9 Chickweed Lane

This strip contains some of the best humorous looks at religion I have ever seen.

Muslims express fury over pope's remarks

By SUZAN FRASER, Associated Press Writer 33 minutes ago

Muslims around the world expressed outrage Friday over Pope Benedict XVI's comments on Islam, with Turkey's ruling party accusing him of trying to revive the spirit of the Crusades and scores taking to the streets in protest.

Pakistan's parliament unanimously condemned the pope, and the Foreign Ministry summoned the Vatican's ambassador to express regret over the remarks.

The Vatican said the pope did not intend the remarks — made in Germany on Tuesday during an address at a university — to be offensive.

Benedict quoted from a book recounting a conversation between 14th century Byzantine Christian Emperor Manuel Paleologos II and a Persian scholar on the truths of Christianity and Islam.

"The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war," the pope said. "He said, I quote, 'Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'"

Benedict did not explicitly agree with the statement nor repudiate it.

The comments raised tensions ahead of his planned visit to Turkey in November — his first pilgrimage to a Muslim country.

Salih Kapusuz, a deputy leader of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's party, said Benedict's remarks were either "the result of pitiful ignorance" about Islam and its prophet, or a deliberate distortion.

"He has a dark mentality that comes from the darkness of the Middle Ages. He is a poor thing that has not benefited from the spirit of reform in the Christian world," Kapusuz was quoted as saying by the state-owned Anatolia news agency. "It looks like an effort to revive the mentality of the Crusades."

"Benedict, the author of such unfortunate and insolent remarks, is going down in history for his words," he said. "He is going down in history in the same category as leaders such as (Adolf) Hitler and (Benito) Mussolini."

Turkey's staunchly secular opposition party also demanded that Benedict apologize to Muslims before his visit.

"The pope has thrown gasoline onto the fire ... in a world where the risk of a clash between religions is high," said Haluk Koc, deputy head of the Republican People's Party, as a small group of protesters left a black wreath in front of the Vatican's embassy in Ankara.

Lebanon's most senior Shiite Muslim cleric denounced the remarks and demanded the pope personally apologize.

"We do not accept the apology through Vatican channels ... and ask him (Benedict) to offer a personal apology — not through his officials — to Muslims for this false reading (of Islam)," Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah told worshippers.

After Benedict returned to Italy on Thursday, Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi said, "It certainly wasn't the intention of the pope to carry out a deep examination of jihad (holy war) and on Muslim thought on it, much less to offend the sensibility of Muslim believers."

Lombardi insisted the pope respects Islam. Benedict wants to "cultivate an attitude of respect and dialogue toward the other religions and cultures, obviously also toward Islam," he said.

Turkey's top Islamic cleric, Ali Bardakoglu, said Lombardi's comments were not enough. "The pope himself should stand at the dais and say 'I take it all back, I was misunderstood' and apologize in order to contribute to world peace," he said.

In another development, the pope appointed Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, a French prelate with experience in the Muslim world, as the Vatican's new foreign minister.

But anger still swept across the Muslim world, with Pakistan's parliament unanimously adopting a resolution condemning the pope for making what it called "derogatory" comments about Islam and the Foreign Ministry summoning the Vatican ambassador.

The pope's words were "deeply disturbing for Muslims all over the world, and had caused great hurt and anguish," the Foreign Ministry said.

The Vatican's envoy "regretted the hurt caused to Muslims and said that the media had totally misconstrued certain historical quotes that the Pope used in his lecture," the statement said.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, of the Islamic Hamas group, said the pontiff had offended Muslims everywhere and called on him to reconsider his statement. He said there would be organized protests later in the day "to express Palestinian anger."

In Iraq's Shiite Muslim-stronghold of Kufa, Sheik Salah al-Ubaidi criticized the pope during Friday prayers, saying his remarks were a second assault on Islam.

"Last year and in the same month the Danish cartoon assaulted Islam," he said, referring to a Danish newspaper's publication of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad, which triggered outrage in the Muslim world.

Indonesia, which has more Muslims than any other in the world, had no immediate response to the pope's comments, but religious groups were quick to protest, condemning the words as insensitive and damaging.

"A respected religious leader like the pope should not say such things, especially as nations across the globe are struggling to find ways to bridge differences between faiths and build understanding," said Ma'ruf Amin, a member of Indonesia Council of Clerics, the country's highest Islamic body.

Din Syamsuddin, chairman of Muhammadiyah, Indonesia's second-largest Islamic organization, also expressed disappointment but urged calm.

The head of Britain's largest Muslim body said it was disturbed by the pope's use of a 14th century passage. The Muslim Council, which represents 400 groups in Britain, said the emperor's views were "ill-informed and frankly bigoted."

"One would expect a religious leader such as the pope to act and speak with responsibility and repudiate the Byzantine emperor's views in the interests of truth and harmonious relations between the followers of Islam and Catholicism," said Muhammad Abdul Bari, the council's secretary-general.

Elsewhere, Syria's top Sunni Muslim religious authority, Sheik Ahmad Badereddine Hassoun, sent a letter to the pope that he feared the comments would worsen interfaith relations.

Later, he delivered a scathing sermon in which he denounced the remarks. "We have heard about your extremism and hate for Arabs and Muslims. Now that you have dropped the mask from your face we see its ugliness and extremist nature," he said.

In Cairo, Egypt, about 100 demonstrators gathered in an anti-Vatican protest outside the al-Azhar mosque, chanting "Oh Crusaders, oh cowards! Down with the pope!"

Dozens of lawyers in Indian-controlled Kashmir also protested, while two separatist leaders were placed under house arrest as they were planning to lead demonstrations.

Benedict, who has made the fight against growing secularism in Western society a theme of his pontificate, is expected to visit Turkey in late November. He was invited by the staunchly secularist Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer, who said the invitation was part of an effort to strengthen dialogue between religions.

Source

Help defeat the Public Expression of Religion Act

The House of Representatives is expected to vote this week on a bill that makes a stealth attack on the First Amendment. The Public Expression of Religion Act [H.R. 2679], introduced by Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN) would prevent plaintiffs who sue over First Amendment Establishment Clause issues from recovering their litigation fees. This is brazenly designed to make it next to impossible for private citizens to sue to protect their First Amendment rights as federal court litigation and lawyers' fees are prohibitively expensive. Marci Hamilton at Findlaw writes:

"Obviously, the religion Hostettler and the other PERA supporters intend to establish is Christianity. Once again, a majority wants to water down disestablishment principles to squelch a minority. (As of 2001, about 80% of Americans identified as Christian, though that encompasses many denominations, while only a little more than 5% identified themselves as believers in other religions. About 15% identified themselves as atheist, agnostic, or having no religion.)

In other words, these Representatives want to cement the establishment of their own religion - already commanding the belief of a supermajority of Americans — as dominant via the force of the government, and the force of law. This is an old story, and it puts these representatives in a light that makes them look very much like the Puritans at the time of the Constitution's Framing who expelled dissenting religious believers (like Baptists and Quakers), because they did not believe what the established church required.

To be blunt, this is yet another bill pandering to the Christian religious right, who persistently but misguidedly insist that the separation of church and state is anti-Christian. That, of course, is historical revisionism at its worst. As I explained in a previous column, the disestablishment principles embodied in modern Establishment Clause cases were derived from the principles of a variety of Christian organizations. So to argue that the separation of church and state is hostile to Christianity is to say Christianity is hostile to itself - an argument ad absurdum, to say the least."

If you want your fellow Americans to be able to continue to vigorously defend their rights to practice the religion of their own choice, or to practice no religion at all, then write to your Congressional Representatives today. Our friends at the Council For Secular Humanism have made it easy to e-mail them, but I suggest you call as well. If you don't know who your Representative is, you can quickly find out by using this page at the U.S. House of Representatives website.

The Rape Victim Who Fought Back

By Chiade O'Shea in Islamabad

Mukhtar Mai decided to go public about the rape

When Mukhtar Mai was gang raped in Pakistan in February 2002, she lost her so-called "honour" and, along with it, her chance to lead a normal life in her village.

She comes over in most photographs as a fragile and frightened woman, but those who have met her speak of a strength and faith not visible on the surface.

Many expected Ms Mai, 33, to commit suicide, as is all too common after rape in Pakistan.

But she refused and started what has become a three-year legal battle against her alleged rapists.

She also built her village's first two schools with her compensation money and now campaigns internationally for women's rights.

'Living in danger'

Ms Mai's first test of courage was to survive her initial suicidal feelings. She recounted that "a passion grew in me to fight back" when more than 200 villagers offered their moral support.

This was a small minority of her community, but enough to convince her that there were some who wanted to change the status quo.

I won't leave Pakistan or my village - I will continue my work in the schools Mukhtar Mai Pakistani justice in the spotlight

Meerwala, in southern Punjab, is in many ways a typical Pakistani farming village. Women often work as hard as men in the fields and always far harder at home.

Government services such as education and basic health care are considered rich people's luxuries. Justice can be a scarcer commodity still.

Mukhtar Mai says she was gang raped on the orders of a tribal council, called to settle allegations that the influential Mastoi clan in the area had levelled against her brother, Shakoor.

The Mastois had alleged that they had seen the 12-year-old Shakoor in the company of a Mastoi woman. This, they said, had brought shame to the entire clan.

The council then allegedly ordered the rape of Mukhtar Mai to avenge the wrong that her brother had been accused of committing.

It was later found in a conventional court that the story against Shakoor had been fabricated to cover up a sexual attack against the boy himself. The three men who attacked him were imprisoned for sodomy. Their convictions still stand.

Four men were sentenced to death for raping Ms Mai and two others for participating in the decision. Five of these convictions have since been overturned and one man's death penalty commuted to life in prison. The Pakistani government has said it will appeal against the decisions.

Now Ms Mai must face the possibility that the men she accused of raping her will be free to return to their village. "There is a danger to my own life and also to my family," she said at a press conference in Islamabad.

Although she is visibly shaken by the prospect of the men's return, she refuses to flee her home. "I won't leave Pakistan or my village. I will continue my work in the schools."

Improving minds

Mukhtar Mai credits her strength and successes to God, but always reserves a mention for the children of the two schools she has founded.

Pupils at Mukhtar Mai's school in Punjab

"Because of the girls and the students, there are colours in my life," she says.

Although she had never seen a school before she built one, Ms Mai's expression of the value of education rivals most education ministries' spin.

"Education can change people through awareness of their rights and duties as well," she said. "We must improve the minds of both the boys and the girls if we're to improve women's rights."

Easily underestimated as an illiterate village woman, Mukhtar Mai's articulate, concise answers are the first clue to how media savvy she is.

In fact, she took a strategic decision after her attack to put herself in the public eye.

Although drawing attention to her rape went strongly against her culture, she judged that the media spotlight could help ensure her a fair trial and keep her safer from the threats she says she regularly receives against her life.

Fame

Ms Mai courts publicity in order to raise money for her charity work. She has worked with a number of NGOs, some of which have funded her campaigning trips abroad, and she has received many donations from the public.

After an article written about her in the New York Times, readers were so moved that they sent in $133,000 (£69,000) for her schools. This is a phenomenal sum in Pakistan where, at the last census, the average monthly income was a mere $65.

Her original schools were built with $9,400. The US aid organisation Mercy Corps has been drafted in to help manage the influx of cash.

In November, Mukhtar Mai was planning to install electricity in her school, but wasn't sure if she could afford the bills. This is no longer a worry as she plans to build schools for other villages and set up local medical services.

She recently set up www.mukhtarmai.com where her supporters around the world can make credit card donations online.

Mukhtar Mai has long been characterised by events beyond her control - as an illiterate village woman, the victim of gang rape and brutal tribal justice.

But her recent charity successes are testament to some of the underlying mettle that has been sustaining her for the past three years.

Source

Hawaiian Punch: School Prayer Isn’t So Great When It’s Someone Else’s Prayer

Many conservative Christians bemoan the lack of officially sanctioned prayers in public schools. Things have gone too far, they argue. The Supreme Court has even banned prayers over the loudspeaker before football games!

Advocates of church-state separation have patiently pointed out that even football games are school events where all students and their families should feel welcome. Pressuring people to stand and acknowledge a prayer outside their faith tradition just isn’t right.

Support for the separationist position came recently from an unusual place: a conservative Christian writing on the far-right Web site WorldNetDaily.

In a letter to the editor, Gary Christenot recalled his time in the Air Force stationed at a base on the Hawaiian island of Oahu. The area was somewhat isolated and dominated by Buddhists and followers of the Shinto faith.

Christenot wrote about attending a high school football game there. The Baptist family was dismayed when a Buddhist priest was called upon to offer the invocation “to god-head figures that our tradition held to be pagan.”

Wrote Chistenot, “We were frozen in shock and incredulity! What to do? To continue to stand and observe this prayer would represent a betrayal of our own faith and imply the honoring of a pagan deity that was anathema to our beliefs. To sit would be an act of extreme rudeness and disrespect in the eyes of our Japanese hosts and neighbors, who value above all other things deference and respect in their social interactions.”

Christenot reports that he made some inquiries to find out if other clergy were ever invited. He learned that because the area was dominated by people of Japanese and Chinese descent, the prayers were always either Buddhist or Shinto.

The incident apparently caused Christenot no small amount of discomfort, as he felt he had betrayed his faith. But it was also a learning experience. Christenot came to understand how non-Christians might feel when they are compelled to sit through Christian rituals.

“We often advocate the practice of Judeo-Christian rituals in America’s public schools by hiding behind the excuse that they are voluntary and any student who doesn’t wish to participate can simply remained seated and silent,” wrote Christenot. “Oh that this were true. But if I, as a mature adult, would be so confounded and uncomfortable when faced with the decision of observing and standing on my own religious principles or run the risk of offending the majority crowd, I can only imagine what thoughts and confusion must run through the head of the typical child or teenager, for whom peer acceptance is one of the highest ideals.”

Amen to that! Christenot’s peers who have yet to see the light and who still agitate for a “majority-rules” prayer scheme in our public schools should spend some time living as the religious minority for a while. They might learn some surprising things.

--Rob Boston

Source

Noah's Ark Discovered ... Again and Again

By Benjamin Radford posted: 05 September 2006 10:53 am ET

In this world there are things that seem on the verge of being discovered every so often, yet never quite materialize. The "Lost City" of Atlantis, for example, has been "found" at least a half dozen times. One researcher is pretty sure it is in Bolivia; another says it is Antarctica; a third claims that Bimini beachrock may be from the lost civilization. So it is with Noah's Ark. The difference is, of course, that the implications of Noah's Ark actually being found extend far beyond archaeology. The weight of all the paired animals in the world is nothing compared to the religious freight that the Ark carries. The Ark story is scientifically implausible; there simply wouldn't be enough space on the boat to accommodate two of every living animal (including dinosaurs), along with the food and water necessary to keep them alive. Furthermore, constructing a vessel of that scale would take hundreds of workers months to complete. Still, Biblical literalists—those who believe that proof of the Bible's events remains to be found—have spent lives and fortunes trying to validate their beliefs. The search goes on Before discussing the recent claims regarding the whereabouts of Noah's vessel, a history of Ark "finds" is instructive. Violet M. Cummings is the author of several books on Noah's Ark, among them "Noah's Ark: Fable or Fact?" (1975), in which she claimed that Noah's Ark was found on Turkey's Mount Ararat. According to the 1976 book and film "In Search of Noah's Ark," "there is now actual photographic evidence that Noah's Ark really does exist.... Scientists have used satellites, computers, and powerful cameras to pinpoint the Ark's exact location on Mt. Ararat." This is a rather remarkable claim, for despite repeated trips to Mt. Ararat over the past thirty years, the Ark remains elusive. Undeterred by a lack of evidence, in 1982 Cummings issued a book titled, "Has Anybody Really Seen Noah's Ark?," published by Creation-Life Publishers. The subtitle, "An Affirmative Definitive Report," hints at Cummings's conclusion. Interest in Noah's Ark resurfaced in February 1993, when CBS aired a two-hour primetime special titled, "The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark." (Little did CBS know that they were using incredible in its accurate, proper meaning: "not credible.") As Ken Feder describes in his book "Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries," the special "was a hodgepodge of unverifiable stories and misrepresentations of the paleontological, archaeological, and historical records." It included the riveting testimony of a George Jammal, who claimed not only to have personally seen the Ark on Ararat but recovered a piece of it. Jammal's story (and the chunk of wood he displayed) impressed both CBS producers and viewers. Yet he was later revealed as a paid actor who had never been to Turkey and whose piece of the Ark was not an unknown ancient timber (identified in the Bible as "gopher wood") but instead modern pine soaked in soy sauce and artificially aged in an oven. Red-faced CBS, which had done little fact-checking for their much-hyped special, said that the program was entertainment, not a documentary. Recent claims More claims surfaced periodically, including in March 2006, when a LiveScience writer reported on yet another incarnation of the Ararat claim. A team of researchers found a rock formation that might resemble a huge ark, nearly covered in glacial ice. Little came of that claim but a few months later, in June, a team of archaeologists from the Bible Archaeology Search and Exploration (BASE) Institute, a Christian organization, found yet another rock formation that might be Noah's Ark. This time the Ark was "found" not on Ararat but at 13,000 feet in the Elburz mountains of Iran. "I can't imagine what it could be if it is not the Ark," said team member Arch Bonnema. They brought back pieces of stone they claim may be petrified wood beams, as well as video footage of the rocky cliffs. The team believes that, within the rock formation, they can see evidence of hundreds of massive hand-hewn wooden beams laid out in the presumed size and shape of the Ark. The Biblical archaeologists seem to have experienced pareidolia; seeing what they want to see in ambiguous patterns or images. Just as religious people will see images of Jesus or the Virgin Mary in toast, stains, or clouds, they may also see images of Noah's Ark in stone cliffs. (In New Mexico's Sandia National Forest there is a large rock formation called Battleship Rock, which—from a certain angle—does indeed look like a battleship. One wonders what the BASE team would make of that.) Other researchers remain certain that the Ark is in fact on Mt. Ararat. Noah's Ark enthusiasts are therefore in the somewhat awkward position of deciding which (if any) of several scientifically "definitive" Ark finds is the real one. The BASE claims, as with all previous reports of finding the Ark, have yet to be proven. Ultimately, it may not matter, because, as BASE president Bob Cornuke states, "I guess what my wife says my business is, we sell hope. Hope that it could be true, hope that there is a God." Yet the question is not about faith, hope, or God; the question is if Noah's Ark is real and has been found. Like Atlantis, the ever-elusive Ark will continue to be "found" by those looking for it—whether it exists or not. Benjamin Radford is Managing Editor of the Skeptical Inquirer magazine and is author of three books and hundreds of articles. His Web site is www.RadfordBooks.com. The Biggest Popular Myths Claimed Discovery of Atlantis Called 'Completely Bogus' Jesus Could Have Walked on Ice, Scientist Says Urban Legends Debunked