Washington, DC—The Secular Coalition for America today urged the U.S. Senate to not include language that protects religiously-based discrimination in its version of the National Defense Authorization Act. The U.S. House of Representatives today passed H.R. 4310, the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2013.

In a press release Tuesday, the Secular Coalition announced its opposition to Sections 537 and 538 which could allow individuals to harass LGBT service members without repercussion and prohibits the use of military facilities for any marriage or commitment ceremonies for gay and lesbian members of the Armed Forces.

The White House released a statement Tuesday in agreement with the Secular Coalition’s stance, in which the amendments were referred to as “troublesome” and a “potentially unconstitutional limitation on religious liberty.”

“President Obama recognizes that these amendments are potentially unconstitutional, and we hope that the Senate will too–and in turn, snuff out this discriminatory language” said Edwina Rogers, Executive Director of the Secular Coalition for America. “It’s unconscionable that those who claim to defend ‘religious liberty’ are attempting to redefine that term to excuse homophobic, discriminatory, and harassing actions as well as infringe on the religious liberty of chaplains who support marriage equality and wish to solemnize the commitments of LGBT service members.”

The two amendments were offered by U.S. Representatives Todd Akin (R-MO) and Steven Palazzo (R-MS). Akin and Palazzo claim that the amendments were added to the NDAA as a "necessary protection of religious liberty." In a statement released by his office, Akin said that the amendments would protect service members who "are facing recrimination for their sincerely held moral and religious beliefs."

Opponents of this exception have called it a "license to bully" because it carves out a special exemption to protect potential harassment and bullying of LGBT service members, based on religious beliefs. It also opens the door to other types of harassment, including that of nontheistic service members.

CONTACT: Lauren Anderson Youngblood, SCA communications manager …….. 202-299-1091 ext. 205 or lauren@secular.org

Washington, DC—The Secular Coalition for America today announced its opposition to two separate amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act that will allow religious discrimination in our nation’s military.

The amendments to the bill will allow chaplains and members of the Armed Forces to discriminate against LGBT service members without repercussion and ban the use of military bases to perform marriage or commitment ceremonies for gay and lesbian members of the Armed Forces.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (H.R. 4310), including the amendments, is expected to be voted on tomorrow (Wednesday, May 16, 2012), by the U.S. House of Representatives.

“All American service men and woman deserve to be treated with respect regardless of their personal religious beliefs or sexual orientation,” said Edwina Rogers, Executive Director of the Secular Coalition for America. “It’s unacceptable that anyone who has chosen to sacrifice for our country would be discriminated against while doing so.”

Chaplains in our nation's military already have the ability to refuse to perform ceremonies or rites that conflict with their religious faith. These amendments, however, allow military personnel to speak out against religiously defined "inappropriate expression(s) of human sexuality" without fear of reprisal. Such harassment of LGBT servicemen and women has no place in our military.

The two amendments—made during the House Armed Services Committee hearing on May 8, 2012—were offered by U.S. Representatives Todd Akin (R-MO) and Steven Palazzo (R-MS).

The language of Palazzo’s amendment requires that no military property may be used to “officiate, solemnize, or perform a marriage or marriage-like ceremony, involving anything other than the union of one man with one woman.” Akin’s amendment prevents chaplains who would wish to perform commitment ceremonies or marriages for same-sex couples from doing so—a direct infringement on their sincerely held religious beliefs.

Akin and Palazzo claim that the amendments were added to the NDAA as a "necessary protection of religious liberty." In a statement released by his office, Akin said that the amendments would protect service members who "are facing recrimination for their sincerely held moral and religious beliefs." Opponents of this exception have called it a "license to bully" because it allows service members to express anti-gay and homophobic views regardless of their impact on the members of their unit as long as they use a religious justification.

The Secular Coalition for America calls for both amendments to be removed from the NDAA before final passage.

CONTACT: Lauren Anderson Youngblood, SCA communications manager …….. 202-299-1091 ext. 205 or lauren@secular.org

In April, the Department of Health and Human Services added Heritage Keepers Abstinence Education, an abstinence-only education program, to its list of evidence-based pregnancy prevention programs that receive government funding. This decision was based upon unpublished, unreliable, and biased research conducted at Brigham Young University.

Studies typically go unpublished because critical review would shine light on bias or skewed data. This study did not include the conflicts of interest disclosure required by most journals to publish research. This is likely because there is a clear conflict of interest for researchers at BYU, where the university honor code requires students and faculty “live a chaste and virtuous life.” This bias leads researches to draw conclusions based on their existing belief.

The testing procedure calls the reliability of this study into question. Instead of randomly deciding which students would receive the abstinence-only education, researchers purposefully selected which students would participate in the abstinence-only program. Intentional selection allows researchers to fill the abstinence-only education group with students already more likely to abstain from sexual activity and then attribute their abstinence to the program. Additionally, only past studies by the lead researcher are cited when describing the reliability and validity of the testing measures.

Government officials should rely on high quality research, not studies tainted by religious belief, when making health care and education policy decisions.

Please tell the Department of Health and Human Services to remove the Heritage Keepers Abstinence Education program from its list of evidence-based pregnancy prevention programs that receive government funding until they are supported by published, unbiased, reliable research.

Click here to sign this action alert!

On April 27, the Obama administration published its new guidelines for organizations receiving federal funds to provide services through faith-based initiatives. In an effort to increase transparency, according to the administration, the 50-page report details how organizations must separate their religious mission from their community service mission-- certainly a worthy goal. However, the report contains little significant change to the church-government partnerships initiated by President George W. Bush that provide direct taxpayer funding to religious institutions. Some of these institutions, not surprisingly, have had some problems separating the community’s best interests from their own. One especially crucial issue, which President Obama himself recognized in Zainesville, Ohio, as a candidate in 2008, is the fact that these organizations are allowed to discriminate in the hiring process based on religion.  

In his Zainesville speech, President Obama said, “First, if you get a federal grant, you can’t use that grant money to proselytize to the people you help and you can’t discriminate against them – or against the people you hire – on the basis of their religion. Second, federal dollars that go directly to churches, temples, and mosques can only be used on secular programs.” There you go, that’s a wrap, folks – taxpayer money is to promote general well-being and if he gets elected those funds aren’t going to be used to further one group’s specific causes over the other – right? Not quite. Three years later the President has not kept his promise. When he was pressed on the issue, by Amanda Knief of the Secular Coalition for America, the issue of hiring discrimination by faith-based groups had become “tricky” and the President had apparently decided that the status quo struck a good balance. Fast forward 9 months, and the Administration has now confirmed in its guidelines that hiring discrimination is acceptable, if religion is a core principal of your mission.

Despite what the President said last summer, there is no nuance, it isn’t “tricky”; he had it right as a candidate. An organizational mission that serves the entire public doesn’t require employees of a specific faith. The Administration’s decision to allow this discrimination is a choice to prioritize the concerns of religious organizations over the people these programs are intended to serve.   

Washington, DC—The Secular Coalition for America today expressed disappointment that the Health and Human Services (HHS) contraceptive rule continues to be used to promote a false definition of religious freedom by some religious employers seeking to push their religious beliefs on employees.

On Monday, Legatus, a group of Catholic CEOs of secular companies in Michigan filed a federal lawsuit against the HHS rule that requires insurance coverage for contraceptive care. The group is seeking a court ruling to permanently block the implementation of the HHS rule. The stated mission of Legatus is “[t]o study, live and spread the Catholic faith in our business, professional and personal lives.”

Among other claims, the group says that the HHS rule puts “coercive pressure” on the employers to “change or violate their religious beliefs.”

“Legatus is asking the government to place the religious beliefs of the employer over the individual religious beliefs of the employees, and they are doing it under a smoke screen of religious persecution,” said Edwina Rogers, Executive Director of the Secular Coalition for America. “True religious freedom allows for individuals to make personal moral and health decisions for themselves.”

In March, this issue was considered by the U.S. Senate: the Blunt amendment—a bill introduced by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) —would have allowed employers to exclude any insurance benefit they deem immoral or “contrary to their religious beliefs,” but was clearly rejected by the legislators.

Since first announcing the rule, the Obama administration announced that employees of religiously affiliated employers would be able to obtain contraceptive services free of charge, directly from insurance providers—ensuring that these employers are not actively involved in the process. It is unacceptable  for employers to act as a “big brother” and second guess health care best practices.

Rather than infringing on the employers’ religious freedom, the HHS rule actually supports the religious freedom and rights of individual Americans by allowing each person to decide for herself and himself whether contraceptive coverage is appropriate in their life—and not forcing them to follow the religious views and perspectives of their employers—or anyone else.

In addition to cost saving benefits, there is ample scientific data that represents medical benefits of contraception for women who are contraindicated for pregnancy, as well as demonstrated preventive health benefits from contraceptives relating to conditions relation to conditions other than pregnancy. (e.g. treatment of menstrual disorders, acne, and pelvic pain).

The use of preventive services—such as all FDA approved contraceptive methods as recommended by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) guidelines and researched by the independent Institute of Medicine—result a healthier population and reduces health care costs by helping individuals avoid preventable conditions and receive treatment earlier.

 “Every American is entitled to their personal religious beliefs and practices, but they do not have the right to impose them on others –including their employees—or ask for privileging from the government,” Rogers said.

There are many different religions with varying views on what is acceptable when it comes to health care, but to build public policy around any particular religion would not only be unconstitutional, it would also be impractical and negatively affect those of different faiths or none.  Christian Scientists for example, do not believe in modern medicine, opting instead to be “healed” by prayer. Scientologists do not believe in the use of pscychiatry. When you allow employers to pick and choose what health benefits are available to employees, based on the employers personal belief, many main stream medical procedures and medications will be up for debate. It is impossible to respect the beliefs of every religion when it comes to setting public policy—nor is it fair to employees or the general public.

The Secular Coalition continues to assert that an employer being able to deny its employees the full range of preventative health care benefits is not religious liberty—especially when those employees may not share the employer’s religious beliefs. True religious freedom allows individuals to decide what is or is not appropriate within their religious tradition. The religious beliefs of employers deserve no special treatment or exemption from government regulations which have a strictly secular purpose.

CONTACT: Lauren Anderson Youngblood, SCA communications manager …….. 202-299-1091 ext. 205 or lauren@secular.org

We live in scary times. The rise of the Religious Right has created a co-mingling of religion and government that has been steadily increasing since the 1970s.

Some of the politicians that have risen from this movement want to insert their particular brand of religion into secular laws—at both the state and federal level. While mixing religion and politics is almost always unconstitutional, it has gotten to a point where it’s spiraling completely out of control.

We have seen a slew of laws being introduced across the country that affect everything from contraception and women’s health care access, to religious exemptions in bullying laws, to laws that discriminate in adoptions. These pieces of legislation attempt to insert religion into our secular laws. We see a mobilized Religious Right opposing all sorts of science-based ideas and research on things such as stem cell research, and dragging down the American public education system by attempting to teach intelligent design in public schools rather than the scientific theory of evolution, insisting on abstinence only sex education, and discouraging funding for schools that don’t comply with their religious agenda.

For example, earlier this year former U.S. Senator and Republican presidential candidate, Rick Santorum, criticized college because he said college students lose their "faith commitment."  He also wanted to decrease taxpayer support for public schooling in favor of homeschooling—which some groups of conservative Christians believe is best because their children won’t be introduced to science-based ideas that conflict with their religious beliefs.
 
Some say the Republican Party has been hijacked by the Religious Right. And it’s easy to see why this sentiment prevails—especially within the secular movement. After all, the Religious Right seems to be closely affiliated with the Republicans, and many secularists wonder why we should “waste time” trying to include, persuade or reason with a party that seems to have aligned itself against the very thing we aim to protect and strengthen: the separation of religion and government.
 
However, that is the very reason we must reach across the aisle. While the Religious Right may represent a faithful voting bloc—and therefore hold a disproportionate amount of power within the party—they do not represent all who identify as Republican.

In 2000, about 14 percent of the electorate identified itself as part of the "Christian Right," with 79 percent of this sector voting for George W. Bush. A new analysis shows that the share of voters identifying with or leaning toward the GOP has either grown or held steady in every major religious group. But the GOP is not comprised of only conservative Christians. Another recent study found that 34 percent of Republicans (and 51 percent of the general public) agree that religious conservatives have too much control over the GOP. And a full 44 percent of Republicans believe the Church should keep out of politics.

While individual nontheists may identify as liberals, conservatives, libertarians, independents, among others, the nontheist movement as a whole is associated with the Left in the minds of many.  As a result, we haven’t been able to reach quite a few on the conservative side who are either nontheists, or who may be receptive to the secular agenda. And there are quite a few. Nearly 30 percent of “nones”—people who do not identify with any religious affiliation—identify as Republican. 

Between the Republican “nones” and the 34 percent of Republicans that don’t like where the Religious Right is taking their party-- that’s a lot of people we’re missing if we work with only the other side. Not to mention that legislators tend to be a bit more motivated to introduce satisfactory legislation and fight harder for your vote when there is legitimate competition for it—rather than paying empty lip service to a voting bloc they know is not going anywhere. One needs look no further than President Obama backing off his promise to end discrimination in the hiring of government-funded positions by religious organizations, or his hosting of in the annual Prayer Breakfast, to see that politicians on both sides are angling for religious votes.

The reality is, no matter where you fall on immigration, taxes, foreign affairs, crime—it does not affect the principles of secularism and the constitutional value of separating religion from government. Secular values should be shared by all, regardless of where you fall on everything else.

We do ourselves a disservice when we actively attempt to align ourselves with only one party. Of course, we may naturally gravitate toward one side or the other, but we must remember that most people are not single issue voters.  That is to say that when they go into the voting booth, they are not voting solely on their beliefs on religion (or any one issue). They may be put off by the religious rhetoric of a particular candidate, but are more concerned about immigration policy, for instance, and vote for a religiously-affiliated candidate anyway.

It’s our job as a movement to make voters see the importance of voting based on secular issues. We should never give up on creating relationships and building coalitions where ever we can.

As a movement, and in the case of the Secular Coalition, an advocacy and lobbying organization, it must be our goal to make secular viewpoints transcend party lines—a concept especially important when we remember that the political tide is always only one election away from possibly turning in the other direction.  What a shame it would be to lose 2, 4, 6, 8 years—or more, because we are waiting for “our side” to be elected or reelected, before we were able to join the conversation or enact legislation of our own. And even then, is it guaranteed?

Having relationships on both sides of the aisle ensures that no matter who is elected, we will have a seat at the table. And if we have a place in both parties, we can even help temper the influence of those with more radical and religiously extreme views—pulling the party back toward the center.

We often say that secular values are American values because they represent the principles our country was founded upon and the vision our founders had for this nation. And that’s the truth. These values belong to all of and should never belong to any one party.
 
If we want to succeed as a movement, we cannot focus on partisanship, but instead, on pragmatism. If we want our message and values to be widespread and universally socially accepted and valued, we can't focus our message on only certain groups. When we have relationships with both sides, we will begin to have real and lasting power to effect change in legislation. 

When we can successfully do that, we will not only be able to combat the horribly egregious issues we are seeing pop up from state to state around the country, but we will also have helped protect the very values our forefathers intended for us when they founded this great nation.

WASHINGTON, DC—The Secular Coalition for America—the nation's only full time nontheistic lobbying organization—proudly announced the selection of longtime Republican lobbyist, Edwina Rogers, as its new Executive Director today.  Rogers brings two decades of experience on Capitol Hill as a lobbyist and attorney, including roles as General Counsel for several high profile politicians.

“For too long, the 50 million secular Americans have been ignored, underappreciated and undervalued—that’s what drew me to the Secular Coalition for America,” Rogers said. “It’s time to change that. Secular Americans are increasingly pulling together as a voting bloc that demands attention—a constituency that is due formidable representation in Washington, D.C.”

Rogers has been a public policy expert for over 20 years and has worked for two Presidents and four Senators. She has served as an advisor to the George H.W. Bush administration and the George W. Bush White House, as well as General Counsel to the National Republican Senatorial Committee. She worked for Senator Trent Lott while he was Majority Leader in 1999 and handled health policy for Senator Jeff Sessions in 2003 and 2004.

Rogers’ background is an ideal fit for the Secular Coalition for America, now in its 10th year.  She has a proven track record of managing coalitions and implementing nation-wide strategies. In her most recent roll as Executive Director of the Patient Centered Primary Care Collaborative, she organized a coalition that included major employers, consumer groups, labor unions and health care providers. In this position she also planned and implemented a successful 50-state strategy.

The Secular Coalition continues to move forward implementing its own 50-state plan, as well as continuing to focus on advocating for nontheists on Capitol Hill, including expanding recognition of nontheists by lawmakers. Rogers is a strong advocate of the separation of government and religion and is in a unique position to push the secular message to those on both sides of the aisle.

“Secular issues are not partisan issues,” Rogers said. “All Americans should be concerned about protecting our most basic rights and I want to bring that message to politicians of all stripes.”

Secular Coalition President, Herb Silverman, said Rogers has the unique ability to reach out to many of Washington D.C’s power players, who may mistakenly associate secular values with a particular political party or ideology.  

"Edwina Rogers is an exciting addition to the organization. Her experience managing non-profit coalitions, along with her lobbying and staffing proficiency on Capitol Hill, are the needed skills that can bring the Secular Coalition to a new level,” Silverman said. “We are confident that Ms. Rogers will help to broaden the base and expand the movement beyond its traditional reach, including to the many conservatives who share our secular values and who have not previously been aware of the Secular Coalition for America.”

The Secular Coalition represents 11 member organizations and their members on Capitol Hill. Rogers’ hire comes on the heels of the Reason Rally in March—a Secular Coalition for America sponsored event that drew tens of thousands of atheists, agnostics, humanists and other nontheistic Americans to Washington, D.C. She will begin her duty as Executive Director on May 3, 2012.



For a bio, high resolution photo, Q&A Interview and introduction video please visit: http://secular.org/bios/Rogers

CONTACT: Lauren Anderson Youngblood, SCA communications manager …….. 202-299-1091 ext. 205 or lauren@secular.org

WASHINGTON, DC—The Secular Coalition for America—the nation's only full time nontheistic lobbying organization—proudly announced the selection of longtime Republican lobbyist, Edwina Rogers, as its new Executive Director today.  Rogers brings two decades of experience on Capitol Hill as a lobbyist and attorney, including roles as General Counsel for several high profile politicians.

“For too long, the 50 million secular Americans have been ignored, underappreciated and undervalued—that’s what drew me to the Secular Coalition for America,” Rogers said. “It’s time to change that. Secular Americans are increasingly pulling together as a voting bloc that demands attention—a constituency that is due formidable representation in Washington, D.C.”

Rogers has been a public policy expert for over 20 years and has worked for two Presidents and four Senators. She has served as an advisor to the George H.W. Bush administration and the George W. Bush White House, as well as General Counsel to the National Republican Senatorial Committee. She worked for Senator Trent Lott while he was Majority Leader in 1999 and handled health policy for Senator Jeff Sessions in 2003 and 2004.

Rogers’ background is an ideal fit for the Secular Coalition for America, now in its 10th year.  She has a proven track record of managing coalitions and implementing nation-wide strategies. In her most recent roll as Executive Director of the Patient Centered Primary Care Collaborative, she organized a coalition that included major employers, consumer groups, labor unions and health care providers. In this position she also planned and implemented a successful 50-state strategy.

The Secular Coalition continues to move forward implementing its own 50-state plan, as well as continuing to focus on advocating for nontheists on Capitol Hill, including expanding recognition of nontheists by lawmakers. Rogers is a strong advocate of the separation of government and religion and is in a unique position to push the secular message to those on both sides of the aisle.

“Secular issues are not partisan issues,” Rogers said. “All Americans should be concerned about protecting our most basic rights and I want to bring that message to politicians of all stripes.”

Secular Coalition President, Herb Silverman, said Rogers has the unique ability to reach out to many of Washington D.C’s power players, who may mistakenly associate secular values with a particular political party or ideology.  

"Edwina Rogers is an exciting addition to the organization. Her experience managing non-profit coalitions, along with her lobbying and staffing proficiency on Capitol Hill, are the needed skills that can bring the Secular Coalition to a new level,” Silverman said. “We are confident that Ms. Rogers will help to broaden the base and expand the movement beyond its traditional reach, including to the many conservatives who share our secular values and who have not previously been aware of the Secular Coalition for America.”

The Secular Coalition represents 11 member organizations and their members on Capitol Hill. Rogers’ hire comes on the heels of the Reason Rally in March—a Secular Coalition for America sponsored event that drew tens of thousands of atheists, agnostics, humanists and other nontheistic Americans to Washington, D.C. She will begin her duty as Executive Director on May 3, 2012.



For a bio, high resolution photo, Q&A Interview and introduction video please visit: http://secular.org/bios/Rogers

CONTACT: Lauren Anderson Youngblood, SCA communications manager …….. 202-299-1091 ext. 205 or lauren@secular.org

I strongly support the National Day of Reason, although I wish it weren’t needed. There would be no National Day of Reason if there were not a government-endorsed National Day of Prayer.

Though held annually on the same day, the first Thursday in May, there is a major difference—and not just in terms of reason vs. faith. Some government officials claim that the National Day of Prayer represents a broad interfaith coalition, which it does not. Shirley Dobson, wife of James Dobson, heads the event. Together they promote conservative Christian causes. However, even if the event were religiously inclusive, it would still exclude millions of Americans who do not pray, and it marginalizes them as second-class citizens.

As a secular country with a secular Constitution, our government should not favor one religion over another, or religion over non-religion. But for those who truly want to be inclusive of all Americans, I have a solution: Have the government sponsor two separate days—a National Day of Prayer and a National Day of Non-Prayer, a day on which Christians might then appreciate how atheists and humanists feel about a government pushing prayer.

That said, I don’t need a president or anyone else telling me to set aside a special day to not pray, because I happily do not pray every day. On the other hand, those who wish to pray every day are free to do so without government urging. Our government should never tell its citizens when, how, or whether to pray.

Read more at the Washington Post.

Here it comes again. On May 3, the nation will once again be subjected to the annual fiasco wherein conservative Christians utilize the apparatus of government to publicly exalt their theological beliefs, to ensure that their vociferous anti-secular views are promoted as official state doctrine. I refer, of course, to the religious pandering known as the National Day of Prayer.

As a humanist, I would not bat an eye if the nation's churches privately banded together to promote a non-governmental National Day of Prayer. If the country's evangelical leaders, Catholic bishops, and other clerics - without using the machinery of government - felt that a nationwide interfaith event encouraging prayer would be somehow beneficial, they would have my very secular blessing. Enjoy your day of prayer, folks. Knock yourselves out.

But the religious activists behind the National Day of Prayer are not content with their religious freedom. Instead, they have a compelling need to see their government (which also happens to be mine and yours) sponsor the annual prayer event and issue proclamations, preferably accompanied by grandiose ceremonies, validating their supernatural theological beliefs.

To an inattentive observer the NDOP may seem like a broadly inclusive event that pays respect to the beliefs of all theistic religions – Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, etc. – but in practice such ecumenical goals are absent. In fact, the NDOP is driven by a narrow fundamentalist Christian cartel that sees the entire affair as a means of promoting its worldview.

When we look at those behind the NDOP, we see not a broad interfaith coalition but a tight-knit roster of Religious Right figures. The NDOP Task Force readily concedes that it exists “to mobilize the Christian community to intercede for America’s leaders and its families,” and it cites numerous New Testament passages to support its mission. Religious liberals who see the NDOP as benign should realize that the event's most visible backers have an underlying agenda of attacking science, rewriting history, denying rights to women, tearing down the wall of separation between church and state, and opposing LGBT equality.

Read more at Psychology Today

WASHINGTON, D.C. – – The Secular Coalition for America and the American Humanist Association are pleased that U.S. Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) has officially recognized the National Day of Reason by issuing a proclamation in the House of Representatives. The National Day of Reason, to be observed on May 3, is an alternative to the congressionally endorsed National Day of Prayer.  

The proclamation states, in part, “Our nation faces many problems—bringing our troops home from Afghanistan, creating jobs, educating our children, and protecting our safety net from irresponsible cuts. We will solve these issues through the application of reason. We must also protect women’s reproductive choices, the integrity of scientific research, and our public education system from those who would hide behind religious dogma to undermine them.” To view the full text of the proclamation, click here.

“Reason should be the guiding force for public policy,” said Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the American Humanist Association. “The National Day of Prayer excludes millions of Americans who choose not to pray or prefer keeping prayer private. Reason is something that everyone can celebrate.”

Lauren Anderson Youngblood, communications manager for the Secular Coalition for America, agreed.  

“Our founders recognized that the best guarantee of freedom for all was a separation of religion and government,” Youngblood said. “The National Day of Reason reminds us of the continued importance of our nation’s founding principles and offers an alternative to the government-sponsored theism that the National Day of Prayer represents.”   

The event is scheduled on the first Thursday in May each year to coincide with the National Day of Prayer in order to raise awareness of the threat to religious liberty posed by government intrusion into the private sphere of worship. Many local groups affiliated with the American Humanist Association observe the National Day of Reason by participating in blood drives, holding rallies outside state government building or host social gatherings. Some groups also hold rallies outside state government buildings or host social gatherings. The National Day of Reason website, NationalDayofReason.org, was established by the American Humanist Association and the Washington Area Secular Humanists.

The American Humanist Association and the Secular Coalition for America urge all Americans to support the constitutional principal of church-state separation by recognizing the National Day of Reason. Supporters are encouraged to visit the official website, NationalDayOfReason.org, to post an event in their area, sign a petition to be sent to President Obama, and learn how to encourage local governments to issue a National Day of Reason proclamation.

Contacts:

Secular Coalition for America: Lauren Anderson Youngblood, Communications Manager, Office: (202) 299-1091 x205, Mobile: (202) 630-9725, lauren@secular.org

American Humanist Association: Brian Magee, Communications Associate, (202) 238-9088 ex. 105, Mobile: (202) 681-2425, bmagee@americanhumanist.org

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) are appealing a recent federal court ruling that found unconstitutional the government authorization and funding of their religious-based restriction on services to help sex trafficking victims. Congress appropriated up to $10 million for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to carry out the Trafficking Victims Protection Act's purpose of providing services to victims of human trafficking. Despite the warning in its proposal stating the USCCB would not allow the government money to "provide or refer for abortion services or contraceptive materials for our clients," the HHS selected the USCCB as general contractor to administer these funds. As of June 2010, the government awarded the USCCB over $15.9 million.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts (ACLU) filed suit against the HHS for violating the First Amendment by allowing the USCCB to "impose a religiously based restriction on the disbursement of taxpayer-funded services." The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from suggesting that a particular religious belief is favored or preferred. The ACLU argued the government appeared to endorse a Catholic belief by authorizing the USCCB's religiously motivated restriction on reproductive services that beneficiaries of the TVPA program would otherwise have received.

The USCCB disagreed, arguing the government's acceptance of their restriction was an accommodation of their religious belief, not an endorsement. The government is allowed to accommodate religion to remove burdens on free exercise of religion. There is no question USCCB's restriction was motivated by deeply held religious beliefs, but this is not a burden on free exercise of religion because there is no legal obligation mandating the USCCB provide abortion or contraceptive services. If the sincerely held religious beliefs of the USCCB do not allow them to fulfill the requirements of this government contract, they are free to not take the money. This is about the government authorizing the use of taxpayer money by a religious institution to impose its beliefs on others.

Still, the USCCB cries this ruling is discrimination against religion. Demanding the government respect the separation of church and state does not discriminate against religion. It respects religion by refusing to favor any one faith over another. In a statement about their decision to appeal the ruling the Archbisops William E. Lori and Jose Gomez quoted Justice William O. Douglas that "when government acts to accommodate religion ‘it follows the best of our traditions.'" In the same case where he wrote those words, the Justice also wrote "there cannot be the slightest doubt that the First Amendment reflects the philosophy that Church and State should be separated. And so far as interference with the ‘free exercise' of religion and an ‘establishment' of religion are concerned, the separation must be complete and unequivocal."1 The well reason ruling of Judge Sterns in this case upholds the First Amendment and should withstand this latest challenge.

1. Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306, 312 (1952)

Last week, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued a proclamation that called for every priest, parish and layperson to participate in a "great national campaign" to "defend religious liberty", which they said is "under attack, both at home and abroad." In fact, there are more than 100 upcoming “religious freedom” rallies scheduled nationwide.

True religious freedom is the ability to practice your religion and hold your religious beliefs, as long as those beliefs and practices do not infringe upon the religious freedom others, break the laws of the country we live in, or expect special government privileging. The secular character of our government is the best guarantee of the freedom for people of all religions to protect this right—whether they are Catholic, Muslim, Jewish, or any other religion —or non-religion. 

The truth is that religious liberty does not mean that the government should excuse any person or organization from following the law based on their religion, nor does it mean that the government should fund any religious group that uses the funding to further its religious agenda. Religious institutions are not above the law, nor are they entitled to special treatment or funding.

To push its massive attack on true religious liberty, the USCCB is pushing a false definition of religious freedom—and it will be massive.

"This is bigger in that it's not a one-time thing, not aiming for a specific Sunday" said Sister Mary Ann Walsh, the communications director for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in a CNN article. "It's going to be extensive and it's going to be occurring over a few years."

In a statement, the USCCB cited seven examples of what they say are violations of religious freedom. One of the complaints took issue with the federal government for refusing to reauthorize a grant to a Catholic organization that was supposed to serve the victims of sex trafficking but refused to provide or refer the victims to services for abortion and birth control. In other words, they are complaining that they lost a government contract, after they refused to provide the very people they were supposed to be helping, with the necessary care.

In its statement, the USCCB also complained that some states are cutting off contracts to Catholic agencies that discriminate in state adoptions. They also complained about the HHS regulation that religious institutions are not exempt from offering insurance coverage that includes contraception care. Not only did the USCCB complain that they were held to the same laws that secular organization are held to—they feel the government should fund Catholic organizations even if they break the laws of the land.

Catholics for Choice agrees. In a recent statement, they wrote, "[The USCCB] have sought to redefine religious liberty so that it is limited to policies and issues that they support, and in order for them to get their way, they are happy to deny the religious liberty of those who wish to be free from the dictates of the US bishops…The bishops' idea of 'religious liberty' proposes that one narrow interpretation of one religious tradition should be allowed to run roughshod over the religious beliefs of every single American."

The Supreme Court ruled on this over 130 years ago. In its 1878 decision on Reynolds vs. the United States, the Supreme Court took up the question of whether the government's laws overruled religious belief and found that they did.  The decision read, in part, "Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? 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. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances."

And subsequent rulings have been in agreement with the court’s original decision.

In the 1986 case, Bowen v. Roy, the court ruled that “Free exercise clause does not require Government to conduct its internal affairs in ways that comport with the religious beliefs of particular citizens.”

 In 1990, in the case of Employment Div., Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, the court’s decision read, “…the right of free exercise does not relieve individual of obligation to comply with valid or neutral law of general applicability on ground that law proscribes, or requires, conduct that is contrary to his religious practice, as long as law does not violate other constitutional protections.”

The Supreme Court knew then that religious liberty doesn't put believers above the law but it seems like there are lot of people in America today who need to be reminded of that, including the USCCB, which believes that “religious freedom” gives it the right to ignore U.S. laws and force its brand of religion on the masses.

The USCCB is asking the government to privilege its particular brand of religion over others, under a smoke screen of religious persecution.  Catholics, like every other religious group, are more than welcome to practice their beliefs—that is one of the cornerstones of this country. However, true religious freedom allows for individuals to make their own decisions. What the USCCB and is trying to do is impose its religion on others—a direct affront to true religious freedom.

Kansas' "Preservation of Religious Freedom Act" will protect discrimination based upon religious beliefs. Currently Kansas prohibits discrimination in employment, public accommodations, and housing on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin, ancestry or familial status.  The Kansas cities of Salina, Wichita, Hutchinson, and Pittsburg discussed adding the classes of sexual orientation and gender identity to their local anti-discrimination ordinances. The Kansas House of Representatives responded by introducing the "Preservation of Religious Freedom Act" to block cities from expanding their anti-discrimination laws. The bill passed the House on Thursday, March 29th, by a vote of 91-33. It is now being considered by the Senate as Senate Bill No. 142.

Protection of discrimination masked as a protection of religion is a dangerous expansion of an individual liberty into a justification for intolerance. The constitutional right to Free Exercise of religion is not unlimited. The freedom to believe is absolute, but the freedom to act on those beliefs is not. There is already a system in place for determining when Free Exercise rights are unconstitutionally restricted by the government. When an anti-discrimination law restricts an individual's Free Exercise of religion, courts compare the importance of the preventing that discrimination against the burden on the individual. The government cannot substantially burden a sincerely held religious belief unless they have a "compelling government interest." This test is used by courts around the country, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Kansas House of Representatives twists this balanced approach into an unfair fight by stating discrimination against a class not already protected is NEVER a compelling government interest. Therefore, even if a city determines an unfair bias against select individuals is important enough to the welfare of its citizens to be considered a "compelling government interest," this law restrains the city government from taking action. This doesn't protect religion, it protects discrimination.

Authorizing an individual to discriminate against others based upon a quality for which he cannot be discriminated against shocks the conscience. This bill will protect the right of a Christian to refuse to rent to a gay couple only because they are gay, when it is illegal for a gay couple to refuse to rent to a Christian because he's Christian. This bill will allow landlords to use religion to refuse to rent to anyone for any reason not currently protected: unwed couples, single mothers, LGBT individuals and couples, the list continues indefinitely.

This is not to say that every characteristic of a potential renter's identity should be off limits as a reason for exclusion. But the identities and prejudices of our communities are evolving. If a local government deems the protection of a class of individuals is instrumental to the public welfare, it should be able to provide those protections. The use of religion as a shield to defend discriminatory activities should be concerning for every American, but especially to those in the nontheistic community familiar with discrimination under the guise of freedom of religion.

Last week the Secular Coalition held Lobby Day for Reason—an event that drew 200 nontheistic Americans to Capitol Hill to lobby their representatives on behalf of secular values.

More than 125 meetings were held with Senate and House staffs on both sides of the isle—in fact, the number of scheduled meetings was split almost down the middle between the offices of Democrats and Republicans. After all, secular values are non-partisan—they are uniquely American values.

Participants lobbied their representatives to raise awareness of the secular community, to ask for inclusion by lawmakers, and on religious discrimination in health care law.

As atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers from across the spectrum, it’s important for us to make ourselves known. The prevalence of the Religious Right in politics today demands that we make our voices heard and protect the separation of church and state—which is the best guarantee of freedom of religion for all, including, ironically, those who seek break down that wall.

Lobby Day participants learned the skills they needed to lobby their federal representatives that day, but also took home valuable skills to lobby their local representatives—a task equally as important.

Many of the attacks we see on secular values are happening at the state and local levels. Today 38 percent of current members of Congress served first in local or state offices. Often the federal leaders of tomorrow are most accessible today in state and local positions.

Religion is seeping into every facet of our government from the state level on up and that wall of separation between government and religion that we so treasure is under constant attack.

Lobby Day was an opportunity to show our elected officials that they have nontheistic constituents, and to cement ourselves in their minds as a voting bloc – as well as an opportunity to raise important issues to the very people responsible for setting the legislative agenda for our country.

It was an amazing start—but it’s just the beginning. As secular Americans we need to keep making ourselves known, keep voting, keep raising issues and keep fighting to protect the separation of government and religion.

You can read some of the press coverage we received on Lobby Day and for our participation in the Reason Rally, here.

On Monday, March 19th the Tennessee Legislature passed House Bill 368. The confusing double negative language of the bill prohibits school administrators from prohibiting teachers from helping students critique scientific theories. Support of critical scientific thinking from the Tennessee Legislature is unexpected and inspiring, to the point of raising eyebrows and red flags. Like a leopard can't change its spots, but is a master of camouflage; the Tennessee Legislature refused to give up on religion in public schools, so they disguised it. In place of an explicit endorsement of religion, the legislature cleverly inserts a prohibition on prohibitions. This is not their first use of this tactic to subtly insert religion into the public school curriculum. The Tennessee Legislature succeeded using this method in regards to school prayer (TCA §49-6-1004. Moment of silence; prayer) and Bible study (TCA §49-6-1062. Nonreligious academic Bible study; influence on the arts).

If the purpose of the House Bill 368 truly is to encourage critical scientific thinking, then it is at best unnecessary. That is why a bill that gives science teachers more instructional freedom is opposed by the Tennessee Science Teachers Association, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Center for Science Education, the National Association of Biology Teachers and all eight Tennessee members of the National Academy of Sciences. Critical thinking is already an integral piece of science education. Analyzing theories through the scientific process is already taught in classrooms and science fairs across the country and in Tennessee.

Evolution is named in the bill, with global warming, as a controversial theory that requires more critique and review. Evolution may be a religious and political controversy, but it is not a scientific controversy. As the Tennessee Science Teachers Association stated in their letter to the Tennessee House Education Committee, "...the scientific theory of evolution is accepted by mainstream scientists around the world..."

By authorizing unnecessary and non-scientific curriculum changes, it is clear the true purpose of this bill is to introduce non-scientific alternatives, such as creationism and intelligent design, into the public school science classroom. Any form of religious education in public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Despite multiple courts striking down Tennessee's past public school religious instruction mandates, the message that their actions are unconstitutional was not received. The Tennessee Legislature perceives the Establishment Clause not as a right or the law, but as a problem to work around. Using a double prohibition to disingenuously authorize critical thinking to slip non-scientific alternatives into the science curriculum is brilliant, in an evil genius way.

UPDATE: This is now the law in Tennessee. Governor Bill Haslam did not veto or sign the bill, but Tennessee procedure dictates that a bill will become law if the Governor takes no action on it. Governor Haslam's decision to neither support nor reject the bill bolsters the argument that the contention surrounding evolution is more political than scientific.

Here was an interesting distinction between Christians and secularists: Christians had the same unifying word, but fought over theology; secularists had the same unifying theology, but fought over words. At least our wars were only verbal.

I give credit to the Christian Coalition. Though I disagreed with everything they stood for, they had a terrific model: put aside minor theological differences, work together on important political issues, and grab media attention. That was their plan to change the culture and make politicians take notice. Their strategy of demonizing atheists and secular humanists, while moving this country closer to a theocracy, worked all too well. I’m willing to learn from anyone who has something to teach us.

I joined a number of secular organizations in the 1990s because each was working on causes I supported. But these organizations saw themselves as competing with one another for funds from what they viewed to be a fixed pie of donors. The organizations were spending too much time arguing about labels (atheist, agnostic, humanistic, freethinker, etc.) and too little time showing strength in numbers and cooperating on issues that affect all secular Americans. I knew we needed to grow the pie to benefit all these groups and the secular movement as a whole.

There were lessons to be learned from the Christian Coalition and its religious right successors, who now argue less about dogma and cooperate more on political goals: preventing women from having access to all reproductive health care, promoting that evolution is just a myth and contending that our country was founded as a Christian nation that allows freedom of religion, but not freedom from religion.

The Secular Coalition for America was formed in 2002 to help break down walls and build bridges among atheist and humanist organizations. As a result, we now cooperate on the 95 percent we have in common, rather than argue about the 5 percent that distinguishes us from one another. The Secular Coalition has grown to eleven national member organizations, and covers the full spectrum of nontheists. Since each member organization has strict limits on lobbying, the Secular Coalition incorporated as a political advocacy group to allow unlimited lobbying on behalf of secular Americans. For too long, our nontheistic community has been considered politically inconsequential. There are over 50 million such Americans, and the Secular Coalition advocates for those millions without god beliefs.

Read more at the Washington Post's On Faith.

In a show of solidarity that would have been unimaginable even just a few years ago, thousands will be flocking to the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on March 24 in celebration of secularity. The Reason Rally, a day-long event featuring notable entertainers and speakers and attracting busloads of nonbelievers from all over the country, could be a watershed moment for the secular movement.

The lineup for the day includes a mix of entertainers, public intellectuals, and representatives from various secular groups. All events are free. The band Bad Religion will be performing, and the crowd will also hear from comedian Tim Minchin, popular skeptic and debunker James Randi, and author and scientist Richard Dawkins. Lawrence Krauss, author of "A Universe from Nothing," whose ideas inspired Miley Cyrus to tweet on the issue (thereby sparking a backlash from enraged Christian fans), will also be on hand, along with many others, to address the secular festival.

The event is not a protest and certainly not a religion-bashing affair, but instead can be best understood as a coming-out party for an entire movement. This has caused some to belittle the rally, suggesting that demographic unity around the notion of disbelief is itself nonsensical. Such critiques, however, only reflect a failure to understand what fuels the modern secular movement.

It is very true that many Americans—even many who are themselves nonreligious—see the idea of personal secularity as somewhat insignificant. That is, even many nonbelievers rarely consider emphasizing their religious skepticism—their secular worldview—as a primary means of identification. Ask a typical American nonbeliever to describe her basic lifestance, for example, and she may use terms like "liberal" and "feminist" and "environmentalist," and perhaps numerous others, before reaching any identifier that would raise the issue of religious skepticism.

For many in recent years, however, personal secularity has become an increasingly important aspect of their identity, a clear way of describing one's basic lifestance in the midst of a political and cultural landscape that has become an anti-intellectual wasteland. As such, the Reason Rally, as its name suggests, can be seen as a public manifestation of the secular trend that vehemently opposes America's descent into irrationality.

Ironically, the primary root cause of the growing secular movement is the Religious Right. Because politically mobilized religious conservatives have become such a visible force in America, nonbelievers increasingly feel the need to assert themselves as a demographic. Whereas America's seculars previously went about their daily business without openly displaying their naturalistic, reason-based identity, this indiscreet approach has required rethinking in the face of religious conservatives constantly claiming moral superiority, attacking church-state separation, and tainting public policy .

Read remainder of article at Psychology Today.

WASHINGTON, DC—Hundreds of atheists are expected to converge on Capitol Hill this upcoming Friday as part of the Secular Coalition for America’s lobby day. The Lobby Day for Reason will begin at 8:30 am on Friday, March 23, 2012, at the Hyatt Regency, located at 400 New Jersey Ave. NW, Washington, DC.

The Lobby Day for Reason will offer nonreligious and secular-minded individuals a morning of free lobbying training followed by the opportunity to meet with congressional staff to discuss issues related to the separation of religion and government. The event is free to attend, but participants had to preregister.

More than 280 nontheistic Americans from 36 states and the District of Columbia registered for the event. More than 150 meetings with Congressional staff are scheduled--as of today there are 50 meetings scheduled with U.S. Senate offices and over 100 meetings scheduled with the offices of U.S. Representatives. The Secular Coalition staff plans to continue adding meetings until the days immediately preceding the Lobby Day for Reason.  

"We wanted a wave of nonreligious and secular voters to flood the halls of every congressional building—and that’s just what we are going to have,” said Amanda Knief, government relations manager for the Secular Coalition for America, who will be training constituents in lobbying. “Secular and nonreligious Americans are part of every congressional district in the nation and we aim to educate our elected officials that we are here, we vote, and that we care about our country just as much as any other American. Only by participating in the very system that is working against our communities right now can we hope to change things.”
 
Lobby Day for Reason will encourage and support secular and nontheistic Americans to speak out to the elected officials who were put in office to serve all of their constituents regardless of religious beliefs. The Secular Coalition for America will support these taxpaying Americans as they put faces to the nontheistic and secular communities and tell their federal representatives that they are voters and are paying attention to issues.

Lobby Day for Reason will coincide with the Reason Rally, taking place on the Washington Mall on Saturday March 24, 2012, expected to be the largest secular gathering in American history, co-sponsored by the Secular Coalition for America. 

Contact: Lauren Anderson Youngblood, SCA Communications Manager, Office: (202)299-1091 x205,
Cell: (202) 630-9725, Email: lauren@secular.org 

NOTE: Please email lauren@secular.org if you plan to attend Friday. Press who were unable to RSVP are still welcome.

It seems a bit odd that a Mormon and two Catholics are the leading presidential candidates in a Republican party dominated by Protestant evangelicals. Unfortunately, this is not a sign of the religious diversity espoused by presidential candidate John F. Kennedy in 1960, when he assured Protestant ministers in Houston that he believed in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. President Kennedy gave good secular arguments based on available evidence for decisions he made on behalf of the country. Since then, Catholic candidates have rarely been questioned about whether they would take orders from the Pope if elected.

When Rick Santorum contemplated the kind of separation of church and state espoused by Kennedy, Santorum said he "almost threw up."

Judging by Santorum's continued support among Protestant evangelicals, apparently many of them would be happy if candidates took some of their orders from the pope.

Lauren County, in my home state of South Carolina, now has a purity pledge for the county's aspiring Republican candidates, showing in some ways the county to be more Catholic than the pope. The pontiff would agree with the pledge's opposition to civil unions for gay couples, opposition to abortion under any circumstances, opposition to pornography, and abstention from sex before marriage. But at least the pope would allow members of his flock to confess the "sin" of premarital intercourse, and be accepted. Not so with pledge proponents. Welcome to Laurens Country, South Carolina.

Since no Mormon has yet been president, Mitt Romney's religion will undoubtedly undergo close scrutiny, and its beliefs will seem strange to many. According to the Book of Mormon, after Jesus died, but before he went to heaven, he stopped in the United States. This story was chiseled in Egyptian hieroglyphics on gold plates and buried in Palmyra, New York. In 1827, the angel Moroni led Joseph Smith to the gold plates and a magic stone. When Smith put the magic stone into his hat and buried his face in it, he was able to translate the gold plates into English.

This story sounds silly to me, but no sillier than the claim that Jesus rose from the dead, or that one can drink his blood and eat his body every Sunday, or that a talking snake tricked Adam and Eve into eating a piece of fruit.

I can enjoy a good chuckle over many such religious beliefs, as long as they don't intrude on my daily life. Perhaps I long more for that "old-time religion" when practitioners were mostly interested in saving souls. The new-time religion seems more concerned with providing rules and restrictions about sex for politicians and everyone else.

Read the remainder of the article at Huffington Post.