ADDENDUM::Relaxed Educational Standards for Homeschooled Children in Pennsylvania and Beyond Should Frighten All of Us

Hemant Metha is not only a former homeschoolee but and educator as well. He offers some interesting insights concerning Pennsylvania's recent relaxation of its requirements. While I focused primarily on the home schooling issue as a whole, Mehta has dug in deeper.

However, I have concerns when, unlike in a school setting, facts go through the filter of one or two individuals, for whom there is little or no oversight at all. In other words, a well-meaning but wrong individuals can teach their children something entirely, demonstrably false, with no one there to sound the alarm, simply because they believe it to be true. That isn’t education.

Which is pretty much what the NYT piece is about — states making it easier for parents to teach whatever they’d like, however they’d like to do it. The statistics are very worrying:

[,,,]
We shouldn’t relax or eliminate teaching standards for parents who take on the role of educator for the same reason we shouldn’t eliminate all educational standards.

Education is supposed to provide a student with factual information and the tools to reason in order to prepare him or her for life. We have a system in place to guarantee students this basic opportunity. By eliminating standards and guidelines that protect students’ interests in certain cases, we’ve effectively declared that some students don’t deserve the same access to factual information; they can receive it only at the whim of their parents.

And still, those championing largely religious “alternatives” to public education are demanding to be held to fewer — or no — standards.

[,,,]
This isn’t right — not for the children whose educations are at risk, not for the adults they’ll become who may well have to unlearn any number of false teachings, and not for the society that faces the prospect of potentially under-, poorly-, or un- educated citizens. It should hardly be a burden to meet reasonable educational standards. If the responsibility to demonstrate that you are fulfilling your self-appointed obligation to educate your child offends you, your priorities are misplaced. Education is, after all, about the child — not the beliefs or convenience of his parents.

Relaxed Educational Standards for Homeschooled Children in Pennsylvania and Beyond Should Frighten All of Us

ADDENDUM::Thanks to You, a Public Library Targeted by Conservative Christian Activists Just Received a Large Donation

Early in December I posted this story unaware of a "connection" to Hemant Mehta, "It turns out that mother, Megan Fox, is the same person who (with a friend of hers) had been a pain in the side of my local library for the past year."

So it was nice to read that lemons were turned into lemonade.

Within a month, you all raised an astonishing $7,614. After GoFundMe took its cut, the total amount was $6,918.49.

Yesterday, I visited the Orland Park library and gave them the check:

It doesn’t entirely undo the damage that Fox has caused, but I can tell you the staffers I met with appreciated how much support they had from all across the country.

Thanks to You, a Public Library Targeted by Conservative Christian Activists Just Received a Large Donation

Winfield (Alabama) City Council Declares God “Owner” of the City

It is really hard to fathom that for 14 years I have been blogging in some form or another. It is hard to believe how Havoc and Chaos has morphed in that time period, especially the last 4-5 years. Besides the obvious stupidity, this declaration brings the separation of church and state to a whole new level, which I never imagined before.

But what caught my eye is this one line by Hemant, "There’s the jump from ceremonial Deism on our currency to government endorsement of Christianity."

Why?

I was reminded of something I wrote back in 2011. Something that changed not just how I think but it eventually changed this blog. I wont re-create the entire post but it dealt with a David Silverman interview from American Freethought. A discussion ensued concerning, the Kentucky Homeland Security lawsuit and the Utah Highway Patrol/Utah Highway Patrol Association's lawsuit that were in the news at the time, ceremonial Deism and why it was/is important to combat the issue:

When these type of laws come into play, we have to fight them or they become precedent; the next steps will go further still. The Religious Right has been playing a game of baby steps since the 1950's when the phrase "one nation under God" was placed in the pledge and when "in God we trust" was placed on our money. Those few words are the bases of all these other laws because everyone thinks they are supposed to be there. These things have to be fought and fought on a regular basis, whenever the government endorses a religion by force, which is what they are doing.

Some things change, something obviously never will.

Winfield (Alabama) City Council Declares God “Owner” of the City

One call, that's all: Atheist picks up phone, Air Force surrenders again

An atheist known for attacking expressions of faith in the U.S. Armed Forces has convinced the Air Force to remove a newsletter contribution from a colonel because he mentioned his faith.

Mikey Weinstein, who leads the so-called Military Religious Freedom Foundation, complained after an Air Force colonel wrote about his faith in a newsletter called “The Stinger.”

The colonel is Florencio Marquinez, a medical group commander in the 180th Fighter Wing of the Ohio Air National Guard. Among other observations, the colonel wrote in the newsletter that his faith has sustained him throughout his military career.

Ron Crews, executive director of The Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty, says the Ohio Air National Guard cannot censor the protected speech of one of its members based on the content of that speech.

“When we found out about this,” says Crews, “we drafted a letter to the commander to give him the constitutional reasons why this good colonel has every right to say that faith is what has sustained him in his military career.”

[,,,]
Weinstein has congratulated himself in the past for how quickly military leaders respond to his complaints – even counting the minutes – and this time was no different.

“After merely speaking with me once over the phone,” Weinstein wrote, the “amazing and caring” Col. Baker “immediately recognized the seriousness of this egregious Constitutional and Air Force regulation violation.”

Crews, however, calls the colonel’s decision “just one more egregious example” of the Air Force denying officers and airmen the right to exercise their faith.

I was having a bit of difficulties with this story, understanding exactly what the issue is and why the Reich is freaking out so much.  Enter Hemant Mehta who does a nice job in clarifying the issue(s) at hand.

Point 1::"On the surface, it doesn’t sound like he’s proselytizing or saying everyone else needs to agree with him. The problem is that he’s definitely promoting his faith, not as a private citizen, but as a military leader using his title, uniform, and publication space,,,."

To which Mehta points us to Section 2.11 of the Air Force Standards: ",,,they must avoid the actual or apparent use of their position to promote their personal religious beliefs to their subordinates or to extend preferential treatment for any religion."

It is the same point that Mikey Weinstein makes when citing Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 in his letter to Colonel Craig R. Baker Commander, 180th Fighter Wing (OHANG) :

This Court has long recognized that the military is, by necessity, a specialized society separate from civilian society... While the members of the military are not excluded from the protection granted by the First Amendment, the different character of the military community and of the military mission requires a different application of those protections. ... The fundamental necessity for obedience, and the consequent necessity for imposition of discipline, may render permissible within the military that which would be constitutionally impermissible outside it... Speech [to include religious speech] that is protected in the civil population may nonetheless undermine the effectiveness of response to command.  If it does, it is constitutionally unprotected.

Point 2::"Weinstein also told me this decision would never have been questioned by the Religious Right if Marquinez was promoting Islam or atheism instead of Christianity. He said, 'It’s not a small thing. It strikes to the very core of who you are as a human being.'"

As Mikey states in his letter, "It is a fair question to ask what Ron Crews and his attorney advocates would say if Colonel Marquinez's online letter had professed a belief in Allah, the Prophet Mohammad, and the Holy Koran, or from any other non-Christian text and/or belief system.  Beyond any doubt, if that had occurred, I’m betting that then, and ONLY then, would they have told you about Parker v. Levy and advocated strict adherence to the non-proselytizing standards in AFI 1-1, quoted above. 

And just to note, Mikey Weinstein is NOT an atheist, he is a Jewish Agnostic.

One call, that's all: Atheist picks up phone, Air Force surrenders again

David Barton Says It’s Almost Impossible to Find Atheist Farmers Because They’re Around God’s Creation All Day

Hemant Mehta's take on a recent David Barton spiel,,,

… Paul said that everything that can be known about God… including the intricacies of the Godhead, have been revealed through what He has created… Now Paul says everything you can possibly know about God, you can get by studying Creation. The problem we have today is we don’t study Creation. We don’t understand how it works. We don’t know a lot about it. It’s an interesting thing: folks who grew up on farming and ranching [communities] know a lot more about Creation than folks in the city, which is why it’s almost impossible to find an atheist among farmers and ranchers, and it’s very easy to find among people who work in skyscrapers their whole life. If you’re in urban areas, it’s a whole lot easier to not believe in God than people who get out and have their hands in the middle of it.

That’s quite the reach. Barton thinks when you’re around the natural Earth, you’re more likely to believe in his God. By that logic, you’d think people who study living organisms (biologists), or the properties of those organisms (chemists), or the stars (astronomers) would also be able to see evidence of “God’s Creation”… but we know those fields are full of atheists.

David Barton Says It’s Almost Impossible to Find Atheist Farmers Because They’re Around God’s Creation All Day

UPDATE::Eric Hovind Offers Fake Apology After Using Flood Site for Pro-Creationism Video

One piece of his "defense" Dinoboy cites is the Canyon Lake flood of 2002 and subsequent study by Lamb & Fonstad - Rapid formation of a modern bedrock canyon by a single flood event - focusing in on one statement from the entire study, "“Our traditional view of deep river canyons, such as the Grand Canyon, is that they are carved slowly, as the regular flow and occasionally moderate rushing of rivers erodes rock over periods of millions of years. Such is not always the case.”

What he ignores,

This doesn’t take away from the insights from Lamb & Fonstad’s study. What they document here is just how rapid significant Earth-surface modification can occur given a certain set of conditions. In this case, they explicitly make the point that characteristics of the bedrock are important within the context of their results:

We suspect that well developed vertical and horizontal joints at Canyon Lake Gorge define blocks of bedrock that have little interlocking along their boundaries, rendering their behavior similar to an alluvial bed when critical stress for mobility is surpassed. … Thus, it seems plausible that erosion of well-jointed rock by large floods might be extremely rapid, such that canyon formation is limited by the capacity of the flood to transport plucked blocks rather than by the plucking process itself.

In other words, the bedrock which was eroded during the flood was already slowly eroding through the formation of joints (a type of fracture) in the rock. The high-energy flood event took advantage of this weakness and literally plucked large boulders of bedrock from the floor and walls of the canyon. In this case, the slow and gradual processes of joint formation worked in concert with the catastrophic flood event to produce this result. There will be some who will use this paper to attempt to tear down uniformitarianism. Not only will they fail to mention the nuances of this specific study but they will be tearing down an idea that has long since been discarded by geology. _ 

And that is exactly what Hovind did, ignored the nuances, and cherry picked what fit his version of geology. Here is the link to said study by the way, something he conveniently left out http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v3/n7/abs/ngeo894.html

Eric Hovind Offers Fake Apology After Using Flood Site for Pro-Creationism Video

Like father, like son,,,He lies

So, Robert Baty posted this wonderful video from our friend Dinoboy over on the group page for Havoc and Chaos . He sets up his belief in "flood geology" by asking, "the amount of time or the amount of water,,,?"





That is what one would call a loaded question.

Leave it to Hemant Mahta to get some answers,,,

Claire Stout, who has a degree in Environmental Science, explained it this way:

This video clearly depicts that the water washed away topsoil, not the bedrock. It is also a very sandy topsoil. Sandy soil is one of the most unstable soils available. This is not erosion; it is a washout.

[,,,]
Chris Peterson, a research associate at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, told me that Hovind was really comparing apples and oranges because the geologic environments were so different:

The erosion shown in this video resulted from several feet of sediment being washed away. Pensacola lies on the Citronelle Formation which consists of unconsolidated gravel and sand… In other words, there’s no rock.

Two things to notice. Both use the terminology "washed away" and both distinguish the "sandy" sediment/topsoil from "rock." And last I knew, the Grand Canyon is not made of sand it is made of mainly "limestone, shale, schist, granite, and sandstone."  Also, a "washout" was not the same as erosion.

Can't wait to see if and what Hovind replies in regards to his out right lies. (Hemant was being nice and says "misinformation." I'm not always a friendly atheist.)

After Filing a Lawsuit Against a Public School District That Hosted a Christian Rapper, an Atheist Family Needs Help

Since we often talk on this site about the need for young atheists to stand strong against religious indoctrination in their public schools, it’s only fair that we also discuss the backlash that sometimes results from that.

One particular story — that has a not-so-happy-ending — began in September of 2011 at New Heights Middle School in Chesterfield County, South Carolina, a place that’s home to over two hundred Christian churches.

After Filing a Lawsuit Against a Public School District That Hosted a Christian Rapper, an Atheist Family Needs Help

Kirk Cameron Promotes ‘Great Article’ Encouraging Parents To Never Ever Explain Anything to Their Children

Hemant sums it up well,,,

This is just awful advice, no matter how you slice it. Children need to learn how to question, how to reason, and how to think through the consequences of their actions. I know parents would love it if their kids obeyed their every word, but at some point, those kids also need to learn why you think the way you do. There are reasons for why they need to come home by a certain time, and why they should share their toys, and why they shouldn’t draw on the wall with crayons that go well beyond “Because I said so.” A well-reasoned explanation, at least in theory, should help them understand where you’re coming from and give them more of an incentive to follow your rules. Does it always work? Of course not. But it sure as hell has a better chance of succeeding than “Do what we say or else the Baby Jesus will cry.”

[,,,]
It makes sense coming from Cameron, though. Questions lead to learning. Learning leads to even more critical thinking. And that never ends well for anyone who promotes Creationism.

Kirk Cameron Promotes ‘Great Article’ Encouraging Parents To Never Ever Explain Anything to Their Children

The Secular Safe House: A Refuge for Those Coming Out of Religion

Hemant Mehta aka the "Friendly Atheist" is one of my go-to sites for information. His posting of the following is one important way he fosters ongoing dialogue as well as activism. What a wonderful program that is in the making!!

Troy Fitzgerald, who grew up in a religious cult and is now out and proud about his atheism and sexuality, has embarked on a neat project that could really help a lot of people: It’s called Secular Safe House and it’s designed to help those atheists and LGBT individuals who have been kicked out of their homes or just need someone to talk to,,,

The Secular Safe House: A Refuge for Those Coming Out of Religion

Remember the Pastor Trying Out Atheism for a Year? He Just Got Fired by His Christian Employers. Let’s Help Him Out

I find this "experiment" intriguing, and it is stirring up a shit storm as Bell is already being apologetic in regards to his former employers; justifying their actions. You see what he will find at the end of the road, if he is honest with himself, there is no God, religion is cruel, and voicing those views will cause backlash as he will be seen as "not normal." People he thought that were his friends will disappear one-by-one; even his own family will step back from him. His apostasy will be viewed as "just too much to bear," or "you're being influenced by the debil." He will hear "I'll pray for," at least once a day if not more. The fact he has gone public, good luck getting a job, hiding who you really are sucks.

Bell is in for a long journey, what many forget and he will soon discover, religious belief (or non) is ingrained in us since birth. Doesn't matter if you are Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu or whatever, those views inform every decision, every thought, that we make/have whether we like it or not. In order for him to embrace non-belief he will need to examine every part of himself. He will not come out of this unscathed, to discover that the very foundation of your life was a myth, well it just hurts. And yes I'm speaking from personal experience.

Last week, I posted about Ryan J. Bell, an adjunct professor at Azusa Pacific University and Fuller Theological Seminary and a former pastor of a Seventh-day Adventist church. Bell decided to run an experiment where he would live like an atheist for a year while documenting his journey.

I criticized the methodology — I don’t think you can even pretend to be an atheist simply by reading books by atheist authors and attending atheist gatherings when your religious beliefs are still somewhere in the back of your mind — but I still applauded the fact that he was exploring atheism and wanted to learn more about it.

Unfortunately, exploring faith with a critical eye, as Bell was attempting to do, was a little too much for his employers. Just days after he made his announcement, they fired him until he rededicates himself to Jesus:

Remember the Pastor Trying Out Atheism for a Year? He Just Got Fired by His Christian Employers. Let’s Help Him Out

‘Friendly Atheist’ informs megachurch: We’ve heard all of it before | The Raw Story

Hemant is one of my favorite bloggers to follow. I like his "low key" sort of style but yet he gets his point across. And yes I do agree with him, WE HAVE HEARD IT ALL BEFORE!!

Hemant Mehta of the “Friendly Atheist” blog at Patheos sat down in front of thousands of Christians on Sunday to discuss his non-belief.

Mehta talked about atheism with minister Randy Frazee at Oak Hills Church in San Antonio. During the discussion, Mehta explained that many atheists were afraid to “come out” because others would assume it meant they were immoral. Mehta himself scrubbed his book from his resume, fearing a future employer would be wary about hiring an atheist.

Mehta also explained many Christians had negative stereotypes about atheists that prevented fruitful conversation.

‘Friendly Atheist’ informs megachurch: We’ve heard all of it before | The Raw Story