of the Interior (Gobernaci6n) willbe subject to admonition, fine up to one hundred
pesos and suspension of office
up to one month. In the event
of recurrence of the offense
the body will be dissolved.43

McCabe comments
It just so happened that right about
this time, a well-known Atheist author
by the name of Joseph McCabe was

40Macfarland, Chaos in Mexico, p. 173.

41Ibid., p. 175.
42Ibid., p. 175.
43Ibid., p. 177.
American

Atheist

"We, the episcopate, the clergy, and the Catholics

do not recognize Articles 3, 5, 27, and 130 of the present Constitution,
but rather we shall combat them."
- Archbishop Mora y del Rio (1926)

traveling in Mexico. Let's see what he

had to say about the situation, as he
observed it, in 1926.
I. What I Saw in Mexico
The way is prepared by filling
the world with horrid stories of the
persecution of religion and the
butchery of priests in Mexico. Ten
years ago I had sent to me a little
booklet, in blood-red cover, which
had been published by the American Knights of Columbus. It gave
a list of priests who had been murdered by Mexican officials or soldiers in the early summer of 1926,
and on the last page it appealed to
. the financiers of Wall Street to
help Catholics to induce the Government at Washington to .... At
that point such appeals always become vague, like the pope's Delphic utterances on Abyssinia." It
happens that in just that period I
travelled from end to end of Mexico, from El Paso to the south of
Yucatan, and no such murders or
executions took place. This was
the period of the tense beginning
of the conflict of Church and
State, yet I saw no harshness anywhere, even in Catholic towns like
Puebla and Oaxaca. The Government had begun to apply a law
that had been passed long before
to put an end to political intrigue:
priests and nuns who were foreigners - that is to say, who were
Spanish - must leave the country.
A veteran of the days of Diaz told
me how that famous President
had more than once tried to apply
the law to Spanish religious communities, but his pious wife had
secretly warned them and defeated
him. President Calles began to
apply the old law strictly, and the
story was spread abroad, as usual,

45Archaic name for Ethiopia, an empire in

east-central Africa.
Austin, Texas

that a handful of Atheists had secured power and were tearing religion out of the hearts of the devoted
people. That truth was that, as
one of the politicians confessed to
me, the body of the workers themselves put pressure upon the Government to enforce the law.
It was at first enforced with restraint and courtesy. I saw police
or soldiers escorting Spanish nuns
to the coast, and their conduct
was irreproachable. I mixed among
all classes, sometimes spending
hours in conversation with groups
of Indians far away from towns,
but I never heard, even in the most
Catholic parts, a charge of violence.46

The Roman Catholic church

and its princes respond
The question now logically arises as
to what the reaction of the church was
to the constitutionally
engendered
events of 1917 and their subsequent
"embellishments" under President Calles,
regardless of the validity of church reports on the manner of government enforcement. The official attitude of the
church can be summed up by the following declaration, published in a Mexican
paper in 1926by Archbishop Mora y del
Rio.

The information published in EI

Universal on the 27th of January,
with reference to the campaign
which will be undertaken against
these unjust laws which are so
contrary to natural right, is perfectlyaccurate. We, the episcopate,
the clergy, and the Catholics do
not recognize Articles 3,5,27, and
130 of the present Constitution,
but rather we shall combat them.
Under no circumstances can
we abandon this criterion without
treason to our faith and to our religion.47

The doors dose

The" campaign" of which Archbishop
Mora y del Rio spoke was for the church
to shut its doors in protest for what was
to be a period of three years. In February of 1926all the parochial schools were
closed. Demonstrations, counterdemonstrations, acts of violence and riots
occurred everywhere. A "National League for Defence of Religious Liberty"
formed and advocated boycotts
to include all newspapers, luxuries, the use of vehicles and utilities and houses of amusement.
The Catholic people were advised
not to send their children to lay
schools."

The doctrine of the Church is

invariable because it is the truth divinely revealed. The protest which
the prelates of the Mexican Church
made in 1917against the constitutional articles that are opposed to
liberty and religious teachings are
firmly reiterated. It has not been
modified; it has been strengthened
because it has been derived from
the doctrine of the Church.

The. business boycott paralyzed trade.

On July 31 the clergy was ordered to
withdraw from the churches, after four
rioting Roman Catholics were killed by
government troops, thus suspending religious exercises requiring the services
of priests, such as the holding of mass or
delivering of communion to their parishioners.
The position of the pope of the period,
Pope Pius XI,49in support of the likes of

46Joseph McCabe, The Papacy in Politics

To-Day, Vatican Plots in Spain and Other
Countries (London: Watts & Co., 1937), pp.
137-39.

47Macfarland, Chaos in Mexico, p. 13l.

48Ibid.,p. 73.
49(1857-1939; pope 1922-39), an Italian named
Achille Ratti.

April 1990

Page 13

General Obregon survived Mexico's

bloody revolution and an assassination
attempt led by a priest only to be killed
by a religious fanatic, Jose de Leon
Toral. When asked why he bombed the
newly elected president of Mexico,
Toral revealed that the mother superior
of a convent had repeatedly told him
that the only way to save the church in
that country was to kill its anticlerical
leaders.
power should be completely independent and that this should be
made manifest.v
It was not long thereafter that guerrilla
warfare began. On 29 October 1926,
conservative peasants led by General
Gallegos, with the blessing and the
direct leadership of the priests, took up
arms against the government. These religious rebels were known as the "Cristeros," who rode to the battle cry of

Archbishop Mora y del Rio and his rev-olutionary rhetoric, can only be established specifically with reference to an
apostolic letter of 2 February 1926
which voiced sympathy for the
Mexican clergy because of the
"wicked ... regulations and laws
... against the Catholic citizens of
Mexico."5o
We can, however, take note of the general position of this particular pontiff
with regard to jurisdictional disputes between the church and the state. In his
encyclical of 23 December
1922, just
four years earlier, he said:

"Viva Cristo Rey!" ("Long live

Christ the King!"). They banded
[also] under the leadership of the
head of the League of Catholic
Youth, Capistran Garza ....
The
Mexican bishops proclaimed him
"Provisional President," and General Arteaga their military leader. 52
"Many members of the episcopate were
deported on the ground that they had
encouraged
the Catholic uprisings."53
As the fighting escalated, centered primarily in Jalisco and Guanajuato states,
on 3 April 1927 a band of Cristeros, led
by a Father Angulo, attacked a train in
Guadalajara,
stealing 200,000 pesos
after killing the armed guards and more
than fifty civilians, among them twenty
children.

The church at war

The divine origin and nature of
Our power as well as the sacred
right of the community of the faithful scattered throughout the entire
world, require that this sacred
power should be independent of
all human authority, should not be
subject to human laws. They require in fact that these rights and

50Encyc/opaedia Britannica, 1961ed., vol. 15.

These few words are the only actual "text"
of this letter that could be found in the
resources on hand of this author, although
frequent yet oblique references to it were
encountered in the various texts used.
Page 14

Meanwhile the church hierarchy continued to attempt to distance itself from

responsibility for the uprising, but it finally could no longer do so. In 1927 the
archbishop
of Durango, who was in
Rome at the time, issued a pastoral
letter in which he said:

the recourse of arms, and ask advice from their Prelate, advice
which we cannot refuse when
asked for by our own sons, we believe it to be our Pastoral duty to
face the question fully; assuming
fully (con plena conscienca) the responsibility before God, and before history, we dedicate to them
these words: We did not provoke
this armed movement. But now
that that movement exists, pacific
means having been exhausted, to
our Catholic sons raised in arms in

defense of their social and religious

rights, after having thought at
great length before God and after
having consulted the wisest theologians of Rome, we ought to say
to you: be at peace in your consciences and receive our benedictions.54 (Emphasis in original.)
Then came the Mexican elections of
assassination of presidential candidate General Alvaro Obregon,55 by means of a
bomb,

1928. There was an attempted

in Chepultepec
park [in Mexico
City] on November 13, 1927. Four
men, including the priest Padre
[Miguel] Pro and his brother, were
accused of the crime and were
shot without trial and without evidence being given to the public.w
Despite this attempt Obregon was elected as the Mexican president on 1 July
1928. On July 16

Now that, in our archdiocese,

many Catholics have appealed to

Obregon openly blamed the Catholic Church for the civil war and
stated that he would carry out the
policy of the previous President.57

51The Forum magazine, January 1928, p. 53,

as referenced in Marshall, The Roman Catholic Church, p. 34.
52Manhattan, Vatican Imperialism, p. 231.
53Encyc/opaedia Britannica, 1961ed., vol. 15.

54Macfarland, Chaos in Mexico, p. 132.

55(1880-1928), Mexican soldier and politician,
president of Mexico (1920-24, 1928).
56Encyc/opaedia Britannica, 1961ed., vol. 15.
57Manhattan, Vatican Imperialism, p. 233.

May 1990

American Atheist

"Ex-President Calles went to interview the assassin in person, who, in

answer to the question 'Who instigated you to take the President's life?'
declared: 'Christ, our Lord. In order that religion may prevail in Mexico.' "
- Avro Manhattan, The Vatican in World Politics

Assassination included
On the next day, 17 July 1928, President-elect- Obreg6n was assassinated
by a Roman Catholic fanatic by the
name of Jose de Le6n Tora\. Baron Avro
Manhattan reports on the aftermath of
the assassination
in this way, in his
books
Vatican Imperialism in the
Twentieth Century and The Vatican in
World Politics:58
Ex-President Calles went to interview the assassin in person,
who, in answer to the question
"Who instigated you to take the
President's life?" declared: "Christ,
our Lord. In order that religion
may prevail in Mexico."
The American Press, like most
of the world Press, declared that
report false. The Vatican stated
authoritatively
that Calles was
unable to speak the truth because
no atheist knew what the truth
was. The world should, instead,
believe the Mexican hierarchy
and, last but not least, the Holy
Father. Calles and his devilish supporters were lying. If it were not
so, why did the Mexican government not let American and Catholic journalists interview the accused? The Mexican government
obliged, and invited as many American Press representatives as were
willing to interview the murderer.
They had a two hours' talk with
him. The assassin not only repeated
what he told Calles but declared
once more: "I killed General Obreg6n because I believed he was the
instigator of the persecution of the
Catholic Church."
At the trial Toral (the assassin)
confessed that the Mother Superior of the Convent of Espiritu
Santo, one of the suppressed insti-

58Avro Manhattan, The Vatican in World

Politics (New York: Horizon Press, Inc.,
1949), p. 403.
Austin, Texas

tutions, had "indirectly" inspired

his crime by repeatedly telling him
that "Religion is being destroyed,"
and that "the only solution is the
death of Obreg6n, Calles and the
Patriarch Perez [SiC]."59
It was not until 4 December
1936,
eight years later, that the Supreme
Court of Justice of Mexico confirmed
the sentences against two coconspirators, a Father Aurelio Gimenez Palacios
and Manuel Trejo, who were sentenced
to twenty and fourteen years' imprisonment respectively, under charges that
they had acted as instigators in the murder of President Obreg6n.
Emilio Portes Gil, secretary of the interior, was elected provisional president
by the congress and he took office on 1
December 1928, replacing the assassinated Obreg6n.
The assassination of Obreg6n marked
the apex of the civil strife instigated by
the church because of the Calles administration enforcement
of the Constitution of 1917. In 1929 U.S. Ambassador to
Mexico Dwight W Morrow= succeeded
in putting together a truce between the
church and the state. In May of 1929 the
last regular Cristeros rebels gave up
without a fight after most of their leaders
had fled to the United States. In the
same month, President Gil issued a
statement absolving the Roman Catholic church as an institution for their
"crimes" during the rebellion. Pascual
Ortiz Rubi061 was then elected presi-

dent of Mexico in November of that

year. There was still one more incident
of note, though:
In 1931 the pope [still Pius XI],
claiming that the states were not
permitting all priests to register [to
vote], and protesting against interference with religious education,
broke off the Morrow truce between church and state. The National Revolutionary party retaliated by voting to expel the foreign
religious hierarchy and to suppress
the four leading church papers."
As it turned out the generalized analyses of Baron Manhattan, as quoted at
the beginning of this article, regarding
the geopolitical methods of the Roman
Catholic church certainly rang true in
Mexico.

John Paul II's intervention

We can now turn to the events of the

second modern papal visit to Mexico in
May 1990. It was, however, imperative
that you, the reader, be given a synoptic
history of relations between the Roman
Catholic church and the state in Mexico
in order that you might understand the
controversy
aroused by the current
Mexican papal tour. It is obvious that
more than just a few rebels, but the bulk
of the people of Mexico, had become fed
up with the interference of the Roman
Catholic church in their affairs and, as
was their sovereign right, made the decision to oust the oppressor. The Vatican has never "forgiven," except in a
59Manhattan, Vatican Imperialism, pp. 233, biblically metaphorical sense, the Mexi34.
can people for exercising their good
6oMorrow, a former partner in the house of judgment. The Roman Catholic empire
Morgan [John Pierpont Morgan (1867-1943), has been itching to regain its former
second son of Junius Spencer Morgan (fam- status and power within the Mexican
ily'founder). The Morgan family headed in- state now for many years.
ternational banking enterprises, an industrial
It comes as no surprise then that
empire including railroad holdings, and
formed U.S. Steel Corp. in 1901], had replaced, by order of President Coolidge, U.S.
61(1877-1963),Mexican politician, president
Ambassador to Mexico Sheffield in October
of Mexico (1930-32).
of 1927.His daughter, Anne Morrow, married
Col. Charles A. Lindbergh in May of 1929.
62Encyc/opaedia Britannica, 1%1ed., vol. 15.
May 1990

Page 15

This time the pope was received as a visiting head of state

and President Salinas unexpectedly officially greeted him
at the airport's presidential hangar
in a planeside ceremony.
most of the media attention to the papal
tour centered around the activities of
the current Mexican president, Harvardeducated President Carlos Salinas de
Gortari, and his earlier moves to make
the state-church relationship in Mexico
a "friendlier" one. Salinas took office on
1 December 1988. He broke tradition at
that point by inviting Cardinal Ernesto
Corripio Ahumada and several bishops
to his inauguration, held in the Chamber
of Deputies, and allowing them to wear
their formal cassocks.P In his acceptance speech he vowed to "modernize"64relations with the church. In January of this year Salinas invited the president of the Mexican Bishops Conference, Monsignor Adolfo Suarez Rivera,
and some of his associates to dine at the
official presidential residence at Los
Pinos. In February President Salinas
made the announcement that "a personal representative of the president of
the republic" would be sent to the Vatican' the first since 1857.65The representative was former Mexican Supreme
Court Justice Agustin Tellez. President
Salinas told the media that he was sending Justice Tellez to Rome merely as a
"fact finder."66Not all the media bought
that line. EI Universal, a national daily,
said in an editorial,
For the first time in history, the
Mexican government has sent a
diplomat to the apostolic delegation that for all practical purposes
is a diplomatic seat. 67
Justice Tellez was received by the pope
63"An ankle-length
garment
with closefitting sleeves worn esp. in Roman Catholic
and Anglican churches by the clergy and by
laymen assisting in services"
(Webster's

Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary).

64LosAngeles Times, 29 April 1990, sec. A,
p. 1.

65IndianapolisStar, 5 May 1990, sec. 0, p. 10.

66Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 29 April 1990,
sec. 1, p. 20.
67Ibid.
Page 16

on 25 April 1990.68 A poll for the newspaper Excelsior found that 49 percent
approved of the president's decisions?
to send a personal representative to the
Vatican. In response to the sending of
Justice Tellez by President Salinas, the
pope named Geronimo Prigione his permanent envoy to the Mexican government."? Prigione does not have the rank
of ambassador because Mexico does
not formally recognize the Vatican."
President Salinas had then paved the
way for the second papal visit through a
series of actions which constituted an
invitation, in and of themselves, to the
Vatican vulture who had been waiting
on just such an opportunity. When Pope
John Paul II visited Mexico in 1979, to
attend an Episcopal Bishops Conference, then President Jose Lopez Portillo
received him at the airport. That was
about as far as the formal "warm" welcome of that prior visit went. The pope
entered Mexico, in 1979, as a "distinguished visitor,"72but not as either a religious leader or a head of state. The
pope did, however, on that earlier visit,
go to the president's house to bless his
mother and to "chat briefly and unofficially."73
In his memoirs, published last
year, Mr. Lopez Portillo expressed
ambivalence about the papal visit
in January 1979.
"The pope arrived a few hours
ago. I resolved to receive him. I
brought Muncy (his wife) and gave
a brief welcome," he wrote.
"In a few hours, the pope will
come to Los Pinos. This will pro-

68Indianapolis Star, 5 May 1990.

69The Dallas Morning News, 8 May 1990,

duce many attacks, some against

me," he said. "It's interesting to
open this option to the people. Ultimately, there's much to say and
to meditate over in this matter."74

Power play of the papacy

This time the pope was received as a
visiting head of state and President
Salinas unexpectedly officially greeted
him at the airport's presidential hangar
in a planeside ceremony." President
Salinas also entertained the pope at his
Mexico City residence and hosted a
dinner for him, with three former presidents of Mexico in attendance.
Sensing weakness in the present government on state/church issues, the
Vatican moved in to prepare to make
the most of the papal visit. .
Under the lead of the papal delegate
in Mexico, Girolamo Prigione, the Mexican Bishops Conference had written a
letter to President Salinas back in June
of 1989, outlining proposed changes to
the Constitution of 1917.
"The Mexican people," the bishops said, "are obligated to live a
double life, one that is reality and
one that is the law." They said this
"causes a disorientation of consciences and is the source of grave
moral corruption, because of the
lack of regard for the law in which
it originates."
The bishops asked the government to recognize the "fundamental right to freedom of religion or
belief, not only of individuals but
also and especially of churches
and religious communities .... "
They would give churches the
right to own property and have
parochial schools."

sec. A, p. 6.

7oFort Worth Star-Telegram, 13 May 1990,

sec. 1, p. 7.
71Ibid., 29 April 1990, sec. 1, p. 20.
72The Dallas Morning News, 8 May 1990,
sec. A, p. 6.
73Ibid.
April 1990

74Ibid.

75The Washington Post, 7 May 1990, sec. A,

p.13.
76LosAngeles Times, 29 April 1990, sec. A,
p.15.
American

Atheist

Salinas was elected with the lowest vote

ever for a presidential candidate of his party.
Many politicos in Mexico believe that his recent overtures to
church hierarchy stem from his need to bolster his political popularity.

Then in February of this year the

Jesuit order in Mexico (which had regained its footing since 1767),from the
Miguel A. Pro Human Rights Center,
issued a report on the government's
human-rights record for the previous
year, releasing it to the media for the first
time this year (presumably due to the
impending papal visit), although it had
published reports on two prior years. It
appeared in the magazine Proceso. The
report claims a myriad of abuses, including murders, kidnappings, and torture,
by police, armed forces, and those loyal
to the Institutional Revolutionary party
of President Salinas." A little "blackmail" insurance in case President Salinas
failed to follow through with his overtures?
Salinas was elected with the lowest
vote ever for a presidential candidate of
his party. Many politicos in Mexico believe that his recent overtures to church
hierarchy stem from his need to bolster
his political popularity. One sure way to
increase his popularity, in a country in
which the Roman Catholic church
claims 90 percent of its eighty-five million inhabitants" or 8 percent of the
world's 950 million Roman Catholics,"?
is for the incumbent president to cozy
up to the pope. Salinas needs to use the
pope to get a leg up on the pro-Catholic
opposition National Action party on the
right, while at the same time garnering
support he willneed in facing a formidable challenge from Cuauhtemoc Cardenas'" and the party of the Democratic
Revolution on the left. In fact, in a
newspaper ad run on May 4 the Popular Socialist party "charged that the
pope ... was coming to Mexico to 'realize an intense, eminently political cam-

77Ibid.
78DeQueen Daily Citizen, DeQueen, AR, 7
May 1990, p. 9.
79GreenBay Press-Gazette, 20 May 1990, A14"World."
80Cardenas is the son of Gen. Lazaro Cardenas, president of Mexico (1934-40).
Austin, Texas

paign' against the Constitution." The

Leftist political leader Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, a leading 1988
presidential candidate, said the
visit had been "designed with
political ends" by both the Salinas
government and the church hierarchy. He asserted that the pope's
itinerary would take him chiefly to
places where the Institutional Revolutionary party recently had suffered reverses."81
It is indeed obvious that this year's papal
tour has been very carefully orchestrated to aid President Salinas come reelection time. To begin there were frequent
prearrival Mexican television announcements about the pope's visit, which
were absent before his 1979visit. Political scientists in Mexico feel that such announcements would not have been
broadcast without government approval.

The political planning

All of the sites that the pope was to
visit were refurbished, some with government funds and some paid for by private benefactors. Allof the papal events
were under the control of Salinas's government officials. Here are some examples82 of the politically manipulated
papal schedule.
1. The original site for a meeting between the pope and representatives of
the Jewish community was to be Mount
Cristo Rey. That was changed because
of the connection to "Cristo Rey!"
(meaning Christ the King!) which had
been the battle cry of the Roman Catholic
rebels during the Cristero Rebellion.
That association was too close for the
Salinas government to allow the meeting at that site.

81The Washington Post, 7 May 1990, sec. A,

p.14.
82Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 6 May 1990,
sec -.4 "Newsfront."
May 1990

2. The pope visited Chalco, a capital

district slum, which heavily favored the
leftist opposition in the 1988 elections.
This area could be crucial in municipal
elections to come in the fall and President Salinas badly needs a boost among
voters in Chalco.
3. The pope stopped in Chihuahua
state in northern Mexico, where a oneSunday priests' strike had been staged
by three bishops in 1986 to protest a
gubernatorial election they feel had
been "flagrantly rigged by the ruling
party." Perhaps the "holy presence"
supposedly smoothed things over?
4. Tuxtla Gutierrez, a stop in the state
of Chiapas, is a "key stronghold of traditionalist Catholic clergy" who side
with the pope in opposition to the leftist
"liberation theology" movement. A little
ally gathering for the church and for the
incumbent president, both at the same
time.
5. In Villahermosa, capital of Tabasco
state, virtually all the churches were
closed by an anticlerical governor in the
1930sand as a result most of the churches
there are new. The church has grown
stronger in Tabasco as a result of that
persecution, not unlike the situation in
Eastern Europe in the pope's homeland.
That analogy was too strong for the
pope not to make a stop in Villahermosa.
6. Veracruz, a coastal city,and another
stop on the papal tour, has been the site
of inroads by Protestant evangelical denominations called "sects" in Mexico.
The Roman Catholic church has been
losing ground to these evangelical sects
with "the number of Protestants in Mexico growing more than 500 percent between 1950and 1980, to 3.29 percent of
the population."83
Veracruz is also the city where Christianity allegedly first entered Mexico.
While there the pope announced plans
to celebrate the SOOthanniversary of

83Sunday News-Register, Wheeling, Wv, 6

May 1990, p. 3 "News."
,Page 17

In fact, Mexican authorities spent millions on the papal tour,

not unlike our government
during the visits of Pope John Paul II
to the United States in 1979 and 1987.

Christianity in the New World. This was

received with some criticism, though,
by those who recognize that the church
came "as an agent of conquest, repression and disease."84
The premier focal site of the Mexican
papal tour, though, was John Paul II's
first mass at the Basilica of Our Lady of
Guadalupe in Mexico City, which was
attended by President Salinas's wifeand
family. At this occasion the pope beatified85 Juan Diego, a sixteenth-century
Mexican Indian who supposedly saw a
vision of the Virgin Mary.
~ 84The Muskegon Chronicle, 8 May 1990.
85Astep toward canonization, in the Roman
Catholic church, that process being the one
by which a person is officially enrolled
among the saints. To secure beatification,
proof of two miracles must be offered.
(Columbia- Viking Desk Encyclopedia, vol.
1).

Depending on which source you care

to believe, and "belief" is the key word
here, Juan Diego was an Aztec peasant
who saw an apparition of the Virgin May
on 12 December 1531. According to
legend Diego
carried out-of-season roses to his
bishop from a hillwhere the Virgin
of Guadalupe appeared to him in
1531. When he opened his white
cloak, the image of the Virgin appeared on it.86
The Virgin was, again depending on the
source, named patroness of Latin America by the church in 1910 and patroness
of the Americas in 1945. The important
detail here is, however, that this Diego
86DeQueen Daily Citizen, DeQueen, AR, 7
May 1990.

The Myth
of the Virgin of Guadalupe
by Rius
In every nation of the world the Roman Catholic church seized pagan
monuments, temples, and buildings - and converted them to Roman
Catholic churches, chapels, cathedrals, monasteries, and nunneries.
Even the personae in the old tales, the old gods and goddesses, became
saints of the Roman Catholic church. This was particularly the case in
Mexico, Central and South America.
Today one of the most sacred and most beloved of all stories and
shrines in Mexico is the Virgin of Guadalupe. The Virgin, it appears,
even left an image on a cloth, just as Jesus Christ left his on the shroud
of Turin.
In this illustrated book.first published in Mexico in 1981, Rius goes
after this myth and shows how and why it was fabricated.
Stock #5439. $9.00 plus $1.50 postage and handling. Paperback. 69
pages. VA/MC telephone orders accepte.d. Order from:
American

Atheist Press
140195
Austin, TX 78714-0195
(512) 467-9525
POBox

Page 18

May 1990

fellow's alleged vision was of a Virgin

Mary with Indian features, a particularity that was played for all it was worth by
the Spanish missionary priests of the
time in their quest to convert the natives
to Roman Catholicism.
It is no wonder then that "paving
stones were replaced where needed"
around the Guadalupe basilica and "pollution damage" repaired on the bronze
statue of John Paul II which had been
put up for his prior visit in 1979. The
traffic islands along the boulevard that
"Guadalupano" pilgrims use en route to
the shrine were rebuilt in time for the
papal arrival. To reach the basilica John
Paul II's motorcade would have to cross
a newly constructed "five-mile-long
causeway, lined with benches and rose
gardens and ending with a ramp that
leads to the Basilica's enormous plaza."87
The pope is obviously trying to drum up
some support from the native peoples
through this beatification.

How to manipulate the masses

In fact, Mexican authorities spent
millions on the papal tour, not unlike our
government during the visits of Pope
John Paul II to the United States in 1979
and 1987. The English-language Mexico
News reported that "as much as $3.7
million will be spent to receive the pontiff."88
This is corroborated by the leftist
paper UnoMasUno. For several weeks
prior to the papal visit some priests, intellectuals, and political leftists have
made the point in the Mexican media
that the government is wasting
badly needed money on superficial
public works projects to present a
distorted, atypically pretty view of
Mexico, which is now entering its
second decade of economic crisis.
The example most frequently cited
is that of Chalco, a Mexico City

87SanDiego Union, 6 May 1990, sec. A, p. 14.

88FortWorth Star-Telegram, 6 May 1990.
American Atheist

Can John Paul IIdestroy in one visit the

wall of separation between state and
church which it took Mexico decades to
erect?

slum area of some 1.5 million

squatters .... Several months ago,
Chalco received electricity; other
squatter settlements wait.89
The week before the papal visit "state
crews were paving the neighborhood's
streets"90 in Chalco. In the plaza of the
Basilica of Guadalupe, in Mexico City,
an eighty-footconcrete cross was erected
for the papal visit. In Veracruz two, and
in San Juan de los Lagos one, heliports
were built just for the papal arrival at
those sites, in addition to three bus stations and two water reservoirs. All of
this expenditure did not go entirely unchallenged. According to the San Diego
Union:
In mid-April, two letters were
mailed to the Pope - one signed
by 1,500 lay Catholics, the other
by 500 dissident priests. Both letters, which urged the Pope to
change his itinerary and see the
"real" Mexico, were widely publicized.
"There exists in our country a
great propaganda campaign that
intends to hide the reality under
which the majority is suffering,"
reads the text of the secular letter.
"We are concerned that those in
power want to use your presence
as a sign of respect for their unpopular programs."?'
And what do the Mexican people really think about the second papal visit to
their country? It is decidedly hard to tell
from the media coverage of the event
here in the United States, as biased as
that coverage has consistently been
toward John Paul II's papacy. A couple
of things did slip through, however.
First, the Los Angeles Times apparently did a poll in Mexico in 1989 which

"found that 80% of those interviewed

considered themselves Catholic, but
74% said the church should have 'no
voice' in the nation's politics,"92 and
second,
an opinion survey released by the
popular magazine Nexos [in Mexico] said 66 percent of the public
welcomed the pope's visit. But
roughly a quarter opposed it saying
they feared that the church would
use the trip to impose its views on
religious education and such issues
as abortion, premarital sex and
divorce.v'
In addition, the government-run daily El
Nacional was quoted here as saying of
the pope's visit:
On some occasions he failed to
respect the distance between
political and religious work which
is part of the historic victories the
Mexican people reached through
their constitution."

~
about two millionbirths per year. Taking
into account that 40 percent of Mexicans are under the age of fifteen, this
means a doubling of the population in
twenty-nine years. Still there is hope.
The government goal is to lower the
population growth rate down to 1 percent
by the end of the 1990s. International
Planned Parenthood reports that 48
percent of Mexican women now use
contraception, which is a good start, but
the government challenge is made more
difficult by the fact that abortion is still
illegal.95
In an astute move, the papal itinerary
planners chose Mother's Day, celebrated
in Latin America on May 10, for a major
address by John Paul II at Chihuahua.
The pope spoke to a crowd of about
100,000 in a speech in which he said:

Be faithful and multiply

Well, that is not all the pope did not
respect. A major subplot of this papal
visit was to attack Mexico's family-planning program. It is not inconsistent for
the Vatican's chief representative to do
so, with its well-known "pro-life" stance.
In Mexico, government health clinics do
distribute contraceptives and perform
vasectomies, though abortion is illegal.
Mexico's program has been one of the
Third World's most effective. The population growth rate in Mexico has been
cut from nearly 3.7 percent in 1977to 1.9
percent today. That amounts to a reduction to a growth rate of 2.4 percent a
year. Even at that rate there will be

In a modern society scarred by

"violence, abortion, euthanasia,
the marginalization of the disabled
and the poor," it is the woman who
"is called to keep alive the spark of
life, the respect for the mystery of
all new life."
Terming Catholic marriage a
"demanding reality," the Pope said
that Roman Catholic couples must
always be open "to the gift of life."
"You must keep in mind that if
the possibility of conceiving a child
is artificially eliminated in marriage, the couple is shutting itself
off from God and opposing his
will," ...
"Furthermore," he said, "the

92LosAngeles Times, 29 April 1990, sec. A,

p.14.

89SanDiego Union, 6 May 1990, see. A, p. 14.

90lbid.
91lbid.
Austin, Texas

93Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 6 May 1990,

see. 4, p. 13.

94St. Petersburg Times, sec. A, p. 14.

May 1990

9SRichmond Times-Dispatch, 11 May 1990;

Los Angeles Times, 11 May 1990; New York
Times, 11 May 1990, sec. A, p. 3.
Page 19

What must be learned from watching the Vatican in action, in Mexico and
elsewhere, is that it never gives up. The forces of Roman Catholicism will
just keep coming at you, if you oppose them, until they have worn you down
like the wind and sand shape a boulder in the desert sun.
husband and wife close themselves off from each other because
they reject the mutual giftof fatherhood and motherhood, reducing
the conjugal union to an opportunity to satisfy each other's egotIsm."96
Meanwhile, as the pope lectures Mexican women on the virtues of continuing
to breed, the United Nations Fund for
Population Activities in its annual survey
made public on May 14 reported
that the world's population, now
estimated at 5.3 billion, would
reach 6.25 billionby the end of this
century, nearly the equivalent of
adding a new China."
Thus, the church shows its determination to thwart the government of Mexico
on the family-planning front as well as in
regard to state/church separation matters.
It is obvious from all of the information that did make it through the proclerical, politically conservative media
gauntlet and finallyinto print in the United States that the visit of Pope John
Paul IIto Mexico this month was almost
entirely politicallymotivated. The worldwide aims of the Vatican power structure were dealt a blow by the events of
the past century in Mexico which resulted in the disestablishment of the church
there. When the current and most recently past presidents of Mexico showed
some weakness in the overall resolve of
the government of Mexico to continue
its strong position on state/church separation, the forces of the Vatican empire
knew it was time to strike. The Vatican
made its first move in 1979 and then, like
any good strategist, "followed through"
in 1990.

Sweetness and light

The Vatican never gives up

In the meantime, for the international

media audience, the church had to keep
up the pretense that it was on a "pastoral" mission with its heartfelt concern
for the "people" of Mexico uppermost in
the pope's mind. In his address at Cuautitlan, John Paul II emphasized that the
Mexican government should not consider the Roman Catholic church a constitutional enemy. Speaking to Mexico's
bishops, he said: "In a state of law, the
fulland effective recognition of religious
freedom should be the fruit and guarantee of civilliberties." He went on to say,

What must be learned from watching

the Vatican in action, in Mexico and
elsewhere, is that it never gives up. The
forces of Roman Catholicism will just
keep coming at you, ifyou oppose them,
until they have worn you down like the
wind and sand shape a boulder in the
desert sun. Our own Founding Fathers
here in this country had the somewhat
easier job of wrestling with the forces of
a fragmented and often disorganized
Protestant establishment with regard to
the drafting of our Constitution. Had
they been up against as well-organized
and paramilitary-type a machine as the
Roman Catholic church, we may not
have had the First Amendment clauses
we have clung to so precariously to this
date. That is why I can only greatly admire the valiant fight which the Mexican
people have waged to keep their country above the rushing tide of theocracy.
It is a battle, however, that they are destined to lose in the long run. There are
some hopeful signs still remaining, however, one of which I shall leave you with.
On the occasion of the anniversary of
the birth of President Benito Juarez,
Mexican Interior Secretary Fernando
Gutierrez Barrios delivered a speech in
which he said:

the church in Mexico wants to be

considered and treated not as
something strange, nor as an enemy that must be confronted and
fought, but as an ally of all that is
good, noble and beautiful. 98
In addressing teachers in Aguascalientes, John Paul II continued on that
theme in saying:
A new perspective of contacts between the church and the political
community in this country is taking place now. . . . In this new
phase of better understanding and
dialogue, the church wants to
make its own contribution, without
exceeding the bounds of its own
goals and specific competencies.s?
Yet, in the final analysis, despite any
assurances of the kindliest of motives,
the Vatican seized the opportunity of
the papal visit to cement itself in further
with the Mexican authorities by expanding the role of its representative in
Mexico, making him a "permanent special envoy"IOOto the government.

Freedom of beliefs is confirmed

daily, as is lay education and the
separation of church and state, ...
We will not simply cancel what
was done with such courage, negating our past and judging history.101
We can only hope that such sentiment
can be spread to others in Mexico who
may be willingto expend the energy necessary to maintain it. ~

98Richmond Times-Dispatch, 13 May 1990,

sec. B, p. 6.

96LosAngeles Times, 11 May 1990.

97New York Times, 15 May 1990, sec. A, p.
6.
Page 20

99LosAngeles Times, 9 May 1990, sec. A, p.

l2.
looIbid.
April 1990

1OIFortWorth Star- Telegram,

29 April 1990,

sec. 1, p. 20.
American

Atheist

A twenty-three-page section commemorating

the first ten years of "The American Atheist
Hour," the weekly radio talk show produced
by the Houston Chapter of American
Atheists, calculated to show to all and sundry
that Atheism can have a continuing viable and
vibrant voice in one of the most repressive
and reactionary cities in the United States thus demonstrating, hip hip hurrah, that there
is ample example for Atheists' being assertive
on the audio electronic media in the more
cosmopolitan cities of the United States.

Austin, Texas

May 1990

Page 21

RAOI

IFINESTI

Il

t is May of 1990,and we are celebrating the tenth anniversary of "The

American Atheist Hour" radio program, broadcast out of Houston, Texas.
"The American Atheist Hour" was the
first live, continuous Atheist broadcast
of any kind in the United States when it
started back in 1980. It has been on the
air weekly ever since, and we feel this is
quite an accomplishment. Very little has
been written or said about this program
beyond the broadcast itself. Those of us
who produce it have been making history, but have been a bit negligent in
keeping Atheists of America informed
about our efforts. No doubt some of you
are interested in knowing what it is like
to hear a live Atheist broadcast. I therefore want to take this opportunity to tell
the story of how it came about, and how
it feels to produce and experience live
Atheist radio.

by Gipson
Arnold
Page 22

May 1990

The history of Atheist radio is brief,

with most of it being obscure, if not lost
completely. Religion did not take long to
monopolize the airwaves in the United
States once radio became popular. No
doubt Atheists and freethinkers of those
early years realized the need to defend
their views on the radio, but little information is available about any attempts
being made. We can imagine there being
a few appearances by Atheists on radio
doing interviews, or (more likely)debates
with preachers, but I cannot verify that.
The Library of the Houston Chapter of
American Atheists has a biography of
Clarence Darrow mentioning a radio
appearance in which he played the part
of an attorney defending Benedict Arnold
in a mock trial. It did not mention any
radio appearances to discuss agnosticism or Atheism, but since he was so
famous for speaking publicly in this
American Atheist

Facing page: The staff of "The American

Atheist Hour." In the back row are Kim
Willis, Gipson Arnold, Kathy Diederich,
Robert Knowles, and Bruce Chancey. In
the front row are Victor King and Gary
Yokie.
This page: Atheist radio pioneer Robert
Harold Scott (right) caused a national
controversy when his voice went over
the San Francisco airwaves. Decades
later, Howard Kreisner and Madalyn
O'Hair (below right) continued his work.
Now his pioneering spirit lives on in the
efforts of Kathy Diederich (below), who
has produced the "The American Atheist
Hour" since 1987.

regard, it seems likely that if he spent

much time on the radio, he would have
expressed his views. I also found a short
clip about Joseph Lewis doing some
freethought radio programs in Miami,
Florida, but no date was given.

The first Atheist broadcasts

The earliest Atheist radio appearance
that I can state with any certainty is that
of Robert Harold Scott, in what is generally accepted as the United States'
first Atheist radio broadcast. The historic address was given on 17 November

1946over radio station KQW

in San Francisco. Scott had
to fight a five-year legal battle
with radio stations to give
him airtime. He had been
trying to get the FCC to
force radio stations to provide time as a matter of fairness. The FCC, on 19 July
1946, handed down a decision concerning radio broadcasting which said that "freedom of religious belief necessarily carries with it freedom to disbelieve," and that
"immunity from criticism is
dangerous, dangerous to
the institution or belief to
which the immunityis granted
as well as to the freedom of
the people generally."
Finally, KQW said Robert
Harold Scott could have the
spot on Sunday morning
normally filled by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. This is when
Scott gave his address titled "There Is
No God," in which he made a statement
that should become recognized as very
significant in the history of Atheist
media:
I do not throw stones at church
windows. I do not mock at people
kneeling in prayer. I respect everyone's right to have and to express
the belief that a god exists. But I require respect for the corresponding right to express disbelief in
such a being.
The resulting furor over the broadcast
was reported in Newsweek and Time
magazines. Newspapers all over the
country covered the story, and it even
resulted in a congressional investigation
of the FCC! As a result, there would be
no more airtime offered to Robert
Harold Scott.
The only other Atheist radio broadcasts that I am aware of, prior to Madalyn O'Hair's "American Atheist Radio

Austin, Texas

May 1990

Series," were discussed on her radio

program titled "Other Radio Programs,"
first broadcast on 31 May 1971.The first
show she mentioned was a single program done on radio station WOL, in
Washington, D.C., on 3 March 1963,by
Mr. Edward Ericson. Mr. Ericson was a
leader in the Washington Ethical Society. His program was titled "Have Atheists the Right to Teach in Our Public
Schools?" The other radio program was
one which ran in 1967 for about six
months in Minnesota, on radio station
WEBC. It aired on Sunday mornings at
10:25 A.M. and was five minutes long.
The show was called "The Voice of the
Page 23

Gerald Tholen, Jon G. Murray, Madalyn

O'Hair - pen in hand - and Howard
Kreisner quickly figure out a statistical
answer to an inquiry.

Crucible" and was produced by Garry

De Young, a longtime member and supporter of American Atheists. His broadcasts started with a half-minute recording of "The Stars and Stripes" by John
Philip Sousa.

Naturally, one of the goals of the new

Chapter was to try to get some media
exposure in order to attract Atheists to
the local group. Howard Kreisner, director of the new Chapter, had previous
broadcasting experience. He was able
to get some guest spots on local television and radio talk shows, due in part
The American Atheist
to the shock factor of having an active
Radio Series
By this time Madalyn O'Hair had Atheist group in Houston. Dr. O'Hair
been appearing on television and radio and Gerald Tholen, national ombudstalk shows quite regularly and trying to man of American Atheists, also had
get her "American Atheist Radio Series" media appearances in Houston. These
started. She broadcast her first show on appearances, plus some newspaper
KTBC in Austin, Texas, on 3 June 1968- articles, did attract a bit of attention, but
This radio show was fifteen minutes in they still were far short of the kind of
length, was prerecorded on tape, and popular exposure that Atheists in this
was subject to prior approval (censor- country really need and deserve.
ship). A full report of the "American
Atheist Radio Series" is contained in the Independent radio
June 1988 issue of American Atheist
for independent folks
magazine. To make a long story short,
Fortunately, there was a kind of radio
that radio series eventually failed due to environment that offered hope of being
lack of funds, the logistics of producing accessible. It was community licensed
and shipping tapes, and the production
public radio. Community licensed radio
of cheap AM/FM radios, making the FM stations are like other public radio staradio band commercially successful and tions except that they are not licensed
airtime expensive. The radio series was to universities or major corporations.
discontinued in September of 1977.We The independence of these radio staclearly needed another way to get Athe- tions contributes to their willingness to
ist programming on the radio. It needed deal with topics that other stations
to be economically feasible and free of avoid due to affiliations. According to
the commercial pressures that tend to the National Federation of Community
discourage controversial topics from Broadcasters, there are 101 community
being aired.
licensed radio stations in the United
States.
In Houston there is KPFT, a commuThe Houston Chapter is born
In 1979,a Chapter of American Athe- nity licensed public radio station owned
ists was founded in Houston, Texas. by the Pacifica Foundation in California.
Page 24

May 1990

The Pacifica Foundation owns five radio

stations, and lists the freedom of speech
as a founding premise. It has been involved in at least two important court
cases in support of free speech on the
radio.
When the Houston Chapter first
began meeting, it was well understood
that KPFT would be the place to seek
media access. KPFT had established
itself as a broadcaster of "alternative"
viewpoints, and even holds the distinction of being the only radio station in the
United States that has had its transmitter
bombed twice by intolerant listeners.
The station's signal is transmitted at
100,000 watts, which is the legal maximum for the Houston area. KPFT's antenna is only about 475 feet up, though,
which limits the broadcast range a bit.
The station began reading public announcements of American Atheist Chapter meetings, and representatives of the
Chapter were guests on some of the
shows being aired at the time. Howard
Kreisner immediately began talking seriously to the station about starting an
Atheist radio program.

A show is born
Ray Hill was the station manager and
Richard King was program director in
1980, and they wanted to create a program called "Other Religions." Christian fundamentalism was saturating
commercial media, and they felt other
viewpoints needed to be expressed.
Howard Kreisner was assigned this
time to present the Atheist perspective.
The first show was aired on Sunday,
May 4, at 8:00 A.M. For an introduction,
he used John Lennon's song "Imagine."
His program dealt with state/church
separation, along with the aims and purposes of American Atheists. It also contained, among other things, a segment
called "Nirvana Newsreel," which reported news about violence, prejudice,
and greed in the name of religion. He
told listeners they could call in to ask
questions, but he was so nervous that
he forgot to give the telephone number.
American Atheist

Right: All of the hubbub of "The Atheist

Pride March," in April 1987, at the Seventeenth Annual National Convention
in Denver was taped by Harold Kreisner
(far right, with microphone) to be included
in "The American Atheist Hour."
Below: Howard Kreisner received the
"1980 Atheist of the Year Award" from
Jon Murray at the 1981 Convention of
American Atheists in Salt Lake City.

The program ended without any calls.

Kreisner represented Atheism again the
next Sunday, and it was clear by the end
of this segment that the time slot belonged
to "The American Atheist Hour."
Kreisner said that the eventual focus
of "The American Atheist Hour" took
quite a while to develop. He liked the
format he heard on another KPFT program called "Wild-N-Stein." This was a
show dealing with Gay rights issues in
which they used free format discussions, the reading of literature, and
topic-related music to educate about
the subjects covered every week. Kreisner wanted to use that sort of approach
with "The American Atheist Hour."
It was difficult at first to find music expressing Atheist ideas, but through the
years, thanks in part to the help of other
KPFT volunteers, our list of such songs
has grown quite large. It is not necessary
for all the music we play to have a specificallyAtheistic message. For instance,
a discussion about censorship might be
accompanied by a song about freedom
of speech, or about the denial of it. We
also decided that it was not necessary
for allthe music we play to be performed
by Atheists, since music by known
Atheists is so rare, and since the personal viewpoints of most musicians cannot
be determined anyway.
There were a few people who helped
some with the program from the beginning. Gerald Tholen, national ombuds-

Austin, Texas

man of American Atheists, presented

topics that he prepared, including a discussion of his book Massism us. Natural
Religion: The Atheistic Connection.
Chapter member Anna Pease was usuallythe voice of "Nirvana Newsreel" and
helped Kreisner with the program from
the beginning. There were a number of
people who worked the sound board to
"engineer" the show. Other Chapter
members read passages from Atheist
books and articles, and there were interviews with special guests.

Creating a balance
of programming
Kreisner says that he tried to create
a balance between what Atheists like to
hear and what he thought they need to
hear. According to Kreisner, Atheists
tend to like religion bashing (and there
was a bit more of that in the early years),
but the various religious factions bash
themselves better than anybody, so he feels it is important for Atheists to educate
therriselves and to focus on
the positive aspects of Atheism.
He likewise took a lot more
telephone calls in the early
years until he realized that too
much precious time was being
filled with religionists expressing religious ideas. He decided
that his proper objective was
to collect Atheists, to organize,
mobilize, and encourage them
to articulate their positive
Atheist viewpoints. "Nirvana
May 1990

Newsreel" was eventually dropped in

favor of more important news dealing
with Atheism and state/church separation.
In June of 1980,"The American Atheist
Hour" moved to noon on Mondays.
This provided a much larger audience
for the program, and for a while it was
extended to two hours. The program
got so popular during this time that it
significantly affected the listening audience of the commercial noontime talk
shows. At the 1981national convention
of American Atheists, Howard Kreisner
received the "Atheist of the Year" award
for producing "The American Atheist
Hour."

Listener support and response

In January of 1983, Howard Kreisner,
resigned as director of the Houston
Chapter of American Atheists in order
to devote his time to the radio program.
Scott Kerns, a very assertive activist,
took over as Chapter director. The
Chapter developed into a more active
group, with demonstrations and other
more noticeable public events. This
provided more serious Atheist news
about which Scott would often report.
Shortly after the election of Scott Kerns
as director, "The American Atheist
Hour" was moved to Thursday evening,
where it has held its own quite nicely
against such notable prime-time television shows as "The Cosby Show" and
"Dynasty."
As KPFT is a listener-supported radio
station, it is important that shows be
Page 25

~~==========~------------------~

Left: John Allegro, Dead Sea Scroll expert, in from England for the Sixteenth
Annual National Convention of American
Atheists in New Jersey, was interviewed
for the Atheist Hour in Houston by
Harold Kreisner.
Below: The current producer of "The
American Atheist Hour," Kathy Diederich
alleviates a sour note!

able to raise decent amounts of money

for the station during semiannual fund
drives called "marathons." "The American Atheist Hour" has established itself
as a very effective fund-raiser. It usually
receives one of the highest pledge
amounts in the talk-show category. It
also tends to have large percentages of
those phone-in pledges being paid,
which speaks well of the honesty of
Atheists.
Through the years there have been
many wonderful moments. "The American Atheist Hour" has been a part, and
a reflection of, some of the most important events of Atheist history. Among
these would be the occasion of the
twentieth anniversary of American
Atheists in 1983."The American Atheist
Hour" was able to broadcast a nine-anda-half-hour special about the school
prayer decision and its aftermath, in
which Dr. Madalyn O'Hair discussed at
length the violent takeover of her Atheist organization in Maryland, her escape
to Hawaii, to Mexico, and of her final
settlement in Austin, Texas. Other notable guests who have been on "The
American Atheist Hour," either live or
as call-in guests, are abortion rights
activist Bill Baird; linguist and Bible
scholar John Allegro; author of Christianity Before Christ, John G. Jackson;
and author of The X-Rated Bible, Ben
Edward Akerley.
Throughout the time that Howard
Kreisner was doing the show, "Imagine"
was used as the opening theme song.
During the course of the song, the
sound .level would be reduced, and a
brief introduction would be read:
KPFT and the Houston Chapter of American Atheists present
Page 26

"The American Atheist Hour."

American Atheists is an organization dedicated to the promotion of
freedom of thought concerning religious beliefs, tenets, dogmas, rituals and practices, jl .~complete
separation of state and church,
and the development and propaeation of a social philosophy in
which people are central; who
alone must be the source of
strength, progress, and ideals for
the well-being and happiness of
humanity. "The American Atheist
Hour" is a program of news, ideas,
and opinions produced by members of the Houston Chapter of
American Atheists.
Kreisner talked a lot on the program
about practical aspects of being an
Atheist in our culture. He educated
Atheists about state and church issues
by examining the significance of important court cases. He also dealt heavily
with the influence of media, and how to
tell honest information from misinformation. When he discussed more abstract ideas or viewpoints, he would do
a sort of "monologue" with a
bed of light music as a
background.

was very little time left to talk about

important Atheist topics.
This is about the time I got involved
with the Chapter and the radio program.
I wrote some segments for the show,
and wrote and recorded a few Atheist
songs.
In 1985, Scott Kerns recorded the
speeches presented at the Fifteenth Annual National Convention of American
Atheists in Austin, Texas. This is something the Chapter continued to do,
which significantly increased the amount
of high quality programming that we had
readily available for air-play.
Due to popular demand, "The American Atheist Hour" was once more given
an hour-long format. The program content improved some more when, in 1986,
Houston Chapter fund-raising projects
enabled us to purchase two tape decks
for the purpose of dubbing and mixing
audio tracks for the production of more
creative prerecorded segments. Another
development in the program was the
taping of on-location news segments
called "Earwitness News" reports.

Making friends
while making history
Something should be said about the
scene surrounding the radio station and
weekly broadcasts of "The American
Atheist Hour." Volunteer helpers with
the show, as well as other Chapter members, hang out in the lobby during the
broadcasts. They visit each other while

Production changes
During 1984and 1985,the
program was reduced for a
while to a half-hour format.
This reduction limited the
show's content quite a bit.
By the time the introduction
was played, a couple of public
service announcements were
read, and a song or comedy
piece was presented, there
May 1990

American Atheist

The success of "The American Atheist Hour" has attracted a growing volunteer
staff. In 1985,the weekly program was put out by just four persons (below, insert):
Kathy Diederich, Bruce Senior, Anna Pease, and Howard Kreisner. Though
Kreisner, the original producer of the program, left in 1987,the dedicated - and
increasing - staff made sure that the program continued without missing a beat.
In the back row of the 1987 staff photo are Gipson Arnold, Gary Yokie, Robert
Knowles, and Chuck Schutte. In the front row are Bruce Senior, Scott Kerns, Kathy
Diederich, Kim Willis, and Cathi James.

answering telephones or doing whatever needs to be done for the program.

As you can imagine, "The American
Atheist Hour" receives a few calls that
can certainly be labeled as strange.
There are plenty of opportunities to engage in discussions with weirded-out religious fanatics, but there are also a
good number of serious calls from Atheists who are tremendously pleased to
hear our program on the air. For a while,
"The American Atheist Hour" was followed by a program called "Vibrations,"
which promoted "New Age" beliefs
such as astrology, palm reading, and
spirit channeling. This proved to be an
interesting situation more than once.
After our program is over we usually
decide on a place where we all go to eat
and visit in a more relaxed atmosphere.
These weekly shows and subsequent
dining excursions are surely one of the
world's most successful and enduring
Atheist social settings.

New hands at the helm

In July of 1987,Howard Kreisner announced that, due to an advancement in
his career, he would be moving to San
Diego and thus would no longer be able
to produce the show. At a series of
meetings to determine the fate of "The
American Atheist Hour," it was decided
that Kathy Diederich would take over as
the program's producer, but that there
would be more of a focus on teamwork,
with more people involved and more
voices heard each week. We call our
group "The American Atheist Radio
Collective," a term that had been used
previously, and we began meeting weekly and then monthly to plan topics we
would cover and how to present them.
This group effort has resulted in program content being more thoroughly
researched and more professionally
produced. We have done some experimenting and made some changes in the
format of the show. We use a variety of
different songs for our introduction
now, and produce the program in a sort
of magazine format with Diederich hostAustin, Texas

ing, and introducing the different segments of the show as it unfolds. We try
to keep on top of historical events and
discuss them near their anniversaries.
When we highlight important people of
the past, we often have one person presenting a biographical sketch while
somebody else segments the bio with
related quotes, all with a light musical
background.
Some of the other people presently
helping with "The American Atheist
Hour" are Gary Yokie (the present
Chapter director), Kim Willis (a former
director and longtime activist), Bruce
Senior (sound engineer), Robert Knowles,
Bruce Chancey, and Robin Sherburne
(researchers) .
Some topics of interest being handled
on recent shows include secular sobriety programs as alternatives to religiousbased substance abuse programs, Atheists in the military, and raising children
as Atheists. We have even had monthlong series treating topics like "Black
Atheists" during Black History month,
and a series on censorship which included
a complete reading of D. M. Bennett's
Open Letter to Jesus Christ. There is
May 1990

certainly no shortage of topics to present on an Atheist radio show. The most

difficult challenge now is to keep the
program fresh, and to offer our views in
a way that is worthy of our cause.
"The American Atheist Hour" is now
an American institution. It seems unthinkable for the show to ever end. This
Atheist enterprise is proof that the
barriers confronting Atheists in this
country can be overcome. Everybody
should be so lucky as to have a program
like this available for their enjoyment.
No community should be without an
Atheist voice. How many other Atheist
radio programs can there be around the
country with a little effort? Let's find
out.~
About the author
Gipson Arnold is the assistant director
of the Houston Chapter of American
Atheists. In 1989 he received the "Outstanding Chapter Worker" award.
Page 27

EARWITNESS

NIlS RIPDRT
ATTHE

IMARyl

newspaper article on 4 January

1989 told of hundreds of people

A flocking
to a junkyard in the community of Barrett Station near Houston,
to see a vision of the Virgin Mary on a
shiny tabletop. That night, Don Sanders
and Mark Franceschini of American Gay
Atheists decided to go check it out. When
they got there, they discovered that a light
from a nearby car wash was surely the
culprit, so they unscrewed the bulb. This
caused an angry reaction from the crowd.
The next night, during a regular broadcast
of "The American Atheist Hour," they
went back to the location of the "vision"
and gave us the scoop.
Page 28

May 1990

Kathy: We just got an instant news flash

here. We're going to be talking to Don

Sanders, who is president of American
Gay Atheists. When we started the show,
Kim [Willis]and I were telling you about
the sighting in Crosby and the fiasco
that's going on out there and how Mark
[Franceschini] and Don were down there
yesterday. Well,Don is on the phone now
and he's going to tell you what happened
this evening. So, Don, are you there?
Don: Yes,I am, Kathy.
Kathy: Great!
American Atheist

"Where would the Virgin be

without Houston Lighting & Power?"

Don: I'm at Crosby-Lynchburg

Highlands.

road in

and pointing at it and so on, then looking

over toward the direction of the light while
they spoke, so we feel most certainly that
the light bulb, that particular light bulb, is
playing a very large role in the -

Kathy: That's where it is, huh? The infamous road. Well, tell us when you got
there, what happened, what did you see?

Kathy: In the Virgin Mary.

Don: Well, we pulled up to the back of the

car wash. I'm sure your listeners know
about the car wash and the lights?
Kathy: Yes, I mentioned
earlier.

that to them

Don: Okay, fine. We parked in the parking lot of the car wash, and when we got
there we saw several people standing
around the spotlight, the floodlight that
shines in the direction of the lot where the
vision is being sighted.
Kathy: They were guarding it?
Don: They were essentially guarding it.
There was an older man;: there was a
young teenage boy with along flashlight at
this particular time. We got out of the
truck and KTRH got out of their car, and
we four were walking through the parking
lot and the older gentleman asked us, "Do
you know anything about these light
bulbs?" He said, "People unscrewed my
light bulbs around here last night." We
said, "No, we don't know anything about
it." And so that was it. We went over
toward the entrance to the junkyard
where the sighting is, and KTRH interviewers or media people were trying to go
inside ahead of the line because they were
press. They wanted to do a story, but
whoever was guarding or taking care of
who was going in and out of this thing
wouldn't let them in. They said, "If you
want in, you're going to haye to wait in line
like everybody else; we've had too much
bad press over this lately anyway."
Kathy: So they don't want any press over
there at all?
Don: No, keep in mind the line - it takes
about two hours to get into this thing.
Kathy: That's amazing. And they're not
asking for money or anything like that?
Don: No, we couldn't find that out at all.
Austin, Texas

Don: Yeah, the sighting, or the Mary

image or whatever it is. We talked to some
people who were coming - Mark just
made a little joke, "Where would the
Virgin be without HL&P [Houston Lighting & Power]7"

In fact, we were here last night. No one

seemed to be asking for any money.
There was no indication that anyone was
asking for money tonight. However,
something we noticed is that every church
in the area, whether it's a Baptist church
or whatever religion - the churches are
very full. They were full last night, they're
fulltonight, the parking lots are full, there's
activity going on in each of the churches,
so we think that this is a big boon for the
churches.
Kathy: Well, I bet. I'm sure it is.
Don: And also it's a big boon for the local
merchants in the area because they're doing a very brisk business, like the little grocery stores staying open late because
there's a lot of people here. KTRH interviewed a woman who has driven all the
way from Monroe, Louisiana, to see this.
Kathy: Oh, you're kidding!
Don: No. Now to get back to what else
happened. Later on, Mark and I walked
back to the site of the car wash where our
truck was parked, to check on it because
it was parked on private property. When
we got back, there was a Harris County
sheriff standing next to the gentleman
who allegedly owns the property, and also
next to the young teenage boy, and he
was guarding the light too. And when we
walked back through, they were talking
about the light. We could hear their conversation and they were talking about the
light bulb, and they were looking up at it
May 1990

Kathy:
cute.

(laughing)

Good, that's

pretty

Don: At any rate, some people say, "Yeah,

we see something that looks like the Virgin Mary holding the baby Jesus." Some
people say, "I don't see anything. It's just
a strange light that we see." Keep in mind
that this image is appearing on a piece of
tabletop that is sitting in the ground at an
angle of about thirty degrees, something
like that, and there is sort of a diamondshaped image on it, but it's just like I told
the reporters, all of this can be explained
very scientifically, and I think they were
convinced too that the light from the car
wash is having a big role in all of this.
Kathy: That's so silly.
Don: Yeah, it's quite an incredible thing to
watch how many people will come out to
see something like this, and believe that .
they have actually seen a vision of the Virgin Mary. But why would she pick an old
abandoned junkyard that nobody can get
to? She can project herself off the Transco
Tower. That would be a better place to Kathy: Well, I would think so; she would
get more use out of that. She would get
more coverage that way.
Don: I think she would, yes.
Kathy: Well, thanks for calling, Don. As
I said, we told people about this earlier, so
it's interesting to hear Don: Your roving Atheistreporter,
Kathy: Right! Exactly! So, we'll talk to
you later, Don. ~
Page 29

THE FIRST

10 YEARS

OF THE

HOUSION
CHAPIIR
n January of 1989, the Houston
Chapter of American Atheists celebrated its first decade in existence.
On "The American Atheist Hour," we
looked back on those years by having a
telephone interview with Howard Kreisner, the first director of the Chapter and
original host of "The American Atheist
Hour." Kathy Diederich (the present
host) and Scott Kerns (former Chapter
director) spoke with Kreisner about all
the Chapter had done, while people all
over the Gulf Coast of Texas listened in.
One of the most unique facts about
"The American Atheist Hour" is that it
is live. We felt that this bit of dialogue
would give readers a good idea of what
live Atheist radio is like.

[J

Gipson: (song) Back on the TV again

Jimmy and Tammy and friends

Exploiting our fears with the blackest of
tears
Yes, they're back on the TV again.
Page 30

May 1990

Back on the
Tar dripping
The 01' PTL
Now they're

TV again
down her chin
has gone straight to hell
back on the TV again.

Back on the TV again

Saving us all from sin
With a fraudulent heist and a playland
for Christ
Now they're back on the TV again.
Back on the TV again
Raking the money in
Better send them a buck or you'll run
out of luck
They're back on the TV again.
Kathy: So, without further ado, I'm going to punch in Howard. Howard? How
are you doing?
Howard: Fine, happy new year.
Kathy: Yes, happy new year to you
also. I'm not going to say "Long time no
hear" since we just talked last night, but
American Atheist

We felt that the environment of religiosity prevented the possibility of

extricating fellow citizens from Tehran, so one of the things we did as a
Chapter was to offer to both Cyrus Vance and the Ayatollah Khomeini to
negotiate the peaceful settlement of this dispute in a religion-free context.

Facing page: The Houston Chapter has

taken many opportunities to publicly
protest state/church separation violations. For instance, on 4 April 1984members protested the placement of Christian
crosses, in Bear Creek Park.
Right, below: After leaving Houston,
former Chapter Director Howard Kreisner joined the San Diego Chapter of
American Atheists in its efforts to remove
a religious display from a San Diego
park. As a result, he was the co-winner
of the "Most Hated Atheist" award for
1989.

Kathy: We've got your picture staring

at us here on the board so we can remember what you look like - and actually this is a great picture too. You look
wonderful.
Scott: The Howard Kreisner memorial
board here at KPFT.
Kathy: So what have you been doing in
San Diego? Why don't you give us a
rundown of some of that before we get
into the Chapter itself.

Howard: Well, the biggest thing that we

have done in San Diego was on the
we here at the radio program haven't twenty-third of September. You know
talked to you in - we think it's been some people put up Christmas trees at
several months.
Christmas time and other people litigate.
On the twenty-third of September,
Howard: Yes, it sure has, and it's great
to hear your voice. In fact, I was listen- we filed a suit against the city of San
Ing to the station in the last few minutes Diego for its obscene nativity display in
and - there's no radio station like the public park in the center of town
[Director's Briefcase, American AtheKPFT.
ist, December 1988].It happens to be a
Kathy: You're right, we are very lucky beautiful park if you ever visit San Diehere in Houston to have something like go, and I know some of you will for the
it, very much so.
convention [of American Atheists] in
Howard: I liked Gipson's song too March. Do not miss the park, because
it is where they had a world's fair in, I
[about Jimand Tammy Bakker].
think, 1936. And the buildings are just
Kathy: Yes, that was good, wasn't it?
gorgeous and beautifully landscaped.
Howard: We predicted back in 1987 They take this beautiful thing called the
that Jim and Tammy would be back on orchid pavilion and they fillit with eight
different scenes with painted chalk statthe air.
ues and painted fabric, kind of like mini
Kathy: Yes, you're right, and as usual, dioramas. You know in carnivals they
most of our predictions are correct.
have little games in little tent-like things?
You knock down milk bottles. That's
Howard: Yes.
Kathy: So we have Scott here with us where they put these things.
also, since the two of you have been two Kathy: Oh no! That's appropriate!
of the most active people in the Chap- Howard: These eight little scenes, each
ter through many years.
set in separate Howard: Is Scott sitting right there?
Kathy: Yes.
Scott: Right here, Howard, how are
you doing?
Howard: Fine, did you get my envelope?
Scott: Yes, in fact we're looking at your
face as we listen to you on the phone.
Austin, Texas

Kathy: Eight little scenes? So these are

scenes depicting biblical passages or Howard: Yes, different narrative portions from biblical legends, you know like Jesus' circumcision, that kind of
thing.
Scott: (Laughing).
Kathy: What? I missed that!
May 1990

Scott: Jesus' circumcision!

Kathy: That's great!
Howard: Jesus' first breast-feeding.
You know, the early things as well as
other things that have nothing to do
with the nativity, such as the assumption, and Jesus in the temple at age
twelve and so on. So it's really quite a
religious display; it's really not a holiday

display at all. So we [the San Diego

Chapter of American Atheists] filed
suit, because we feel that the display
violates the United States Constitution,
and the California Constitution, which
happens to be a bit more specific in
terms of state/church separation than
the U.S. Constitution.
Kathy: Really?
Howard: And we had a press conference at the Marriott where the conven-

tion will be, and we got a lot of press

attention. A lot of television and radio
attention too.
Page 31

Left: Scott Kerns and Gerald Tholen

appear on the" American Atheist Forum."
Kerns (insert) was a member of the
board of directors of American Atheists
for many years.
Right: On 2 September 1988, the Houston Chapter and American Gay Atheists,
picketed the permanent display of Bible
in a glass-enclosed case outside of the
Harris County Civil Courts Building.

Kathy: Yes, and she's our secretary

right now, going on her second year.
Howard: Well, that's a pretty long-term
involvement.
Kathy: Yes, it is, and she's been secretary before if I'm not mistaken.

Kathy: Great! So this is not

actually just a holiday display. Were they planning on
leaving it up longer?
Howard: No, actually it is
up for six or seven weeks ~..
every year, which makes it &
up for one day out of every eight during
the 365 days of the year. So it's kind of
semipermanent.
Kathy: So it was there, of course, this
last [holiday] time. You're hoping by
next year to have it eradicated?
Howard: I have asked for a permanent
injunction. And I really think we have a
good chance of winning, because it
doesn't fall within the spectrum of the
typical holiday display.
Kathy: No, certainly not.
Howard: And it's sponsored by the
city, and the government simply allows
it to promote religion with their property.
Scott: Where did you find an attorney,
Howard?
Howard: Several have volunteered.
When the issue became publicized by
the Chapter director here, whose name
is Steve Thorne, two or three attorneys
presented themselves to him as volunteers to help.
Scott: That's refreshing.
Howard: It's advantageous for the
Chapter and for this whole effort.
Kathy: It's good to hear that you're doPage 32

ing something with the Chapter that's active, that's nice.

Howard: So far we really Steve and I actually wrote
the suit, the lawsuit that was
filed, and I'll send you a
copy.
Kathy: Yes, we'd like to see that. So
why don't we actually get down to what
the Houston Chapter of American
Atheists has done. You were the founder
of that, were you not?
Howard: Yes, it actually started in January, the second week of January in
1979, and it started at the Shamrock
Hotel. Is it still there?
Scott: No. They tore it down.
Howard: Madalyn and Jon and Robin
rented a meeting room there for the
purpose of organizing a Houston Chapter, and there were about a hundred
people in attendance because Madalyn
draws a big crowd wherever she goes.
Kathy: Oh, certainly.
Howard: The purpose of the meeting
- and Gerald [Tholen] was there too,
and there were about a hundred people
there. Several people volunteered to
participate in a kind of steering committee for our Chapter and I was among
them. Several dropped out along the
way. One of the people who was there
at that meeting, and I remember, and I
know there were others who are still
involved, but one person who is still involved, who was at the meeting was
Monika House.
May 1990

Howard: That's right, she was when I

was director. Anyway, we started there
and we had meetings in people's houses
very shortly after that. In fact we met a
few times in a woodshop in Montrose,
not far from Allen Parkway.
Kathy: Really?
Howard: We just met in the back room
in a place where one of the members
was refinishing furniture, and that was
the place where we met.
Kathy: We've come a long way, I'd say!
Scott: Atheists in the woodpile.
Howard: And we met after a while in
the Holiday Inn at the Medical Center
several times and we issued a lot of press
releases as public service announcements which KPFT did broadcast. During that first year, one of the most important international events was the
taking of fifty-four American hostages
in Iran. And that was something which
all Americans were kind of surprised
about and outraged, and we felt that the
environment of religiosity prevented
the possibility of extricating fellow citizens from Tehran, so one of the things
we did as a Chapter was to offer to both
Cyrus Vance, who was secretary of
state at that time, and the Ayatollah
Khomeini, we offered by telegram, to
negotiate the peaceful settlement of this
dispute in a religion-free context.
Kathy: We know that didn't happen,
but did you get a response to that at all?
Howard: No, none.
Kathy: No, I'm not surprised that you
didn't. Not being in the Chapter at that
time, I didn't realize that was done.
That's interesting. So the radio show
came about when?
American Atheist

Even very early in 1979

everybody thought that we really needed media access and we were patiently contacting KPFT many, many time-so
There was enough movement at the station to allow us our opportunity.

Howard: May 1980. Even very early in

1979everybody thought that we really
needed media access, and everyone
needs media access - and we were
patiently contacting the station many,
many times. There was enough movement at the station to allow us our opportunity. We had been guests on other
programs. Gerald [Tholen] and I guested
on several programs. I was a guest on
John Matthews' talk show on Sunday
night on KAUM (it has another name
.now). But in May we got our first
chance to do a Sunday morning program called "The American Atheist
Hour." Now originally it was supposed
to be a kind of rotating anthology program called "Other Religions," that was
the original context.
Kathy: It started on a Sunday morning,
didn't it?
Howard: "Other Religions," yes, so I
called this program "Other Than Religion."
Kathy: (Laughs) That's good!
Howard: And apparently no other religious group kind of picked up on it so
we did it for a while, and we were only

at it for about a month when we went to

Mondays at noon, and that was a very
good time for us to be on the air. Now
this was 1980. Some of the notable -

Howard: I was director for four years,

and then Scott took over, so that was
'79 to January of '83. That's when Scott
took the helm.

Scott: I heard that first Monday pro- Kathy: And you took full-time with the
.radio program, which you had already
gram, I remember.
been doing anyway.
Kathy: Is that what made you become
Howard: That's right, and it was in the
involved?
January following the election that we
Scott: Yes.
went to the Thursday night slot.
Howard: 1980was an election year, and Scott: Another thing that we did, I beone of the things we did in the months
lieve it was in December of '80, on the
of (I guess) September and October
Atheist Hour, or actually KPFT in genwas - we interviewed representatives
eral, was the "Hear This, Mr. President"
of all six presidential candidates in tape.
town, for their stand on state/church
Howard: That was in January after the
separation.
inauguration of Reagan. Yes, that's
Kathy: So you were actually able to get right, we had special spots about imporpeople to come down and talk on that. tant Supreme Court decisions which
Howard: Oh yes. And the least orga- define separation of state and church.
nized candidates were Reagan and Car- Also we had a pretty nice John Lennon
ter. It was the smaller candidates who program when John Lennon was murwere more organized. So that was one dered. We did a retrospective of a lot of
thing we did. We had a lot of guests dur- his recordings, his interviews and music
as a fitting memorial.
ing that year.
Kathy: Now with the Chapter itself, I
Kathy: So how long were you director
know - I'm trying to remember when
of the Chapter?
Bruce [Senior] and I became involved.
Scott: Eighty-three.
Kathy: Was it '83? I thought it was earlier than that. My goodness.
Scott: I distinctly remember, because
the first thing we did that year was to
picket a Jimmy Swaggart Crusade in
Houston, where he was hollering that
Gays should be put to death, and I remember Bruce Senior showed up as a
photographer for that event, and shortly
thereafter, the two of you became heavily involved.
Kathy: And it's been history ever since,
so to speak. Now I notice on some of
your notes, the Women's Lobby Alliance here and the voter's guide. Didn't
the Chapter at one point have something heavily to do with that, as far as
some of the questions?

Austin, Texas

May 1990

Page 33

Howard: Yes, we helped to write some

of the questions for the voter's guide,
which had to do with asking questions
to candidates. I guess this was back in
1980.We were the first men who showed
up at Women's Lobby Alliance meetings.
Scott: And continued to be the only
men as far as I recall, and our involvement went on until 1986, when the
Women's Lobby Alliance disbanded.
Howard: One of the things I - I got out
my diary from this period, and it reminded me that when we first started,
we didn't have enough money to do a
newsletter, so we sent out postcards.
Kathy: Every month?
Howard: Yes, one of our members had,
not a Xerox machine, but a postal mimeograph machine, and we would send
out notices on postcards.
Kathy: So when did the actual newsletter start then?
Howard: Scott did that.
Scott: That was in '83.
The continuing attempts of American Atheists to be recognized as a part of the
human community have developed in local areas to outreach by its Chapters. That
outreach necessarily must be recognized and encouraged. The National Office of
American Atheists accordingly has developed the pattern of advising, encouraging,
directing, and educating Chapter personnel. When outreaches are crowned with
success, annual awards are made at the National Conventions, broadcast in the
American Atheist magazine, and reviewed on the "American Atheist Forum." The
Houston Chapter has harvested many of these awards. Most notable are the:
American Atheist of the Year, 1981: awarded to Chapter Director Howard
Kreisner for his production of the weekly radio series "The American Atheist
Hour."
Most Hated Atheist of the Year, 1985: presented to Chapter Director Scott
Kerns for his actions in protest of the distribution of Bibles in Houston-area public
schools.
Chapter Achievement Award, 1985: given in appreciation of Chapter members'
volunteer help in the collating of the American Atheist journal.
Chapter Director of the Year, 1986: presented to Scott Kerns.
Distinguished Service Award, 1987: presented to the Chapter for its help in the
general production of the American Atheist journal.
Outstanding Chapter Worker Award, 1989: addressed to Gipson Arnold,
Assistant Director, for his services to the Houston Chapter and to the American
Atheist General Headquarters.
Page 34

May 1990

Kathy: So that was when you took over

and started getting money?
Howard: I think when I was Chapter
director we might have had maybe one
or two newsletters a year.
Scott: No, I think it was - I had more
money than Howard did!
Kathy: Oh, that's the way it worked
out! Until people started donating to
the Chapter.
Scott: And that was back when Atheist activists were chipping in their own
money to do things like that.
Howard: I'm sure that hasn't changed.
Kathy: No, that's true, but it's definitely gotten better. We're more financially
stable than we had been before for sure.
Howard: I think the newsletter looks
beautiful. I really enjoy it.
American Atheist

!l

Kathy: Well, good, we've received a lot

of compliments on it. I think that Rusty
Rhoad, who is the editor, and Gipson
Arnold, who puts a lot of hard work into
that, have done a good job with it.
Howard:

the very first. One thing that happened

in October of '82 was that Houston was
host to a Gay Atheist convention.
Scott:

That's right.

Kathy:

That's right.

Oh, I didn't know that!

Kathy: So when did the Dial-An-Atheiste

service come into play?

Howard: It was a pretty nice affair and

several Atheists spoke. It was quite
nice.

Howard: We started Dial-An-Atheist I

think around 1981 or 1982, but it was just
the same message all the time.

Kathy:
Wow. So did many
attend that?

Kathy: That's what I remember now. I

don't remember when we changed it to
being at least every month, and then we
changed to being weekly, and now it's
weekly to every two weeks. I don't
know - when did that happen? I know
that message was on there forever.

Scott:

people

Yes, oh yes, it was well attended.

Kathy: So people from all over the

country? How did that Scott: Yes, that was back when there
was just one Gay Atheist organization,
GALA.

good

Kathy: GALA, that's right. I forgot

about them. Are they still around?

Kathy: It was good, but you can only

call so many times -

Scott:
I think they're in California,
aren't they, Howard? I think San Francisco.

Scott: It was a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to his nephew, I believe.

Howard:

Kathy: Is that what it was? So when did

we actually start changing that, does
anybody remember?

Kathy: Because you don't hear anything from them anymore. I guess now
that Don's no longer a part of it, you
know.

Scott: It was an exceptionally

message, though.

Scott:

That was '83, I think, late '83.

Kathy: I think we were able to do a lot

of that because more and more people
became actively involved and interested in the Chapter.
Scott: We had some people who were
fairly good writers in the Chapter who
got involved.
Kathy: It no longer was a one- or twoperson show, it actually started spreading out andScott: Occasionally we'd have some
live Dial-An-Atheists.
I know Howard
and Anna [pease] occasionally
answered the phone live and talked to
people.
Howard: Anna was very involved she was involved with the program from
Austin, Texas

I think so.

Scott: It's kind of hard to compete with

Don Sanders and Dominic Florio.
Kathy: Between him and Mark [Franceschini], and Dominic, that is pretty
difficult.
Howard: Don was a frequent
the radio program.

guest on

Kathy: And we still have him on - oh,

not quite once a month, but sometimes
we do.
Howard: Good. Because he's an effective activist. He's a person who has a lot
to offer.
Kathy:

Yes, he really does.

Howard: He brought us a tape with

Mae West on it. It was a tape from 1939,
of Mae West and Don Ameche. It was
May 1990

a satire of the Adam and Eve story. That

was a lot of fun. By today's standards it
was quite tame, but it was thought to be
so racy and obscene by contemporary
standards that she was never on the
radio again.
Scott: The Hays Office,
after them for that one.

I think,

got

Kathy: How funny. I don't guess I've

heard that one. Is it on one of our old
tapes?
Howard:

Probably, yes.

Kathy: I'll have to go digging through

our boxes for that. That would be interesting to hear.
Howard:

Well, Don probably

has it.

Kathy: That's true, he probably does.

That would be fun to hear, I think.
Howard: I'm sure there are a lot of listeners who have never heard that.
Kathy: I'm sure there are. So when was
it that we started getting active with the
Coalition [the Coalition to End Clinic
Violence]?
Scott: That was '85. The coalition became an active organization actually in
1986, I believe, although it is kind of hard
to remember.
It seems like it's been
years. No, I'm sorry, that is incorrect, it
was 1983. It was in November of 1983
that we held the first escort training and
we had a demonstration,
and we began
doing regular escorting at that point.
Kathy: Okay, because I thought we had
been doing it for quite a while.
Scott: And the Houston Chapter endorsed it officially at about the January
'84 meeting.
Kathy: I'm sure we did, because most
of our members were fairly active in
that. That's a real strong emotional
issue and it's one that we definitely
think is very important, we always have,
and I'm sure we always will.
Scott:

That lasted through

early 1987
Page 35

Left: Houston Chapter members have

been consistently involved not only in
local but also national Atheist activism,
participating in all national protests and
marches since the Chapter's inception.
Here former Chapter Director Scott
Kerns (far right) belts out a rally cry at
the Atheist Pride March in Denver on 18
April 1987.

Kathy: Yes, I did, as a matter of fact [Francis] Bellamy. I certainly did. I

found that real interesting the whole
time we were doing research. So much
of what I was looking at came out of our
regular encyclopedias and books that
are available to anybody if they choose
to go and look these topics up. People
are just willing to watch television and
watch news and be told what to think.

and the need for escorting basically disappeared at that point, and we had to
reactivate it again last year in October.

Robertson's participation in the political election. Everything that we disclosed

during our interview came true.

Howard: One thing that we did in '82

was that we got involved with the coalition of groups that was protesting
President Reagan.

Scott: Mmm. That is interesting.

Scott: Right, The Reagan Protest Coalition.

Howard: That's it, and that was in '82,
wasn't it, Scott?
Scott: Yes.
Howard: And each group was protesting Reagan for a different reason. But
we were able to work together and we
got a substantial turnout on a day that
he came to the Albert Thomas Convention Center to raise money for Republican candidates.
Kathy: That's great!
Howard: And we spoke at the rally, and
we were able to influence the platform
of the coalition. It was a very successful exercise.
Kathy: I know that it's important for
Atheists to be politically active as much
as possible. Even in this current election, we had Chapter members who, on
their own as party delegates, tried to
have something put in concerning
state/church separation, since obviously that is one of the things that is most
important to us.
Howard: In the fall of '86, we did an
interview with Kent Tedine about Pat
Page 36

Howard: Everyone was quite hysterical

about Pat Robertson's involvement in
the political process. We analyzed the
issues from a political science point of
view, that is, scientifically. Kent, of
course, is an expert in the subject.
Everything he predicted is exactly what
happened. And the rest, of course, is
history. That's another example of
when we were able to shed a little light
on coming events.
Kathy: Right, I think we usually try and
look at things like that. I'm sure we can
be biased in our own right occasionally,
but for the most part we try to be
rational or look at various sides. I know
that we had a campaign show when this
recent election was going on, and basically what we were doing was shedding
light on some of the falsehoods of even
the Pledge of Allegiance, and that type
of thing. We talked about how "One
nation under God" didn't come into existence until 1954,and that was McCarthyism, and the actual pledge didn't
have that in it and it was written in the
latter 1800s. I think that one thing we
are good for is letting people know that
what they hear a lot of the time is misinformation.
Howard: Did you announce that the
Pledge of Allegiance was written by a
socialist?
May 1990

Scott: You were talking about dispelling myths and misinformation. One of
the things I think the Chapter has been
very diligent in, both on a local and a
national level, is breaking a lot of information first. Howard definitely was the
first person to expose the crosses in
Bear Creek Park here for the real reason that they were installed. We reported
on the events of the Meese [Attorney
General Edwin Meese] Pornography
Commission hearings, which I attended
when I was in Houston, and we got information and interviews from the actual investigators and experts who were
called for the commission. We've infiltrated Life Advocates, the anti-abortion
group, and reported on that. The Federation for Decency, which is another
censorship group, we try to get that information to the people, which you
know they're not going to hear anywhere else.
Kathy: We had a counter-picket of
that. That's one thing good about
KPFT, since we're patting ourselves on
the back. I think that's one thing good
about the Houston Chapter and also
"The American Atheist Hour."
Howard: Ten years, that's a long time.
Kathy: That is a long time. Hopefully
we'll - I know we'll go farther. Hopefully we can continue to be active. This
last year or so we've been concentrating more on letting people know that
we're around. We've had a lot of information booths at the Houston International Festival, Westheimer Arts Festival, and various functions like that. I
attended a media conference for a
American Atheist

The Houston Chapter has never failed

to be represented at the Annual National
Conventions of American Atheists - in
fact, often Houston has the largest
contingent of members present of any
Chapter. They find the conventions
useful both for planning sessions (as at
the 1988 Convention, below right) and
for just plain fun (as at the 1984 Convention, below left).

women's media group, and Scott and I

were talking the other day about how
it's time for us to shake a few leaves, so
to speak, and try another lawsuit or
something. There are various things
here in Houston that need to be addressed.
.
Scott: Numerous violations.
Howard: When I left, there was an
issue of people putting crosses on the
roadsides.
Scott: Right. That is one of the things
that we definitely are going to have to
litigate in the future.
Kathy: And look into what we need to
do to start that.
Howard: That's pretty awful.
Kathy: Every time you turn around it's
going on. Every corner is Scott: We're working with American
Gay Atheists on getting rid of the Bible
monument in front of the Harris County
Courthouse building.
Howard: That certainly has no secular
purpose.
Scott: Yes, as Bruce [Senior] mentioned back there, ifthere's any lawyers
of the calibre and degree of concern like
they have in San Diego apparently,
please give us a call.
Kathy: Yes, as a matter of fact, you can
call us here at 526-4000!
Howard: You having an Open House?
Kathy: Yes, that's right, we do have an
Open House coming up on January 29,

and that will be at #4

Chelsea Place from
2:00 to 5:00 P.M. It's a
Sunday afternoon. It's
a good time to get your
feet wet, in a friendly
atmosphere with people of the same ilk.
Scott: That will be a
good opportunity for
people and members
to locate our new meet:
ing room too.
Kathy: That is true,
we had a mishap last month and we no
longer have the meeting room that we
have had for the last nine years. We will
be meeting at #4 Chelsea Place for at
least the next month. Unfortunately
Atheists are still considered to be
controversial. We lost the room because
somebody in the media violated a portion of our contract (a newspaper published the name of the savings and loan
building where we were meeting). This
was unknown to us until the day of the
meeting that we normally have.

Scott: And, Howard, I meant to say

you're looking good.

Scott: While the ink was still drying on

the newspaper.

Howard: Well, thanks, and Scott, give

me a call.

Kathy: So that's something we still

have to dispel - the controversial
aspect of Atheists. We are just regular
people. It's funny, I was talking to Daniel
Goldman last night and we were mentioning the fact that having a belief in a
superstition is considered the norm in
our society and being a regular person
without any kind of belief system - we
are the ones considered abnormal.
We've got a long way to go but I think
we're making progress. We need to
wrap this up, Howard. I'm getting the
signs here (laughs).

Scott: I certainly will.

Howard: Okay, well - let's look forward to the next ten years with success.
Kathy: And I look forward to seeing
you myself in March at the American
Atheist Convention.

Scott: What number is this one?

Howard: The Convention? Gee, I don't
know.
Kathy: We've been at all of them, right?
I think it's the nineteenth, but anyway,
thanks for being on the air, Howard,
and I always enjoy talking to you.
Howard: Thank you a lot for inviting
me.

Howard: It's a pleasure and let me congratulate you, Kathy, on your continued
success with the program and the
Chapter.
Kathy: Thank you.
Howard: Ithink everybody knows it's a
team effort.
Kathy: Oh, it definitely is!
Howard: ... to get it rolling and I think
it's a very important exercise and I think
we all have a lot to be proud of.
Kathy: You're right.
Howard: Allright, wellyou later.

we'll speak to

Kathy and Scott: Bye, Howard. ~

Howard: Oh yes, won't that be fun.

Austin, Texas

May 1990

Page 37

ElECTION
I

RHETORIC

his piece is an example of one of

"The American Atheist Hour"
productions featuring a collage of
sounds, music, and text aimed at a
particular topic. The presidential election of 1988,with the hyped-up hysteria
about the Pledge of Allegiance in schools,
flag-waving, and the "war" on crime,
was well suited to this sort of presentation. The rhetoric of our leading politicians, when put in such a way as to show
their incredible hypocrisy, with the
approval of cheering crowds, is sobering to anyone concerned about freedom. This segment was produced by
Kathy Diederich (the regular host of
"The American Atheist Hour") and
Bruce Senior (one of our sound engineers).

Song "C.l.A.gent Man"

He's a man to whom the truth remains

a stranger
That he may be elected poses a danger
Oh what a lucky twist of fate, to get
Bush November 8
We'll all head for the mountains come
tomorrow
c.I.A.gent man, C.LA.gent man
Runnin' cocaine through the Contras,
selling weapons to Iran
Song "Circus" -

Talking Heads
Found out this morning there's a circus
coming to town
They drive in Cadillacs using walkietalkies and the secret service
They're bigtop - imitation of life
With all the flags and microphones
We have to cover our act
George Bush: And we must see to it
that government intrudes as little as
possible in the lives of the people, and
yet remember, it is right and proper that
nation's leader take an interest in the
nation's character.

by Kathy Diederich
& Bruce Senior
Page 38

Ronald Reagan: For our children, we

don't think it's wrong to have them
committed to pledging each and every
day to the one nation under God, indiMay 1990

visible, with liberty and justice for all

(cheers). And we have so many requirements in their classrooms, why can't we
have at least one thing that is voluntary,
and that is allow our kids to repair
quietly to their faith to say a prayer to
start the day as Congress does (cheers).
And for the unborn, quite simply,
shouldn't they be able to live to become
children in those classrooms? (We want
Ronnie, We want Ronnie ... )
Pat Robertson: There's another word
that the Democrats did not mention
once in their platform, and not once in
the acceptance speech of their candidate. It's a G-word - the name of God
(cheers). Ladies and gentlemen, the
president of the United States, Ronald
Reagan, was not ashamed to ask the assembled delegates at our convention in
Detroit to bow their heads in silent
prayer to God. As Americans, we are
not ashamed to pledge allegiance to a
flag that is a symbol of "One nation under God" (cheers). And I submit to you
that our party, the Republican Party, assembled here in New Orleans, is not
ashamed to write into our national platform our solemn resolve that the children of this country will once again be
allowed to pray to God in the classrooms of America (cheers). And as an
aside, I should mention that Michael
Dukakis is a card-carrying member of
the ACLU (boos). As you know, that's
an organization dedicated to removing
all public affirmation of religious faith in
America. As president, Michael Dukakis
willpack the courts with ACLU radicals
(boos). If for no other reason, and there
are many, to deny Michael Dukakis the
presidency, this is reason enough for all
of us to vote against him in November
(cheers).
George Carlin: I really haven't seen
this many people in one place since they
took the group photographs of all the
criminals and lawbreakers in the Ronald
Reagan administration. Yeah! Oh! Two
hundred and twenty-five of them so far!
American Atheist

I don't think that a belief in a god

necessarily qualifies someone unconditionally
to be patriotic, or a good citizen for that matter;
we've seen that throughout history.

Two hundred and twenty-five different

people in the Ronald Reagan administration have either quit, been fired, been
arrested, been indicted or convicted of
either breaking the law or violating the
ethics code - 225 of them! And Edwin
Meese alone has been investigated by
three separate special prosecutors and
there's a fourth one waiting for them in
Washington right now!. ..
And the Supreme Court decided a
year ago that it's all right to put people
in jail now if we just think they're going
to commit a crime. It's called preventive
detention .... Well, if we'd known this
seven or eight years ago we could have
put a bunch of these Republican motherf--ers
directly into prison.

They've got muscles for brains

Unknown: The Reagan-Bush revolution has already been written on the
pages of history. Now George Bush and
Dan Quayle are going to add several
bold new chapters to the story of the
greatest nation God ever put on this
Earth.
Ronald Reagan: I know I've said this
before, but I believe that God put this
land between the two great oceans to be
found by special people from every corner of the world, who have that extra
love of freedom.

George Bush: Should public school

teachers be required to lead our children in the Pledge of Allegiance? My
opponent says no, I say yes.
Should our children have the right to
say a voluntary prayer or even observe
a moment of silence in the schools? My
opponent says no, I say yes.
Song "Nation of Followers" - Martha
and the Muffins
This is how it goes
We believe in anything, before we believe
in ourselves
This is how we live
Not at war with anyone, just waging a
war with ourselves
Nation, Nation of followers
Song "Unknown"
Your pain is for you oh Lord as it is,
as it was, as it willbe, forever. Amen.
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
George Bush: Is it right to believe in the
sanctity of life and protect the lives of
innocent children? My opponent says
no, but I say yes.
Song "Muscles for Brains" - Gang
of Four
Don't save me, I can save myself
If I'm incomplete, don't fillthe gaps
Save me from the people who would
save me from myself
Austin, Texas

Song "Master Plan" - Talking Heads

I'm afraid that God has no master plan
He only takes what he can use
Someday we'll live on Venus
Men willwalk on clouds
But we willstill be monkeys deep inside
Pat Robertson: We are the children of
those who tamed the wilderness, spanned
the continent, and brought forth the
greatest nation on the face of the Earth.
We are the heirs of those who enriched
the world with the electric light, the telephone, the airplane, mass-produced
automobiles, transistors, and countless
wonderful inventions. Yet we are the
heirs of a more enduring legacy than
mere material progress. We are the
heirs of a legacy of ideas, a legacy of
freedom, a legacy of equality, of opportunity, a legacy of government of the
May 1990

people, by the people, and for the

people.
Kathy Diederich: Well, you are listening to "The American Atheist Hour."
This is an Atheist's perspective on the
campaign. I hope you enjoyed that. I myself, with the special help of Bruce
Senior, our main engineer, was able to
put this together for you. I want to thank
Bruce Senior for being the help that he
was with this. So, anyway, as you can
tell, instead of trying to deal with tangible problems, such as the deficit, and
possibly even the homeless, or why
don't we even try the environment?
What do we hear? We're talking about
values; such a nebulous idea. Family
values, such as prayer in schools, citizens,
values, and of course that means the
Pledge of Allegiance. Again, these are
nebulous ideas at best, and when I
looked up the word value (and we've
talked about that before), the technical
term for it is the desirability or worth of
a thing, beliefs, or standards, or to
regard something highly.
My question to myself was, "Is there
a monopoly on such ideas?" I don't
think there is, or I certainly hope there
isn't. Atheists and freethinkers have
strong feelings for our country. We're
just as patriotic, or can be, as the next
person. I don't think that a belief in a god
necessarily qualifies someone unconditionally to be patriotic, or a good citizen
for that matter; we've seen that throughout history. Atheists are often equated
with communists, and certainly there
are Atheists who are communists. The
people who say this don't know any
better. They are ignorant of the subject.
Atheists cross all barriers; we are of all
political parties. That's why I hope that
I am not stepping on too many toes
here. However, we are also for selfpreservation and the ideas that we just
heard obviously don't preserve us at all.
We're as proud of this country as anybody else and that's why we try to expose things like this. We want to keep
our country free, or as free as possible.~
Page 39

THE

t+l

ne duty of the Houston Chapter

of American Atheists and the
radio show it produces is to
assess the world situation and let Atheists know exactly where we stand. The
truth is not always pretty, but this is the
world we live in, so it is important to observe life and try to deal with it in the
best way possible. I have always tried,
either with "The American Atheist
Hour" or the Houston Chapter newsletter' to express my views about the world
situation. One of my most ambitious
projects of this kind was a bit of dialogue
aired on 5 January 1989.It was alternately narrated by Kathy Diederich and
myself. I called it "The Big Picture."

Gipson: With ever-increasing problems

Gipson Arnold
Page 40

and challenges that confront us all in our

lives - with magnificent achievements
May 1990

in which we are so proud - we look

back to our past to see how we got
where we are today. With fervent hope
for a better world, and a good knowledge of what is humanly possible and
probable, we look to the future. We observe our declining superstition and our
increasing knowledge. Our technology
is like a growing child, fullof wonder and
promise. As this technology grows, we
have to work increasingly hard to clean
up after it. Can this child we call technology be potty-trained?
Overpopulation, hunger, crime, ailing
economies, and war are all problems
that we aren't dealing with very effectively.Some people would have us reject
the promise of the future and go running
back to the ways of the past - or to the
way the past is thought to have been.
Where are we now as a society? Where
are we going? Where can we go? StepAmerican Atheist

The rise of fundamentalism and the sectarian political activism

we have seen lately
are the result of religion's more determined struggle
to reverse the slow and continual downfall of its dominance.

ping back, we can see the world as one

big culture and life itself as a single process. The mind is just one tool and society is one artwork we can shape with
this tool.
Does the "New. Right" religion-inpolitics image of the 1980s spell an end
to our secular society? Have the churches
become so big and wealthy that they
can't be kept from taking complete control of our lives? To seek some answers
and shed some light, let's take a look at
the big picture.
Kathy: The 1990s will no doubt be significantly different from the 1980s. Ever
since the arrival of the twentieth century, our culture has been changing so
rapidly that every decade seems to have
a unique flavor all its own. The turn of
the last century was when Charles Darwin's evolution, coupled with archeological excavations in the Middle East, lent
a credibility to Atheism that began really
taking its toll on religious belief throughout the world. This was also a time of
very rapid technological development.
Belief in and adherence to religion has
been declining more or less ever since.
Burnham P. Beckwith documented
this decline in his book titled The Decline of
Religious Faith 1912-1984.
He catalogued the methods and results
of major polls and studies throughout
those years. A small sample of what he
found can be seen by comparing results
of one of the earliest surveys with results of a much later survey, thereby giving us sort of a "before" and "after" look
at religious faith. In a poll of college students in 1912,56 percent of the men and
83 percent of the women acknowledge
belief in a personal god who answers
prayers. A belief in immortality was declared by 72 percent of those polled. A
1981 Gallup poll, however, found that
only 19percent of the college graduates
"constantly seek God's will through
prayer." A growing number (22 percent)
of the college graduates polled said that
the Bible is a book of fables. The results
of these polls are just a small part of a

us.

Austin, Texas

mountain of evidence showing religion's

decline over the past century.
The 1980s, however, seem to be a
time when the decline of religion has
been checked somewhat, ifnot reversed
completely. The rise of fundamentalism
and the sectarian political activism we
have seen lately are the result of religion's
more determined struggle to reverse
the slow and continual downfall of its
dominance. Atheists in America know
how Christianity's more aggressive effort to recapture control of our culture
has changed the religious climate here
in the United States. The book Sacred
Rage, by Robin Wright, tells how the
same process is perhaps even more profound in countries under the influence
of Islam:
Gipson: (Quoting Robin Wright) "Yet it
is true that the Islamic crusade is the
greatest single threat to the status quo
in the region .... [It] has become widespread, stretching from Saudi Arabia on
the Persian Gulf into Lebanon and Tunisia on the Mediterranean, and on through
North Africa to Morocco on the Atlantic. No single trend has so threatened
the interests of Arab, Israeli, Western,
and, to a lesser degree, Eastern governments. Nor has any movement sparked
such visible fear."
Kathy: We can hope this deviation in
the progress toward civilizing our culture is short-lived because the church's
power has constantly fluctuated throughout history. We can look at education as
a guide to where our future is headed,
because well-educated and knowledgeable people tend to be less religious.
This is shown by many well-documented
polls concerning education and religion.
The decline of religion so far this century can be attributed in part to the
availability of higher quality education
for the masses. Never before has public
education reached the level it has in the
twentieth century. It does little good for
science to hammer nails in god's coffin
if nobody is made aware of it.
May 1990

Gipson: How is the quality of education

in the United States affecting religion
today? How well is it keeping up with the
progress in science and technology?
United States public education is under
intense scrutiny today because of our
difficulty competing in business with
other countries. This indicates that our
system of education is inadequate. Organized religion is, naturally, blaming
the poor quality of our schools on the
lack of religious teaching therein resulting from the removal of prayer from
public schools in 1963. Actually, the
United States first became aware of
problems with our public education on
4 October 1957(six years before prayer
recitation was removed from the schools).
This was the day the Soviets launched
Sputnik I, the first artificial earth satellite. Americans saw this achievement
and wondered why the Soviets were
able to do it first. Many felt this was a
national disgrace that needed to be remedied. An immediate effort was made to
intensify the school curriculum, which
had been watered down to remove all
unpleasant facts from our history and to
keep from challenging religious beliefs.
Most of the prevailing censorship concerned science because it is seen as the
greatest threat to religious belief. With
the Soviets leading the space race, it
was now seen as a threat to our national
security for Americans to be so ignorant
about science.
The public school system has been
rocked ever since by the conflict between
the need for quality education and the
desire by some to have education with
a Judeo-Christian bias. For years now
the powers-that- be have harbored an
illusion of an economic incentive to support religion. Joseph McCabe, the celebrated Atheist writer, observed that the
United States was in an "unholy alliance"
with organized religion in an attempt to
stop the spread of socialism. Communism and socialism were seen then as a
threat to the very wealthy capitalists
and to those currently in political power.
Religion teaches blind obedience and
Page 41

From the very beginning of our lives we are taught to depend on the national god; that we are incapable of thinking or making good decisions for ourselves, that we are inadequate, that we can't be happy without Jesus in our
lives, that if we are not religious we will be hopeless, selfish, and immoral.
the willingness to suffer one's lot in life,
even if that means an inferior social
status. Government and big business
have therefore promoted religion in this
country to supposedly protect their
own interests, but religioncauses serious
problems of its own that those in power
seem to ignore.
Unintelligent people are easier to sell
products to. Merchandise can be sold to
foolish people by having somebody on
television simply hold the product and
smile. The unthinking person willassume
that the product willmake them happy
and willhardly consider quality or their
need for the product. Most goods in this
country are promoted solely with the
simplistic idea that they will make us
sexy. An intelligent person would see
through this ploy, so the media is raising
our children with heroes and role models
like Fonzie, Hulk Hogan, Vanna White,
and televangelists in what looks like a
concerted effort to nurture stupidity.
People who can't think their way out
of a paper sack are depicted as exciting,
sexy, and popular. Intelligent people are
portrayed as boring. In this way, big
business in America is attempting to
raise a whole generation of stupid consumers who can be talked very easily
into buying anything. Stupid people usually can't make as much money as intelligent people, so profits are lost in the
long run. The stupid consumers, fed
with stupid media, begin working for the
companies designing and building stupid
products. In this way, we are losing our
ability to compete with foreign manufacturers.
Kathy: Another problem with our culture is that we are taught all our lives to
be dependent. From the very beginning
of our lives we are taught to depend on
the national god; that we are incapable
of thinking or making good decisions for
ourselves, that we are inadequate, that
we can't be happy without Jesus in our
lives, that if we are not religious we will
be hopeless, selfish, and immoral. We're
taught not how to learn, but what to
Page 42

_."~~"'-:.:1
haps not. It is difficult to tell, because
such fundamental changes occur so

'

...

slowly and are difficult to monitor.

There are forces pulling us both ways.
Our prominence as a nation and our
ability to compete with other countries
in business will require the habitual use
of intelligent thought. Such a profound
change among people would be truly
revolutionary. Use of traditional thinking based on religious beliefs as opposed
to intellect has been the rule instead of
the exception and has been instrumental
in getting us where we are today in regard to overpopulation, crime, starvation, and pollution. The pope goes to
countries like India and Pakistan and
tells people that they must refrain from
any form of birth control. Pat Robertson
said during his presidential campaign
that the West is rushing toward "racial
suicide" with the use of abortion, and
that termination of pregnancy is causing
a "depopulation of the West." The book
Sex Link, by Hy Freedman, has some
interesting things to say about overpopulation.

'------learn - not how to think, but what to

think.
In the same way, we are taught to be
dependent on products the television
sells. We won't be cool if we don't wear
the right brand of jeans. We will not be Kathy: (quoting Hy Freedman) "Varsexy, and therefore willbe less of a man ious studies have shown the destructive
or woman if we don't chew the right effects of overpopulation on a socibrand of gum. Since everything we are ety. . . . Under [these] conditions of
taught to be dependent on is so super- peace and harmony the population inficial,we willnever stay satisfied. We will creases and the resultant overcrowding
always look for something new outside creates social disruptions. At first these
or beyond ourselves to sustain us. The are minor incidents, but they grow inAmerican people are being programmed
creasingly serious as the situation deteto look for meaning to life in sex, drugs, riorates. The first major indication of an
rock 'n' roll, fashion, society, sports,
important breakdown of the social
therapy, and anything that requires con- structure is the appearance of a generspicuous consumption. It is very un- ation gap, when the adolescents repuhealthy in a psychological sense to cen- diate adult authority and form in youth
ter our lives around the purchase or gangs. These roam the community in
possession of things, especially when defiance of hitherto accepted local laws
we invest in self-abusing religious beliefs. and customs. They prey on all individSo where do we stand concerning reli- uals they encounter and appropriate or
destroy any goods or property they
gious beliefs?
desire.
Gipson: Big business in America may
"This is not a description of some
be beginning to see that perhaps it's not metropolitan inner city, but the case
in its best interest to promote gullibility history of a community of rats. The
among the masses, but then again, per- brown rat, with its almost human ability
May 1990

American Atheist

People seem to be like anything else,

and if you have an overabundance of them,
their value drops.

to learn, remember, and pass on knowledge to the next generation, is the greatest biological competitor to the human
species. Yetthis very intelligent animal is
rendered helpless in the face of an overcrowded environment."

revenue and attendance,

trend? It's hard to tell.

but is it a

Kathy: Jim and Tammy Bakker's PTL

organization' was rocked by a drug
abuse scandal, a sex scandal including
accusations of homosexuality, and nuGipson: The population on planet
merous financial scandals. The PTL
Earth reached five billionin July of 1986, holdings were sold to the highest bidder
and may reach eleven billion by 2050, at a tremendous loss, and Jim Bakker
according to a prediction by the Popu- was indicted on fraud charges. Now the
lation Institute. Street gang activity was Bakkers are receiving $1,000 donations
shown to be spreading in the United once again on their new television show
States in a Houston Chronicle article of [this was before Jim Bakker's trial]. Pat
9 November 1986. People seem to be Robertson said he was quitting his "700
like anything else, and if you have an Club" talk show for good when he ran
overabundance of them, their value for the presidency. His campaign failed
drops. In a small town, you can hardly to get him elected despite god's endorsemeet somebody without them waving at ment, and now he's back on his show
you. In big cities, homeless people are just like he promised he wouldn't be.
everywhere and we can't take the time
Oral Roberts is still with us despite
to notice them. Unwanted infants are the fact that the money he raised with
increasingly being found in dumpsters.
the help of a death threat from god
Child abuse is on the rise, with Catholic- wasn't spent on what he had said god
dominated San Antonio reporting 1,886 wanted it spent on. Jimmy Swaggart
cases of child abuse in the first four lost a significant amount of support
months of 1988. This figure is approxi- when he was caught hiring a prostitute,
mately the same as the year-long total but his shows are still on the air, and his
for 1987.
organization is still big enough to have
All these atrocities intensified during its own zip code.
a time when religious belief apparently
grew in popularity. While illiteracy in- Gipson: The sixties weren't like the
creased, sightings of Jesus Christ, the fifties, and the seventies weren't like the
Virgin Mary, and Satan also rose. Weep- sixties. Happily we can expect the nineing icons, faith healing, and spirit chan- ties to be different from the eighties. It's
neling have been very popular. The hard to imagine lifegetting much crazier
scandals of the big-timetelevision preach- than we have seen lately, but anything's
ers have spurred on decreases in church possible with religion. The eighties gave

us an ex-astronaut hunting for Noah's

Ark, it gave us Tammy Bakker Halloween masks, and "I ran into Tammy
Bakker at the mall" T-shirts. We saw sixyear-old preachers in public schools,
the Harmonic Convergence, an end of
the world that failed to arrive several
times, and dolls held in a praying position through the magic of Velcro. The
pilot of a plane crash that killed thirteen
people said god broke the plane in the
right places. Images of Jesus were seen
on a ceiling, on the side of an oil tank, on
a shiny tabletop, and on a fried tortilla.
A man named Floyd Choat said that
god told him to lie on his stomach at his
son's grave in May of 1988.About three
weeks later, a local sheriff finally hauled
him home and laid him down in his back
yard. Mr. Choat said that he would not
get up until god tells him to. It is now
January of 1989 and we don't know if
he's gotten up yet.
On a positive note, the American
Atheist organization celebrated its
twenty-fifth anniversary in 1988. It has
continued to grow throughout the eighties, and has established the production
of a considerable amount of Atheist
media. It is quite common now for people to challenge religious symbols on
government property. Atheists as a
group are more active and organized
than ever before. Is Atheism going to be
able to have a strong mass movement?
The future could go either way.Whatever
happens now to a large extent depends
on us. OC

Help us keep our suits up

All over the nation, the Society of Separationists, a watchdog Atheist organization, is going to court to stop state/
church violations and protect the civil rights of Atheists. Your help is needed to pay the legal costs in these
efforts to protect all Atheists from mandatory support of religion. Please send your tax-deductible donations to:
Society of Separationists, Legal Fund
P. O. Box 140195
Austin, TX 78714-0195
First Amendment
Austin, Texas

rights are your rights too. Help us protect them.

May 1990

Page 43

.. .:

I INTERVIEW

Gary Yokie
Page 44

uring KPFT's first year on the air,

Iwas a sophomore in high school.
The eclectic blend of minority
public affairs, alternative rock, comedy,
local news, and jazz, bluegrass, classical,
and multi-ethnic music gave me as
much insight into the world around me
as anything my teachers worked to
instill. The most influential program to
me was the "American Atheist Radio
Series"; it ran on Sundays. The mere
mention of the name Madalyn Murray
O'Hair was enough to send local folks
searching for axe handles and pitchforks in the suburbs where Ilived at the
time. It was refreshing to hear that the
Atheist pioneer was not a fire-breathing,
child-eating radical, but instead was a
lone, rational voice in a Sunday broadcasting desert. Less than a decade after
Mrs. O'Hair's prerecorded stint on
KPFT, Howard Kreisner gave us a
homegrown, live radio show devoted
entirely to Atheism. His program (and
Reagan's election to the presidency
May 1990

amid the fervor of the religious right) led

me to membership in the Houston
Chapter of American Atheists.
When Kreisner left Houston to advance his career, Ibecame more involved
with the writing and production of "The
American Atheist Hour." Two segments
of the show particularly evoke pride.
One feature was "Myths and Misconceptions About Atheists and Atheism" (published in the March 1989 issue
of American Atheist). Chapter members helped me compile the more ridiculous slander and disinformation leveled
at our godlessness. The other feature
was a January 1988 program devoted to
the New Age movement. Most of the
show assessed Shirley MacLaine, channeling, past-life regression, crystalclutching, tarot-tossing, the Harmonic
Convergence, and other popular hokum
harking us back to the Dark Ages. Ialso
read verbatim the official letter debunking astrology from the American Academy of Science. We punched up the
American Atheist

"The serious seekers of truth know that my translations and revelations

are more encompassing than most; that in listening to my guidance
they can overcome their fear of
questions like, 'Is tomorrow the end of today?' "

show with an interview of New Age guru

of gurus Dr. AuGratin (portrayed whimsically by Houston actor, playwright,
and radio comic Edwin Erwin). The
zany doctor played it straight, which is
more than I could do interviewing him.
A sample exchange follows:

Gary: . . . but no examination of this

New Age movement would be complete
without a short discourse by one of the
foremost proponents of this worldwide
spiritual awakening. We are fortunate
indeed to have with us tonight Dr.
AuGratin. The good doctor has just
arrived exclusively for our program
from his Rod of God Sanctuary in the
Rocky Mountains. Well, welcome, Doctor. Welcome to "The American Atheist
Hour."
AuGratin: Thanks for inviting me on
your K-Puffed [KPFT] radio program.
Of course, I knew I'd be here, even before I was born (the last time, that is).
Did you know that I met you and arranged this before I was born?
Gary: Why, r had no idea, Doctor.
AuGratin: The last time - I mean I've
been born more than once, you know.
Gary: Oh - All right, I'll go AuGratin: It's true! I'm not goosin' ya,
Ducky! You and others listening can
learn about reincarnation, balanced
karma, forgiveness of sins, and soul
memories in the third session of my
seven-part, mind-startling, inter-purpose
workshops. Next time you'll be able to
pick your parents and your kids before you're born! Ha! Ha! Ha!
Gary: Well, okay, but we have to be
careful not to mention prices and things
- this is a noncommercial station.
AuGratin: Oh, I understand. Can we
mention the product? The tape series?
Gary: Be aware of trademarks AuGratin: Just let me know. Imean I've
Austin, Texas

helped countless people release their

energy - release their light. They find
harmony! I can't tell you how many! I've
helped hundreds create their own reality! They're all up there in our mountain
home, working contentedly, in full control of the circumstances of their lives.
They've opened a new vein in the sacred
mine. You should see the gems and mineral crystals we are finding. We're collecting them, don't you know, at the Rod
of God Sanctuary. You don't have any
spare radio crystals around the station
you'd care to donate, do you?
Gary: Well, we are using them tonight,
but I do like the arrangement you've
spread out here on the board.
AuGratin: It is lovely, isn't it? Audrey
likes these; these are her favorites. She
likes the blue ones the best.
Gary: They do have a luster to them.
AuGratin: Well, I - You know, I've
been sent gems and minerals from the
historically powerful energy sources
that remain throughout this world today.
The Taj Mahal in India, that's where this
little green one here came from.
Gary: That must have cost you a few AuGratin: It cost somebody else. They
sent it to me 'cause, you know, they love
us.
Gary: Well, that's right, to the Rod of
God Sanctuary.
AuGratin: The Rod of God Sanctuary
in the mountains. The Minoan cities of
Crete sent us some more crystals. The
ancient pyramids of Egypt - we got' em
from the Parthenon of Greece, hidden
sites in the Himalayas, and other locations too sacred and secret to mention.
But you know, my work with preColumbian texts and the Dead Sea
Scrolls is recognized worldwide for
what it is.
Gary: I'm sure it is.
AuGratin: The serious seekers of truth
know that my translations and revelaMay 1990

tions are more encompassing than

most; that in listening to my guidance
they can overcome their fear of questions like, "Is tomorrow the end of today?" I actively seek contact with the
masses, the insatiable seekers of truth.
Mountain hermit? Not this soul! I love
their enthusiasm and admiration. I'm
concerned with the teaching of the
spontaneity of truth. By the time you
perceive it, it's already happened. The
brain/thought to do it precedes the perception/thought of the event itself. Ha!
Response is too late! But you know I'm
here tonight to Gary: Gee, I never thought of it that
way, Doctor.
AuGratin: Well, think about it and try
to sleep tonight, Chucko. I'm gonna try
some stuff here. I've got a revelation I
want to share with everybody here tonight. I want to talk to you about how
the fact that (I've got proof and everything) the dinosaurs are a creation of the
oil companies. Let's face it, we're not as
young a planet as we were 225 million
years ago. Neither am I! So before Iget
any older, Iwant to talk to you This evening about the New Age controversy
surrounding the creation (or scientific
evolution) debate.
Gary: Now, we have gotten into the
creation versus evolution debate on this
show, but never with a New Age cast.
I'm sure you can put it into perspective
for us.
AuGratin: I've got proof and everything! I'm gonna tell ya all about it. Yes,
it's me all right, Dr. AuGratin, and over
the years, thousands upon thousands
have written me asking for the facts, the
truth. Those who attended the first
annual AuGratin Solstice Seminar and
Workshop last summer were tremendously rewarded with a surfeit of information, and a spiritual banquet that left
us all stuffed. Ha! In an earlier broadcast
(on another radio station, I don't mind
telling you) we examined modern Himalayan dietetics as the one surviving posPage 45

itive proof that the sacred ball games of

ancient Mexico ("El Huego De Dios" is
what they call them) were parodies of
prehistoric canine archeological methodology. But that's not what I'm talkin'
to ya about! Creation or scientific evolution? New Age hoax? Let's look at the
facts! Dinosaurs - extinct terrestrial
reptiles of the orders Saurischia and Ornithischia, many of which were of gigantic size and abundant in the Mesozoic
era.
Gary: That was a long time ago, Doctor.
AuGratin: It's older than both of us put
together. Fact, fantasy, or terrific hoax,
we know of dinosaurs from fossilremains
that have been preserved in the rocks of
the Earth's crust. What evidence is
that? Ha! Now while Aristotle, in 400
B.C., stated that fossils were organic in
origin, he also noted that fossils were imbedded in the rocks as a result of "mysterious plastic forces" at work within the
Earth. Now how did Aristotle know
about plastic?
Gary: I don't know, Doctor.
AuGratin: It kind of makes you think,
doesn't it? Well, I tell ya, doesn't plastic
come from oil made from dead dinosaurs? Could the ancient record have
been tampered with to cover an awful
truth? I say yes, but let's look at more
evidence. Theophrastus, one of Aristotle's students, believed that fossils had
developed from seeds or eggs planted in
the rocks. Ha! Ha! Ha! Planted indeed!
Planted by those who would keep the
secret origin (of the oil they so earnestly
created a worldwide dependency on) an
unthought-of subject. Well, I've thought
about it, and through painstaking efforts
have prepared indisputable proof. Proof
that dispels the theories of the scientific
evolution of the dinosaurs. Proof that
casts out impractical theories of dinosaur
fossils being remnants of the scriptural
great flood. No! . . . Listeners . . .
seekers. Dinosaurs are a creation of the
oil companies. Yes, they fabricated the
hoax, doctored the record, and planted
Page 46

the false so-called evidence.

Gary: I'm flabbergasted, Doctor! Why?
AuGratin: Why? Why? Because the
petro-controlled United Nations conspiracy sold the Earth to aliens years
ago. That's right, we get oil from outer
space. I've ridden with real aliens who
inadvertently let the awful truth slip.
While on the last flight aboard their
Mayan designed spaceship! Did you
know that Elvis and Luigi Pirandello are
still alive working for the aliens playing
intergalactic buffo musicals? Well, I've
seen that too, it's true! Well, anyway,
messengers from ancient civilizations
have tried to warn us, but we've been
poisoned by synthetic fibres, heavy
paper, and spot-treatments. Now a look
at the truth of the dinosaurs can be told.
Look for it in my forthcoming dinosaur
book, profusely illustrated (Audrey did
the pictures), containing a wealth of
facts, menus, and a panorama of the
secret Eskimo spiritual wars. I'm Dr.
AuGratin, and I'll be back.
Gary: Well, I'm shocked at some of the
revelations that you've come up with
this evening.
AuGratin: They're shocking, aren't
they?
Gary: Yes, they are. I've never looked at
history in that light before.
AuGratin: Well, you know, we've been
working with sentient broccoli up at the
sanctuary and these facts come out.
Gary: Sentient broccoli? Broccoli that
talks, thinks?
AuGratin: We're trying to include it in
our frozen food line, along with the
tapes and the - Can I talk about the
tapes?
Gary: Go ahead. Just no prices and
addresses.
AuGratin: Well, we're still selling the
tapes and the pamphlets, and of course
the frozen food line is coming along
nicely.
May 1990

Gary: Frozen food? I thought it was

salad dressing or popcorn.
AuGratin: That's Newman, god love
him, he's got it and people always think
I've got barbecue sauce. I want to tell
each and everyone of you, "no barbecue sauce." We're still selling Audrey's
AuGratin.
Gary: The frozen food for the microwave?
AuGratin: Yeah, we're a microwave
generation, so we thought we'd come
out with Audrey's AuGratin Afterbirth.
Yep, it's that old 1%8 recipe from home,
from the spiritual sanctuary up in the
mountains. You know we were snowed
in up in our geodesic dome, almost out
of food and fuel, and the real kick in the
tie-dye was Audrey's overdue pregnancy.
Well, everything came out all right, and
we survived the blizzard with Audrey's
AuGratin Afterbirth. Mmmmmmm,
what a flavor, must have been the organic onions. Now you can enjoy Audrey's AuGratin Afterbirth at home.
Precooked, covered with bread crumbs,
butter and cheese (an "in" brand). Oh
no! No burnt pan scrapings are used, it's
organic! Heat in a conventional oven or
a microwave and serve. For you all
know that meat is murder, friends. Remember that nothing had to die for
Audrey's AuGratin Afterbirth. Enjoy the
guilt-free flavor. Look for Audrey's in the
frozen food section of your favorite grocery. If they don't stock it, find out why!
Gary: Well, thank you, Doctor, we appreciate your perspective on the New
Age movement and I'm sure we'll all
take home a cartload of these tapes and
books here and Au Gratin: You can write for them.
Gary: Okay, okay, well, great.
AuGratin: I'll give the prices when you
write.
Gary: Well, thank you, Dr. AuGratin,
the nation's foremost authority on the
New Age movement. ~
American Atheist

Who's running this country,

anyway - god or the state?
or a number of millennia, the idea
has been abroad in the world that
man's primary duty, obligation,
and attachment should be to god. The
state has been, at most, a second runner-up, the family lags in the hinterlands
of semi-importance, and in the last place
is any individual himself. Emperors,
czars, pharaohs, monarches, sovereigns,
rulers, kings, and presidents have supplicated the representatives of gods the priests, the monks, the holy men,
the sacred ones - and in obsequious
manner bowed to their wills. The family
was the unit of indoctrination and the
individual was nothing in the scheme of
things.
With the advent of the United States
into history, the situation changed somewhat, but not really all that much.
Until that time most civilized nations
had been theocracies in whole or in
part, especially since the dominance of
Judeo-Christianity (beginning with the
Roman Catholic church) in the West. In
regard to the beginning of our nation,
from the very early 1600s the idea of
state theocracies was brought to our
eastern seaboard colonies and deliberately planted there as Protestant
rivals to the outreach of Spain and Portugal throughout the world and especially in South and Central America, as
well as in the southwestern portion of
what was to be the United States. One
needs to remember that Spanish colonies were thriving in the South and the
Southwest from the early 1500s. Brazil
was claimed by the Portuguese in 1500.
Ponce de Leon explored Florida in 151213.Hernando Cortes set out to conquer
Mexico in 1519.Diego de Almagro completed the conquest of Peru in 1524-35.
Chile was invaded in 1535-36.Saint Petersburg, Florida, was founded in 1565.
Buenos Aires, Argentina, was settled in
1580. The Spaniards moved into Monterey, California, in 1602. In the north,
the Roman Catholic French had begun
the settlement of the area now known as
Canada from 1534,primarily to establish
fisheries and for fur trading. Quebec

Is religion so
sacrosanct in the
United States that only
"a compelling state
interest" can interfere
with criminal acts of
the religious?

Born on April 13, 1919,Dr. O'Hair

initiated the United States Supreme
Court case Murray v. Curlett, which
removed reverential Bible reading and
prayer recitation from the public
schools of our nation in June 1963. She
founded American Atheists in the
same year. Together with GORA she
founded the United World Atheists,
sponsor of the triennial World Atheist
Meet. A champion of freedom of
speech, freedom of assemblage, freedom of conscience, and the right to be
free from religion, she is known nationally and internationally as an Atheist
spokesperson.

Madalyn O'Hair
Austin, Texas

May 1990

was founded in 1608.These settlements

were flourishing before the first Johnnycome-lately straggling Protestant landings in Virginia in 1604and later at Plymouth Rock in 1607 and 1620. In all, religion ruled, and in the areas governed by
the Spanish and the Portuguese, the
Inquisition was still in force in America.
Since only the native American Indians
were involved in the brutality of the
Roman Catholic religious reign in the
South/Southwest, no one gave a damn.
And since it was only working people
caught up in the Protestant witches
craze in Massachusetts, no one gave a
damn about them either - press them
to death, who cares?
In the north, along the eastern seaboard, every colony became an established Protestant theocracy. God reigned
through his clergy. The religious theocracies were slowly legally "disestablished" in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and
New Jersey in 1776;in New York, North
Carolina, and Georgia in 1777;in Virginia
in 1786; in South Carolina in 1790; in
Connecticut in 1818;and in Massachusetts in 1833. All of the colonies had at
least one hundred and fifty years of
theocratic reign before their citizens
were released from tax support of the
clergy.
This disestablishment, when it came,
did not strip from the clergy their political power or their control of education
or the culture of the United States.
Basically, the ordinary American citizen
was still influenced by the pull of fifteen
centuries of Judeo-Christian religious
domination over the lives of all of the
peoples of the Western world.
For millennia mankind had been held
to be a subject of the Governor of the
Universe - god - before he could possibly be a member of the Civil Society.
Concomitant with that was the idea that
religion must be exempt from the authority of society at large. The religious
had no restraints put upon them by organized society, that is, civilization. Perhaps the citizens of the United States
did not need to pay the salary of the
Page 47

For millennia mankind had been held to be a subject

of the Governor of the Universe - god - before he could possibly be a
member of the Civil Society. Concomitant with that was the idea that
religion must be exempt from the authority of society at large.
clergy after religion had been officially
"disestablished," but that did not mean
that their lives would not be ordered
according to the morality and the dictates of "The Good Book"

God first, humankind second

As one goes back now to read the
Declaration of Independence, it is stillall
there.
When in the Course of human
Events, it becomes necessary for
one People to dissolve the Political
Bands which have connected them
with another, and to assume among
the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which
the Laws of Nature and Nature's
God entitle them, _..
We hold these Truths to be selfevident, that all Men are created
equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, ...
We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress Assembled, appealing to the Supreme
Judge of the World for the Rectitude of our Intentions, ... And for
the support of this Declaration,
with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other .
[Emphasis added.]
They thought that Nature and Nature's
God, their Creator, the Supreme Judge
of the World, and divine Providence
came first.
Much has been written about the
Virginia fight against established religion, but - again - rereading Jefferson
and Madison, with a sense of surprise
one sees that they accepted the premise
of the superiority of religion and god.
Jefferson's Reply
to the Danbury Baptists
January 1, 1802
Believing with you that religion
Page 48

is a matter which liessolelybetween

man and his God, that he owes
account to none other for his faith
or his worship, ...
I reciprocate your kind prayers
for the protection and blessing of
the common Father and Creator
of man ...
Madison's Memorial
and Remonstrance against
Religious Assessments
Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that
Religion or the duty which we owe
to our Creator and the Manner of
discharging it, ... "
The Religion then of every man
must be left to the conviction and
conscience of every man; ...
It is unalienable also; because
what is here a right towards men,
is a duty towards the Creator. It is
the duty of every man to render to
the Creator such homage, ...
This duty is precedent both in
order of time and degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society.
Before any man can be considered
as a member of Civil Society, he
must be considered as a subject of
the Governor of the Universe: And
if a member of Civil Society, who
enters into any subordinate Association, must always do it with a
reservation of his duty to the general authority; much more must
every man who becomes a member of any particular Civil Society,
do it with a saving of his allegiance
to the Universal Sovereign. [Emphasis added.]
Jefferson's Bill
for Establishing Religious
Freedom (in Virginia).
Introduced in 1779,
passed in 1786
by the Assembly of Virginia
Well aware that ... Almighty God
hath created the mind free, and
May 1990

manifested His supreme will that

free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible of restraint;
that all attempts to influence it
by temporal punishments, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations,
... are a departure from the plan
of the holy author of our religion,...
We the General Assembly of
Virginia do enact ...
that all men shall be free to profess ... their opinions in matters
of religion, and
that the same shall in no wise
diminish, enlarge, or affect their
civilcapacities. [Emphasis added.]
One can plainly see that the expression in the Declaration of Independence
summed up the opinion of the prior
twenty thousand years of humankind's
recorded history: god was first.
And it has not changed in the United
States since 1776. God has always and
now come(s) first, above and beyond
obligation to self, to family, to community, to state, even to any proper or
theoretic principle of law.

Special privileges for god's agents

The agents of god have always been
excluded from what must be imposed as
duties on individuals in order to form a
cohesive and mutually beneficial society.
In the United States until this day ministers or students of the ministry are excluded from the draft, from service in
the armed forces. Religious leaders and
religious institutions are free from sales
tax, income tax, inheritance tax, real
estate tax, franchise tax. Christian Scientists may with impunity kill their children by withholding medical care. Jehovah's Witnesses may do the same rather
than permit a blood transfusion. The
Amish may deprive their children of
education. The Moslems may mutilate
their women with pharaonic circumcisions. The Jews can impose upon the
nation the idea of circumcision of all
males. Although priests and nuns now
have the benefit of payments from
American Atheist

Up to the current date, religion has been sacrosanct,

transcending all other human values.
And government has been afraid
to say religion nay.
Social Security, this was given to them
without their paying the taxes you
shoulder for your future Social Security
benefits. Until recent times the clergy
rode free on trolleys, streetcars, buses,
trains, and airplanes; even today they
are frequently given discount rates.
Government turns over to religious institutions billions of dollars yearly for
these organizations of god to furnish
social services to the casualties of modern life.
Government constantly pays deference to the representatives of god who
invade the White House or gubernatorial mansions, the federal and the state
congresses, and city halls at will. The
minions of religion intrude themselves
into education, politics, economics,
medical care, social welfare programs,
detention and punitive facilities, and into
the judicial, legislative, and executive
levels of all governments. They claim a
monopoly on morality and the need to
dictate their terms therefor to all of the
people of the nation; the leaders of the
nation toady before them.

Restricting religion
When viewed from this historical perspective, it becomes obvious that the
famous "wall of separation of state and
church" was to preserve the rights of
religion from the inroads of government. This is, in fact, the current radical
religious right's interpretation of the
First Amendment: religion can do what
it may and government dares not interfere.
Up to the current date, religion has
been sacrosanct, transcending all other
human values. And government has
been afraid to say religion nay.
When, therefore, the Supreme Court
of the United States recently handed
down a decision which the religious
interpreted as impinging upon their
"free exercise" of religion, it caused an
uproar in the religious camps across the
nation. Government had dared to tell a
specific minority religion practiced by a
much abused ethnic group that an imAustin, Texas

portant ritual central to its doctrine was

in conflict with general laws purporting
to govern the health and well-being of
everyone in the nation. Therefore it or-

gious group (of Native American Indians)

had in using drugs in a religious ceremony under the protection of the "Free
Exercise" of religion clause of the First
Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States.
That First Amendment had affirmed
from the date on which it was adopted 1
that the rights of religion were superior
to the rights of our collective people as
set forth in the Constitution of the United States. It opted religion out of the
power of the Congress to supervise it in
any way, to pass any law which would
interfere with it. The pertinent part of
the First Amendment states:
Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of
religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; . . .

On 22 September 1990, six

years after they were fired and
six months after the Supreme
Court decision, Alfred Smith
and Galen Black were advised
they are not entitled to unemployment compensation.

The religious uproar over the recent

Supreme Court decision, the proverbial
biblical wailing and gnashing of teeth,
has continued unabated, headlines
screaming in religious journals after the
immediate hubbub of radio, television,
newspapers, and news magazines had
subsided.

The peyote problem

dered that the religious ritual must be
discontinued.
Only once before in the history of the
nation had such an opinion been handed
down, and that also was against a small
religious group struggling for recognition of one of its central doctrines: the
Mormons and polygamy - but I willget
back to that.
In mid-April the Supreme Court of
the United States handed down a decision regarding the use of peyote, a
cactus that contains the hallucinogenic
substance mescaline, in the religious
ceremonies of the Native American
Church. Basically the decision was that
the United States had a more "compelling government interest" in controlling
drugs on behalf of the public than a reliMay 1990

Let's have a look at the case, Employment Division, Department of Human

Resources of Oregon, et al. v. Smith et
al., the opinion on which was delivered
by the Supreme Court of the United
States on 17April 1990.

"The first ten amendments (Bill of Rights)

were ratified effective 15 December 1791,
and at that time spelled out a federal right.
The First Amendment was not made applicable to the states until the passage of the
Fourteenth Amendment, seventy-seven
years later. The Fourteenth Amendment
was ratified on 9 July 1868. Supreme Court
decisions in the cases of Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940), Murdock v.
Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. :i05 (1943) and Everson
v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) had
affirmed this through case_law.
Page 49

But beyond believing and professing,

there is the matter of actions based on those beliefs and professions.
Here the Supreme Court,
with Antonin Scalia writing the opinion, drew a line.

The facts are that two men, Alfred L

Smith and Galen W Black, were fired in
1984 by the Council on Alcohol and
Drug Abuse Prevention Treatment
(ADAPT), a private drug rehabilitation
organization, because they ingested
peyote (for sacramental purposes they
claimed) at.a ceremony of their Native
American Church. When they applied
for unemployment compensation, they
were denied benefits since they had
been discharged for work-related "misconduct." The misconduct was the ingestion of peyote, a hallucinogen (mescaline) derived from the plant Lophophora williamsii lemaire, which was
used for sacramental purposes at religious ceremonies in which they had participated in the Native American
Church.
Since the peyote had been ingested at
their church, not on their job, they filed
suit to have the unemployment compensation decision reversed. The suit
alleged that neither man had broken the
law; and neither was charged with a
crime. The case, over a three-year period, finally worked its way up to the
Supreme Court of the United States.
The Oregon controlled substance law
(nowhere quoted in the Supreme Court
decision) makes the consumption of
peyote a crime. However, the law did
not speak to "sacramental [i.e., religious]
use" of peyote, and the Supreme Court
sent it back to the Oregon Supreme
Court for a determination on this issue
alone: ifreligious use would exclude the
ceremonial use of peyote from the legal
proscription of the drug. That court
found that the Oregon statute made "no
exception for the sacramental use" of
the drug. This, it held, was an infringement of the Free Exercise clause of the
First Amendment and the state could
not deny unemployment benefits to the
two men who used the hallucinogen for
a religious ritual. The state appealed and
the case soon worked its way back up
to the Supreme Court of the United
States. A decision needed to be made as
to whether or not, since Oregon prohibits
Page 50

all use of peyote - including religious

use - that prohibition was in conflict
with the Free Exercise of religion clause
of the First Amendment.

~BrrIBlJ'
l11ten

i)~

God approved of polygamy

and David and Solomon demonstrated it. Joseph Smith had
forty-eight wives and Brigham
Young twenty-seven, but when
all Mormons tried it, Puritan
America said, "No!"

Searching for his creator

Smith, one of the men who brought
the suit, is a Klamath Indian who was
reared in a non-Indian society, attending
a Roman Catholic school as a child. He
is also a seventy-year-old recovered alcoholic and was working at a substanceabuse treatment center in the 1970s.At
that time, he became involved often
with Native Americans who had been
convicted of driving under the influence
of something or other, and was invited
to discuss the problem of alcoholism at
their Indian church. He soon began to
attend the Native American Church's
ceremonies and felt that this brought
him closer to his roots. Along the way,
after overcoming his alcoholism, he
May 1990

began a search for his "Creator," through

continuing involvement with Indian
religious rites, including "sweat lodge
ceremonies" and ultimately the use of
peyote.
Galen W Black, the other litigant, is
not a native American Indian and has
not been a subject of media attention.
Smith, however, has sought out opportunities to be heard in support of the
Native American Church ritual which
he desires to preserve. He is currently
working at Goodwill Industries as he
pursues his religious goal.
The issue was, in a sense, not new to
the Supreme Court of the United States,
which had had the matter of denial of
unemployment compensation because
of conduct required by a worker's religion before it at an earlier time. The rulings have generally been that a worker
may not be asked to forgo conduct required by his religion in order to retain
his job, or if fired because he insists on
the religious conduct, he may not be
denied unemployment compensation.

When religion breaks the law

In its recent decision on Smith, the
Supreme Court first reviewed the Free
Exercise cases which have been before
it and pointed out that it had held in
diverse cases that the free exercise of
religion meant, first and foremost, the
right to believe and profess whatever
religious doctrine one desires. The First
Amendment, then,
1. excludes all "governmental
regulations of religious beliefs
as such";2
2. prohibits government from compelling affirmation of religious
belief;"
3. prohibits government from punishing the expression of religious
doctrines it believes to be false;"

2Sherbert u. Verner, 374U.S. 398 (1963).

3Torcaso u. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1%1).
4United States u. Ballard, 322U.S. 488(1%1).
American Atheist

With the theoretics underlying the establishment of the United States as a

government, and particularly under the First Amendment, the Mormons
should have been able to stay with their "higher calling" from god and
should have been able to continue their polygamous practices.

4. prohibits government from imposing special disabilities on the

basis of religious views or?
5. prohibits government from lending its power to one or the other
side in controversies
over religious authority or doqma.f
But beyond believing and professing,
there is the matter of actions based on
those beliefs and professions. Here the
Supreme Court, with Antonin Scalia
writing the opinion, drew a line. If there
is a general criminal law passed which is
to be applied to all people equally, and
which is not directed at any specific religious practice, it should be, he opined,
applicable to all and there should be no
exemption to accommodate
a religious
ritual, the performance of which violates
the law.
The essence of our legislative procedure is to determine what conduct the
state is free to regulate. Once a valid and
neutral law is promulgated to regulate
that conduct, an individual obliged to
obedience to that general law, which is
not aimed at either promotion or restriction of religious beliefs, cannot ask for
exclusion from the law.

Then - 1879 and the Mormons

The example given by the Supreme
Court was Reynolds u. United States,'
There were criminal laws against polygamy in this time era - 1850 forward.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints (Mormons) commanded the
practice of polygamy. The Supreme
Court held that the custom of monogamy
in the United States was of greater value

5McDaniei v. Paty, 435 U.S. 618 (1978);

Fowler v. Rhode Island, 345 U.S. 67 (1953);
Larson v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228 (1982).
'Presovterion Church v. Hull Church, 393
U.S. 440 (1969); Kedroff v. St. Nicholas
Cathedral, 344 U.S. 94 (1952); and Serbian
Eastern Orthodox Diocese v. Milivojevich,
426 U.S. 6% (1976).
798 U.S. 145 (1879).

Austin, Texas

to the entire nation than to permit the

Mormons to practice polygamy.
Curiously, in deciding that case the
Court made a most unusual statement
which has been totally ignored ever
since. In speaking of the practice of
polygamy, which was contrary to the
custom of monogamy sanctified by law
in the United States, the Court held that
no man could excuse his practice of
polygamy on the basis of religion.

Indians for centuries in their religious

ceremonies and its primary use was to
put its user into a hallucinatory state to
enable him to come into communication
with god.
In addition to the Reynolds case which
stood alone, the Supreme Court pointed
out that another line of cases with which
it had dealt involved not alone the Free
Exercise clause but other constitutional
protections:

To permit this would be to make

the professed doctrines of religious
belief superior to the law of the
land, and in effect to permit every
citizen to become a law unto himself.

1. invalidating a licensing system

for solicitations
under which
the administrator had discretion
to deny a license to any cause
he deemed nonreligious."
2. invalidating a flat tax on solicitations when applied to the dissemination of religious ideas; 10
3. invalidating a law denying parents the right to send their children to religious schools.!'
4. invalidating a compulsory schoolattendance
law as applied to
Amish parents who refused to
send their children to school
past a certain grade; 12
5. invalidating compelled display
of license plate slogan which
offended individual religious
beliefs.P
6. invalidating
compulsory
flag
salutes challenged by religious
objectors. 14

This is, of course, just exactly what

the United States government
does,
despite these words to the contrary. It
permits every religion to become a law
unto itself, and grants the permission
under the "Free Exercise" clause of the
First Amendment,
particularly
if the
religion is a majoritarian one. With the
theoretics underlying the establishment
of the United States as a government,
and particularly under the First Amendment, the Mormons should have been
able to stay with their "higher calling"
from god and should have been able to
continue their polygamous
practices
unhindered by state law.

And now - 1990 and the Indians

In the Smith case, it was noted that
twenty-three states with a heavy indigenous Native American population have
made an exception to their drug laws for
sacramental peyote use.f Also Congress,
when listing dangerous.controlled
substances in 1970, had made an exemption
for Native American sacramental use of
peyote. It was undisputed in the case
that peyote had been used by American

In this case Scalia saw that Smith and

Black were asking that when (government-prohibited)
conduct was accompanied by religious convictions,
the

9Cantwell v. Connecticut,

310 U.S.

296

(1940).

10Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105

(1943).

llPierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510

(1925).

8Most of the peyote used in the United

States is supplied from the cactus grown in
the Rio Grande Valley.
May 1990

12Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1976).

13Wooley v. Maynard, 430 U.S. 705 (1977).
14West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
Page 51

O'Connor pauses to note that the majority decision is a disfavoring

of minority religions' rites as an "unavoidable consequence" under our
system of government, and that it would suggest that the accommodation
of such religions must be left to the political process.

conduct should be free from both conviction under those laws and, generally,
from government
regulation. His response was "We have never held that,
and decline to do so now." He was
joined in his opinion by Chief Justice
Rehnquist and Justices White, Stevens,
and Kennedy.
However, the attorneys for Smith and
Black argued on the basis of the "balancing test" set forth in Sherbert v. Ver-

ner, IS Thomas v. Review Board, Indiana

Employment Div.,16 and Hobbie v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n of Florida,17 all unemployment
compensation
cases. In these the Supreme Court had
invalidated state unemployment
compensation rules that conditioned
the
availability of benefits upon an applicant's
willingness to work under conditions
forbidden by his religion. Two cases involved working on the Sabbath of a particular religion, with the Thomas case
involving a transfer to work on production of turrets for military tanks, which
violated the pacifism doctrines of the
worker's religion.
The balancing test was whether a
substantial burden to a religious practice was justified by a compelling governmental interest. This test has not
been applied, in recent years, outside of
the unemployment compensation field.
In this case, the Court declined to use
the Sherbert rule. It held that if there is
a law of the land which is not directed
specifically at anyone's religious practice, and which is constitutional
as
applied to the general public, the religious motives of the persons involved in
the acts are immaterial. That is, if prohibiting the exercise of religion is not the
object of the law but merely the incidental effect of its being generally applicable, the First Amendment is not offended.

15374 U.S. 398 (1963).

16450U.S. 707 (1981).
17480U.S. 136 (1987).

Page 52

Because respondents' ingestion

of peyote was prohibited under
Oregon law, and because that prohibition is constitutional,
Oregon
may, consistent
with the Free
Exercise Clause, deny [Smith and
Black] unemployment compensation when their dismissal results
from use of the drug.

The dissent examines

conduct and belief
O'Connor was not in agreement and
wrote a dissenting opinion in which
Brennan, Marshall, and Blackmun joined.
O'Connor agreed with the results the
Court reached, but Brennan, Marshall,
and Blackmun did not.
Basically, O'Connor held that there
could not be a distinction between belief
and action in respect to religion.
Because the First Amendment
does not distinguish between religious belief and religious conduct,
conduct motivated by sincere religious belief, like the belief itself,
must therefore be at least presumptively protected by the Free
Exercise Clause.
Therefore, a law that prohibits certain
conduct - conduct that happens to be
an act of worship for someone - manifestly does prohibit that person's free
exercise of his religion. O'Connor concludes then that the Sherbert test of a
"compelling
state interest"
must be
applied to justify governmental interest
in regulation of conduct.
The compelling
interest test
effectuates the First Amendment's
command that religious liberty is
an independent liberty, that it oc. cupies a preferred position, and
that the Court will not permit encroachments
upon this liberty,
whether direct or indirect, unless
required by clear and compelling
governmental
interests
"of the
highest order."
May 1990

That highest order, of course, would

be in the interest of promoting
the
health, safety, and general welfare of the
citizenry of the nation. She pointed to
numerous cases where the balancing of
"a compelling state interest" was necessary:
1. State interest in regulating children's activities justifies denial
of religious exemption
from
child labor law; 18
2. State interest in uniform day of
rest justifies denial of religious
exemption from Sunday closing
law;'?
3. State interest in military affairs
justifies denial of religious exemption
from conscription
laws;20
4. State interest in comprehensive
Social Security system justifies
denial of religious exemption
from mandatory
participation
requirement. 21
In the midst of her argument, O'Connor pauses to note that the majority decision is a disfavoring of minority religions' rites as an "unavoidable consequence" under our system of government, and that it would suggest that the
accommodation
of such religions must
be left to the political process.
O'Connor saw that Smith and Black's
case argued that the Free Exercise
Clause required the state to grant them
a limited exemption from its general
prohibition against the possession and
use of peyote in religious ceremonies.
She therefore,
using the "compelling
state interest," made her own decision
about the case.

18Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158

(1944).
19Braunfield v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599 (1961).
20Gillette v. United States, 401 U.S. 437
(1971).
21United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252(1982).
American Atheist

Blackmun, Brennan, and Marshall

felt that the majority decision" effectuates a wholesale overturning
of settled law concerning
the Religion Clauses of our Constitution."
O'Connor's logic
The Oregon Supreme
concluded that

Court had

state's general criminal prohibition of

the use of peyote would "unduly interfere with the fulfillment of the governmental interest."

the Native American Church is a

recognized religion, that peyote is
a sacrament of that church, and
that [Smith and Black's] beliefs
were sincerely held.
However, drug abuse is one of the
greatest and most serious problems
affecting the health and welfare of our
population. The Oregon statute= regulates peyote as a Schedule I controlled
substance, having a high potential for
abuse, with no accepted medical use,
and a lack of accepted safety for use
under medical supervision. Therefore,
according to O'Connor, Oregon has a
compelling interest in prohibiting the
possession of peyote by its citizens.
It follows, then, that the next question
is whether exemption from the state's
general criminal prohibition willinterfere
with the government interest. Since the
use of peyote by even one person is inherently harmful and dangerous, such
use violates the very purpose of the law
that prohibits that use.
Under such circumstances, the Free
Exercise Clause would not require the
state to accommodate Smith and Black's
religiously motivated conduct. A religious exemption would be incompatible
with the state's interest in controlling
use and possession of illegal drugs and O'Connor, using this different test,
still concurs in the judgment of the
majority of the Supreme Court.

~
\4/IfI!J.'!/IjI/Ii~~

-~~

Knowing that a life can be

saved, medical doctors, in fully
equipped, modern hospitals,
must stand aside and watch a
patient die because a millennium
of devotion to an absurd book
has indoctrinated the patient.

Instead of focusing on the state's

broad interest in fighting the critical
"war on drugs," they wished to focus on
the state's narrow interest of refusing to
make an exception for the religious ceremonial use of peyote. The Court recognized that Oregon had not evinced
any concrete interest in enforcing its
The dissent's view
Blackmun, Brennan, and Marshall drug laws against religious users of peydissented. They felt that the majority ote. It had never sought to prosecute
decision "effectuates a wholesale over- .Smith or Black and did not claim to have
turning of settled law concerning the made any enforcement efforts against
other religious users of peyote. ThereReligion Clauses of our Constitution."
They saw the question as whether ex- fore, the case had come up to the
empting Smith and Black from the Supreme Court as a speculative one.
The state offered no evidence that the
religious use of peyote had ever harmed
220re. Rev. Stat. 475.005(6) (1989).
anyone. A review of other states disAustin, Texas

May 1990

covered that Arizona had found that the

quantities of peyote used in the sacraments of the Native American Church
were not proven to be harmful to the
health and welfare of the participants.
California held that in the opinion of scientists, peyote worked no permanent
deleterious injury to the Indian.
Reviewing these, the minority decision justices found that the carefully circumscribed ritual context in which
Smith and Black had used peyote was
far removed from the irresponsible and
unrestricted recreational use of unlawful drugs. The use of peyote was found
to be isolated to specific ceremonial
occasions, and its use outside of such
rituals was deemed to be sacrilegious.
Actually, the peyote plant is extremely
bitter, and eating it is an unpleasant experience, often causing vomiting and
nausea as a by-product of its use. Additionally, it was found that there is practically no illegal traffic in peyote.
The ingestion of peyote is, in this religion, the means for communicating with
the Great Spirit. Peyote embodies their
deity, and eating it is an act of worship
and communion. Without peyote they
could not enact the essential ritual of
their religion.
For all of these reasons, the three
dissenting judges found that Oregon's
interest in enforcing its drug laws against
religious use of peyote is not sufficiently
compelling to outweigh the right of
Smith and Black to have the Free Exercise of their religion protected. And the
state of Oregon could not deny them
their unemployment benefits.

The media's reaction

The media, by and large, were sympathetic to an exemption from the controlled
substance law for American Indian use
of peyote in religious rituals. The Pittsburgh Press (1 July 1990) carried a
lengthy article covering four Supreme
Court decisions this year. In that the
director of religious liberty for the National Council of Churches was quoted
as describing the Scalia opinion as the
Page 53

What actually is coming to fruition

is the Court's commitment to majoritarianism that the government's position should be upheld when possible
because it reflects the will of the majority of the people.
"Dred Scott" decision of the Free Exercise clause. The reference was to the
old, most shameful and embarrassing,
decision of the Court= which had held
that a slave was the property of his owner. He defined the Free Exercise clause
as meaningless, putting other than
mainstream religions at risk of having
their practices challenged. Of course,
O'Connor had made a similar remark in
her dissenting decision.

is not a right" (Chicago Tribune, 13 July

1990).A professor of political science at
the University of Richmond ascribed a
different motive:

The associate legal director of the

American Civil Liberties Union opined
that

The associate general counsel to the

Baptist Joint Committee on Public
Affairs had another approach: that the
battle for church rights is likely to shift
to the United States Congress and to
state legislatures.
The big established religions
that carry clout willbe able to get
the exemptions they need, but it's
the minority religions, like the
Native Americans or the Amish,
who are going to be hurt.

Religious rights v,
religious privileges
The state/church studies professor at
Baylor University had a sharp evaluation of the decision: "The Court is suddenly saying that free exercise of religion

23DredScottv. San[d}ford, 60 U.S. (19 How.)

393, (1857).
Page 54

... represents a dismaying refusal

by the Court to accord a religion
with American Indian roots the
sort of exemptions from the secular law that it has allowed other
faiths.
And the editorial also wondered if Roman Catholics could be prevented from
using wine in Communion if a state
adopted a ban on alcoholic beverages.
The Los Angeles Times (18 April
1990) interpreted the case as being a
refusal of the Supreme Court to "shield
believers whose practices violate generallaws." But its reporter added:

The Court today suggests that

the disfavoring of minority religions is an "unavoidable consequence" under our system of government and that accommodation
of such religions must be left to the
political process.

... there's no doubt that this court

is resolving ambiguities in favor of
the state over individual rights.

that the decision

Unfortunately the religious

parents always make the decision for the death of their children - and the child is felt to
have the duty to die that the
parents may have the right to
life and belief.

What is happening here is that

the courts are finding it hard to
come up with fair criteria to determine which exemptions are rights
and which are privileges ... that
the whole quesfion of who should
get exemptions is a can of worms.
What actually is coming to fruition is
the Court's commitment to majoritarianism - that the government's position
should be upheld when possible because
it reflects the will of the majority of the
people.
The Pittsburgh Post Gazette (20 April
1990)titled its editorial "Just Saying No
to Religion." The piece featured an
attack against the Supreme Court, in
May 1990

Religions that are out of the

mainstream are most likely to be
affected, because their unconventional practices and lack of political influence have led them to depend on the courts for protection ....
Now, the government need not
show that it has a "compelling interest" ... Its general laws will be
presumed valid . . . even if they
seriously infringe on someone's
religious beliefs or practices.
Associated Press (18 April 1990)in its
national wire service release quoted a
spokesman for the Navajo Tribe,
To punish individuals because of
their religious beliefs is beyond
comprehension and ... an act of
extreme ignorance.
The Knight-Ridder News Service,
which provides material for the Austin
American-Statesman
(21 April 1990),
also reported at length on the case.
Again, an American Jewish Congress
spokeswoman was quoted,
It reduces free exercise law to a
shell of what it once was. It's
devastating.
American Atheist

Of course, religion has always claimed that it could engage in any of these
exercises since it is "above the law," answering to god alone.
And all branches of government go out of their way,
in every conceivable instance, to aid religion in this posture.
And, again, the Baptist Joint Committee
on Public Affairs was sought out, where
another spokesman felt that the decision would have a particularly harsh impact on unpopular minority religions,
but "it's going to creep into mainstream
religions, too."
Minority religions, lacking political
influence, filled with unconventional
practices, need all the protection they
can get. They are forced to litigate
under the Free Exercise Clause of the
First Amendment to seek court aid.
It is course, just those minority religions such as Jehovah's Witnesses and
the Amish that the Supreme Court had
been shielding up to this time. The
newspaper picked out a single sentence
of O'Connor's to emphasize this.
In my view, the First Amendment was enacted precisely to
protect the rights of those whose
religious practices are not shared
by the majority and may be viewed
with hostility.
The Washington Post (18 April 1990)
reported the decision without bias. But
again, fragments of O'Connor's dissent
were singled out - that the majority
approach
... dramatically departs from wellsettled First Amendment jurisprudence ... and is incompatible with
our Nation's fundamental commitment to individual religious liberty....
[A] law that prohibits certain
conduct - conduct that happens
to be an act of worship for someone - manifestly does prohibit
that person's free exercise of his
religion.
And the reporter specifically noted
that Blackmun had accused the majority
of "a wholesale overturning of settled
law" on religious rights.
The Post also editorialized under the
caption "Church, State and Peyote."
Austin, Texas

This was to the effect that the

ruling gives the government broad
power to enforce criminal laws of
general applicability that conflict
with religious practice, because it
abandons in such cases the "compelling [state] interest" standard.
Its recommendation was that the
state of Oregon should sanction the unusual but nonthreatening religious practice of the ritual use of peyote. In making this recommendation it recalled that
during the Prohibition era, federal regulations specifically exempted the religious use of wine by Christians from the
general ban on alcohol.
The New York Times (18 April 1990)
surprisingly also presented an unbiased
report of the case. The Washington Post
(3 May 1990)saw it differently, pointing
out that the decision would preclude the
transformation of countless criminal
prosecutions into theological probings
into religious convictions. The reporter
asked,
Should religious convictions
empower believers to flout military conscription, tax obligations,
manslaughter and child-neglect
laws, compulsory vaccination,
minimum wage, child labor, animal
cruelty, environmental protection,
and racial equality edicts?
Of course, religion has always claimed
that it could engage in any of these exercises since it is "above the law," answering to god alone. And all branches of
government go out of their way, in every
conceivable instance, to aid religion in
this posture. As the reporter noted, the
federal government is magnanimous
toward religion: employment laws prevent discrimination based on religion;
health-care recipients of federal funds
may not discriminate against physicians
with religious scruples against abortions; federally subsidized public elementary and secondary schools may
May 1990

not discriminate against religion, and

must open their premises for religious
extracurricular activities; and these are
but a few of the privileges of religion.
The Los Angeles Times (19 April
1990) wrote what it considered to be a
compelling argument on "The Necessity of Religion - High Court Says Religious Freedom Is a Luxury - Wrong."
The editor saw the decision as
. . . a sweeping repudiation of
nearly a century of humane and
enlightened legal precedent [and]
an affront ... to our society's hardwon pluralism.
Here again it was noted that only "a
compelling interest" of the state, such as
enforcement of health and safety laws
on religious schools, should ever cause
a conflict with an inalienable right of religion to be free of all state constraints.
Scalia, it decried, had ruled that generallaws willbe presumed to be valid even
if they (gawd forbid) infringed on the
exercise of religious freedom.
A gaggle of letters to the Times immediately supported this position. Meanwhile, the religious writer for that paper
(21April 1990)contacted major religious
denominations, seeking opinions on the
suit.
The Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs commented, "This was a
shocker; the nation's first liberty has
become a constitutional stepchild."
A spokeswoman from the American
Jewish Congress said, "It was a terrible
decision for religious liberty."
The leader of the Native American
Church lamented, "This medicine has
been our faith."
An American Indian Unity Church
representative responded:
If we give up our world view, then
[the government] willdo it with the
Sikhs, the Buddhists and the
Baptists.
Through a spokesperson, Americans
Page 55

To override that First Amendment protected right of "Free Exercise,"

the SUpreme Court would have needed to invoke the
"compelling state interest" rule, thus giving deference to religious rights.
O'Connor was sensitive to this; the majority was not.
United said that the suit is a harbinger of
a narrowing interpretation of the First
Amendment.
By May 5, a coalition of religious
groups asked the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision. This included the
American Jewish Congress, the National
Association of Evangelicals, the National Council of Churches, the Presbyterian Church USA, the Lutheran ChurchMissouri Synod, American Friends
Service Committee, the Christian Legal
Society, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The request
for reconsideration was, of course, not
granted. But once again as in the Moon
and Scientology battles with the IRS,
the churches, when seeing an attack on
the theology of anyone of them, or its
income, hastened to cooperate. The
case was viewed as a national precedent
for upcoming government interference
in the Free Exercise of religion.
The Christian Science Monitor featured an opinion editorial on May 2l.
Basically it complained that the "compelling government interest" had been a
determinant in ruling if religious convictions could be used as an exemption
from the general application of a law for
forty-three years and that this had now
been abandoned (rejected) by the Supreme Court. The editorial stated that

thereto.
To the deeply convinced believer,
religion shapes his whole view of

The court set that standard

aside and ruled that general laws
willbe presumed valid even ifthey
seriously infringe on the exercise
of religious freedom.

Again and again, religion imposes on children its dogmas

and its restrictions. The Amish
religion, frozen into the past,
retains its children there,
refusing the intellectual expansion that comes with education.

. . . legal scholars are calling this

case "the single most dramatic
change in free-exercise doctrine in
the last twenty-five years ... the
clearest doctrinal turnaround in
the constitutional area."

the world and guides his lifestyle.

. . . His approach to education,
work, family life, and health care
. . . The First Amendment was
written specifically with the committed believer in mind.

The author, a lawyer for the Christian

Science Church, emphasized that Justice Blackmun in his dissenting opinion
called it "a wholesale overturning of settled law."He also called for the reinstatement of the rule of "compelling state interest." But the author's general remarks were compelling and fortify the
precept that god is first in the order of
things human, and the state must protect the religious person's commitment

He also felt that religious ideologists

would need to turn to legislators, plunge
into the legislative fray, to protect the
right to worship freely. Of course, this is
exactly what the Christian Scientists
have done over the course of the last
several decades. It has gone to the legislatures of forty-four states to have
Christian Science parents exempted
from child abuse laws so that they can,
as a class, permit their children to die by

Page 56

refusing all but prayer to a child struck

with an illness.
The editorial by the Los Angeles
Times (19 April 1990) had been even
more scathing and pronounced the decision "pure legal adventurism."
It claimed that the guarding of the
Free Exercise of religion dated back to
the First World War, when the Supreme
Court then held that the individual's
right to religious freedom must prevail
unless the state asserts an even more
"compelling interest," such as enforcement of health and safety laws on religious schools.

May 1990

Again on April 22, the Los Angeles

Times carried the opinion of George F.
Willand of a frequent state/church separation attorney litigator from Pennsylvania. Will saw the ruling as a return to
the strict constructionist view of the
Constitution and commended the justices for it. But the second article was
titled "High Court Goes Cold on Religious Liberty" and was a scathing denunciation of the "jettisoned" compelling state interest test.

Why use the test

of "compelling state interest"?
Curiously, the religious groups often
supported O'Connor's decision, which
was against the state exempting the use
of peyote for religious rituals from the
controlled substance law of Oregon.
O'Connor, however, had used the "compelling state interest" argument, which
had been at the basis of the Reynolds
decision outlawing the Mormon practice of polygamy 111years earlier. The
two cases were theoretically identical: a
minority religion engaged in a practice
which had been prohibited by a criminal
statute. The Mormons were then a small
and a despised group; American Indians
American Atheist

The situation in respect to the First Amendment has thus changed only in
political emphasis: the majoritarian religions, the established religions, the
politically powerful, the traditional, the well-financed - that is,
the Judeo-Christian - still have a right superior to the laws of the land.
are an ignored and inconsequential
Freedom Restoration Act" had been
group. The First Amendment was not introduced in Congress by the National
invoked by the majority in either case. Council of Churches, Americans United
There was no need to do so. To override for Separation of Church and State, and
that First Amendment protected right - hang on to your hats - the American
of "Free Exercise," the Supreme Court Civil Liberties Union.
The act is allegedly proposed to
would have needed to invoke the "compelling state interest" rule, thus giving "reverse the Supreme Court decision
which limits freedom of religious expresdeference to religious rights. O'Connor
. "
was sensitive to this; the majority was sion.
not.
It has been thrown into the hopper by
The situation in respect to the First Reps. Stephen Solarz (D-N.Y.), Paul
Amendment has thus changed only in Henry (R-Mich.), James Sensenbrenner
political emphasis: the majoritarian reli- (R-Wis.), and Don Edwards (D-Calif.).
The president of the 1.6~milliongions, the established religions, the politically powerful, the traditional, the member United Church of Christ adwell-financed - that is, the Judeodressed a letter to every member of
Christian - still have a right superior to Congress proposing that the legislation
the laws of the land to be permitted
be passed since it would
freely to practice their theology. The socalled cults and the minority religions do
restore protections to religious
not.
liberty, which the court unnecessarily abandoned.
But there are those who are not covered by the First Amendment at all.
That group consists of American Athe- Of course, the churches are precluded,
ists of any stripe, or of any nomenclature
by their tax-exempt status, from prounder which Atheists desire to hide. posing or advocating legislation. That is,
There is only a right to the "Free Exercise "lobbying." But, in this case, who gives
of Religion" ~ there is no protected
a damn? The Supreme Court had already
right for Atheists who do not care to ex- been dealt its comeuppance in the
ercise a religious right and who are, matter of "Equal Access." When it held
essentially, opposed to such an alleged that Bible reading and prayer recitation
"right" being an obligation for all and were improperly in the public schools,
being held in a special place which is the U.S. Congress had passed an "Equal
beyond the reach of any law.
Access" bill to put both back into the
But with this case, the group now public schools. And a legal test of the
outside of the protected right to "Free law found the Supreme Court caving in
Exercise of Religion" has been enlarged and permitting the intrusion. This adto include not alone Atheists but now venture with the U.S. Congress is to be
those who are by statute criminals,
the second face-off power play.
since they use forbidden drugs. It is
The head of the National Council of
inevitable that sanctions against all out- Churches had his say, that the ruling
side the parameters of established religions willbe eventually applied.
. .. swept aside the Free Exercise
standard that the Court has used
.for twenty-seven years by no longer
Enter the United States Congress
It was, therefore, no surprise to anyrequiring the state to show a
"compelling interest" for overridone that the same coalition of religious
organizations which had asked the
ing an important worship practice
Supreme Court to reconsider its deciof a recognized religion.
sion would seek help from their congressmen. By the end of July a "Religious
The ACLU also addressed a letter to
Austin, Texas

May 1990

House members that the legislation

would be "corrective." Without it, the
Smith decision could quite easily be
cited
to criminalize communion for
Christian minors, or be employed
to strip a Jewish student of his
right to wear a yarmulke to school.
This argument is fanciful; the ACLU
should have been ashamed to introduce
it. Communion is a standard feature of
all the majoritarian churches and not
likely to ever come under attack. More
specific and to the point would have
been the argument that the Christian
Science religion could have its practitioners charged with murder when they
deprive children of medical care. With
or without the criterion of a "compelling
state interest," murder is murder. The
same difficulty would have needed to be
overcome in the situation of Jehovah's
Witnesses depriving blood transplants
to those in need thereof.
And the reference to a Jewish boy
(naturally - never a girl) being prosecuted for wearing a. yarmulke simply
shows the power of the Jewish faction of
theACLU.~

An illustrated analysis of the

sexual origins of many religious
symbols. A account of the real
(and quite "blue") origins of the
cross is included. By Sha Rocco.
Written in 1898. Reprinted in
1982. 55 pages. $5.50 ppd.
Product #5440.
American Atheist Press
P.O. Box 140195
Austin, TX 78714-0195
Visa/Me
phone and fax orders
accepted; just dial (512) 467-9525.

Page 57

Talking Back

Well, tell him to keep

his hands to himself!
What does an Atheist
say to a Christian who
announces:
"Jesus loves you"?

So you're having a hard time dealing

with the religious zanies who bug you
with what you feel are stupid
questions? Talk back. Send the question you hate most and American
Atheists will provide scholarly, tart, humorous, short, belligerent, or funpoking answers. Get into the verbal
fray; it's time to "talk back" to religion.

Page 58

It has been this editor's general

practice not to tamper with the contents of letters to the editor and
other reader's forums in this journal. Spelling errors and other problems of that nature are, of course,
repaired, but the line is drawn at
any changes of a substantive nature.
This editorial policy created something of a problem in the assembly
of this month's "Talking Back."
Among the replies that were sent
in by readers were two containing
what might be called "indelicate
words." This editor felt that each
answer was a worthwhile approach
to this month's Christian statement.
(Besides, she has never met a word
she considers obscene - just a few
ideas.)
So this is your fair warning: if you
don't like to read slang terms referring to sexual activities which now
are published in most major magazines, skip this page.
Andrew D. Kahn, retired newspaper
printer, replies:
Assuming Jesus was a real person (a
very large assumption), it is clearly evident from the New Testament record
that he did not love anyone. Neither are
real, non-hypocrite Christians capable
of love.
To love is to accept others as they are,
warts and all. Love requires knowledge
of, respect for, caring for, and responsiveness to the loved one. All of which
requires an act of one's will.
Jesus meets none of those criteria.
He demands of all who desire to follow
him perfection and the total surrender
of their will before they are acceptable
to him. He further requires that they
sever all close human relationships. A
"loving Jesus" is not only oxymoronic, it
is pure fiction.
Only imperfect beings, like humans,
are capable of loving precisely because
of their imperfections. Jesus was said to
be perfect and (aside from the fact that
May 1990

he is dead) that renders him incapable of

love as we understand the term. It is one
of the charms of Christianity that it insists on having it both ways.
Joyce Cassidy, technical writer and
Canadian Atheist, speaks her mind:
Oh really? Then how come this "loving" god plans to send me straight to
everlasting hell when I die? This ambition can only be the product of a twisted,
sadistic, and hate-filled mind. Jesus
would, perhaps, find support for his
brand of love from people like Hitler, the
Marquis de Sade, and the medieval inquisitors. I, however, would sooner
throw up.
Mark Spencer, Life Member of American Atheists, who resides in Maryland, puts in his two-cents worth:
I'm sure that the tooth fairy would
love me, too, if such a being existed.
Being assured that "Jesus loves me" is
about as meaningful as having a nonexistent ally in time of war or being
promised a dividend from a stock that
doesn't exist.
John M. Davis, medical supply buyer
in California, adds:
In response to the statement "Jesus
loves you," especially from a stranger in
a public place, I am often tempted to
respond with a little rhyme that I learned
in junior high school:
"Jesus loves me, yes I know,
The motherfucker told me so."
This blasphemous response inevitably
shocks the Jesus hustler as I walk away
without being struck by lightning.
Herbert G. Ault, a Florida member
of American Atheists, talks back:
In response to the statement, "Jesus
loves you," or, for that matter, the often
quoted statement, "We will pray for
you," which is in the same department,
it should first be considered what the
religionist really means, and what he
really means is; "Fuck you." In all fairness, not all these perverted idealists
American Atheist

The Christian idea of god's love is a

rather wimpy one ("He died for you").
Other religions, however, have more
vivacious images of their deities' affectionate nature. Vishnu and Lakshmi
(right), Hindu gods, embraced openly.
According to his followers, Zeus was
taken to sharing his love with more
earthly bodies, such as Danae, whom he
visited in a golden shower.

intend that connotation and simply,

parrot-like, repeat standard Christian
phrases. Even so, the answer supplied
here will do in either case. One should
look the Christian directly in the eye and
say, "I know exactly what you mean.
The same to you."
E. Scrooge, publisher of the Taruk
Bible, gives what he considers to be
the ultimate reply:
Yes, but will he respect me in the
morning?
Jim Steamer,
a Texas Atheist,
replies:
How can an imaginary being love
you? To assume so puts one at about the
level of a three- or four-year-old child,
when it is normal to imagine characters.
Madalyn O'Hair, founder of American Atheists, says:
The word love used in the sentence is
a verb. It describes an affective aspect of
a certain sensitivity emanating from a
relationship between one or more (to
use generic terms) organic entities:
"That dog sure loves you."
In order to be innervated by such a
sensation there would need to be a corporate organic body in direct relationship with another. Jesus Christ is an
idea only and a fallacious one at that.
Love cannot emanate from such a
nonexisting source.
When, therefore, someone shouts to
Austin, Texas

me from a crowd, from the street, as the

person passes my table at a restaurant,
or into the telephone, "Jesus loves you,"
it is necessary to try to reply often, at
most, with a single sentence and still
embrace the above. No matter what the
situation, Atheists are always the teachers in the short pejorative back-andforths between Atheists and theists.
It is frequently and almost impossible
in these situations to make a rejoinder
that will educate. One is often brought
to exasperation because one knows
that nothing willpierce the mind of a religious idiot. I usually whip off one of several replies based upon the assumptions
that the Christians have about J.e., or
their religious educational level, or simply to taunt them:
"I thought he was dead."
"Your mommy told you so?"
''So does my dog."
Chuck Schutte, Life Member of
American Atheists, has this to say:
When someone says, "Jesus loves
you," I simply reply, "Why would he tell
you?" I leave them pondering while I go
May 1990

on about my business. One cannot reason with them. It's a waste of precious
time.
Bill Botts,

a California Atheist,
replies:
Really? Which one? There must be
tens of thousands of men with that
name just here in southern California.
And it is pronounced Hay-SOOS.

R. Murray-O'Hair,

editor of the
American Atheist, mocks:
Sorry - I'm saving myself for the
Easter Bunny.
Upcoming questions
What would you put in religion's
lace?
ve there isn't
ad.
VII w..
yo ... acktoany
of those statements? Send your
replies (limit 200 words) to:
"Talking Back"
P. O. Box 140195
Austip, TX 787).4.0195

Page 59

Poetry

No god made Julie

Campfire

No god made Julie, so blonde and free;

in the shower she laughs at me.
She pulls me to her by the waist;
this is all of heaven I want to taste.
Her wet hair clings to my sheltering chest,
and later, when we can rest,
"This feels good," she sighs as I kiss her face,
and we drift away in time and space.

A small hell,
limited by rocks
piled on all sides,
imitates apocalypse.
Flames tease the darkness,
casting shadows as awesome
as those that flaw a mind
with afterlife devotion.
I stare into the yellow blaze,
search for a tiny devil-fork,
search for the river Styx,
for Charon and his boat of souls ....

Allan Case

A salvation of sorts
My dog Bert had took to drinking
And was headed for the grave
He saw the Jim and Tammy show
And now he has been saved.

The flame weakens,

dies with my fantasy,
leaving ashes
to grey within circling rocks
and cool to lucid thought.

Bert reads the Bible twice a day

Church solos he has sung
He prays and picks up rattlesnakes
He speaks in unknown tongues

Angeline Bennett

Creationism
Bert studied Oral Roberts
And he's given up strong drink
The change I've seen in my dog Bert
Would make agnostics think.
Bert
Dog
Bert
And

Everyone admires the viewlake cupped in Autumnal hills,

sky, blue with one clear streak
of green, meaning
cold weather ahead. Someone said,
Aren't we lucky to know
the Creator of this? (flourish
of an arm across and up,
and all eyes follow)

has an air- conditioned house

food he now declines
sticks to steak or rare roast beef
ribs, if they are prime.

The neighbors' dogs are pregnant too

(Not by the Easter Bunny)
Like young Jim B. and Jimmy S.
Bert's hooked on sex and money.

Down, down come the predetermined

trees, the static rocks
and squirrels, and the breeze stale
with dead fish, flaunting
their clammy undersides. Each blind eye
mirrors the sky, as all other eyes
and minds roll
belly-up.

Bert's been a minister six months

My mind's still in a fog
But if the nuts and crooks can preach
o hell, why not my dog?

Julia Rhodes Pozarzycki

John B. Denson

Page 60

May 1990

American Atheist

American Atheist Radio Series

Religion and insanity, part 1

Ou would not believe the insane still further in the same path. Galen,'
asylums I have been in. For about toward the end of the second century
seventeen years this was my reaffirmed the thesis and in the fifth cenwork: psychiatric social work. And even tury, Caelius Aurelianus- taught that
today the situations in these institutions insanity was a brain disease and that the
treatment of it must be gentle and kind.
are quite deplorable. Unfortunately,
Christianity in Western civilization has In the sixth century Alexander of Tralles=
much burden to bear for the lack of presented still more research on melanprogress in this field of medicine and cholia and taught the world how to deal
psychiatry. In all the triumphs of science with it. In the seventh century, Paul of
Aegina,? under the protection of the
for humanity, few have been farther
reaching in good effects than the prog- Caliph Omar, made still further obserress in the treatment of the insane. But vations. This entire line of scientists laid
the struggle between psychiatry and reo stress on the cure of madness as a disligion was long and severe. On one side ease and on the absolute necessity of
stood the dogmatism of various theol- mild treatment.
The whole evolution of this science of
ogies, the interpretation of various sacred books, the greatest theologians all investigation of insanity, now called psycompacted into a creed that insanity is chiatry, was interrupted and then stopped
mainly or largely demoniacal posses- by Christian theology. Early in Chrission; and on the other side stood battered tianity came a current of belief which
science saying that it was gradually ac- was so designed that for centuries it
cumulating proofs that insanity is always supported the infliction of torture, physthe result of some physical or emotional ical and mental, upon hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and
imbalance.
children. This basic belief was that madThe vast, almost the total summation
of religious opinion, was that insanity ness was mainly or largely possession
by the devil. This idea of diabolic agency
was the result of Satanic intervention,
the result of diabolical agency of Satan in mental disease has always been in all
in man's affairs. When Christianity was the Oriental sacred literatures. In the
being given birth, the Western world civ- series of Assyrian mythological tablets
ilization centered in Greece and Rome in which we find those legends of the
had the beginnings of science. Indeed creation, the fall, the flood, and other
the Greek word for superstition meant, early conceptions from which the Heliterally, fear of gods or demons and brews so largely drew the accounts
superstition was to be scoffed at by wrought into the book of Genesis, have
Greek and Roman scientists. In the fifth been discovered the formulas for drivcentury before the Christian era, Hip- ing out the evil spirits which cause dispocrates of COSl asserted that all mad- ease. In the Persian theology regarding
ness is simply disease of the brain. In the the struggle of the great powers of good
and evil, this idea was developed to its
first century after Christ, Aretaeuscarried these ideas yet further and observed the phenomena of insanity with
great acuteness and reached yet more
valuable results. Near the beginning of 3Soranus (second century A.D.), Greek
the following century, Soranus- went physician.

For centuries,
Christianity's answer to
the mental health
problems of its
adherents was to beat
the devil out of them literally.

When the first installment of a

regularly scheduled, fifteen-minute,
weekly American Atheist radio series
on KLBJ radio (a station in Austin,
Texas, owned by then-President
Lyndon Baines Johnson) hit the
airwaves on June 3, 1968, the nation
was shocked. The programs had to be
submitted weeks in advance and were
heavily censored. The regular production of the series ended in September
1977,when no further funding was
available.
The following is the text of "American
Atheist Radio Series" program No. 93,
first broadcast on April 20, 1970.

Madalyn O'Hair
Austin, Texas

lHippocrates (ca. 460-ca. 377 s.c.), Greek

physician.
2Aretaeus (second century A.D.), Greek
physician and writer.
May 1990

4Galen (129-ca. 199 A.D), Greek physician.

sCaelius Aurelianus (fifth century AD.),
Roman physician.
6Alexander of Tralles (ca. 525-ca. 605),
Byzantine physician.
7Paul of Aegina (ca. 625-ca. 690 A.D), Greek
surgeon.

Page 61

More and more it was felt

that cruelty to the insane was not to them so much
as to the devil
residing within them or acting upon them.

highest point. The views compounded

until one idea became dominant - the
mocker of the Garden of Eden became
Satan, with legions of evil angels at his
command. In the sacred books, still
revered today, the diabolic or demon or
devil cause of mental disease took a firm
place. Particularly, Jesus Christ took a
leading role in the idea of casting out
devils. In Greece too an idea akin to this,
the idea of hostile spiritual influence,
took popular root and appeared even in
the philosophy of Plato and Socrates.

nonune

. :<":'

tuO r~monl<l \

,~~;o..

'~J:-

r ....,~.~'i.:.;. _.
l

A detail from- the title page of a seventeenth-century work on the expulsion of

evil spirits shows just how demons were
supposed to exit the body.

In Christianity, in the apostolic times

no belief seems to have been more firmly settled. The early Christian fathers
and doctors in the following ages universally accepted it, and it was considered to be a leading proof of the divine
origin of the Christian religion that the
power of casting out devils had been
given to Jesus Christ. The belief took
firm hold upon the strongest of men in
the church. The case of St. Gregory the
Greats is typical. He was a pope of exceedingly broad mind for his time, yet he
solemnly relates that a nun, having eaten some lettuce without making the sign
of the cross, swaliowed a devil, and that,

8Gregory (ca. 540-604), pope (590-604).

Page 62

when commanded by a holy man to

come forth, the devil replied: "How am
I to blame? I was sitting on the lettuce,
and this woman, not having made the
sign of the cross, ate me along with it."
As a result of these convictions, the
Christian Church at an early period
gave up the scientific beginnings made
by Greek and Roman scientists, and instead originated a regular discipline developed out of dogmatic theology for
the exorcising of devils from persons
possessed of them. At the very beginning some of this discipline was gentle
and useful, but this was in the centuries
before theology and ecclesiasticism had
become fully dominant. In these gentler
days the afflicted were generally admitted to the exercises of public worship,
and a kindly system of cure was
attempted. In this, prominence was
given to holy water, sanctified ointments,
the breath or the spittle of the priest, the
touching of relics, visits to holy places,
and submission to some mild forms of
exorcism.
Among the thousands of fetishes of
various sorts then resorted to a typical
one was the "Holy Handkerchief of
Besancon." During many centuries multitudes came from far and near to touch
it. It was argued, if touching the garments of St. Paul at Ephesus, related in
Acts 19:12, had cured the disease, how
much more might be expected of a
handkerchief of the lord himself. And,
indeed, this was considered to be a
handkerchief which had belonged to
Jesus Christ. With ideas of this sort was
mingled a vague belief in medical treatment. Ah! but what medical treatment!
Let me read just three of them to you.
If an elf or a goblin come, smear
his forehead with this salve, put it
on his eyes, cense him with incense,
and sign him frequently with the
sign of the cross.
For a fiend-sick man: When a
devil possesses a man, or controls
him from within with disease, a
spew-drink of lupin, bishopswort,
May 1990

henbane, garlic. Pound these together, add ale and holy water.
A drink for a fiend-sick man, to
be drunk out of a church bell:
Githrife, cynoglossum, yarrow, lupin, flower-de-Iuce, fennel, lichen,
lovage. Work up to a drink with
clear ale, sing seven masses over
it, add garlic and holy water, and
let the possessed sing the Beati
Immaculati; then let him drink the
dose out of a church bell, and let
the priest sing over him the Domine
Sancte Pater Omnipotens.
These three examples come from the
Christianity of early England .
Had this kind of treatment of insanity
continued, it would not be necessary to
even attempt to review it except as
something of good humor in the tragicomedy of continuing human history.
Unfortunately, the idea of the satanic
possession of lunatics led to attempts to
punish the indwelling demon. The treatment of insanity tended more and more
toward severity. More and more it was
felt that cruelty to the insane was not to
them so much as to the devil residing
within them or acting upon them.
There were some religious men - we
count them on one hand - who, in a
total of eighteen hundred years, attempted to aid reason and science in
this area. In the fourth century, Nemesius,? bishop of Emesa, accepted the
truth as developed by pagan physicians
and aided them. In the seventh century,
a Lombard code embodied a similar
effort. In the eighth century, one of
Charlernagne's-? capitularies seems to
have had a similar purpose. In the ninth
century, Agobard,11archbishop of Lyons,
tried to make an effort to continue the
scientific idea. Near the beginning of the

9Nemesius (fourth century), Christian philosopher.

lOCharles the Great (742-814), emperor of
the West (800-814).
llAgobard (769 or 779-840), Frankish prelate.
American Atheist

In the Christian mind, demons were real

beings, not metaphorical concepts. Accordingly, physical abuse of the victim
of demon possession could drive demons
away. Here one hops out of the head of
a sufferer.

tenth century Regino, abbot of Prum,"

in the diocese of Treves, insisted on
treating possession as a disease. But
this was all in vain. The Christian idea of
drivingthe demon out of the body of the
afflicted was overwhelming.
Michael Psellus," 'about the beginning of the twelfth century, wrote a treatise on The Work of Demons. In this,
there were two ideas which came to be
disastrous. The first of these, based
upon Christian scriptures and St. Basil,"
was that since all demons suffer by
material fire and brimstone, they must
all have material bodies. The second
was that since all demons are by nature
cold, they gladly seek a genial warmth
by entering the bodies of men and
beasts.
To deny Satan was Atheism. Following in the lines of the earlier fathers, St.
Anselm.t- Abelard.l" St. Thomas
Vincent of Beauvais,'? all the so-called
great doctors in the mediaeval church
upheld the idea that insanity was largely
or mainly demoniacal possession. There
was more and more constant citation to
the text "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to
live."This is a direct order of god, Exod.
20:1, "And God spake all these words,
saying," Exod. 22:18, "Thou shalt not
suffer a witch to live."
The Arabs and the Turks made large
and merciful provisions for the insane
and from these inspirations some part of
the Christian community in isolated instances gave refuge to them. Let me list
those here. In the thirteenth century,
the London Bethlehem Hospital did
12Reginovom Prum (d. ca. 915), German
monk and chronicler.
13Michael Constantine Psellus (1018-ca.
1078), Byzantine philosopher, theologian,
and politician.
14Basil (ca. 329-379 AD), early Christian
writer.
IsAnselm (1033 or 1034-1109), scholastic
philosopher.
16PierreAbelard (1079-?1144),French philosopher and theologian.
17Vincent (ca. 1190-l264),French scholar.
Austin, Texas

some charitable work for them. In

Geneva in the fifteenth century
there was some work. In Marseilles in the sixteenth century
there was some work. This was
done, we think, by certain
Franciscans in France, by the
Alexian Brothers on the Rhine,
and by the Black Penitents. But as
a rule these establishments were
few and poor. Unfortunately all of
them degenerated into "madhouses," where devils were cast
out mainly by cruelty.
The first and main weapon
against the indwelling Satan was
exorcism. According to sacred scripture,
a main characteristic of Satan is pride.
Pride led him to rebel. For pride he was
cast down. Therefore the first thing to
do in driving him out of a lunatic was to
strike a fatal blow to his pride. The
theory was carried out logically, and to
the letter. The treatises on the subject
simply astound one by their wealth of
blasphemous and obscene epithets.
The Treasury of Exorcisms printed in
Cologne in 1626 contains hundreds of
pages packed with the vilest epithets
which the worst imagination could
invent for the express purpose of
overwhelming the indwelling Satan. Let
me see which ones I can use on this
program without the Federal Communications Commission getting on my
back. Very few of them really, for they
are all so astonishingly foul.
Thou lustful and stupid one, . . .
thou lean sow, ... thou wrinkled
and mangy beast, ... thou beast
of all beasts the most beastly, ...
thou drunkard, most greedy wolf,
. .. thou Tartarean boor, ... filthy
sow, . . . perfidious boar, . . .
. envious crocodile, ... malodorous
ass, ... lousy, ... lowest of the low.
I think I need to stop there, for the
rest would never get past the censor.
But in addition to disgusting Satan's
pride with this blackguardism, there
May 1990

was another purpose and this was to

scare him with tremendous words. For
this purpose, thunderous names from
Hebrew and Greek were imported.
Efforts were also made to drive him
out with filthy and rank-smelling drugs.
Urine and fecal material loomed large in
this, as did sulphur, which were all to be
burned under his nose or smeared upon
the persons in whom he had taken refuge. Still further to plague him, pictures
of the devil were to be spat upon, trampled under foot by people of low condition, and sprinkled with foul compounds.
These were preliminaries only. There
were long litanies of billingsgate, cursing, and threatening. Occasionally the
demon is reasoned with. This procedure
and its results were among the glories of
the Christian Church. Let me give two
examples. The bishop of Beauvais was
so effective once in one of his exorcisms
that five devils gave up possession of a
sufferer and signed their names, each
for himself and his subordinate imps, to
an agreement that the possessed should
be molested no further. Second example: the Jesuit fathers at Vienna, in 1583,
gloried in the fact that in one such contest they had cast out 12,652living devils. Such was the result of over one thousand years of theological reasoning by
the strongest minds in Europe based on
the Bible and the writings and works of
the great founders of Christianity. ~
Page 63

Under the Covers

The petty minutiae

of Christian oppression

Looking at the details

of the first centuries of
Christianity,
a religious author,
in a purely academic
manner, unwittingly
demonstrates exactly
how a religion paganism - was wiped
out of a culture.

A Chronicle of
The Last Pagans
by Pierre Chuvin
translated by B. A. Archer
Part 1 of Chronique des derniers
paiens, published by Librairie Artheme
Fayard, and Societe d'Edition Les
Belles Lettres, 1990.
Cambridge, Massachusetts, London,
England: Harvard University Press
Hardback, 1990, 188 pages, $25.00

Page 64

The greatest tragedy of human history has been the capture of the Western world by the Judeo-Christian religion. This totally irrational belief system
has, in its sixteen hundred years of dominance, caused Western culture to be
predicated on antihuman premises,
exalting death, sexism, racism, war, authority, ignorance, slavery, intolerance,
and brutality. It is antilife, antiscience,
anti nature , antieducation, antiwoman,
antihappiness, antibeauty. The earth
and all things on it are abhorred by this
religion.
Its victims exalt it, reveling in the ignominy to which it reduces them. Any
human living in this world of distorted
values, to retain his sanity, must needs
ask of himself how it began, how it came
that such insanity conquered and reduced the human mind to theistic nihilism, and why it is that we do not, today,
break free.
The classic answer has always been
that the Judeo-Christian religion won
over allother philosophies of lifebecause
of its beauty, its purity, and its love. It is
defined as the ultimate goodness which
prevailed because of its revealed truth.
Its goal is to embrace all humankind. It
is heralded as the answer to life, the
hope for the future, the revealing of the
past. It surpasses all understanding.
Ah! but the human animal has lived
on the planet for six million years. Records are extant of vast civilizations
which are twenty thousand or thirty
thousand years old. But Judaism is only
2,500 years old at most, with its children
Christianity and Islam being only 1,600
and 1,400 years old, respectively. The
enigma of the Judeo-Christian-Muslim
roots has been ever beckoning to some,
a small number of, scholars.
Yet it is surprising how little of its past
Christianity, particularly, wants to have
unraveled. It prefers to dwell in mystery
and awe. But it is the predominant religion of our nation and when, therefore,
a work appears that purports to look at
the era and the area in which it was
given birth, it is necessary to review it.
May 1990

In this instance, Pierre Chuvin is a

professor of Greek at the Blaise Pascal
University, Clermont-Ferrand, France,
and one would expect him to be expert
in the documents of the founders of the
religion. Apparently he is. He also writes
for the magazine L'Histoire, which popularizes bites of history for the general
public in France.
He writes that the book evolved from
his search for the last pagans of classical antiquity. Whoever wrote the blurb
for the inside cover completely missed
the point of the contents, for he states
that the history of "the triumph of Christianity" is told in the book from the perspective of the defeated: the adherents
of the mysteries, cults, and philosophies
that dominated Greco-Roman culture.
Yet in the twenty-four pages of notes
the author cites Origen's Contra Celsus,
and states, "my exposition essentially
follows this book." Origen (ca. 185 - ca.
254),of course, put Christianity together.
He is generally described as the most
distinguished and most influential of all
the theologians of the ancient church.
He was an apologist for Christianity and
his most famous work is a book (Contra
Celsus) countering - when he couldthe arguments of the pagan Celsus. His
entire argument was an appeal to the
spirit and the power of Christianity as
evidence of its truth.
The author cites every other early
Christian writer and accepts their evaluations as absolutes. This is disconcerting' since Atheist historians know that
they were simple hawkers of the absurdity of Christianity.
There are ten chapters. The first, a
throwaway, is an attempt to define
pagans and reveals that the author has
no idea what people he wants "to find."
The second chapter is titled "An Empire
in Search of Religion." In this the author
attempts to chronicle the "persecutions" (never, incidentally, defined) of
the Christians from 250 to 312, and
comes up with one seventeen-month
term, one three-year term, one two-year
term, and a possible seven-year term.
American Atheist

In Milan in 390, the Emperor Theodosius invited the population

to assemble in the circus for a spectacle.
He ordered his troops to encircle the circus and to kill indiscriminately seven thousand pagans died.

Then, of course, in one fell swoop the

Emperor Constantine established Christianity - well, sort of, unless he really
established the cult of the Sun God, Soli
Invicto Comiti. He sees Constantine's
wavering between religious ideas as
"pragmatism." One-is about to give the
book a heave, when slowly the revelations come. As emperor, Constantine
could do what he wanted. And it was
then - when he moved to Byzantium,
renaming it Constantinople - that he
began to use the statues and the exvotos of the great pagan sanctuaries to
decorate his new Christian city. He took
a ancient wooden statue of Cybele (the
main goddess of Asia Minor, "Mistress
of the Animals"), said to have been consecrated by the Argonauts themselves,
and modified it - the lions on each side
were eliminated; the hands were put into a gesture of prayer. A statue of Apollo
(from Troy) had its head recarved.
And then he modified life. The Christians were dispensed from paying taxes
for the pagan cults. He ordered first one
and then another pagan temple, and
altar, to be razed to the ground, the idols
that profaned the temple to be burnt.
Altars were thrown to the ground. The
army was used to demolish the magnificent large temples. Suddenly towns are
named, temples are identified. Sacred
oaks were cut down. Lime workers and
dealers in used building materials were
encouraged.
Pagans were forbidden by law to
make sacrifices to their gods. Temples
were closed. Worship of statues was forbidden. Night ceremonies were prohibited. The revenues from the temples
were confiscated. Torture was introduced. Temples were soon modified
into churches.
Pagans were denied the right to draw
up wills. Pensions paid by the state to
.pagan priests were eliminated. Property
of the pagans was confiscated. Tales
were told of the "clashes between Syrian peasants and the monks who were
beating Christianity into them." Sanctuaries were burned.
Austin, Texas

In Milan in 390, the Emperor Theodosius invited the population to assemble in the circus for a spectacle. He ordered his troops to encircle the circus
and to kill indiscriminately - seven
thousand pagans died.
The most famous of all temples, the
most important monument in the Empire
after the Capitol in Rome, the Serapeum
at Alexandria, the symbol of the city,
was demolished. The statue of the god
therein, the work of the famous Athenian sculptor of the fourth century RC.,
Bryaxis, was broken into pieces by the
Christians. Libraries were pillaged and
destroyed. All freedom to practice paganism was totally abolished by 392.
Freedom of conscience was suppressed.
Soon everyone got into the act: demolishing temples, turning them into
churches, or razing them to the ground,
breaking statues.
By 397 stones of destroyed temples
were used to repair roads, bridges,
aqueducts, and fortifications. The intention was to scatter the stones and profane them. Gangs of monks pillaged
sanctuaries.
In Gaza alone, eight temples were demolished under a decree from the emperor. The marble facing of those parts
which were prohibited to women were
used to pave the square in front of one
temple, "so that not only women but
animals as well sullied it constantly."
Finally the pagans themselves were
ordered to destroy their own altars and
statues. Prayers were prohibited. Banquets of any kind were outlawed.
The edict of 435 ordered the destruction of the temples "if there are any still
untouched." Finally all the sacred trees
were cut down. Pagan priests were put
under house arrest.
The Christians did not stop until the
culture of the pagans was destroyed.
Hundreds of monks were brought in
from desert monasteries to aid in street
revolts against them.
All of this the author presents in a
scattered manner, citing first one Christian author and then another, actually in
May 1990

a somewhat willy-nillyfashion, jumping

from city to city, from decade to decade.
Through it all he recounts how the
pagans would do anything in order to
stay in favor, in order to keep their appointments, their places of honor. Nothing
availed. By 408 an edict decreed that no
pagan could work in the palace. In 416
they were excluded from the army, the
administration, the judiciary. If caught
practicing paganism the death sentence
was decreed against them in 435, again
in 438, and in 451. Pagans were driven
out of the culture, surviving as intellectuals, historians, philosophers, teachers,
and poets only if they retained their
paganism privately.
Beginning in 527, there was simply an
extirpation of pagans. Stakes were set
up to burn them. They were forced to be
baptized as Christians. Pagans could
not inherit. They were humiliated, tortured, crucified, executed. Their property was confiscated. The endowments
to their academies were seized; the
academies were closed; buildings were
razed; books were seized and burnt.
And how does the author evaluate all
this? He is concerned that the translation of the Greek from one surviving
tract dovetails with the translation from
another. He is the ultimate scholar who
deals only with the petty minutiae of
how the records were kept.
Throughout the book, his asides are
extraordinary, identifying him as a practicing Christian, chronicling the triumph
of his religion.
A principal argument for permitting
religion to thrive and grow today is that
"suppression" of a religion has never
succeeded. The truth of religion, it is
said, has always triumphed over any
such attempts. This book gives the lie to
the contention. Christianity conquered
through brute strength and the suppression of paganism and their enforced
conversion, and this is confirmed by
their own authors, in a book wherein the
author does not mean to disclose the
actuality of events, but only the scholarship of the writers. - Madalyn O'Hair.~
Page 65

Letters to the Editor

Undead corpses

~:nA~~n~:bl

;C

nyto n

"Letters to the Editor" should be either questions or comments of general

concern to Atheists or to the Atheist
community. Submissions should be
brief and to the point. Space
limitations allow that each letter
should be three hundred words or,
preferably, less. Please confine your
letters to a single issue only. Mail them
to: American Atheist, P. O. Box
140195, Austin, TX 78714-0195.

Page 66

The suggestion by Jack Smith in his

letter to the editor in the February 1990
issue of American Atheist, that we may
be overreacting and be pro-abortionists
just because the church is opposed to
abortion is interesting, partly due to his
usage of the term "pro- abortionists"
(used by "Right to Life" people to denigrate the "Pro-choice" movement),
partly due to his reference to abortion
as "murder[ ed]," partly due to his strict
adherence to the fundies' party line, and
also due to his presentation of his point
without any truly searching argument
for choice.
If something is not able to survive
without its host (mother), it is far from
being what it may be IF it can implant
itself in the womb; IF its host carries it
to full term without dying, getting ill,or
aborting (spontaneously or otherwise);
IF it has the strength to survive the birth
process, and IF it is not fatally defective.
Nothing is certain after conception,
and therefore the zygote is not an "unborn child," but a zygote which has the
potential of becoming a child, dependent
on the host and a number of other factors. The decision of the host to terminate is therefore part and parcel of the
zygote's limited potential to live.
If the host is not able to, by her own
reckoning, carry the zygote or fetus to
full term and nurture it, she is free to
terminate. No one can make that decision for the mother. No one but the host
has the specialized personal knowledge
of her own condition, the power, and
the responsibility.
If we use Smith's and the fundies' interpretation, we must consider investigating every spontaneous abortion as
potential murder, looking inside a woman's womb, and performing autopsies
on zygotes to ensure the woman is not
a killer of "unborn children"! In addition,
every time an egg is fertilized and does
not implant, who is to blame for this terrible crime against the "unborn child"?
The whole concept of conception being the "creation of an unborn child" is
May 1990

a concept which is based on a fallacy.

After all, doesn't the same "reasoning"
make you and me "undead corpses"?
Jim Hepburn
California

A pro-choice Atheist
I found the letter to the editor "An
Anti-choice Atheist" in your February
1990 magazine to be interesting. The
abortion issue has been discussed, supposedly researched, analyzed and reanalyzed, but the fact still remains the final decision to have or not have an
abortion should be the woman's decision. Sorry guys, nature didn't equip
you with incubators. But with the help of
medical science, perhaps one day you
can grow your own fetuses in a jar, with
our help of course.
If more humane and reliable birth
control options were availablefor women,
there would be little need for abortions.
But with religion blocking any advances
possible in the birth control arena,
ABORTIONS

WILL BE DONE.

Jack Wilson refers to abortions being

performed for convenience. Vasectomies are convenient, but just how many
male members reading this magazine
have opted for that convenience?
The only question is whether abortions will be done legally or illegallyand
whether it is a safe abortion for the
woman. After all, not every woman will
be as fortunate as my mother, who survived the do-it-yourself coat hanger
trick.
Shirley R. Moll, Director/Secretary
Twin Cities Chapter
American Atheists

How do you deal with a woman?

Your magazine always gives me interesting insights in medievalist thinking
with its analyses of religious delusions
and superstitions. With the February
issue, I got something new - an actual
look at Stone Age thinking. That antichoice letter from Jack Wilson was purAmerican Atheist

est Neanderthal.
The repeated father/son references
(no females in sight in Wilson's conception scenario) show the primitive male
mind in its most addled state: Men must
not allow women to control such a mysterious and essential activity as creating
another human being. Men must control
the process that produces their sons
(daughters don't count). That means
men must control women. And how do
men manage to get control of women?
Through religion.
But Wilson has rejected religion. So
now his primitive urges force him to
seek desperately for some pseudorational basis for the control religion
once gave him. It's way too late. This is
1990. Jack Wilson should come out of
his cave.
Marie Alena Castle, Political Liaison
Twin Cities Chapter
American Atheists

Male circumcision a crime against women?

Frank Zindler's "Probing Mind" ("Circumcision: The Stone Age in the Steel
Age," February 1990) column raises
another question: Is the contemporary
practice of male circumcision actually
designed for sexual repression of
women?
It is taken as fact that men are more
readily stimulated than women; that
men usually reach orgasm first. This is
stated in the popular literature.
My theory for this situation is that

answers. How can data sufficient to

make a meaningful comparison be
gathered? Would the medical establishment take notice if a number of men
asked reconstructive surgeons to replace
the lost parts? Is the current condom
marketing trend of thin and sensitive the
wrong approach? Would a heavy-duty
condom be a good replacement for the
lost penis hood and, by altering the relative sensual responsivenesses, make
sex more satisfying for both sexes?
Douglas Campbell
Ohio

Vicious rumor?
If I remember correctly, one of the
recent publications of American Atheists mentioned the Pontifical Academy
men and women were relatively well- of Sciences and the large number of
Nobel prize winners who are there. I
matched by nature, but the widespread
mentioned this to a researcher where I
practice of male infant circumcision
"tips the scales." By removing the hood work and he told me that the Nobel
from the penis, the man's physical sen- prize winners were invited to come to
the Pontifical Academy of Sciences
sitivity is heightened and he reaches
orgasm much sooner than would occur after they received their Nobel prizes.
otherwise. This leaves the woman unsat- They are offered a large amount of
money by the Vatican to come and do
isfied and sometimes both impregnated
and unsatisfied. Because male circum- whatever they want, such as read or just
cisions are performed on infants, few lie around. He said there is no scientific
men object. We have no memory of the research actually taking place at the
pain inflicted, and no grounds for com- Pontifical Academy of Sciences. The reparison. By making the practice wide- searcher wasn't able to give me a reference to verify this information; maybe
spread, few women have any grounds
for comparison either. Thus, sexual mu- someone else who reads this letter can.
tilation of men becomes sexual represLarry A. Leininger
sion of women.
Alas, I have only questions and not
Minnesota

Are You Moving?

Please notify us six weeks in advance to ensure uninterrupted delivery. Send us both your old and new addresses.

New Address: (Please print)

Old Address: (Please print)

Name
Address
City
State
Effective Date:

Name
_
Zip

_
_
_

Address

City
State

_
Zip

Mail to: American Atheists, P.o. Box 140195, Austin, TX 78714-0195

Austin,Texas

May 1990

Page 67

American Atheist
reader

Classified

Ads

service

Subscription. Renew or begin a

subscription to American Atheist
for only $25 per year. ($35 outside
the U.S.)
Gift subscriptions. You can send
a special gift subscription of the
American Atheist for just $20. ($30
outside the U.S.) That's a $5 savings. Enter the name and address
of the recipient below.
Library subscriptions.
Library
and institutional subscriptions are
just $12.50 a year.
I don't want to miss anything. Sign me
up for the following:
One-year subscription to the American Atheist. ($25/year; $35/year outside the U.S.)
D

D A gift subscription for a friend (address below). ($20/year; $30/year outside the U.S.)

Please send informational brochures

on American Atheists, free of charge.

Please send a catalog of American

Atheist Press publications. I am enclosing $1.00 for postage.
D

D I am enclosing a check or money

order or authorize American Atheists
to charge my VISA or MasterCard for
the above which totals $
_

Notice: The American Atheist willno longer

accept paid display or classified advertising
of any kind. All advertisements received
before this notice will be run until the expirations of their contracts.
The American Atheist willcontinue to run
free advertisements for nonprofit educational
and charitable organizations as a public
service.

Services
AMERIKIDS, foreign study program,
seeks people interested in supervising foreign students while they attend American
High Schools. Although considered a volunteer, you would receive remuneration for
each student supervised. Write - 407 Delaware Avenue, Glen Burnie, Maryland 21061
or CALL (301) 761-8817.

~anizations
American Gay Atheists: P. O. Box 66711,
Houston, TX 77266-6711.Serving the Gay &
Lesbian Community. Dial-A-Gay-Atheist,
Houston: (713)880-4242;Dial-A-Gay-Atheist,
New York: (718)899-1737;Dial-A-Gay-Atheist,
Chicago: (312)255-2%0.

Publications
Please enter your name and address
here:
Name:
_

Address:

City:

Read Genocide
in East Pakistani
Bangladesh (A Horror Story). Report on a
holocaust with a difference! This was committed with American arms. Three million
Hindus, Buddhists and Christians were
gunned down by Pakistani dictator, bigoted
Yahya Khan's barbarous Moslem army.
300,000 women were raped, many disemboweled, babies butchered! The first authentic
recording of Islam's genocide in modern
times. Truth is disclosed just like Katyn
murders! ($16.50 postage included). Order
from: A Ghosh (Publisher), 5720 W. Little
York #216, Houston, Texas 77091. (Texas
residents add 8% sales tax.)

_
_
_
_

Sacrilegious, Religious Joke Book. Hilarious caricatures of god, Moses, Jesus, etc.
Divided into Old and New Testaments. Too
hot for the book stores. Mail $5 to: Hugh
Manist, P.O. Box 2471, Longmont, CO
80502-2471.

Address:

City:
State:

_
Zip:

If you are placing a gift subscription,

please place the name and address of
the recipient here:
Name:
_

State:
Card #
Bank No./Letters
Expiration Date
Signature

Zip:

Return form to:

AAG.H.Q., p. O. Box 140195,
Austin, TX 78714-0195
Page 68

Catalog of American Atheist Press books

and booklets. Send $1. Write: AAP., 7215
Cameron Rd., Austin, TX 78752-2973.
May 1990

"Free Love: 38 Essays in Libido Liberation,"

$19.95. Dawn Press, Box 02936, Detroit, MI
48202.
Hello there, Jesus! Remember all those
cute Christian books with letters from kids
to god? A hundred years ago, an Atheist
wrote an epistle to Jesus Christ that was so
thought-provoking that the U.S. government
jailed him for distributing it through the
mails. Read An Open Letter to Jesus Christ
by D. M. Bennett. Available from American
Atheist Press for only $5.50 postpaid. 29 pp.
Stapled. Stock #5024. Write: AAp, 7215
Cameron Rd., Austin, TX 78752-2973.Texas
residents add 8% sales tax. VA/MC phone
orders accepted at (512) 467-9525.
Atheism and Ethics is explained in Hector
Hawton's Why Be Moral?, a 1947,23-page,
Haldeman-Julius booklet explaining how to
be good while being godless. $4.50 ppd.
Product #5144. Write: American Atheist
Press, 7215Cameron Rd., Austin, TX 787522973. Texas residents add 8% sales tax.

Wanted
Little Blue Books are needed for the
Charles E. Stevens American Atheist library and Archives. We are trying to complete
our collection of these little 3Yzx5-inchwonders published by E. Haldeman-Julius in
Girard, Kansas, from 1919to 1951- but we
need your help. Send donations of books to:
C.E.S.A.A.L.A.,
Inc., P. O. Box 14505,
Austin, TX 78761-4505.
Your help. You can help the cause of Atheism long after your death - without any
miracles. Just remember American Atheists
when you make your willor trust. For information on the best ways to make sure your
intents will be carried out, write: Project
Wills, AAG.H.Q., P.0. Box 140195,Austin,
TX 78714-0195.

Products
Born Again Atheist bumper sticker says it
all. $1.50 postpaid. Stock #3279. Write: AAp,
7215 Cameron Rd., Austin, TX 78752-2973.
Texas residents add 8% sales tax.
American
with blue
Atheists."
Cameron

Atheist Cap: Yellow and white

lettering announces "American
$7.50 ppd. Stock #3005. AAp,7215
Road, Austin, TX 78752-2973.
American Atheist

suggested

American Atheist
introductory reading list

II
Literature on Atheism is very hard to find in most public
and university libraries in the United States - and most of
the time when you do find a book catalogued under the
word Atheism it is a work against the Atheist position.
Therefore we suggest the following publications which are
available from American Atheist Press as an introduction
into the multifaceted areas of Atheism and state/ church separation. To achieve the best understanding
of thought in
these areas the featured publications should be read in the
order listed. These by no means represent our entire collection of Atheist and separationist materials.

1. All the Questions You Ever Wanted to Ask American

Atheists with All of the Answers by Jon Murray and
Madalyn

O'Hair.

Paperback.

248 pp. #5356

$9.00

12. History's Greatest Liars by Joseph

3. What on Earth Is an Atheist! by Madalyn

Paperback.

288 pp. #5412

$4.00
O'Hair.
$8.00

4. An Atheist Speaks by Madalyn O'Hair. Paperback.

pp. #5098

5. All about Atheists by Madalyn O'Hair. Paperback.

pp. #5097

321
$8.00

Ingersoll.

342 pp. #5216

$10.00

349 pp. #5349

$10.00

8. Essays on American Atheism, vol. II by Jon G. Murray. Paperback.

284 pp. #5350

$10.00

9. Essays in Freethinking, vol. I by Chapman

Paperback.

229 pp. #5052

10. Essays in Freethinking, vol. II by Chapman

Paperback.

240 pp. #5056

Cohen.
$9.00
Cohen.
$9.00

II. Life Story of Auguste Comte by F. J. Gould. Paperback. 179 pp. #5132
$6.50

$4.00

soll. Stapled. 37 pp. #5184

15. Our Constitution O'Hair.

$4.00

The Way It Was by Madalyn

Stapled. 70 pp. #5400

$4.00

16. Religion and Marx by Rick B. A. Wise. Paperback.

267
$12.00

pp. #5521

17. Fourteen Leading Cases on Education, Religion, and

Financing Schools. Paperback. 273 pp. #5500
$5.00
18. Sex Mythology

by Sha

Rocco.

Stapled.

#5440

19. Women and Atheism,

Madalyn

O'Hair.

55 pp.
$4.00

The Ultimate Liberation by

Stapled. 21 pp. #5420

20. Christianity Before Christ by John G. Jackson.

back. 238 pp. #5200

$3.50
Paper$9.00

21. The Bible Handbook (All the contradictions,

absurdities, and atrocities from the Bible) by G.W. Foote, W.P.

Ball, John Bowden, and Richard M. Smith. Paperback.
372 pp. #5008
$9.00

22. The X-Rated Bible by Ben Edward

back. 428 pp. #5000

7. Essays on American Atheism, vol. I by Jon G. Murray.

Paperback.

Stapled. 57 pp. #5156

14. Some Reasons I Am a Freethinker by Robert G. Inger-

407
$8.00

6. Ingersoll the Magnificent by Joseph Lewis. Paperback.

Paper$6.50

13. Atheist Truth vs. Religions Ghosts by Col. Robert G.

2. The Case Against Religion: A Psychotherapist s View

by Dr. Albert Ellis. Stapled. 57 pp. #5096

McCabe.

back. 176 pp. #5524

Akerley.

Paper$10.00

All of the above publications are available at a special set

price of $130.00 - a savings of $32.50 off the listed price.
Postage and handling is $1.50 for orders under $20.00;
$3.00 for orders over $20.00. Texas residents please add 7%
percent sales tax.
Payment may be made by check, money order, or VISA
or MasterCard.
Telephone and FAX credit card orders are accepted; just
call our automated ordering service at (512) 467-9525. It is
open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

American Atheist Press

P.O. Box 140195
Austin, TX 78714-0195

U.S.A.

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right
of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government
for a redress of grievances.

"Over the years, I realized the god I prayed to

was the god I invented. When I was talking to him,
I was talking to myself. He had no understanding
or qualities that I did not have. When I realized god
was an extension of my imagination, I stopped
praying to him."
- Howard Kreisner
First host, "The American Atheist Hour"