Besen Outs Hypocrisy

[Note: This is a cut-and-paste from Wayne Besen.com, author of the blog Truth Wins Out, from Dec. 9, 2008, and author of the book Anything But Straight. Click on the title below to take you to the Times advertisement described in the Besen column.

[I reprint this in full, because gay marriage is not a "special privilege" separate from straight marriage. The individual sovereignty envisioned by the Founding Fathers and which is part and parcel of the Academy's metaphysical naturalist doctrine, is not served by the denial of civil rights through Constitutional amendments. Marriage is marriage, and it is not, as the hypocrites claim, for the sake of the children. It is for the sake of not having sex outside the sanctity of marriage, something devout believers take as sin--just as they take homosexuality to be sin.

[But if they really believe it is for the sake of the children, then why are gay and lesbian couples with children denied marriage? The hypocrites are causing their parents to have sex outside the sanctity of marriage, not to mention denying the children--and the spouse--the justice of the same legal protections as the hypocrites and their children receive.]

People of Faith or Fibs?

In a breathtaking display of lies and hypocrisy, a group of anti-gay culture warriors and long-time Mormon bashers placed a full page ad in the New York Times pretending to be both victims of alleged homosexual "mobs" and staunch defenders of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons).

Both claims are absurd and a cruel attempt for the victimizers to claim the mantle of the victimhood - which is a manipulative and cynical political ploy.The dishonest Times ad essentially claimed that violent mobs of gay protesters were attacking the Mormon Church and its followers in the aftermath of California voters narrowly approving Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in that state. They even launched a website

www.NoMobVeto.org. (It seems they forget that they put basic human rights up for a vote, which is essentially mob rule)

This Times ad is full of blatant lies - much like the immoral television ads attacking same-sex families during the Prop. 8 campaign. The fact is, the vast majority of the rallies across America were peaceful. Considering gay families just got stripped of their basic rights by deception and deceit, the protests were remarkably tame. If any other group had been subject to such humiliation through a multi-million dollar smear operation, there would likely have been riots in the streets - not the fake "violence" conjured in the bogus Times ad.

The anti-gay organizations and individuals who sponsored this "Big Lie" ad are trying to pull off a remarkable feat: They are both crying wolf, while being the wolf in sheep's clothing. The degree of chutzpah is remarkable and eye-popping.Consider that a few of the unctuous signers of the ad, convicted felon Chuck Colson, Prison Fellowship; Rich Cizik, The National Association of Evangelicals; and William Donohue, The Catholic League are now pretending to love Mormons. In the ad they wrote:

"The violence and intimidation being directed against the LDS or 'Mormon' church and other religious organizations - and even against individual religious believers - simply because they supported Proposition 8 is an outrage that must stop."The ad ended with the following propaganda:

"Furthermore, beginning today, we commit ourselves to opposing and publicly shaming anyone who resorts to the rhetoric of anti-religious bigotry - against any faith, on any side of any cause, for any reason."Well, that is good news. The authors of this hypocritical ad can start by spotlighting themselves:

"Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular." -- Bill Donohue, Catholic League

"Mormonism either affirms historic Christianity, or it doesn't. Since it doesn't, it can't call itself Christianity -- a fact that all the good will and public relations in Utah can't change." -- Chuck Colson, Prison Fellowship Ministries [Note: Colson, you will remember, was one of Nixon's henchmen during Watergate, along with G. Gordon Liddy, who now does TV commercial for "gold."]

"While Mormons share some beliefs with Christians, they are not Christians." -- Chuck Colson, Prison Fellowship Ministries

"Most evangelicals still regard Mormonism as a cult." -- Rich Cizik, National Association of Evangelicals

I really do hope this group shines a light of shame on those who promote religious bigotry - but they better be wearing very dark sun glasses when this occurs, as the glare from the light may be quite blinding. It appears that the only thing these men have in common with Mormons, or any other religion that they don't agree with, is an uncommon passion for anti-gay discrimination. To watch these hypocrites act as the great defenders of the LDS church, and religion in general, is beyond laughable.

If this were not bad enough, Pat Boone compared Proposition 8 protests to terrorist attacks on Mumbai in a column for World Net Daily titled, "Hate is hate, in India or America. Boone wrote, "Have you not seen the awful similarity between what happened in Mumbai and what's happening right now in our cities?"In his op-ed, Boone also wrote, "What troubles me so deeply, and should trouble all thinking Americans, is that there is a real, unbroken line between the jihadist savagery in Mumbai and the hedonistic, irresponsible, blindly selfish goals and tactics of our homegrown sexual jihadists." I'm not sure if Boone noticed, but it was religious extremism that was responsible for the attacks in India.

If these so-called people of faith have confidence in their beliefs, why must they resort to lying in the name of the Lord? For whatever they gain in smearing the gay community, it seems their religion loses twice as much in terms of credibility and respectability. I have no problem if these people have a cross to bear, but why must this so often be synonymous with bearing false witness?

© 2008 Wayne Besen. All rights reserved. Anything But Straight www.waynebesen.com

1. More on AIG's Takaful Insurance as Sharia-compliance Invades the U.S.

2. More on Wayne Besen's Fight

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM,
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:
© 2008 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/

Faith; Science & Candidates; PC Fixes Anti-Gay Agenda; Free Speech

The Irreconcilability of Naturalism with Faith

by Curtis Edward Clark

Not one person on Earth needs formal training to make a judgment about the world he/she lives in, in the sense with which this article deals. We all make those kinds of "world-view" judgments everyday of our lives.

Theology, alike with physics, requires more formalized education with which to conclude such "world-views." As a matter of fact, physics accepts almost no "world-view" that is not its own, naturalistic and unassuming of a supernatural presence in the structure and origin of existence. Theology accepts almost no "world-view" that does not assume a creator’s existence; and theology also assumes the intelligibility of the universe solely on the basis of that creator’s existence.

Without the influence of religion, science seeks the intelligibility, the cosmos-from-chaos, through individual thinking and peer review; yet one man may uniquely stand against all his fellows in science and be correct yet shunned, until one day the world discovers he was correct, in which case the “Copernican effect” http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/observations/jupiter_satellites.html alters forever the cosmology of the civilization which accepts the logic, i.e., the line of reasoning; or the scientist stands alone until the world beginning with his peers disproves his theories convincingly.

Theology (proper) seeks to make cosmos-from chaos only from theories of the "faith-based" humanities, as opposed to physically or mathematically provable scientific concepts. Where no explanation of the cosmos results from such faith-based theorizing, religion joins reason to faith, "insofar as is possible" to do so, [Boethius] to create a dogma, a papal bull, or some other form of edict which is taken as policy and as gospel truth, until a proper theological explanation can be rendered. All theological explanations presume the existence of a creator.

The Copernican effect shook the foundations of the Roman Church. Dogma and papal edicts had to be radically changed because of the effect this naturalistic scientific idea had on doctrine. Scientific naturalism is epistemic and the logical metaphysical concomitant for most or many scientists is metaphysical naturalism, which is defined as denial of the existence of the supernatural, and thus of a creator.

Naturalism "holds that the universe requires no supernatural cause and government, but is self-existent, self-explanatory, self-operating, and self-directing" through the cause-and-effect nature of the elements on the Periodic Table interracting with each other. No such effect as "gravity", for example, can exist without being "caused" by such elements interacting as they will by their own scientifically defined nature upon the same defined nature of other elements.

But epistemic naturalistic science does not presume or deny the existence of God. The epistemology of it naturally leads to the search for demonstrable proof, either empirical or mathematical. In the scientist's personal life, God may be a fact, and in fact for some scientists it is fact. But for purposes of peer review using proper standards of math or of physics, any theory or other demonstrable proof of science must be naturalistic in its epistemic foundations. Continued at Irreconciled Naturalism, Faith, and Populist Education

Poll: Americans are much more likely to vote for a candidate that will tackle science issues

"Science Debate 2008"

"In November, 2007, a small group of six citizens - two screenwriters, a physicist, a marine biologist, a philosopher and a science journalist - began working to restore science and innovation to America’s political dialogue. They called themselves Science Debate 2008, and they called for a presidential debate on science. The call tapped a wellspring of concern over the state of American science.
Within weeks, more than 38,000 scientists, engineers, and other concerned Americans signed on, including nearly every major American science organization, dozens of Nobel laureates, elected officials and business leaders, and the presidents of over 100 major American universities. See who here. Among other things, these signers submitted over 3,400 questions they want the candidates for President to answer about science and the future of America.
Beginning with these 3,400 questions, Science Debate 2008 worked with Scientists and Engineers for America, the AAAS, the National Academies, the Council on Competitiveness, and the other organizations listed to craft the top 14 questions the candidates should answer. These questions are broad enough to allow for wide variations in response, but they are specific enough to help guide the discussion toward many of the largest and most important unresolved challenges currently facing the United States."

For compete questions and answers from both candidates, see The Questions and Answers--A Side by Side Comparison

Court Clears Minister Who Wed Lesbian Couple
PCUSA OKs Changes to Faith Document, Removal of Gay Condemnation

"Three years after conducting a wedding ceremony for a lesbian couple, the Rev. Janet Edwards was acquitted Thursday on charges of violating Scripture and the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)'s constitution.

"A 2000 decision by the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, the denomination's highest court, held that clergy could conduct services blessing same-sex couples but could not present them as marriages and that the services should not resemble weddings.

"Although the charges against Edwards contended she "knowingly and willfully" performed a ceremony that was "contrary" to the PC(USA) constitution, Pollock of the regional PJC said the prosecution offered no evidence that Edwards violated Scripture when it listed eight biblical passages defied."

Can anyone answer this question: "Why would a religious order have a Judicial Commission to decide whether secular laws were broken?" If secular laws are broken, is it not the business of the secular admisistrators of law to bring action?

"The Permanent Judicial Commission (PJC) of the Pittsburgh Presbytery ruled unanimously 9-0 to clear the minister on the grounds that she could not have performed the ceremony since the church and state define marriage as between a man and a woman."

It was not just the Presbyterian Church's Constitution the Commission considered, but also the definition of marriage as presented by the state. Since the state does not define marriage as anything but between a man and a woman, the Rev. Edwards "could not have performed the ceremony." for continuation see Presbyterians Work on Removing Anti-Gay Agenda

The Looming Crisis over Free Speech

In a lecture today, October 6, 2008, "Dr. Eric Daniels examines the state of free speech in America and finds that it is under serious threat. From campus speech codes to anti-discrimination and harassment law, fromcampaign finance to commercial speech, Americans today enjoy less andless freedom in communicating their ideas. Today's colleges and universities have become a hotbed of censorship, producing generations of Americans who have accepted suppression of speech as the norm. Daniels argues that the emerging crisis is a result of the lack of aproper understanding of individual rights, especially property rights. Only by understanding the proper basis of rights can we act to secureour freedom of speech and to protect the rights that give rise to it. Where: 101 Morgan Hall, University of California, Berkeley. For more information on this lecture, please e-mail media@aynrand.org."

Note: I will be the featured speaker at the Center For Inquiry (CFI) meeting, October 16, 2008, in Portage, Michigan. The topic is "Atheism as a 'Religion' Protected by Courts According to the Establishment Clause" CEC

mailto:freeassemblage@gmail.com

http://freeassemblage.blogspot.com/

The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists is the SM of the
The Free Assemblage of Metaphysical Naturalists LLC.
The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism TM, The Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger TM, and
Academy of Metaphysical Naturalism Blogger Extra TM are the educational arms of the LLC and are:

© 2008 by Curtis Edward Clark and Naturalist Academy Publishing ®