This Friday we will have a special showing of Jesus Camp. Jesus Camp follows several young children as they attend an evangelical summer camp and allows the audience a look at some of the shocking things that occur there.

Please RSVP on our facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=205567502815908#!/event.php?eid=205567502815908

You can find out more about Jesus Camp here

Hello everyone,

Tomorrow, May 13th (Friday the 13th no less!), Rebecca Watson will be visiting our campus! Rebecca Watson is the founder of Skepchick.org and co-hosts The Skeptics Guide to the Universe. The title of her presentation is “The Religious Right vs. Every Woman on Earth”.

This special event has been made possible through the joint efforts of Bruin Atheists and the Bruin Alliance of Skeptics and Secularists.

Please RSVP on the facebook event page:  http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/event.php?eid=193868633988159

Thanks, looking forward to seeing you there!

Hey everyone! This is my first blog for BASS and I am the first contributor who actually has a religion…So, here we go with something a little different:

We’ve all heard about Osama bin Ladan and his Islamic society dream (nightmare?). And there are many Muslims in California who would love to live in an Islamic society. But what kind of world are we talking about when we say Islamic society? Saudi Arabia? Iran? Did Muhammad really have in mind the Saudi royal family when he started a revolution? Iran is an “Islamic Republic” but where in the Quran or ahadith (sayings of the prophet) is there any mention of an “Islamic Republic?”

First off, we have to talk sunna (traditions). Long, long ago, 7th century Arabia was divided into tribes. The tribes had hakams (judges/mediators) who arbitrated on certain issues (if a member of the tribe kills another member’s pregnant camel, does he owe that other member one or two camels?). The ruling of the hakam would become sunna, and future generations would follow this example.

For Muslims, they follow the sunna of Muhammad. Here is a look at what I am calling his Top Ten accomplishments and why he was so loved:

1. Destruction of the idols in the Kaba and the end of Qurayshi control of it as a business (aka: you can no longer charge people to worship just because your tribe happens to be in possession of a holy site)

2. Rejection of materialism (see number one: rejection of worshiping statues and paying some tribe money to worship them)

3. Decision to worship immaterial things like compassion and mercy (”In the name of God. The compassionate, the Merciful…” (Quran))”

4. No more killing babies because they are female :-/

5. Young orphans and women have the right to inherit (Men, you can’t have it all just because you think kids and women are too simpleminded).

In response to men complaining about the new inheritance law: “Those who disobey God and His messenger, and who try to overstep the boundaries of this [inheritance] law will be thrown in Hell, where they will dwell forever, suffering the most shameful punishment (Quran, 4:14).”

6. You can no longer charge interest and keep people in debt slavery (invention of a tax free market with no-interest loans)

7. Criticism of the Byzantine Empire for its rigid stance on the trinity and it’s persecution of different Christians–even though most Christians in the Middle East were not Trinitarians.

8. Established social equality…It is reported in a hadith: The Muslim Jabalah ibn al-Ayham, an aristocrat of a wealthy tribe, was struck by another Muslim man, one less prominent and from the modest tribe of Mayzunah. Jabalah expected a harsh punishment to be inflicted on his inferior attacker. However, he was informed that in Muhammad’s Islamic society he only had the right to strike the man back with the same amount of force. Jabalah immediately quit Islam and became a Christian.

9. Challenged the local Arabian peninsula Law of Retribution, which endorsed vengeance:

“The retribution for an injury is an equal injury, but those who forgive the injury and make reconciliation will be rewarded by God (Quran, 42:40).”

From the Constitution of Medina under Muhammad: “The community may be solidly against [the criminal], and may do nothing except oppose him.”

10. Established zakat (obligatory charity). That’s right. You have to be charitable. This is not an option.

When you meet Muslims who want to live in an Islamic society, and yet want to curtail the rights of their fellow human beings, be skeptical of that. Ask those people, “Is that really the world you want to live in? You follow the sunna of one of the most progressive, liberal people of his time. He challenged the social structure, laws, and ingrained beliefs of the most powerful and dangerous people of his time in order to uplift those who were less fortunate. How can you want to live in an Islamic society and not live in the spirit of Muhammad?”

The original Muslim society founded by Muhammad was revolutionary, and Muhammad was loved and incredibly popular because of his policies. He lifted up people who needed to be lifted up the most (the poor, women, and orphans) by giving them respect, more opportunities, and more rights than they ever had before.

So what happened to the dream of the liberal and progressive Islamic society?

The room was overflowing with people. Many of the panelists invited their friends, so we had a very mixed audience. One panelist, Jennifer, was part of the Passion for Christ Movement, so we had several audience members wearing their distinctive T-shirts with words like “EX-Hypocrite” and “EX-PornAddict”. Someone from the Passion for Christ Movement was also kind enough to videotape some of the discussion. I will let you know if these videos are made available online.

The following is not a transcript. I simply took detailed notes of the discussion. Nothing is quoted, everything is paraphrased. I try to be fair and accurate, but I apologize in advance for any important omissions or errors.  No attempt has been made to verify the various claims which were made.

Introductions

The first introduction was by Shoshana, a conservative Jew. She explained that Judaism is primarily based on the Old Testament and the Talmud. The Talmud consists of two parts: Mishna, the oral laws, and Gemara, which is basically commentary. There is a range of different positions in Judaism, going from orthodox, to conservative, to liberal. She is part of the smallest group in the middle, the conservatives.

The second introduction was by Ben, a deist. Deists are monotheistic, but they believe the Bible is a metaphor. They don’t believe in miracles or in the divinity of Jesus. They believe in using reason to justify faith. It is more a philosophical position than a religious one. Ben listed a few Deists including Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Adams, and possibly Benjamin Franklin. Deism originated in Europe, and declined around the time of the French Revolution, but there has been a resurgence in the last decade or so.

Leilani offered her own brief introduction by explaining the historical meaning of “infidel”. Infidel means to cover, as in covering the ears or eyes. The word was not originally intended as an insult, as it is often used now, but as guidance or a warning.

Opening questions

The first question was posed to the Christians, Tim and Jennifer. Why base your theology on an interpretation of Paul? That is, why is the resurrection necessary for forgiveness? Jennifer began by noting that nothing is wrong with interpretation. The crucifixion is based on facts. For example, the Roman historian Tacitus described Christ and Christian beliefs. The Talmud, too, mentions Yeshua, and the historian Thallus mentions a darkness at the time of Christ’s death. Tim discussed God’s justice. According to Tim, if you live under Sharia law, stealing is punished by cutting off the thief’s hand. This is a just punishment, because you are under Sharia law. Likewise, we are part of God’s system, so God’s justice must be just. Under God’s justice, God used an innocent man to forgive everyone’s sins.

The second question was posed to the atheists, Andrew and Daniel. What is the purpose of life? Andrew said that there is no inherent purpose. He assigns the meaning and purpose himself. He would like to have a life which is sustainable and enjoyable. Although the freedom to assign one’s own meaning can be scary, he feels more peaceful and content to rely on his own values. He is free to make himself a better person. Rather than being a pawn, he is actively responsible for changing the world. Daniel said that this made him feel more empowered, though Andrew disagreed on this point.

The third question was posed to the Muslims, Nader and Naqib. How do you weigh the evidences for different gods? After opening with a prayer, Nader explained that our purpose is to worship the greater. If we study past societies, we find that they always have a higher figure, though they often have different characteristics. To understand the details of this higher figure, it is best to ask God himself. Nader then pointed to the Koran as a book without contradictions, and some scientifically confirmable facts. The Koran refers to male and female parts of plants before people would have known it was true. It refers to the earth as egg-shaped (the kind of egg in question is a spheroid). The Koran is only a book of guidance, an instruction manual for life, but these things confirm it. While other texts have made predictions, only the Koran is perfect. The Koran says that Allah is absolute one, has no beginning or end, and has no family. Jesus clearly doesn’t fit this description. Nader said that the creation will not have evidence of the creator. Naqib added that intuition of God is not sufficient. That’s why we need the prophets.

The Muslims were also asked what they thought of the story of Abraham (summary: God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son, but stops him at the last moment). They described the story as a test of faith.

More prepared questions

Each of the next four questions was asked of all three groups. Each group was allowed about 20 minutes total to answer all the prepared questions (including the ones above). If some answers are longer or shorter than others, that means that the group allotted more or less time to that question (or I took worse notes).

Prior to these questions, Jennifer took a moment to explain the “EX-Hypocrite” T-shirt she was wearing. She said that labeling oneself a Christian does not make oneself a Christian. At an earlier point in her life, she may have thought of herself as Christian, but she wasn’t. She went on to say that she thinks there is clearly design in the universe. And she referred to the Job verse 37:18 which says that God “spread out the sky”, in agreement with current cosmological science.

What books and authors do you recommend? Jennifer recommended C. S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien. She mentioned C.S. Lewis’ Liar, Lunatic, or Lord argument. Daniel first recommended the Bible, followed by authors Carl Sagan and Dan Barker. He liked Dan Barker’s harm principle and Carl Sagan’s logic and reason. Naqib first recommended the Torah, Psalms, the Gospel, and the Koran. His final recommendation was a book called Muhammed: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources, by Martin Lings.

What led you to your beliefs? Tim said that he was a missionary child. However, he remarked that Christianity is set apart from other religions in that everyone has freedom to choose Christianity. And so he freely chose Christianity rather than just being brought up into it. Andrew explained that he came from a Christian family. When his family stopped going to church, he continued going with friends, but he eventually stopped. The concept of hell was one of the sticking points for him. So he explored many other religions (mentioning Alan Watts and Zen Buddhism), eventually deciding that the scientific is what’s most reliable. Nader explained that he is a Muslim because he wants to be. He explored other religions. He read the Koran and other books, and found the Koran to be the best.

What do you believe happens after death? Jennifer said that we have all sinned, and we are enslaved by sin. As sinners, we will experience hell after death, which is a separation from God. Daniel said that nothing happens after death. That’s why he must try to enjoy this life. He would like to help you enjoy your life too. Naqib said that when you die, you will be asked three questions: Who is God? Who is the prophet? What is your religion?

Do you try to convert other people? Tim explained that no one can be saved without Christ. So he’d have to be a monster not to try to help people. Andrew said that he wants everyone to have the freedom to choose. He wants the ideas to become well-known so that people can choose. Some atheists try to smash belief, but this isn’t very common. No one wants to force people to give up religion. However, he wants to counteract some of the negative forces from other religions. He commented that in the story of Abraham, the first question that should be asked is “Am I being deceived?” He noted that when the Jim Jones cult committed mass suicide, no angel came in to save them, as they saved Abraham’s son. We need to be more independent-minded. Nader said that Mohammed was the last prophet, and that we should share the message. But he does not convert, he only invites people to investigate. Nader also commented that Jim Jones was an atheist and communist, and was not guided by an angel.

Q&A session

The following questions were submitted by audience members.

To the Christians: What middle ground can you find with the atheists? Jennifer related an anecdote of a computer science guy to whom physics proved God. She agrees with the atheists that there is a lot of mystery in the universe to be satisfied by.

To the atheists: Could you comment on the statistics which show that atheists donate less to charities, and have higher rates of depression? Daniel thought that the relationship between atheism and depression might be going in the other direction. Depression can lead to questioning, among other things, God. He also said that there are very few explicitly atheist aid missions, and atheists often donate to religious charities too.

To the Muslims: Is it true that the Koran says that Jesus was not crucified? Naqib explained that the Koran is ambiguous about this. The Koran talks a lot about what did not happen, but does not say much about what did happen. There is a lot of controversy between traditions on Jesus. But Islamic tradition usually emphasizes the life of Jesus rather than the death.

To the Christians: Do you believe in the Rapture or the endtimes? Tim said he does not believe in the rapture, which was an idea developed in the middle ages. However, tribulations will occur. Jesus will return. Tim believes that we are in the endtimes, and that it has been the endtimes since the crucifixion.

To the atheists: Hitler destroyed millions of lives. How is this wrong? Daniel said that we decide it is wrong. We decide that destroying innocent lives is wrong.

To the Muslims: Do you believe in the endtimes? Nader said Mohammed left minor signs of the endtimes, but no one but God knows when it will occur. Since people only have free will up to their death, we can say that in a way, judgment starts at death.

Whilst plugging our upcoming event "Here be dragons" on Bruin walk we met David Pollack an advocate for Humanistic Judaism.

The following is some info about their event happening tomorrow night, I hope to go and I also hope to see some BASStronauts there as well!

Announcements

We are hosting a debate between Matt Slick and John Shook. It will occur on Wednesday, April 29, 6:30 pm, in Humanities A51. The topic is “Christianity or Secular Humanism: Which is ethically superior?”  Expect to see more advertisement of this event soon.

Some of you may have seen the signs on Bruin Walk which say “Is God a Delusion?” This event is hosted by the Lutheran Campus Ministries (the same people who have that “Religion is for the weak” table in front of Pauley Pavilion). The talk, given by Angus Menuge, occurs on Thursday, April 16, 6:00 PM in Broad 2100A.

David proposed an idea: BASS talks. If there’s any topic you find interesting, and think BASS should find interesting too, then you can contact any of us. You can give an organized presentation, about 10 minutes without being interrupted. This gives you an opportunity to practice public speaking, and allows us to devote a small section of meetings to a more structured discussion. (Of course, the opportunity to give a talk was always available, but now we’re making it official.)

Meeting Discussion

We started out by watching a video with James Randi, Hugh Laurie (actor of House), and an Astrologer. And then we watched a clip from Alexander Pelosi’s documentary, Friends of God.

The latter video showed a lot of cute kids parroting creationist mantras. Some of us find this a little disturbing. On the other hand, kids can just as easily be taught to say the opposite the next day, so maybe there’s no need to read too much into it. Another discussion point was the phrase “War on Christians” which was used near the end of the video. Some find this persecution complex to be unjustified, since Christians constitute a powerful majority. Maybe they’re referring just to Fundamentalist Christians, who compose only 25% of the population (still a powerful majority).

To kick off a more politically oriented topic, we watched a video of a “man of truth” who advocates getting rid of paper money. From what I understand, the New World Order plans to make your paper money worthless in the very near future. We started discussing why the gold standard is supposedly good, and why it is supposedly bad. Matthew explained that money is currently worth something because it’s backed up by the government. If we were using the gold standard, then money would be worth something because it’s backed up by gold, which has been historically very consistent in its value. Matthew questioned the need for a persistent currency. Ben thought that having a depreciable currency stimulates the economy because it encourages cash flow. After more back and forth, we watched Scrooge McDuck’s explanation of money.

To cap the meeting, we watched this strange advertisement for the Nation for Marriage, an organization which opposes gay marriage. I would like to see some of the claims in this ad supported by evidence, wouldn’t you?

Reminder: This website is a resource for all members of BASS.  If you want to contribute anything, just contact us or talk to an officer.  There are a lot of events going on this quarter, and we would be very pleased if any attendees could write about their reactions.

Announcements

On April 29, we are hosting a debate between Matt Slick and John Shook. The proposed topic is “Which is ethically superior, Christianity or Secular Humanism?”

UCLA’s Objectivist club, LOGIC will be hosting a panel called “A Critique of Climate Change Science and Policy” on Monday, April 13^th. BASS does not endorse the denial of anthropogenic global warming, nor does it endorse this event. However, we encourage people to attend and ask the panelists questions!

We are thinking of having a field trip in the coming weeks to the Church of Scientology’s “Psychiatry: An Industry of Death” museum. This is the same museum which was mentioned last meeting.

Meeting Discussion

Today, we discussed the Pope’s recent comments on contraception. The pope said that the distribution of condoms “aggravates” the problem of AIDS in Africa. Obviously, this has no basis in reality. Indeed, Catholicism’s position against contraception seems to be ignored by most Catholics, who use contraception anyway.

We moved on to the topic of Mother Theresa, who probably has a much better reputation than she deserved. In fact, from her own statements, her goal was never to alleviate suffering; suffering is good because it is Christ-like. When she accepted the Nobel Peace Prize, she took the opportunity to say “abortion is the greatest destroyer of peace.” At one point she accepted $1.25 million from a man named Charles Keating. When Keating was put on trial for defrauding investors of $250 million, rather than returning the money to the rightful owners, Mother Theresa sent a letter to the judge urging him to consider Keating’s generous donations. One wonders where all that money went, considering how poor the conditions of her missions were. They didn’t even have any medicine, except for aspirin.

We also discussed LOGIC’s panel about climate change (see above announcement). LOGIC approached us to ask us to promote it. However, based on the speakers, it seems that the panel is advancing the position that climate change is not caused by anthropogenic (ie human) sources. Most of us disagree with this position, so we cannot endorse it. We are skeptics, not nay-sayers—they are two different things. Nonetheless, Andrew made the point that it is worthwhile to listen to alternative viewpoints and know opposing arguments.

Other topics that were mentioned during the meeting:

• The Quiverfull movement, which believes in having as many children as possible.
• Baptizing the dead – Mormons have posthumously baptized Genghis Khan! And holocaust victims.
• What do they put in our water that it creates rainbows?! That said, schizophrenia is a serious illness.
• Are pheromones really involved in human attraction? Brief, but intense debate ensues.

Dan Barker is coming to give a presentation sponsored by BASS on Feb. 18th and so I decided to listen to a couple of his old debates. Well I totally forgot how awesome of a debater he was against all the sleazy-type debaters. People like Todd Friel, a host on Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron’s radio thingy or Dinesh D’Souza, who is sleazy beyond words in his debate style–these guys are able to one up people like Daniel Dennett or Christopher Hitchens but not Dan Barker. Barker knows exactly how to handle these type of guys who hit below the belt and well maybe I should link you all to some examples!

First, here’s the link to the Facebook event page:  http://tinyurl.com/DanBarkereventFacebook

Make us look good by at the very least saying you MIGHT attend. Haha.

Here are the debates:

Dinesh D’Souza vs. Dan

Dinesh D’Souza vs. Dan Round Two – I highly HIGHLY recommend this one.

Todd Friel vs. Dan (if you can stomach Friel)

Enjoy!

Meeting minutes!  This week, we talked about Alcoholics Anonymous, and then What the Bleep!? and Quantum Mechanics.

Remember: February 12 is Darwin Day, which is Darwin’s 200th Birthday!  Expect to see us on Bruin Walk.  Also, February 18 is when Dan Barker, copresident of the Freedom from Religion Foundation, is coming over for a talk.

Meetings are on fridays, 5-7 pm in Ackerman 2408.

Meeting discussion

We talked about Alcoholics Anonymous, a group intended to help people with alcohol addiction. From a secularist’s perspective, the problem with AA is that sometimes people are just giving up one addiction, alcoholism, for an addiction to religion. Sometimes, AA is pretty open to nontheists, but they are also strongly based on having a “higher power”.

Several members had anecdotes (keeping in mind that they are only anecdotes) of family members who had problems with the religiosity of AA. One person’s uncle became a fundamentalist Christian after going to AA. Another person’s father had to leave AA after realizing his sponsor had no qualifications, and simply saw his alcoholism as a result of his lapsed Catholicism.

Some questions that came up: Is alcoholism a disease, or a moral failing? Or can it be considered both (since both therapy and drugs can work to fix it)? Is SOS, secular organizations for sobriety, a good alternative? Do people who are alcoholic have an addictive personality which perhaps predisposes them to getting into religion? It seems that many AA members pick up smoking, even as they quit drinking. Does the accountability implied by a God in fact help a person keep off alcohol? After all, complicated rational reasons are hard to keep in mind when you’re drunk.

Mikael is the skeptic of the week for his winning insect analogy. See, alcoholism is like a butterfly. The alcohol has stripped you of your wings, but then you go into a cocoon (the cocoon is God) and you come out a butterfly! Amazing. We love this guy.

Our second topic was What the Bleep!? and Quantum Mechanics. What the Bleep Do We Know!? is a film which uses misinterpretations of quantum mechanics to promote a rather new age view of the world. The really funny part is that the film is a basically a front from this cult which is run by a woman JZ Knight who channels a 35,000 year old Atlantean warrior spirit named Ramtha.

So we spent a lot of time talking about the Double Slit Experiment, the Copenhagen Interpretation, Schrödinger’s Cat, and other aspects of Quantum Mechanics. I could probably talk about this stuff for hours (being a rather knowledgeable physics student), but I didn’t get enough time. Let’s just say that What the Bleep!? gravely misunderstands the relationship in Quantum Mechanics between macroscopic and microscopic behavior. The rest of the details of our discussion are hard to reproduce, as I spent more time talking than taking notes.  However (self promotion alert!), I will point you all to my review of the What the Bleep!? on my own blog.

Comments are open.

By the way, I’d like to remind all BASS members that this website is yours.  If you like to share stories or links, or if you just want a soapbox, you could be a contributor.  You are not required to be serious and verbose like I am.  Just contact us (or e-mail Roy or Deja) if you’re interested.

First, some announcements:

Some BASS members want to start clubs of their own!  Look out for these:
Leilani Allmon wants to start the Infidel’s Club.
Michael Okerblom wants to start the Church of Spiritual Humanism.
Daniel Ben-Zvi wants to start the ESA, basically the white club (irony!).

On February 18, we will be hosting a talk by Dan Barker.
Some time in March, we will have a debate between Matt Slick and John Shook. Details will be forthcoming.

Meeting discussion:

Today’s first topic was Scientology. I’m sure that you’ve all heard a lot about them, but when you get a big skeptical group together, you will hear a lot of new juicy tidbits.

If you haven’t ever heard of Scientology, they are basically a cult started by science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard and his book Dianetics. They charge their members a lot of money so they can rise in the ranks and learn more crazy secrets (which I’m sure you can find online). And they dislike psychologists for some reason. Read more at Operation Clambake.

Here are a few things that came up. You may want to verify them with outside sources to make sure they’re true.

• Someone said they had once gotten e-metered on Bruin Walk. The table was manned by 20-year-olds who were trying to sell copies of Dianetics. An E-meter is a pseudoscientific device used by Scientologists to diagnose people’s problems (your problem is that you haven’t paid enough money to Scientology).
• Someone mentioned that Dianetics did get one thing right: patients can sometimes overhear their doctors while unconscious.
• Sea Org is a central organization of Scientology. There are reports that they’ve forced women to have abortions, and that their general purpose is to make everyone dependent on the Church of Scientology.
• Someone had the conspiracy theory that John Travolta’s son died because Scientology doesn’t allow epilepsy medication, and that they’ve been covering it up.
• The Fair Game Law of Scientology authorizes them to take any actions necessary against suppressors of Scientology. They eventually realized that this was bad for PR, so they announced that Fair Game is no longer followed, but that no actual policy changes have been made.
• Supposedly, they have lots of books by L. Ron Hubbard inscribed on golden plates buried in an underground base in Nevada.

The second topic was so-called “a-evangelizing”. We cited the FFRF plaque that was put up at a few state capitals over the holiday season, the UK atheist bus ad campaign, and the D.C. bus ad campaign. Is this good or bad? And how does our “Ask an atheist” table on Bruinwalk compare? Someone said that it’s good if we’re just providing information to people who want it. However, several members seemed to think that certain celebrity atheists (ie Richard Dawkins) take it too far. Unfortunately, I think our discussion was cut a bit short; however, you are all invited to continue it here!