"Christians, Have Mercy!"--a Poem on Christian Love and "Immoral" Atheism

This poem was also formally rejected, but as with "Rubicon," I believe it too good not to be published.  I think it is quite effective as a poem, notably with its use of change of voice, and the ironic humor.  Also, as an atheist and ex-Catholic, the subject matter is indeed close to my heart--GF

CHRISTIANS, HAVE MERCY!

by

George Fish

 

Show a little of that

vaunted Christian love,

that “love thy neighbor

as thyself” feeling—

especially toward us

“immoral” atheists!

Please realize just how

hard we “immoral”

atheists have it:

after a hard day of

raping, robbing,

pillaging and murdering,

the only way we atheists

can relax in the evening

is through wild drug and

sex orgies, until we finally

get some sleep by passing

out in a drug-and-alcohol-

induced stupor!  Damn it,

we’re so busy in the daytime

raping, robbing, pillaging

and murdering we barely

have time for lunch—all we

can do is grab a baby to eat

while on the run!  Please!

It just ain’t that easy being

sleazy!  And besides, surely

you Christians yourselves

know something about

moral sleaze—after all,

you’ve practiced it regularly

for two millennia to date,

and still counting!  You’re

the ones who burnt people

alive for allegedly being

witches, heretics, or homosexuals,

you’re the ones responsible for the

ecclesiastical murder of Giordano

Bruno and the persecution of Galileo,

not to mention the infamous

Magdalene laundries in Ireland,

or the mass graves of Indigenous

children in Canadian schools

run “for” them by the

Catholic Church, which even

Pope Francis couldn’t bring

himself to fully apologize for!

You’re also the ones who gave us

Catholic priest-pedophilia and its

deliberate cover-up by bishops and

cardinals, “Prosperity Gospel”

hucksters like Joel Osteen and

Creflo Dollar, venomous hate

preachers such as Pat Robertson

and Jerry Falwell, and the

Christian Nationalist zealots who

rally around “I’m proud to be a

Christian” Donald Trump, with his

three wives and two divorces, his

“grab ‘em by the pussy” rhetoric,

and his notably—Stormy—relationships

with women!  And the list goes on

and on—and on!  Yet, you Christians accuse

us, the atheists, of being the “immoral”

ones!  Have you tried looking in the mirror

sometimes, Christians?   Try it.  That’s

where you’ll find the “immorality” you

think is everywhere under the Goddamn sun,

lurking under each and every secular bed,

hiding in each promiscuously tolerant

nook and cranny! 

NAMI and “Spirituality”: an ex-Catholic Atheist’s Perspective

 

A while back, the NAMI Indiana newsletter summarized a Huffington Post article that claimed, based on a sample of 87 respondents, mostly Catholic and Buddhist, that a sense of “spirituality” was integral to mental health, and upheld that position itself.  Needless to say, and self-evident to anyone with a statistics background (which I, as holder of a university degree in economics definitely have), such a small sample size is grotesquely too tiny to have any statistical validity at all; and that the sample was skewed toward Catholic and Buddhist respondents undermines the statistical necessity that the sample taken must be random, which obviously in this case it is not—so such a conclusion has no legitimacy whatsoever.  Also, the recent and current events of Catholic priest-pedophilia and Catholic priests and bishops using Catholic nuns and convents as harems and sources of sex slaves, along with the Catholic bishops’ and cardinals’ deliberate cover-up of decades of priest-pedophilia, and coupled with the ethnic cleansing of non-Buddhists carried out under the aegis of Buddhist monks in Myanmar (Burma), Thailand, and Sri Lanka, denies any moral authority whatsoever for either Catholicism or Buddhism to claim any “moral high ground” when it comes to “spirituality,” the alleged necessity of “spirituality” to mental health, or the tenets of  morality!

 

Psychiatrist Eli Chesen, in his book Religion May Be Hazardous to Your Health (New York: Collier Books, 1972), very admirably points out the perils and deleterious effects of too great an attachment to religion and “spirituality.”  But he still upholds, in my mind, a psychologism, a simple “belief in belief,” with his notion that religion can do some good by teaching appropriate moral values.  However, drawing on my experience as both a Catholic child and adolescent and later atheist adult, I think that appropriate moral values flow more readily from secular humanism than they do from any religion, no matter how “enlightened;” and that “enlightened" religions are such precisely because they’ve been positively influenced by—secular humanism!  (Secular, of course, does not mean atheist; it simply means indifference to religious claims.  Humanism means, of course, human-centered.)  My direct experience with the Catholicism I was born and raised in, and which was inculcated in my through twelve years of Catholic schooling, has taught me that the values religions promulgate and teach are often quite arbitrary and selective—and I’ve seen the same thing in those raised in other religious traditions.  As a key example, within Catholicism, and within Christianity in general, it’s specifically noted that Jesus himself admonished his followers that this commandment was “like unto” the first, of loving God with one’s whole mind, body, and soul, and every bit as important—loving one’s neighbor “as thyself.”  Yet, “Hate thy neighbor” is quite common within Christianity, especially when one’s neighbor is different:  of a different creed, or different sexual orientation, or of a different race or ethnicity, or a “nerd,” or otherwise deemed an undesirable person.  Indeed, I, myself, suffered as a Catholic child and adolescent from my Catholic classmates’ bullying and social ostracism because I was “different”—too physically weak and non-athletic, too “nerdy,” too much given to reading!  Same with my Catholic parents—too much not a “chip off the old block,” too “nonconforming,” too much into intellectual pursuits, not athletic or interested in sports enough.  These were enough to make my Catholic childhood and adolescence, especially from the ages 10 through 18, a living hell!  Also, racism was widespread among my white Catholic classmates, as was disdain for the Civil Rights Movement among both my Catholic classmates and my Catholic parents—a disdain I did not share, and was thus punished for and screamed at for rejecting!  Further, what “values” that were taught us in the Catholic schools were arbitrary, selective, very conforming to right-wing viewpoints, were rigidly upheld, and above all, were quite different and distinct from any notion of “Love thy neighbor as thyself;” which, as I recall, was never taught us in the Catholic schools I attended from 1953 through 1965!  Instead, we were taught a simplistic, totalizing anticommunism, a disdain for Protestants and all other non-Catholics, hostility toward Jews as Christ-killers who had really shady ethics (something Catholicism did not change until the early 1960s at Vatican II!), and above all, once we reached adolescence, the absolute necessity of constantly policing our genitals and romantic/sexual attachments, lest we fall into perdition! Along with absolute obedience and unquestioning allegiance to Catholic authorities and Catholic moral, “spiritual,” and even temporal, authority.  The Church was first, all else was strictly secondary.  Those were the Catholic “values” I was raised on, the Catholic values my classmates and I were specifically taught.  No mention ever of “love thy neighbor.”

 

So it seems to me that when NAMI embraces “spirituality” as necessary for mental health, it’s really saying that, for some reason, simply a belief in some sort of otherworldly, anthropomorphic but supra-human, benign father figure is somehow beneficial to mental health.  Yet NAMI does not answer how such a father figure could be benign and yet punish transgressors with eternal punishment in hell, which is taught specifically by Christianity (at least historically for about the last 2,000 years) and Islam, and certainly implied in some forms of Judaism; while Hinduism posits an equivalent cycle of endless reincarnations into undesirable animals for such transgressors!  All at the hands of an allegedly benign God or gods who somehow love us humans, but whose sense of justice requires very severe, even unending, punishment.  Not exactly consistent with Logic 101, to say the very least!  NAMI’s adherence to such is thus certainly naïve, if not outright false.  In fact, as I state at the bottom of this essay, it’s directly contradictory to the positive peace and humane morality I’ve found as a mental health consumer who’s specifically an—ex-Catholic atheist without an ounce of “spirituality”!

 

Then there are those expressions of religion, of “spirituality,” that are mental illnesses themselves.  As in people who believe they are God, or Jesus, or some saint, or have been given a specific divine mission to carry out by God, even if it is to harm others; not to mention people who believe, are convinced, that God is directly talking to them!  There are also mental health consumers, among them people I’ve known personally, of a New Age “spiritual” bent, who advise other mental health consumers, “Go off your psychotropic medication and let God heal you!”  Indeed, there are many mental health consumers, and even some prominent “mental health professionals” (author Seth Farber, for example, comes to mind, as do those associated with the group MindFreedom) for whom the quintessence of mental health “recovery” is—going off one’s psychotropic medication!  Even just quitting it, cold turkey!  Further, many mental health consumers, both recovering and non-so-recovering, are drawn to evangelical, even fundamentalist, Christian sects and denominations that teach that mental illness, poverty, homelessness, and other adversities in life are God’s punishment for “sin,” and which demand, or at least strongly pressure, their adherents to tithe, i.e., give 10% of their income to the church, even when they have only a poverty-level income.  These, too, all these above, are also “spirituality.”

 

Chesen’s book cited above relates a very moving case history (pp. 75-76)  of someone fatally blinded, led to desperation, by his religion, his “spirituality”: a struggling married Catholic computer programmer with eleven children when he and his wife had wanted only four, but both of whom followed the Church and didn’t use birth control, and who committed suicide when it was apparent he could not support such a large family on his and his wife’s already-stretched-to-the-limit income; after which his wife went on welfare and gave the two youngest children up to foster homes![1]  (Yes, I know, that invidious, “nasty” question pops up, at least to this atheist:  Just where was God when all this was happening?)

 

When I was a Catholic child, I used to pray to God to protect me from those tormenting me, not realizing, in my naivete, that I was asking God to protect me from—his professed followers!  For indeed, as I attended four different Catholic grade and high schools with different student bodies, had professed Catholic parents and Catholic relatives on my mother’s side, and professed Protestant relatives on my father’s side, and have of course known or been acquainted with Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Muslim religious believers in adulthood, I’ve specifically known, or acquainted with, over 500-700 professed Christians or students at Catholic schools in my lifetime; of these, I can say that only 60 of these were what I would consider morally admirable.  Or, only about 8-11% of the whole.  Moreover, of the rest, overwhelmingly they were cruel, insensitive, malicious, or slighting of me personally, and not uncommonly sanctimonious, self-righteous, and in complete denial they were doing anything harmful or hurtful to me, even when they were, and I called them on it!  I had only one-two friends at a time throughout my grade- and high-school years, and didn’t develop any real friendships until I was of college age and older—and with precious few exceptions, those who did befriend me were all  “immoral” atheists who really saw merit in me and actually practiced “Love thy neighbor as thyself,” even as Christians maintained that people were atheists only because they wanted to sin, and rationalize their sin away!  (But then, to Christians overwhelmingly, “sin” has solely to do with how one uses one’s genitalia, and has no relation whatsoever, except in a very abstract, formal, sense, to “love thy neighbor.”)  So, yes, I do have “problems” with cruel, insensitive, sanctimonious, self-righteous, and morally blind religious believers!  Among whom are many such who are absolute bigots toward those they deem “mentally ill”!  But I have no problems whatsoever with humane and humanistic religious believers of any stripe, among whom are some close friends of mine and very admirable, moral people, long-time fighters for social and individual justice—but who, I’ve found, are preciously few and far between among religious believers generally!  So, I content and devote myself to trying to live a conscientious life that is morally upright and admirable, living my life without God or gods, not as one still ruefully “worshipping” a malignant anti-God!  Such is now my positive life as an ex-Catholic atheist who has found full peace and contentment in a life lived without “spirituality,” someone who finds a deep “awe at the universe” more in the magnificent photographs taken by the Hubble telescope than in any notions taken from theology, no matter how allegedly “sublime” they’re portrayed to be.

 

               

---

[1] Catholics, of course, are forbidden by the Catholic Church itself from using any form of “artificial birth control” (condoms, the Pill, diaphragms, IUDs, etc.) and must rely for family planning only on the rhythm method (often sarcastically referred to as “Vatican roulette”!), or else, abstinence from sexual intercourse entirely, to prevent pregnancy.  However, since the Church sees the purpose of sexuality as solely for reproduction, Catholics may not engage primarily in sexual activities (cunnilingus, fellatio, manual sex) that thwart reproduction, although Catholic married couples (sexual activity outside of marriage is strictly forbidden by the Church; that includes masturbation) may use such in foreplay only.  Such is determined by the Catholic Church authorities themselves, from the Pope on down, all of whom are (at least theoretically) celibate males who have been ordained as Catholic priests! (And only males can be ordained as Catholic priests.)  Nuns, by Catholic canon law, are subordinate within the Church to male priests (only from whose ranks may come valid Catholic bishops, Cardinals, and Popes); and lay Catholics are specifically designated as powerless, as their purpose in the Church is only to obey Church authorities.  Such is the reality of the Catholic Church that I, myself, was specifically taught and directly experienced, along with the duty of all Catholics, lay and clergy alike, to uphold these unquestioningly.  Although many Catholics do not hold such rigid views on sexuality, they are deemed illegitimate and “sinning” when they do so.  So, to remain good Catholics, they must not make such views public.  If they do express such views publicly they are deemed as “causing scandal” to the Church, and can be excommunicated.    

Religion is not the solution to the problem. Religion is the problem.

This paraphrase of Ronald Reagan’s famous words as President (“Government is not the solution to the problem. Government is the problem.”) becomes so apt, so tellingly truthful, upon even the most cursory, but honest, examination of religion and its influence on public life. We need look little beyond the headlines of the day, the leading news stories involving religion, for confirmation. First, and obviously, is the continuing scandal of priest-pedophilia and its even worse, even more reprehensible, cover-up by the Catholic Church, especially in Ireland, where the Vatican’s deliberate intervention in preventing action against pedophilic priests drew the ire of the Irish Prime Minister Enda Kenny, who angrily denounced “the dysfunction, disconnection, elitism and narcissism that dominate the culture of the Vatican to this day.” There were further determined protests on the issue of the Catholic Church’s denial of women’s ordination to the priesthood, a conflict that’s been raging now for years, but has only been met with demands for silence by the Vatican. These issues were extensively reported in the New York Times of July 10, July 13, July 22, July 23 and July 25, 2011. (See “References” below)

The death of Osama bin Laden brought back to memory yet another set of crimes committed in the name of a certain type of Islam, those of Al-Qaeda, not only in terms of 9/11, but also in regard to al-Qaeda’s bloody attacks against Muslims who did not share its repressive theocratic authoritarianism. (See Karima Bennoune, “References”) The unholy alliance between the socially hidebound fanatics of the Religious Right with the “secular” economically hidebound fanatics of the Tea Party is still another example. (See Ted Kilgore, “References”)

Does the nefariousness of religion in the public realm ever end?

The religious liberals and mainstream pastors and laity will cry out, “But that’s not us!” But they will do so in vain, for they have not only been silent too long, but have even lent the cover of “religious tolerance” to such theological ugliness. So while their disingenuous acquitting of themselves is technically true—for they are not the ones committing the nefarious deeds—they fail the moral test of at least one mainstream religious current, i.e., Quakerism, in failing to “speak truth to power.” They fail the test of mandatorily speaking out against injustice and deliberate cruelty that’s expressed in both atheist and Christian perspectives: in the atheist Jean-Paul Sartre with his “Silence is complicity,” and in the Catholic Maryknoll priest Roy Bourgeois, about to be laicized for speaking out against the Vatican’s “sin of sexism” in ruling that the Catholic priesthood was a strictly male prerogative. Echoing Sartre, Bourgeois said, “Silence is the voice of consent.” (See George Fish stories on Bourgeois, In These Times, “References”) We need look no further than the silence of mainstream Protestantism in the face of Catholic priest-pedophilia and cover-up. For where were the voices of Christian compassion for the victims here, victims who were obviously receiving no such Christian compassion from the Catholic Church, only the barrage of the Church’s lawyers?

As for Islam, while we can properly note that not all Muslims embraced the methods, or even the aims, of Al-Qaeda, Muslims of note did not speak out against the placing of a bounty on the head of novelist Salman Rushdie, nor the riots by Muslims engendered by the irreverent Danish cartons, acts which are commonly regarded in the “Great Satan” West (to use a popular fundamentalist Muslim characterization) as permissible expressions of free speech. (See Ibn Warraq, “References”) We can talk as well of an assault on a Muslim people themselves in the name of a non-Muslim religious “mandate”, the continued denial of human rights to the Palestinians by the Israelis. Of course, all this above is denounced within the Christian religious tradition itself, in the words of the one Christianity calls the Messiah: “By their fruits ye shall know them.” But where are the voices of Christianity heeding this, acknowledging its telling admonition? Certainly not on the public record, nor, as I’ve found, even in private conversations!

As an accountant might say of the above moral bookkeeping by religion, “There are definitely two sets of books being kept here.” This is something I’ve experienced personally also, in my daily life lived among the believers as well as in being someone who reads the newspapers. This gives a new dimension to my atheism: moving it beyond a strictly intellectual objection to the teachings of the world’s various theologies, to a moral objection that pointedly notes that deliberate cruelty, abuse of power, hypocrisy and the promulgation of double standards are an integral part of religious practice—something I learned early in life growing up Catholic (but didn’t become aware of its causes until later), surrounded on all sides by the emotional and verbal abuse of Catholic parents and family, on the one hand, and, on the other, the abuse of power, censorious repression, and looking the other way when evil was done to me by the Catholic school system and the clerical and lay teachers and fellow classmates within it. So I can truly say I’ve directly experienced the malevolence of religious practice as an integral part of my life experience. A malevolence that by no means ended when I left Catholicism through entering the university, but a malevolence that’s also directly manifested itself in my life here in Indianapolis. A malevolence that’s been, and still continues to be, part and parcel of my treatment by the Indianapolis “peaceable religious progressives;” a malevolence that started with the lies and deliberate character assassination promulgated and broadcast extensively since 1980 by one late “good Quaker woman” who was believed uncritically, and who did permanent damage to both my reputation and to my standing among others. (See George Fish blog, “References”) Fortunately I’ve been able to free myself somewhat by discovering good people who are not motivated by the sanctimonious self-righteousness, that sense of being part of a sanctified elect, that’s so integral to the de facto self-definition of Indianapolis “religious progressives”—even though they will (unsuccessfully) try to deny it.

But this is not merely my own sui generis view. This dissection of Christian morality finds solid intellectual foundation in that seminal work by the 19th Century German atheist philosopher Ludwig Feuerbach, The Essence of Christianity. In it, Feuerbach not only tellingly depicts the self-estrangement of Man from his better nature through adoption of theology (which he distinguishes from the “natural” but vague religious impulse toward love of self and one’s neighbor, but which is corrupted, and has this corruption codified, by theological systems), but shows amply that through such theological embrace, the most cruel and perverted, the most unloving, the most destructive, forms of human behavior are not only tolerated, they are actually celebrated as the will of God and walking in the ways of God himself! Needless to say, history abounds in real-life examples, of which we need only mention the over 900 wars in the West during the Christian era, the Inquisition, the persecution of Galileo, right up to our own day with the priest-pedophilia scandal, the televangelism and political activism of the Religious Right, the televangelizing message of “God wants you to do well in the stock market” as preached by Robert Schuller and his devotees, right into my own personal life of active child abuse by my own “loving” devout Catholic parents, the character-assassination grousing behind my back by the late “good Quaker” mentioned above, and the gleefully active assault on my character and personality by the Indianapolis “religious progressives.”

Even leading Indianapolis “religious progressive” Jim Wolfe concedes that eminent British philosopher and logician Alfred North Whitehead was right when he stated that religion has probably done more harm than good in human affairs. He’s even willing to concede that “there have been more than enough of crusades, holy wars, pogroms, massacres, despotisms, spats, bigotry, abuse” committed in the name of religion. (Jim Wolfe, “Making Peace Among Religions Within Myself”) Atheist writer Christopher Hitchens states appropriately that, while religion is not the cause of what’s bad in human behavior, he also goes on to state incisively, “But the bad things that are innate in our species are strengthened by religion and are sanctified by it…so religion is a very powerful re-enforcer of our backward, clannish, tribal element.” (Quoted in Be Scofield, “5 Things Atheists Have Wrong About Religion," Tikkun, reprinted by AlterNet, www.alternet.org/story/151396/) Put all the above together, and a powerful case is made for regarding religion not as a good in our individual and collective lives, but one of the great evils within these lives.
****************************************************
My good friend Greg King had a long, but most appropriate comment on this blog entry:

Even Karl Marx said something like, "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed; the heart of a heartless world." I'm sure I don't have the quote exactly right, but it's close to that. Many hundreds of millions of oppressed people around the world, for thousands of years, would have killed themselves, were it not for that "pie in the sky when you die" as Joe Hill sang -- that promise of a heavenly reward, if only they can keep trudging through this vale of tears. It has given them a reason to carry on.

Of course, terrible things have been, and continue to be, done in the name of religion, but if it gives people a little comfort, a little solace, it's played a useful role. Of course, for many people throughout history, it has placed them on the wrong end of a pounded nail, a crossbow or a scimitar,faggots and torches, a noose, some stones. There have been many innocent victims of religious blindness and bigotry. But there have been hundreds of millions, or, over the last thirty thousand or so years, even billions of people, for whom it has played a useful role. No, I don't mean the role it has played for the pharisees, the popes, the bishops, the caliphs or the mullahs. I mean, as I've stated, the role it has played for the downtrodden peasants and workers. Buddha, Lao Tse, Jesus, St. Theresa, St. Francis, Dorothy Day, Rev. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Mahatma Ghandi, Martin Buber, Maimonides, the Dalai Lama, Archbishop Romero, Fathers Dan and Phil Berrigan, Fr. Roy Bourgeois, have all played very good roles and each, in their own way, has provided some comfort for the oppressed.

Of course it's better that the oppressed rise up and throw off their chains. But you know as well as I do many people have not had a real opportunity for that. People with the ability to lead, like Spartacus, John Ball and Wat the Tyler, Jean D'Arc, Danton, St. Just, Robespierre, Toussaint L'Ouverture, Sam Adams, Mary Wollstonecraft, St.Simon, Robert Owens, Karl Marx, Proudhon, Lenin, Trotsky, Bukharin, Mao Zedong, Liu Shaoqi, Zhu De, Ho Chi Minh, Joe Hill, Big Bill Haywood, Mother Bloor, Mother Jones, Anne Burlak Timpson, Amilcar Cabral, Sekou Toure, Kwame Nkrumah, Patrice Lumumba, Kenji Miayamoto, Tom Hayden, Rudi Deutschke, Mark Rudd, Bernadine Dohrn, Huey P. Newton, Bobby Seale, Elaine Brown, Angela Davis,Carl Davidson, Carl Boice, Wayne Hayashi, Carol Amioka, Stan Masui, Kalani Ohelo, you, me and countless others, mostly unmentioned, who played major roles or very minor roles (like some of those listed), have to come along and provide inspiration and leadership. Not all of that leadership was good, but it had its good aspects.

Now, you know just as well as I do that the alternative to political leadership -- religious comfort -- may be based on a lie or, in any case, an illusion, a delusion. But we don't know that. We won't know until after we die. Most likely, we'll just insensately feed the grass, or our ashes will be scattered to the wind, and that will be it for us. But we may wake up in some way station between birth and rebirth. We may find ourselves in paradise or purgatory, or a hell somehow worse than the one we came from. We don't know. We may think we know, but it's much easier to prove the existence of something than the non-existence of something. So we might as well try to lead good lives, be considerate of our fellow beings. All our fellow beings.

Me? I don't know what to believe. Maybe Camus was right, and life is a cruel joke. We humans have this wonderful ability not only to experience, but to contemplate the world. But it's all going to be obliterated in an instant. As Simon and Garfunkel sing, "All lies in jest, yet a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." But I have found that appealing to something outside myself helps me through rough times. "When I find myself in times of trouble, Mother Mary comforts me," as the Beatles sing. I know it may just be an emotional crutch; that what I'm appealing to is just air, and nothing more. But it provides some comfort. I suspect that's pretty universal.

REFERENCES, ALL SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING

Bennoune, Karima, “Remembering all al-Qaida's victims,” Guardian (UK), May 3, 2011

Dalby, Douglas, and Rachel Donadio, “Irish Report Finds Abuse Persisting in Catholic Church,” New York Times, July 13, 2011

Donadio, Rachel, “Vatican Recalls Ambassador to Ireland Over Abuse Report,” New York Times, July 25, 2011

Dowd, Maureen, “The End of Awe,” New York Times, July 23, 2011

Feuerbach, Ludwig, The Essence of Christianity, translated by George Eliot, Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1989 [Originally published in 1841]

Fish, George, “Roy Bourgeois Faces Excommunication,” In These Times, March 2009, www.inthesetimes.com

Fish, George, “No Indulgence for Father Bourgeois,” In These Times, October 2010, www.inthesetimes.com

Fish, George, “Politically Incorrect Leftist” blog, www.politicallyincorrectleftist.blogspot.com, esp. entries “Guest Blog from my friend John Williams: The Woman You Thought You Knew” and “On Mother’s Day: for those mothers who were really ‘mothers’”

Frosch, Dan, “Accusations of Abuse by Priest Dating to Early 1940s,” New York Times, July 10, 2011

Goodstein, Laurie, “In 3 Countries, Challenging the Vatican on Female Priests,” New York Times, July 22, 2011

Kilgore, Ted, “’Teavangelicals’: How the Christian Right Came to Bless the Economic Agenda of the Tea party,” The New Republic, www.tnr.com/article/the-permanent-campaign/91661/tea-party-christian-right-michele-bachmann

Mackey, Robert, “Video of Irish Leader’s Speech Attacking the Vatican,” New York Times, July 25, 2011

Scofield, Be, “5 things Atheists Have Wrong About Religion,” Tikkun, reprinted by AlterNet, www.alternet.org/story/151396/

Warraq, Ibn, Why I Am Not a Muslim, Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books, 2003

Wolfe, Jim, “Making Peace Among Religions Within Myself” speech text manuscript, n.d.