In god you trust

As a back-sliding Baptist, I often find myself confronted by the passion of Theocrats who want to inject god into our state's public institutions. And not just on the fright wing fringe. There are plenty of people on all sides of the political spectrum who happily ground their political arguments in religious doctrine and dogma. This kind of thinking, for example, fully explains the NC legislature's recent decision to require the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools.

In recent months, I've been trying to frame a coherent response to the steady stream of claims that god is somehow on 'our' side because he (yes, he) had the ear of the founding fathers. Fortunately, that response has already been written by a person much more eloquent than I. His name is Paul Kurtz, and he has a thoughtful article on the website for Council for Secular Humanism. This is as complete a statement for keeping god out of government as I have ever seen. Consider this excerpt:

The claim that our ultimate moral values are derived from God is likewise highly suspect. The so-called sacred moral codes reflect the socio-historical cultures out of which they emerged. For example, the Old Testament commands that adulterers, blasphemers, disobedient sons, bastards, witches, and homosexuals be stoned to death. It threatens collective guilt: punishment is inflicted by Jehovah on the children's children of unbelievers. It defends patriarchy and the dominion of men over women. It condones slavery and genocide in the name of God.

The New Testament consigns "unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's"; it demands that women be obedient to their husbands; it accepts faith healing, exorcisms, and miracles; it exalts obedience over independence, fear and trembling over courage, and piety over self-determination.

The Qur'an does not tolerate dissent, freedom of conscience, or the right to unbelief. It denies the rights of women. It exhorts jihad, holy war against infidels. It demands utter submission to the Word of God as revealed by Muhammad. It rejects the separation of mosque and state, thus installing the law of sharia and the theocracy of imams and mullahs.

From the fatherhood of God, contradictory moral commandments have been derived; theists have often lined up on opposite sides of moral issues. Believers have stood for and against war; for and against slavery; for and against capital punishment, some embracing retribution, others mercy and rehabilitation; for and against the divine right of kings, slavery, and patriarchy; for and against the emancipation of women; for and against the absolute prohibition of contraception, euthanasia, and abortion; for and against sexual and gender equality; for and against freedom of scientific research; for and against the libertarian ideals of a free society.

True believers have in the past often found little room for human autonomy, individual freedom, or self-reliance. They have emphasized submission to the word of God instead of self-determination, faith over reason, credulity over doubt. All too often they have had little confidence in the ability of humans to solve problems and create a better future by drawing on their own resources. In the face of tragedy, they supplicate to God through prayer instead of summoning the courage to overcome adversity and build a better future. The skeptic concludes, "No deity will save us; if we are to be saved it must be by our own efforts."

The article is simply brilliant. Without rancor or defensiveness, Kurtz lays out a compelling case for skepticism that's hard to argue with. I welcome anyone to believe whatever they want about the existence of supreme beings, but please, don't try to impose that leap of faith on me and my children.