-Caveat Lector-
from: AMERICAN ATHEISTS
subject: AANEWS for July 8, 1999
A M E R I C A N A T H E I S T S
#604 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7/8/99
http://www.atheists.org
ftp.atheists.org/pub/atheists/
http://www.americanatheist.org
---------------------------------------------
A Service of AMERICAN ATHEISTS
"Leading The Way For Atheist Civil Rights
And The Separation Of State and Church"
----------------------------------------------
In This Issue...
* Questionable health claims justify eroding separation
* RLPA action slated in House for next Wednesday
* Germany defies Vatican; RU-486 legal
* "Oral Sex" -- fear and loathing from the courtroom to the school
* Resources
* About this list...
CBN REPORT: PSYCHOLOGIST SAYS "LOWER THE WALL" TO
PROTECT KIDS FROM VIOLENCE
Jefferson's "fence" of separation between church and state?
That's an idea being proposed by psychiatrist David Larson, who
according to a report aired on Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting
Network, suggests that the First Amendment needs to be reconfigured in
order to deal with an alleged epidemic of youth violence.
Last night's opening segment of the CBN "700 Club" program included a
segment by reporter Gailon Totheroh titled "Kids and Psychiatric
Drugs: Quick Fix or Harmful Mix?" Totheroh noted that one of the
youngsters behind the Columbine High School shootings last April, Eric
Harris, was taking the prescription drug Luvox which in some cases may
result in mania. "And maniacs sometimes kill," observed Totheroh.
Other students linked to school violence were using prescribed drugs
such as Ritalin and Prozac, a fact which prompted psychiatrist Peter
Breggin to suggest, "We've had guns in this society for a long time,
we've had angry children for a long time, but it's only in recent
years that we're getting these really bizarre kinds of school
shootings... I believe that very well could be the influence of the
drugs."
While other mental health professionals debated the existence of a
link between violence and legal, prescribed drugs, psychiatrist David
Larson has a different approach. Totheroh reported, "Beyond the
medical questions surrounding school violence are mental health
concerns, including spiritual faith. Psychiatrist David Larson says,
for the sake of the kids, we might lower the wall keeping church and
state apart."
Larson declared, "Where nothing is working, whether it's violence or
at-risk populations in poor environments, we need to look for factors
that might be effective. And where nothing's working, maybe that wall
needs to become more of a fence." Larson went on to blame factors
such as family breakdown for an alleged rise in school violence.
Dr. Larson is one of a number of credentialed experts insisting that
there are important links between positive health, both mental and
physical, and religious belief. He currently is a research
psychiatrist and president of the private National Institute for
Healthcare Research in Rockville, Maryland, and has made a number of
claims concerning spirituality and medical healing. He says that in a
review of medical literature, 19 of 20 studies indicated that religion
played a "positive role in preventing alcoholism," and 16 out of 17
studies indicated a similar link in reducing rates of suicide.
Larson's claims are reported extensively in the religious press, such
as an article which appeared in "Breakpoint With Charles Colson"
(former Watergate crook-turned-evangelist) which claimed, "Religiously
committed people report much higher levels of satisfaction with their
marriage and much lower rates of divorce."
According to the December 9, 1998 issue of the Journal of the American
Medical Association (JAMA), "Larson said physicians are ready to
accept spirituality into their arsenal of treatment provided that good
science backs it up." He suggests that physicians grill patients
concerning their religious beliefs on the first office visit.
While claims of the alleged benefits between spirituality and mental
or physical health proliferate, though, not all scientists and others
in the field of medicine are convinced. Kevin Courcey, a mental
health professional and writer remains skeptical, and notes that
Larson's approach has been criticized in professional literature. He
cites a piece in the respected British journal The Lancet (Lancet
1999; 353: 664-667), noting, "The article specifically criticized
Larson's approach as unethical ... the methodology was flawed, and at
this point we have no evidence that religious belief is beneficial to
health." Courcey adds that the team investigating claims by Larson
and others "went even further by pointing out that even if religious
belief WAS shown to be beneficial, it would simply fall into a
category like being married, or being wealthy." He noted that any
physicians would be "way out of line if they suggested to a patient
that what they needed to do was get married, since married people are
healthier."
Courcey agreed with other critics of Larson's claims that doctors who
attempt to bring religion into the practice of scientific medicine
"abuse their status as professionals."
Another cause for skepticism, says Courcey, is that many articles
which claim to establish a relationship between positive mental or
physical health and religious belief often appear in publications such
as "Journal of Christian Nursing," instead of the more mainstream
outlets like JAMA. Popularized distillations of those articles then
filter down into the mass market press which rarely investigates the
claims made with any degree of thoroughness and objectivity.
As for Larson's National Institute for Healthcare Research -- perhaps
easily confused with the government National Institutes for Health --
Courcey notes that it is funded by Sir John Templeton, founder of the
Templeton Prize for those promoting research favorable to religion.
"It is chilling to think that Christian millionaires, pouring money
into religious medical 'research' in an attempt to justify their own
theistic delusions, have the power to jeopardize the health care we
all receive by distracting medical professionals from the practice of
efficacious medicine," observes Courcey.
Dr. Larson and his supporters have now gone one step further, though,
taking their "faith" in the link between god-belief and health to the
political level. Protecting youngsters from violence -- all in the
name of god -- is now the latest excuse for chipping away at
Jefferson's wall of separation between church and state.
(Visit http://www.americanatheist.org/spr97/T2/faithhealing.html for
Mr. Courcey's article, "Trying to Make a Case for Faith Healing.")
**
HOUSE VOTE EXPECTED WEDNESDAY ON RELIGIOUS
LIBERTY PROTECTION ACT
Sources on capitol hill tell AANEWS to expect a vote in the House of
Representatives as early as next Wednesday, July 14, on the Religious
Liberty Protection Act. Known as RLPA, the legislation would require
that government use a "compelling interest/least restrictive means"
test in dealing with faith-based groups and practices. While
supporters insist that the measure is necessary to guarantee religious
rights in the face of growing government burdens, critics charge that
RLPA violates the constitution and establishes "special rights" for
churches, mosques, temples and religious sects in general.
RLPA was recently approved by a vote in the House Judiciary Committee.
On Tuesday, Rep. Charles Canady (R-FLA.) is expected to seek approval
in the Rules Committee for a quick floor vote on RLPA. Passage in the
House could spur similar action in the Senate where the Senate
Judiciary Committee is expected to hold hearings on its version of the
legislation later in the week.
American Atheists President Ellen Johnson says that she will present
letters of opposition to the SJC or the Clerk of the Senate when she
heads to Washington for a vote on RLPA. Earlier this month, Johnson
presented nearly 200 letters to the House Judiciary Committee. Those
wishing to sign this 'electronic letter" should visit
http://www.atheists.org/action/rlpa.html for more information.
**
GERMANS DEFY VATICAN BULLYING, APPROVE ABORTION PILL
Despite a last minute appeal and a long-running pressure campaign from
the Roman Catholic Church, Germany's National Institute for Drugs and
Medical Products approved the use of the controversial abortion pill
Mifegyne, or RU 486, for women wishing to end an early pregnancy. On
Wednesday, Family Minister Christine Bergmann praised the Institute's
decision, saying that women ought to be able to have the choice of
using the drug. The move comes after several weeks of threats by the
Vatican against the use of RU-486, and efforts to put an end to a
state abortion counseling program.
Earlier this month, German Catholic Bishops compared the abortion pill
to the poison gas used to kill Jews during the Second World War.
Cardinal Joachim Meisner of Cologne described RU-486 as "a chemical
killing instrument specifically for unborn children." But the Bonn
government said that Mifegyne offered women a choice between "surgical
and medicinal methods" of ending a pregnancy.
In the counseling controversy, Bishops and the Vatican denounced a
program that provided women with a certificate at the end of a
counseling session entitling them to an abortion. The church operates
270 "advice centers" throughout the country that participated in the
state program. A Catholic charitable group estimated, though, that of
the more than 20,000 women who went through the church counseling
system seeking abortion, only about one-quarter changed their minds.
During a visit to Poland last month, Pope John Paul II met with
Bishops from Germany and other European countries, and encouraged them
to redouble their efforts against legal abortion.
Anti-choice groups consider RU-486 a major threat to their campaign in
ending abortion rights. The pill, prescribed by physicians,
effectively turns a private doctor's office into an abortion clinic.
Mifegyne is not legally available in the United States yet, but the
French producer of the pill, Edouard Sakiz, told Britain's Daily
Telegraph newspaper that he will apply shortly for permission to use
RU-486 in a number of European Union countries.
**
ORAL SEX: "UNSETTLING NEW FAD" IN SCHOOLS, SOURCE OF
ANGST FOR PARENTS, COURTS
"I did NOT have sex with that woman..."
-- William J. Clinton
Oral Sex has been around well before Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton
made the term an altar call in the Kenneth Starr investigation, and a
seemingly endless source of humor on late-night television. Thousands
of years before Jay Leno recited a string of monologues about White
House dalliances, ancient civilizations like the Chinese considered
the practice an acceptable, even obligatory pursuit for members of
both sexes. A romp through the historical record in books such as
Reay Tannahill's "Sex in History" (Stein & Day, NY, 1980) suggests
that before the cultural hegemony of Christianity, the ancients were
far more tolerant and enthused about sexuality in general, and the
erotic overtones of the human body, that the self-righteous followers
of the modest Christ who came after them.
But after becoming a source of post-prime time guffaws and chuckles,
even in the privacy of American bedrooms, oral sex is now an object of
legal inquiry and parental concern.
* Just what is "oral copulation," at least in the great state of
Missouri? Last week, the state Supreme Court ruled that a Springfield
strip bar violated the ban on simulated oral sex when two dancers
presumably simulated the sex act on a roll of dollar bills. In a 7-0
decision, the justices upheld the ban imposed by the Division of
Liquor Control, and defined "oral copulation" as that act understood
"by a person of common intelligence." The club had been cited by two
undercover police officers, but the establishment's owners took the
state to court, and convinced a County Circuit Judge that the ban was
vague and enforceable since the term "oral copulation" does not appear
in the dictionary. The Missouri Court of Appeals' Southern District
concurred, noting that under the state constitution, all regulations
must be "clear and specific."
An attorney for the state praised the high court's ruling, pronouncing
it a "victory for common sense." The Jefferson City News Tribune
noted that the case was argued before the Missouri Supreme Court in
March, "About the time the parties in President Clinton's impeachment
trial were debating whether the president's intimate contact with
former White House intern Monica Lewinsky constituted sexual
relations..."
* Whether it's claim of the dog eating homework, Satanic cults or
other unusual events, well, youngsters have an uncanny ability to
provoke older parents. The Washington Post reports "an unsettling new
fad" in middle schools, namely, "oral sex," including warnings that
the practice is becoming popular among young adolescents. In
Arlington, Virginia, parents have even attended a meeting to deal with
the issue of "girls at risk," and charges of dozens of young teens
"getting together at parties in one another's homes and at local
parks" for, well, presumably a round of ... it.
"The news dropped like a bomb just over a year ago in the mostly
upper-income community of elegant brick homes, leafy sycamores and
stone walls," noted the Post.
There is precious little evidence that this epidemic of orality really
exists; most of the claims are emanating, shall we say word-of-mouth?,
from a health educator and "consultant" in the Baltimore-Washington
area. The paper notes that while young people "have engaged in sexual
experimentation openly since the 1960s and covertly since the dawn of
time, social scientists have no reliable measures for comparing
behavior today with patterns in the past."
The charges are more lurid, though, than simple oral sex. "Some
youths" have reportedly earned money arranging "oral dates" between
classmates in exchange for cash.
At the turn of the century, venues such as pool halls and even ice
cream parlors were considered gateways into a life of sin and
debauchery for young people, especially girls. The saxophone was
denounced as an instrument of the devil, the "Sexophone," for its
melodious ability to presumably render (white) women willing partners
for sexually charged (black) males. Later, bourgeois America debated
the dangers and temptations the new rock and roll genre of music, even
the beach bikini. Has a wave of oral sex behavior become the latest
barbarian assault on the gates of Christian prudery?
Ironically, what oral sex is taking place in American schools may be,
in part, a reaction to misinformation about AIDS and the campaign on
behalf of chastity and youthful religiosity. The Post noted, "Easy
explanations for the students' behavior eluded adults who knew them.
Impulsive teenage hormones, some said. 'There's been so much
publicity around AIDS and abstinence,' one mother said..."
It is hard to ignore the synchronicity between oral sex in the White
House, a subject popularized even on the network news, and fears of
rampant orality in schools. Is there a lesson here, possibly that
cultural repression of sexuality results in a skewed view of the
erotic component in our lives? If so, those activities embraced long
ago by the ancients as a source of pleasure are now reduced to sterile
legal deliberations and injunctions, dirty jokes in the bedroom, and,
alas, the fears and phobias of parents.
**
RESOURCES FROM AMERICAN ATHEISTS...
* For information about American Atheists, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Please include your name and postal mailing
address.
* For a free catalogue of American Atheist Press books, videos and
other products, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kindly include
your postal mailing address.
* The American Atheist Magazine is now on the web! Check out select
articles from the current or back issues, as well as special web-only
features. Visit us at http://www.americanatheist.org
* If you are a current member of American Atheists, sign up for our
e-mail discussion group, aachat. We have over 120 participants who
discuss topics such as Atheism, religion, First Amendment issues and
lots more! Contact Margie Wait, the Moderator, through
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ABOUT THIS LIST...
AANEWS is a free service from American Atheists, a nationwide movement
founded by Madalyn Murray O'Hair for the advancement of Atheism, and
the total, absolute separation of government and religion.
You may forward, post or quote from this dispatch, provided that
appropriate credit is given to AANEWS and American Atheists. Edited
by Conrad Goeringer, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Internet Representative for
American Atheists is Margie Wait, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe, send a blank message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
