Fri ma ire 188 (12/80)

Vol. 22, No.12

NINE DEMANDS - ANOTHER HUNDRED YEARS?

I. 1874. Francis Ellingwood Abbot published on the front page of his weekly paper, The
for separation of state and church. At the time. the National Reform Association
(founded by Presbyterians
and Episcopalians)
was attempting to amend the Constitution
of the United
States to endorse Christianity officially. Abbot was a leader in a counter movement to propound "a religion
of humanity:
guided by reason and offering an organizational
"home" to non-theists.
In a nation predicated upon the political idea of separation of state and church. we are - incredibly
nowhere near attaining such separation.
Since 1874. in 106 years. only one part of one of these nine
demands has been wrested from government and that by a bitter and protracted legal struggle. In June 1963,
in the case of Murray vs. Cur/ell. reverential Bible reading was barred from the public schools ofthe nation
(see second part. point 4. of "Demands" below) by the Murray-O'Hair
family. founders of the American
On January

Index. nine demands

Atheist orga nization.

The nine demands are reprinted here to scream out to you, in a continuing way, that American
Atheists can not. dare not. permit another hundred years to pass without attaining them. These are
demands.

no".

for our times and for our accomplishing.

1.
We demand that churches and other ecclesiastical property shall no
longer be exempt from just taxation.
2.
We demand that the employment of chaplains in Congress, in state
legislatures, in the navy and militia, and in prisons, asylums, and all other
institutions supported by public money shall be discontinue.
3.
We demand that all public appropriations for sectarian educational and
charitable institutions shall cease.

4.
We demand that all religious services now sustained by the government shall be abolished; and especially that the use of the Bible in the
public schools, whether ostensibly as a textbook or avowedly as a book of
religious worship, shall be prohibited.
5.
We demand that the appointment by the President of the United States
or by the governors of the various states of all religious festivals and fasts
shall wholly cease.
6.
We demand that the judicial oath in the courts and in all other
departments of the government shall be abolished, and that simple affirmation under the pains and penalties of perjury shall be established in its stead.
7.
We demand that all laws directly or indirectly enforcing the observance
of Sunday as the Sabbath shall be repealed.
8.
We demand that all laws looking to the enforcement of "Christian"
morality shall be abroqated, and that all laws shall be conformed to the
requirements of natural morality, equal rights, and impartial liberty.
9.
We demand that, not only in the constitutions of the United States and
of the several states but also in the practical administration of the same, no
privilege or advantage shall be conceded to Christianity or any other special
religion; that our entire political system shall be founded and administered on
a purely secular basis; and that whatever changes shall prove necessary to
this end shall be consistently, unflinchingly, and promptly made.

Volume 22, No. 12 Frimaire, 188

NEWS
ON THE COVER
Pray and Pay - Nay!
Ten Commandments, Kentucky Style

3
4

ARTICLES
Life after Death Bill of Wrongs

Vladimir Chertikhin

8
10

FEATURED COLUMNS
Roots of Atheism - Charles Knowlton (by Mary Lee Esty)
Atheist Masters - Christmas Trees (Chapman Cohen)
The Big Bang Theory and Creation - Ralph Shirley
Want to Be Governed by Clerics? - Ignatz Sahula-Dvke
The Irresistible Force - Gerald Tholen
American Atheist Radio Series - The Solstice Season

5
12
14
15
17
19

REGULAR FEATURES
Editorial

RE4DER'SEA)UN REVIEWI9~O
The Best
of 1980
Robert C. Hobson
=REI:'LANCE
CONNOISSEUR
OF EXCELLENCE

EDITOR IN-CHIEF
Dr. Madalyn Murray O'Hair
MANAGING EDITOR
Jon Garth Murray
ARTIST
Felix Santana
NONRESIDENTIAL

STAFF
Bill Baird
Angeline Bennett
Wells Culver
Conrad Goeringer
Ignatz Sahula-Dycke
Elaine Stansfield
Gerald Tholen

Pittsburgh:
Best Prerecorded Phone
Mes:;age: Dial-an-Atheist. 3-':;
464iS.

"

The American Atheist magazine is

published monthly by American Atheists, located at 2210 Hancock Drive,
Austin,
Texas 78756,
'a non-profit,
non-political,
educational
organization. Mailing address: P.O. Box 2117,
Austin, Texas 78768. Copyright
1980
by Society of Separationists,
Inc. Subscription rates: $20.00 per year. Manuscripts submitted
must be typed, double-spaced
and accompanied
by a
stamped, self-addressed
envelope. The
editors assume no responsibility
for
unsolicited manuscripts.
The American Atheist magazine is indexed in:
MONTHLY PERIODICAL
INDEX
ISSN: 0032-4310

Austin. Texas

Frrmaire 188 (12/80)

Richard Richardson. the Chapter

Director for the State of Missouri, has
spent considerable time and energy
to put together an "Atheist Calendar" which will list for each day of the
year those persons who are or have
been of.siqniticant importance to the
human community. We cannot find a
religious person amongst them!
The month of Frimaire (December)
recalls the birthday of three of the
most important and distinguished
scholars in the world and they are
honored on the cover.
,'.
Tycho Brahe, (the center figure),
Danish astronomer, was born on December 14th, 1546 and died in 1601.
isaac Newton, (on the left), English
mathematici'a-n,was born on December 25th, 1642 and died in 1727.
Johann Kepler, (on the right), German, astronomer,
was born on De.
cember27th, 1571 anddiedin 1630.
That which made them all immemorial frames them and sets them apart.
\\ When the number of humans who
h'flve lived is considered it becomes
appalling clear that only a handful
have advanced us all. Our particular
burden is to treasure the impetus
toward reason as a method for solution which they made clear and used,
to pass it on to the next generation
and to guard it so that it may noy-be
lost as non-reason and irrationality
mounts a renewed assault.
,I
[:
J"

Page 1

EDITORIAL

JON GARTH MURRA Y

The recent election of Ronald Reagan to the presidency of

the United States through a conservative backlash has been
written off by some as reaction only to the failures of Jimmy
Carter. This argument has its merits but the roots from which
the conservative takeover springs run far deeper than Jimmy's term in office. What we see now when we look in dismay
at Moral Majority, Right-to-life Amendments, resurgence of
the School Prayer issue, Gay rights, pro-war, and many more
issues is the ripening of a boil that has been building in our
country for over 100 years.
Like it or not, our nation was founded by a group of welleducated aristocrats, by elitists, not by the people or the "will
of the people." This group of elite men came to the conclusion
that separation of state and church was a necessary prerequisite to keeping our nation from becoming facist over the
long term. They started the nation, not the "people." The
"people" could have cared less what kind of government they
had at the time. The nation was started by revolution of
thought. Yet, when we had our revolution, we had it in the
fields and the streets. After it was over, however, the "people"
still had not had the revolution that counts, the one between
the ears, the one which had been the inspiration for the elite
group of men who had spurred the people on. It is that very
failure of those great men, a failure to educate the people, that
will now, over 200 years later, bring their dream to an end.
The mechanics of state geared up and ran, and ran and ran.
It has been running fairly well for these 200 plus years. The
minds of the people for whom it is run, however, have not
changed. The same ugly values that made it possible for
witches to be burned in Salem, or Negroes whipped ci"ndhung
in the South, or brother to kill brother in a civil war, have
remained inviolate. Intolerance, ignorance and incompetence
are still the name of the game in America. All of these
"qualities" are awarded. Why? Because they are the building
blocks of Christianity. They are what you "go to heaven" for
accomplishing.
Although our technology has progressed, no substantive
attempt has ever been made to change our thinking. Intolerance, ignorance and incompetence are the same if spread
by modern jet plane or horse and buggy. Only one group has
tried to pick away at the minds of America. That group has
been the Atheists. The Atheists have had their troubles
though as well. They have been essentially ineffective. Why?
Because the same kind of thinking they seek to "cure" has
been at epidemic levels in their own ranks.
Every Atheist or pseudo-Atheist group that has ever existed
has based its activities on the proposition of "live and let live"
or "tolerance." Almost every Athiest I have met in America,
with the exception of a very few, has always had the attitude
that "I don't believe in god; I don't go to church; that is my right
and I can do as I please. I don't bother my religious neighbors
and they don't bother me. After all, science and technology
will kill religion in time."
You cannot face a concept based on intolerance, based on
denying of your rights, based on annoying you day in and day
out until you can't stand it anymore and give in and Join them,
with tolerance. Intolerance will always win out over tolerance.
This is natural. It can also be very just if the intolerant stance is
the one of the person who is correct. What, we have 'had in
America however is the intolerant position, being the one held
by the person who operates on that which cannot be substantiated in fact. That is very basically wrong. The person
Page 2

.-

--

with the position based on fact. on logic, on science is tolerant

and loses out.
There is no god. That is fact. Yet every Atheist I have ever
met has inside them some doubt. "Well, maybe there is
something out there and we can't condemn the person who
finds solace in that thouqht, We cannot be dogmatic.
The hell we can't be dogmatic. Facts are dogmatic. While we
are being undogmatic, the dogmatic position of Christianity is
being systematically shoved down our collective gullets.
The legislature of the United States is now closed to
Atheists. The court system of the United States, including the
Supreme Court, is now closed to Atheists. The executive
branch of government, on city, county, state and federal
levels, has now closed its ears to Atheists. Atheists have
earned it; I hope they like it. They have earned it with their
"tolerance. "
If something wereto have been done about religion it should
have been done starting 200 years ago. It is too late now.
It is the hope of this author that Atheist children are forced
to pray in school every day, several times a day; that Atheist
children are beaten in school out of parent control with no
appeal allowed; that Atheists are forced to pray at their place
of employment every day or be fired with no hope of getting
any job any place; that Atheists must pray in court or any
public meeting to be heard as a citizen; that Atheists be made
to vote in a church and church only and that they be made to sit
through a prayer service before being given the ballot; that
Atheist women have to buy a casket for a bloody spot on their
sanitary napkin and pay for a funeral or be jailed for murder of
a living "soul'; that if gay Atheists never can work or have a
place to live again unless a a gay employer or landlord who will
take them in.
In the last analysis, I speak to you. You and your father
before you and his father before him have earned your right to
be dominated by the Christian ethic. I would not for anything in
the world stand in the way of your reaping what you have
sown. You paid for it; now wrap it up and take it home.
The American Atheist Center will continue to do what it can,
how it can, tothe end -with the few who value their freedom.
When there is no Center anymore or no magazine or no
outreach, as individuals we will continue to resist. Those in
the great "silent majority" have earned a place in slavery.
Relax, no one will take it away from you, it is all yours.
When you have lived under a fascist Christian state for
"awhile, you may value the "intolerant" style we at the
American Atheist Center used, that which you all say you hate
so much and about which you grumble in such overwhelming
and continuing way.
Don't look to the scientific community. It won't help you. The
most important thing to any scientist in America today is the
same thing that has been important to them, above all, for 200
years: keeping their tenure, maintaining their salaries, having
their ideas accepted by the non-scientific community and
keeping their grants. The scientists of Alexandria permitted
Hypatia to be killed, didn't they? They handed the Ionian
culture to the Christians. The same surrender is imminent
today.
You can soon "Live and let live" with a whole new meaning.
Militant evangelical christianity lives its way and lets YOU live
its way too.
~

. Frimaire 188 (12/80)

Austin, Texas

jfront ~agt l\tbttbl

we are man as bell ...
PRAY AND PAY - NAY!
Another victory for Atheism came through this month. Since the person
involved laid his Atheism openly on the line and cited it in the law suit as a
reason for filing the suit, the reporting on it was so muted as to be almost
unnoticeable.
Ernest Chambers is a duly elected state senator of the Nebraska Unicameral
Leqislature. District 11, a citizen, a taxpayer of the State of Nebraska, a Black,
and an Atheist. Senator Chambers, offended by the practice of the Legislature
opening each session with prayers and by the content of those prayers,
absented himself from the opening of each session, where he was - by lawrequired to be. He attempted to fi nd out when, where and why the prayers. First
he found that the prayers were delivered by a chaplain who was paid $319.75 a
month by the state for every month the legislature was in session and that the
prayers were later printed, at government expense, and issued in "prayer book"
form, the cost of which was $70.01 for 200 hundred copies in 1975, $260.40for
200 copies in 1978 and $128.15 for 100 copies in 1979. Second, he found that
the State of Nebraska had use of a chaplain for opening of its daily legiSlative
session beginning as early as 1855, twelve years before statehood. In 1867 a
law was passed providing that the chaplain be a salaried employee of the
legislature. In 1973 a final law was passed under which a rule was made
requiring the legislature's Executive Board to recommend a chaplain to attend
and open each day's sitting with prayer.
Therefore, Senator Chambers filed a suit asking that the State Treasurer be
enjoined from the payment of a salary to the chaplain or from making any
payment for the printing of prayers in a "prayer book." He pointed out that he
was an Atheist and that the prayers offended him.
The decision. in the case came down from the United States District Court for
the District of Nebraska on December 24th, 1980 - Christmas eve! It was a
delightful present for the zanies. Judge Warren K. Urbom held that (1) the
printing of prayers at state expense contravened the First Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States and that (2) the paying from public funds of a
chaplain to open a legislative body was violative of the same.
He quoted from a Supreme Court decision Engel v. Vitale, 370 u.s. 421 (1963)
that: "It is neither sacriligious
nor antireligious
to say that each separate
government
sanctioning
themselves

in this country
should stay out of the business
of writing
or
official prayers and leave that purely religious function to the people
and to those the people choose to look to for religious guidance. "

He enjoined the State Treasurer from paying the salary of the chaplain and
enjoined the chaplain from receiving any salary from the state. He enjoined the
State Treasurer from paying for any printing of any religious "prayers" by the
state. This is much in accord with the victory discussed last month in these
columns where the federal appellate court found that the State of North Carolina
could not print a prayer on its official road map.
The court went further, giving a fine short history of prayer in legislative
bodies and pointing out that James Madison protested the payment of chaplains
and observed in respect to prayer delivered that "the daily devotions conducted
by these legal Ecclesiastics [were] already degenerating ~into a scanty attendance and a tiresome formality.
Again the court attempted to find a secular purpose (excuse!) for prayer, but
failed and needed to accept with both the Supreme Court of Nebraska and the
Supreme Court of the United States that "Prayer is always worship.
Send for a photocopy of the decision so that you can make difficulty for the
traducers of state/church separation in your state by showing this decision and
demanding a cessation of payment to chaplains for praver.

~.

Meanwhile, the case of Murray v.

had been slowly working its
way through the legal morass of the
federal court in Washington, D. C. in
an effort to stop the payment of about
$100,000 a year to two chaplains in
the United States Senate and in the
House of Representatives.
The same legal arguments were
used, the same decisions were relied
upon, including that of Engel v. Vitale,
Morton

.supre.

In that case, the federal district court

judge was fearful, and on January
14th, 1981, dismissed the case because of standing! That requires some
explanation.
Back in 1923 the United States
Supreme Court held in Frothingham
v.
Mellon. 262 u.s. 447that no taxpayer
had sufficient monetary interest to
bring a suit against the U. S. for any
reason. However, Frothingham
was
overturned by the U. S. Supreme Court
in respect to First Amendment state/church separation cases in 1968. Since
then, anyone can sue. The cautious
(hostile?) federal judge, however, refused to accept this later decision in
our Murray
v. Morton
case stating
specifically that he desired' an appellate court to rule on the standing issue
first, before he even addressed the
prayer Icost issue. Therefore, it is more
court costs as the judge puts the
American Atheist Center through an
unnecessary step to affirm that which
has already been affirmed - that on
First Amendment issues one has the
right to sue! The case is on its way to
the Court of Appeals which will simply
say we can sue and send it right back
to the same judge for an opinion on the
merits. With the Nebraska case on the
Atheist side, we have a certain win,
but now it is a year and several thousand dollars away yet!
[Send ($2.ooto P.O.Box 2117, Austin,
TX 78768) for your copy of the Nebraska case so that you may utilize it in
your request to your legislative body to
discontinue the payment of chaplains
for prayer::. Once they are not pai~~
they will quit praying.).
m'.

The newsis chosento demonstrate, month alter month, the deadreacuonary hand of religion. It dictatesyour habits, sexualconduct, family
size. It censurescinema, theater, television, even education. Itdictates life values and lifestyle. Religion is politics and, always, the most
authoritarian and reactionary politics. Weeditorialize our npw~ to emphasizethis thesis.Unlike any other magazineor newspaperIn the United
States. we admit it.
Austin, Texas

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

Page3

..10tU~on ~tbti~t~
... anb we won't take It anpmort!
TAKE THEM OFF! TAKE THEM OFF!

1-

It is often not by our direct efforts, but much can be said that
the American Atheist Center provides the kind of attitude
which is necessary that other citizens may take heart and
fight.
This is the case in Kentucky where John Crump, the Chapter
Director of American Atheists, has fearlessly carried on an
educational program for the last four years which can only
give respect to "affirmative action" for Atheists or others who
cannot longer tolerate the idiocy of religion.
When the State of Kentucky decided to pass a law making it
mandatory that the superintendent of public instruction displaya durable and permanent copy (sixteen inches wide by
twenty inches high) of the Ten Commandments on the wall in
each public and elementary and secondary school classroom
in the Commonwealth someone had to speak up. John Crump
did that - loud and often. Unfortunately, the American
Atheist Center is not funded like the Roman Catholic Church
and although John wanted to file suit immediately, this could
not be done. John kept the issue alive and discussed. In due
course, then, the American Civil Liberties went ahead with a
suit seeking to have the law declared to be unconstitutional
as, actually, it was. The results of that suit indicate that an
A.A.C.L.U. (American Atheist Civil Liberties Union) is imperative and that the time is ripe for such an organization.
The statute became 'effective June 17th, 1978 and several
months thereafter a suit was filed. The litigatio'n on it
continued for several years, as is the nature of state/church
suits. They are long and complicated, necessitating a laborious follow up as the suit inches its way up the federal court
ladder. The religious community knows how to play the game
well. First. legislators are influenced to pass laws which
promote religious ideas, ideals or goals. Usually, as in this
case, those laws are suspect as to constitutionality. Recently
the United States Supreme Court has used a three-part
criteria in order to see if these laws will "pass muster" under
First Amendment restrictions against entanglement of state
and church. The biggest hurdle for the religious community is
to find a "secular" purpose for the laws and often this is simply
a gratuitious statement by the legislators. In this instance, at
the bottom of each copy of the Ten Commandments, the
following was printed in small type: "The secular application
of the Ten Commandments is clearly seen in its adoption as
the fundmamentallegal code of Western Civilization and the
Common Law of the United States."
If these laws are to be 'challenged it must be done by a
concerned citizens who are willing to undertake the financial
responsibility, the challenge to the state apparatus and the
abuse given by the religious. Until recently, such a group (or
person) did not even receive an appropriate "thank you." Now,
certain federal legislation gives an opportunity to seek reimbursement of legal costs. Therefore, if money can be put up front to
finance the suits, that money may be recouped in whole or in
great part later if the litigation wins.
In the case of the Ten Commandments in the Kentucky
schools, the final decision was not reached (or twenty-nine
months after the statute took effect. At that time, an appeal for
a Writ of Certiorari (Review) was made to the United States
Page 4

Supreme Court. Instead of replying to the Writ, the Court

summarily issued a ruling on the merits of the case. Once
again it was succinct: "This Court has announced a three-part
test for determining whether a challenged state statute is
permissible under the Establishment Clause of the United
States Constitution: First, the statute must have a secular
legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect
must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion ... ;
finally the statute must not foster 'an excessive government
entanglement with religion.' We conclude that Kentucky's
statute requiring the posting of the Ten Commandmentsin
public schoolrooms has no secular legislativae purpose, and is
therefore unconstitutional. ... The pre-eminent purpose for
posting the Ten Commandments on schoolroom walls is
plainly religious in nature. TheTen Commandments is undeniablya sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths, and no
legislative recitation of a supposed secular purpose can blind
us to that fact .... Posting of religious texts on the wall serves
no educational function. If the posted copies of the Ten
Commandments are to have an effect at all, it will be to induce
the school children to read, meditate upon, perhaps to
venerate and obey the .Commandments. However desirable
this might be as a matter of private devotion, it is not
permissible state objective under the Establishment Clause."
Since there had been much public discussion concerned'
with state payment for the plaques which many saw as too
much of an "entanglement of religion and government," they
had been financed by private subscription. The Court spoke
directly to this: "It does not matter that the posted copies of the
Ten Commandments are financed by voluntarv'private contributions, for the mere posting of the copies under the
auspices of the legislature provides the 'official support of the
State ... Government' that the Establishment Clause prohibits. Nor is it significant that the Bible verses involved in this
care are merely posted on the wall rather than read aloud ...
for 'it is no defense to urge that the religious practices here
may be relatively minor encroachments on the First Amendment.' "
In this case, the United States Supreme Court again
reaffirmed what the American Atheist has pointed out to all
and sundry. Having decided upon a tripartite test for constitutionality, the Court has emphasized that the failure of any part
of this test is fatal to the law, custom, or usage being
co-nsidered. In this case, the court reaffirmed that again. "If a
statute violates any of these three principles, it must be struck
down under the Establishment Clause." The federal district
courts have been obdurate with the Atheist cases insistinq
that the laws must fail all three tests.
The game of finding a "secular" purpose becomes increasing difficult and the reasons found for the same increasing
ludicrous. One must recall the anger of Thomas Jefferson who
wrote: "the judges have ... in their repeated decisions (stated)
that Christianity is a part of the common law. Theproof of the
contrary ...
is incontrovertible. What a conspiracy this,
between Church and State!" Now we may be nearing the end
of the conspiracy. This decision, Stone v. Graham, is a
landmark, an unequivocal statement on which Atheists will
stand again and again.
~

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

Page 7

,I
I

Ro ts
of theism
This is the third of a series of articles on Dr. Charles
Knowlton who was the first physician in the United States and
perhaps the first in 17 centuries who spoke to the concept of
birth control His primary idea was that of a woman having in
her personal control, by her choice, the possibility of introducing a common, inexpensive, (harmless to her,) spermaticide
into her vagina at the time of coition to resist the impregnation
of her ovum.
Thestory takes up where Dr. Knowlton has been imprisoned
for his insistence on the use of cadavers (1820, Massachusetts, USA.) in order to gain human anatomical knowledge.

The anticipated arrival of the couple's first child was

clouded by the pending trial for grave robbing. Dr. Knowlton
was found guilty of dissection and aiding in disposing of a
subject. About this he wrote, " ... I wassafelv lodged in the
Worcester jail for no less heinous crime than that of being
instrumental (as was-supposed) of depriving a parcel of worms
of their dinner."
The enforced idleness allowed Knowlton to ruminate on
some anatomical ideas which had bothered him. The end
result was that he totally rejected the concept of the soul. He
concluded also that all human behavior could be explained in
terms of physiological processes. Realizing that concepts
basic to revealed religion conflicted with his own claims,
Knowlton tried to make a theological case for his own ideas,
claiming that his Materialism was more corisistent with
Christianity than the concept of the soul. Knowlton hoped to
avoid conflict, but he was unsuccessful. Even the title of the
first book which he wrote aroused suspicion. The local clergy
did not like his work (Elements of Modern Materialism:
Inculcating The Idea of A Future State, in Which All Will Be
More Happy, under Whatever Circumstances They May Be
Placed, Than if They Experienced No Misery in This Life) and
called his ideas heretical in public debate in western Massa-.
chusetts. Knowlton's dismissal of basic tenets was blasphemous; why should people behave respectably with no
threat of eternal damnation? The threat of hostile confrontation in one town caused Knowlton to move to avoid trouble.
He had just built a promising practice in a new location when
he became the object of another clerical attempt to destroy his
practice. He stood fast this time, and publicly pled his case:
"Consider then, ... that it is a misfortune, not a crime; and in
the present state of society ... , it is a very great misfortune to a
man to believe differently than most people respecting religious subjects .... I will not say whether it be too little or too
much knowledge that makes one a sceptic; but Ican with truth
say, that for myself I was once a believer, and I have not lost
one whit of the knowledge (if knowledge it may be called) that
made me such, but I have acquired more, and now I am
ycleped an infidel Sorry thanks this, for proving all things and
holding fast that which is good."
Knowlton was accused of being many things in his lifetime
- free-lover, infidel, freethinker, Atheist, lecher, quack, liar,
but he was never accused of being modest.
Austin, Texas

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

Page5

The Hatching of A Radical

Knowlton's authorship of Fruits of Philosophy, his work on
birth control, was not a matter of spontaneous generation.
Personalities and ideas of his time contributed as much to the
birth of his book as did he. Like most persons, he was covetous
of his creation and longed for recognition of it as a unique
contribution. However, such works are usually products of
their times as well as their authors; Knowlton's work was one
link in a chain of events. Knowlton was selling his Elements of
Modern Materialism in New York City when he met Robert
Dale Owen (an associate of Frances Wright) and other social
reformers. He was invited to review his book before two
freethinking
groups, including Owen's. A new theme
emerged at that time, as Knowlton was basking in new found
support of his ideas. He no longer attempted to say that
Materialism was consistent with Christianity, rather, the two
theories were mutually hostile. Christianity should be destroyed since it was " ... a cloak which an ignorant quack, or a
knave may put on. and then trample under foot a mechanic or
a professional man of merit, who is too honest to be a
hypocrite." Knowlton was projecting much of his experience
connected with the publishing of his Elements of Modern
Materialism into this statement. Weeks later the students of
Amherst College strengthened that opinion by having Knowlton arrested for selling his ideas on Materialism in book form.
The arrest left him penniless again.
The book had not sold well, earning Knowlton only radical
literature from exchanges with freethinkers. The fortune
Knowlton expected had not materialized and the dreams of
glory had to be revised. The Knowltons settled, then. in
Ashburnham. Massachusetts. to a steady praetiee-cwhich
helped meet some of his $900 printing debt. Later, the
prospect of a better job in Providence was made even brighter
by the presence of a freethought group in that city. Knowlton
next moved there. hoping to have his family join him later.
Owen's book. Moret Physiology. had interested Knowlton in
the problems of preventing conception. He may even have
obtained from Owen a copy of Carlile'sEvery Woman's Book.
Owen had written and published Moral Physiology in late
1830. His thoughts were brought to the idea of contraception
while he was in New Harmony. Indiana. when he received
Carlile's book. His doubts about its style and physiological
information caused him to delay any action on this topic.
Carlile had described the use of a sponge in the vagina,
condoms and coitus interruptus. Carlile's real contribution to
birth control literature lies in the stimulation of a more
temperate mind to dwell on the issue; Owen finally wrote
Moral Physiology to provide better information on the subject.
It would be hard to imagine a more temperate. reasonable,
or moral argument than Owen's. In flowery. but hard hitting
language, he made his position vividly clear; even so. the text
is permeated with the feeling that he anticipated a criticism
which nothing could forestall. There was criticism. but there
were no legal reprisals and relatively little publicity. The quiet
circulation was brisk; 1.500 copies sold within five months
and the fifth edition was out within one year.
The idea of controlling conception sprang logically from the
freethinker'S view that man is in control of his own fate. There
was no question of immorality when exercising judgment in
an effort to better one's life. Knowlton acknowledged that
Owen's book had set him to thinking about the problem.
Actually. Fruits was partly written before Knowlton's move to
Providence. The first edition was published anonymously. and
copyrighted in 1831.
Owen's influence was fully acknowledged by Knowlton.
There was no conflict between these two freethinkers regarding the social or medical aspects of contraception. Their
acceptance of the need for distribution of contraceptive
Page 6

information sprang logically from their view that humankind

can control its own fate. There was no question of immorality
for them. Smaller families would improve family life economically and preserve maternal health.
The point on which they disagreed was method. The only
contraceptive method recommended by Owen. coitus interruptus, was unacceptable to Knowlton, partly because the
woman was not the one in control and she was the one to bear
the consequences in the most literal sense. Even more
germane from Knowlton's standpoint was that his patients'
experiences seemed to support the theory of absorption, of the
prevailing theories of conception. According to that theory the
"seminal absorbents" conduct semen from the labia and
vagina directly to the ovaries and coitus interruptus would
therefore be little or no protection. Killing the sperm seemed to
meet the need and Knowlton chose that approach. He talked to
people he met while traveling, and tested their reactions to his
idea and book. He noted, "I hardly think I could thus far have
persisted in publishing Fruits, if I did not believe that a great
proportion of the enlightened parts of the community do or will
think favorable of it."
The first edition sold quickly and Knowlton traveled around
New England selling subscriptions for the second edition,
which he considered so different from the first that a separate
copyright was taken out. There are no known copies of the first
edition, so it is impossible to know just how Knowlton
developed.
What he thought he had discovered was:
" ... what I honestly and firmly believe to be the most useful
idea that ever entered the brain of a philosopher. I mean that of
destroying the fecundating property of the semen by chemical
agents. in a simple, sure, and more than harmless manner;
and thereby enabling humankind to limit at will the number of
their offspring as well as to regulate the period of their birth, as
their several circumstances may require."
Knowlton had been cautious about selling the book. He was
the only one to do so with the first edition, wanting to be
certain that children and the idly curious did not acquire it.
Precautionary legal research and consultation with several
lawyers convinced him that " ... no such kind of book as this, or
as Every Woman's Book, or as Moral Physiology, was known
or thought of at the time our old imported common law as
made and provided." He was wary of the possibility of legal
prosecution or restraint of the book.
The second edition was published by Abner Kneeland, a
close friend of Owen and Wright. Indeed, Kneeland had come
to Boston in 1831 as resident lecturer of "The First Society of
Free Enquirers" founded by Frances Wright in 1829. He
replaced a previous lecturer named Jennings and started the
Atheist journal the "Boston Investigator." He was the first
person other than Knowlton, himself, to sell Fruits. Knowlton
kept a close control, never giving it to any booksellers and
never advertising .
.. The precautions did not prove efficacious since Knowlton
was arrested and prosecuted in Taunton. Massachusetts, for
its distribution. He was found guilty of publishing a book likely
to endanger the morals of the community. A juror told him,
"Well. we brought you in guilty-we
did not see how we could
wen get rid of it, stilillike your book, and you must let me have
one of them. After the trial the judge also subscribed for the
second edition and the prosecuting attorney gave his own
court fees to Knowlton. a recontrite gesture.
Knowlton's pride was rankled at one point in the trial when
a physician testified that there was nothing new in the book.
The idea of a chemical spermaticide. Knowlton felt. was his
own unique contribution to mankind, but during his life he
never did gain the recognition due him.
Before the Taunton trial was over Knowlton learned that
another complaint had been filed against him by a Lowell.

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

~~~~'~-----'W-~--T(~i

American Atheist

---------------------------------------

MassLachusetts,
physician.
The complaint
stated that "John
(not even a correct narne ll Knowlton
..
soliciting
subscriptions to a certain lewd, lascivious
and obscene book called
Fruits of Philosophy ... " had approached the physician and
shown
him the book. He was advised to avoid the new
warrant,
and he reports, " ... and with all ease [I] might have
evaded it, but I felt that I ought to contend for my rights."
He was bound over to a court of common
pleas, three
months distant,
in the sum of $1,000 to perhaps
make it
difficult
for him in a strange city. The grand Jury found that
Knowlton
was an evil person, and was, "contriving,
devising
and intending
the morals as well of youth as other good
citizens of the commonwealth
to vitiate and corrupt, and to
raise and create in their minds, and to incite them to commit
the crime of fornication;
[he] knowingly
did compose,
and
print, and did cause to be composed, printed and published,
a
certain
lewd, wicked,
scandalous,
infamous
and obscene
printed book entitled
"Fruits of Philosophy".
. and to give
certain directions,
by means whereof
men and women may
practice carnal copulation
and hinder and obstruct the ordinary issues and course
of nature,
and of which
these
processes and directions
are so lewd, indecent and obscene
that the same would
be offensive
to the court term and
improper to be placed on the records thereof."
The legal advice was that Knowlton should pled guilty even
though,
"
I had just as leif plead guilty of selling or
publishing
that book, as if it were the bible or any other book
-what
I contend for is that it is a good book, and such as I have
a right to publ ish." The price he paid for publish ing Fruits was
three months at hard labor.
Abner Kneeland quickly gave notice of the imprisonment
to
the readers of the "Investigator."
Under the heading "The
Days of Witchcraft
Returned,"
he rallied support for Knowlton,
without taking up the issue of contraception
since important
issues to Kneeland were freedom of the press and freedom of
speech. The Kneeland
family
had been neighbors
of the
Knowlton's
and Abner provided moral support to the.prisoner.
The daily press of Boston did not mention the Knowlton
trial
and the most attention
and help came from a group of
freethinkers
in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania,
through Kneeland's
attention to the case in his publication.
Only after Knowlton was released from jail in March, 1832,
did he allow any advertising
of Fruits of Philosophy. and
Kneeland continued
to sell his books as the sole representative of authorized
editions.The
day he was released he gave
two speeches in Kneeland's
hall. These were offered for sale
along with Knowlton's
two books, Fruits and Elements of
Modern Materialism. The advertisement
was enigmatic.

FRUITS OF PHILOSOPHY
"An angel flying
the everlasting

in the midst of heaven, having

gospel

to preach

to them

dwell on the earth, and to every nation,

and tongue

and people.

Beasts are speaking

Just in time -

"Rev.

that

kindred,

xiv: 6"

come and see!*

"Philosophy"

First the germ, and then the shoots,

Last of all, its ripened

"Fruits."

The Excitement in Ashfield, Massachusetts

After cautiously
copyrighting
the second edition of Fruits
(1833) In Taunton, rather than in Boston, Knowlton accepted a
medical practice with an elderly doctor in Ashfield,
Massachusetts.
The quiet life there was appealing
but local clergy
began a campaign to uproot him from the town by accusing
him of every kind of disregard
for human
life. If, as a
Materialist,
he did not believe in the human soul, why should
he care about life] A public meeting
was called to urge a
boycott of him. Naturally,
he appeared to speak in his own
defense and naturally this was not permitted.
Knowlton
said
that more lies were told about him," ...than could be cleverly
stuffed into a forty foot barn." He countered
with a speech in
the town hall followed
by a public letter to the leader of the
ministerial
inquisition,
in which he warned,
" ... if you would
attend to soul-saving
and let me alone, I would attend to
body-saving
and let you alone, otherwise
I should be constrained
to erect my own standard.
I have been hoisted
about from pillar to post, by the influence
of priestcraft,
quite
enough, and I will not budge another inch."
When the townspeople
did not support the desired boycott,
but continued to patronize the Infidel doctor, the ministers had
a warrant sworn for his arrest. An unknown minister was sent
to buy Fruits and Knowlton was again charged with seiling the
book. While
awaiting
the trial to be held in Greenfield,
Knowlton
turned to propagandizing
in hopes of influencing
the public opinion throughout
the county and perhaps improving his chances in court. Kneeland published a pamphlet
for himself, "A History of the Recent Excitement
in Ashfield"
and handed this out as he rode around the area on his calls.
The pamphlet
delivered
a telling
blow to the minister
leading the attack since it pointed out that he had bought a
copy of Fruits himself at the time of his marriage. What the
effect of Knowlton's
counter
effort was cannot be demonstrated, but the first two trials ended in hung Juries At the first
trial the jury deliberated
seventeen hours, ten Jurors being for
acquittal.
The second trial, five months
later, ended in no
decision after the Jury deliberated
one entire night with seven
jurors being for acquittal.
Knowlton
returnerf'to the court for
the third trial six months
later, but that was not started
because the new government
prosecuter
asked the court that
the charges be dropped.
At the end of this time, the minister who had led the attack
left town having discovered belatedly that the meeting house
was "too large for his voice."
Nonetheless,
Dr. Knowlton
was put through
eighteen
months of litigation
and worry, in addition to financial
costs,
because of the activities of the ministers
in the town in which
he simply wanted to practice medicine.
When it was all done, the people of Ashfield had themselves
an unusual man for their town physician.
He was determined
to help mankind
reach two Ideal goals: the destruction
of
superstition
and the alleviation
of misery and suffering.
With
science and philosophy
providing
the ultimate
weapon
truth, the road to a better life would be open. He would be
physician for the eradication
of both disease and superstition,
confident that human curiosity freed of religious bonds woud
uncover nature's secrets to the benefit of all mankind and that
medicine
would eventually
erase most human ills from the
earth.
[to be continued
next month]

Rev. vi: 1, 3, 5, 7
Later writers speculated
that Knowlton
felt he was persecuted for his association
with Owen, Wright and Kneeland.
But the combination
volatile mixture.

Austin, Texas

of birth

control

and Materialism

was a

Frrrnaire 188 (12/80)

Page 7

LIFE AFTER DEATH

Vladimir Chertikhin

~~.,/-

tJ. ~

./
~"'LUU

<;;
pllEU TIlE "".;-.:--..:-_
.
. ---11 ~

if'aJlOfTR

0.
.o

c:
..
1>

.. -

().

o~

OO~or
.

_~-'!----

....

Page 8

"fl.~----'

'.

_ _

u or

J~

~~ .

'SAi'I.T.IA'0

-----_.

JUPIT

:--_~
.. '

00.(1_

>I'D> 'au-

"

iii'

0
0

.......

---

-,

co
.00

Meditating on immortality, a man invariably proceeds from

his personal notion of it. Every man would like to live a long
and interesting life. Therefore, it is natural for him to try to
leave a trace in material and spiritual works, to embody a
particle of himself in those who will carryon after him since
the biological functions of the human body are not limitless
and will finally succumb to the general laws of living nature.
In man's study of the reasons and the laws regulating life
and death we find all types of religious myths conflicting with
the objective laws of the material world. We hear interpretations of "life hearafter" not only in conversation among
believers and sermons on heaven and hell delivered from the
pulpit, but also from those who possess scientific knowledge
of the surrounding world. Physicians, for instance, who
endeavour to prolong human life, also show an interest in the
problem of "life beyond death" since science is still faced with
a number of unanswered and unexplained questions including: "Where is the borderline between life and death?"
I have had occasion to read the book Life after Death written
by the American psychiatrist Raymond Moody Jr. which came
out in the USA several years ago. The author collected the
testimony of 150 patients whom physicians have brought
back to life after what is termed clinical death, a short period
after the patient has stopped breathing and.his heart stopped
beating, when it is still possible to restore the vital functions.
Some of these were first-hand recollections. They came
from people who had experienced the condition of clinical
death. Others were those of the people who were beside them
at the time. Their stories, according to Moody, coincided in the
principal details.
"At the moment of extreme physical exhaustion a man
hears the doctor pronouncing his demise. He hears an
unpleasant noise, a loud ringing and roaring. At the same time
he has the sensation of rushing along a long dark tunnel and
suddenly feels he is separating from his body which he can
see from a distance ... He is met by some sort of amiable
beings. Among them he recognises his dead relatives and
friends. Then there appears a being of light - a kind, loving
spirit whom the deceased had never seen before. Without
speaking, this being asks him to take an estimate of his life by
making the main events pass before his eyes.,:Suddenly the
man feels he is approaching something that looks like a wall or
a line, and realises that it is the border between earthly life and
the next world. However, he does not cross this border, he
feels he has to return; that the time of his death has not yet
come."
It seems amazing. One hundred and fifty testimonies from
the threshold of death, the testimony of "eye-witnesses"
regarding life beyond the grave, an astounding confirmation of
the idea of existence after death which Buddhism, Christianity
and Islam have been preaching for centuries.
However, let us not rush with the conclusions. I must say.
that the author of the book, which made such a sensation,
believes that you cannot view anyone of these testimonies as
actually coming from the "place of no return."
In his book Moody records the testimony of people influenced to a minor or lesser degree by religious notions
which made themselves felt at a critical moment in their lives.
Apparently the influence of religion is still quite strong. Yet
there was a time when the idea of life beyond the grave had a
still greater influence on the minds of mankind. For many
centuries the advocates of different religions spread the idea
of life after death, of happiness in heaven as a reward for an
unright life on earth and eternal torture for a sinful life.
For instance, if we take a look at the Orthodox religion, one
of the three principle branches of Christianity, we will discover
that in its symbol of faith, which contains its basic religious
tenets, two out of the twelve tenets are devoted to life after
death. the Buddhist monks intimidate their followers by

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

American Atheist

I
i

threatening horrible tortures by hect and cold in hell and

promise all kinds of pleasures in the Buddhist paradise. The
notions of heaven and hell occupy an equally significant place
in the teachings of Islam, the youngest of all world's religions.
Theologists maintain that all knowledge of life hereafter, of
heaven and he", was given to people directly by god or through
his messengers like, for example, Jesus Christ, the founder of
Christianity, or the Prophet Mohammed. That is supposed to
lend authenticity to the theory of life after death. Faith in life
beyond the grave has become one of the basic guiding
principles for the believer. It rules his behaviour, his actions,
desires and hopes. But what if this guiding principle has no
real foundation? Then, it turns out that the betievejs entire
behaviour had been oriented to a false goal.
How are we to check the veracity of the vital principle that
religion offers? I believe the best way of approaching the
problem is to investigate historically the development of ideas
regarding life after death. It is no accident that Friedrich
Engels stressed the importance of such an approach. He
devoted considerable attention to studying the historical
development of religious notions. He wrote that you cannot do
away with a religion like Christianity only with the help of
mockery and denunciation. We have to fight against it
scientifically, that is, we have to explain it historically, he said.
Hence, let us turn to science. Clinical observations during
neurosurgery have registered a number of cases of visions on
the brink of death which people with religious outlook have
tried to pass off as indisputable testimony of the existence of
the next world. What do the neurosurgeons have to say on that
score? It seems that the suppression of the vital activity of the
nerve cells in the parietal and parieto-occipital areas of the
cortex of the large hemispheres of the brain cause an acute
derangement of spatial orientation and the appearance of the
"double" symptom when the patient feels that he is being
detached from his body and can see himself at a distance.
In this way we see that hallucinations and apparitions that
arise on the threshold between life and death are in no way a
testimony of the existence of another world. Researchers
have discovered the natural physiological and psychological
mechanism of these phenomena. Further research will help to
shed light on its other aspects.
Researchers have observed another interesting point - the
visions that the patients see when they are in a state of clinical
death depend on their national culture and their religion. Most
Americans, for instance see their relatives and friends, and
most Indians see relioious irnaqes. Not a sinqle Christian has
Austin, Texas

seen Indian gods in his visions, and not a single Indian has
seen Jesus Christ.
A man experiences a strong sensation of fear at the hour of
his death. That is why he involuntarily explains the vague
sensations that arise in him in a way I mentioned above in
order to overcome this fear. That is why he sees the faces of
his relatives, his friends, and hears their kind and encouraging
words. It is a fact that a man suffering from thirst takes any
glistening surface to be water. The same mechanism acts
when a man close to the condition of clinical death has
visions. In shona man sees what he wants to see, what he
hopes to see. That is when pictures of heaven and hell run rife
in his consciousness. And certainly heaven is the more
desirable.
Like religion in general, the concepts of heaven and hell
have taken shape as a result of the fantastic reflection in the
consciousness of man of social and natural forces which had
held sway over him for a long time. The idea of heaven and hell
has always played the role of reconciling the working people
with the reigning social order, comforting them with promises
of illusory reward in the next life for their sufferings on earth.
Sometimes people say that Atheists rob them of hope and
faith in a better life hereafter. Though illusory, it helps a man
carryon, they maintain. society needs this faith in the next
world because the prospects of future reward or torment in
hell makes people adhere to the rules of social behavior. If
there were no heaven or hell then everything would be
allowed, they say.
I would like to counter this belief by asking: has religion
prevented crime or the violation of the norms of behavior?
Certainly, we cannot deny that absolutely. Many believers
have lived according to the moral code believing it was
established by god. On the other hand, we may cite examples
when religion was the reason for crime. The crusaders
plundered the Moslem lands and mercilessly slaughtered
peaceful citizens and that was considered pleasing to god; the
more infidels a crusader killed, the surer was his road to
heaven. In their turn, the Moslems believed that the holy war
against the disbelievers was also a straight road..to..heaven.
The main objection against the idea of heaven and hell is
that it mav be interpreted as a boon for mankind.
A man who consciously regulates all natural and social
forces has no need for illusory consolation.

.....
.

Luna

~-----

A1Jcborio

.....
""

Measurement (If angular distance with a cross-stafj

jacob's SIal], an instrument used b y Copernicus

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

or

Page9

Oi

..,,"'\\

. ~ 4~

,.+ ~fI
~fI~~Cf+:
t-~
"

T:

Taking its cue from the Bible, the established order of the nation has made
certain that the evangelicals who desire to take over the country shall be
heard and located so that the fundamentalists of every political coloration can
understand their message and get to them to help. It is all there in Matthew
5:15 that men should not light a candle and put it under a bushel. While
allegedly deploring that for which they stand, the media has been careful to
give the new evangelicals every possible type of publicity available in the
land: television, radio, newpaper, magazines. Every network has featured the
entire cast of characters, along with their political hatchet men. Cartoonists,
columnists, news reporters, editors continue the litany recitation of their
power, influence, wealth and outreach.
You are being prepared to cringe before them as fear is built into you. You
are learning that they are a Juggernaut which will necessarily take over the
land.
The problem is impressed upon you: who will save the nation from these
ruthless fanatical religious maniacs? And, it is just now that the heroes who
are to rescue the culture are unveiled.
The bad guys in the black hats, the powerful ones whom you should fear,
are the Moral Majority, the Christian Voice, the Religious Roundtable, the
Viguerie group. The good guys in the white hats, the saviors whom you can
trust, are the Roman Catholic Church, the Mormons, the Baptists, the
Methodists, the Jews. In fact. we find that no less a person than Norman Lear
has fallen for it and established a counter [FJodreligious group "People for
The American Way" to fight them. Even the Humanists are in on the act,
pointing out the rational religious leaders, those who will save state/church/and the status quo. And into whose hands shall we place ourselves?
The list of religious reactionaries is a long one.
Look at the Christian Bill of Rights provided for you upon this very page and
see who will profit. Amendment One is a goal of the Roman Catholic Church
in its Right-to-Life Amendment to the Constitution of our country, dictated to
the Council of Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church by the Pope himself.
Amendment Two screams out for the right of "Laissez Fair e" exploitative Big
Business, blessed by all the mainline religions Amendment Three restores
capital punishment while striking a blow at birth control, again to the
satisfaction of all denominations. Amendment Four destroys free speech
and the free press and restores the witch-hunts
of (Roman Catholic)
McCarthyism. Indeed before the new administration could be sworn in,
Senator Strom Thurmond, the new. chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee revived the Subcommittee
on lnter nal .?ecurity. Amendment Five has been a continuing goal of the Mormon and the Roman Catholic
Church. Amendment Six, coupled with federal, state and local tax funded
parochiaid has been the dream of the Roman Catholics, the Lutherans and
the Jews for three decades. Amendment Seven has been demonstrated by
the Baptists in the Bible belt, the Mormons in Utah, the Roman Catholics in
Massachusetts, the Lutherans in Minnesota, the Jews in New York and
Miami and the Presbyterians everywhere. Amendment Eight has the
personal blessing of the Pentagon, sweeps away Dwight Eisenhower's
Farewell address with his warnings about the military and reinforces the role
of religion in war. Amendment Nine is the reiteration of the right to brutalize
both women and children in the white male dominated cultural milieu of
enforced nuclear family Christianity. Amendment Ten is the appeal that the
taxpayer should pay it all.
'
Only the dominate WASP majority is recognized. All other minorities, races
and cultural groups are ignored as are all of their civil and human rights.

Page 10

Frimaire 188(12/80)

Amel
withir
life up
AI el

tQ1 pur

d~ect

Amel
punisl
duced

naturr

Amel
writte
citizer

Amel
public
Bible I

Jerry Falwell says it all in the "8

Constitution. 'Should any of ourreal
he molds for a modern Born-Again

Not a one of the heroes, the "esta

the Juggernaut if he (and they are,
privately celebrate and send money,
indeed, has been no attempt by ar
Family Protection Act. to be reintroc
ately. This restrictive reactionary legi
role in child abuse or wife abuse case
stamp assistance to full-time colle
Supreme Court jurisdiction over st:
church related schools and other in!
vision.
American Atheist

Amendment 1- We believe that, from the time of conception

within the womb, every human being has a scriptural right to
life upon this earth. (Ex.20:30; Psa. 139: 13-16)
Alendment II - We believe that every person has the right
t~ pursue any and all goals that he or she feels are G?dd~ected during that life on this earth'. (prov. 3:5-6) .
Amendment 11I-We believe that, apart from justified capital
punishment, no medical or judicial process should be introduced that would allow the termination of life before its
natural or accidental completion. (Psa. 31: 15)
Amendment IV - We believe that no traitorous verbal or
written attack upon this beloved nation be permitted by any
citizen or alien living within this country. (Rom. 13: 1-7)

Amendment VI- We believe in the right and responsibility to

establish and administer private Christian schools without
harassment from local, state, or federal government. (Deut.
1118-21)
Amendment VII - We believe in the right to guide and
influence secular professions, including the fields of politics,
business, legal, medical, in establishing and maintaining
moral principles of Scripture. (Prov 14:34)
Amendment VIII - We believe in the right to expect our
national leaders to keep this country morally and militarily
strong so that religious freedom and Gospel preaching might
continue unhindered (I. Pet 213-17)
Amendment IX - We believe in the right to receive moral
support from all local, state, and federal agencies concerning
the traditional farnilv unit, a concept that enjoys both scriptural and historical precedence. (Gen. 2:18-25)

Amendment V - We believe that all students enrolled in

public schools should have the right to voluntary prayerand
Bible reading.(Josh. 24: 15)
Amendment X - We believe in the right of legally-approved
religious organizations to maintain their tax-exempt status,
this right being based upon the historical and scriptural
concept of church and state separation. (Matt. 22: 17-21 )

Your Signature

n the "Bill of Rights" which he has issued, presumably to replace the secular Bill of Rights of our
our readers have had any doubt as to the intensions of this man, or the people who follow in the cast
n-Again, read and take heed.'

ie "established churches" leaders, would stop

ley are all "he's") could. In fact they probably
money, intelligence and all possible aid. There,
t by any mainline religious group to stop the
reintroduced into the 97th Congress immediiarv legislation would deny the government any
15ecases, strip homosexuals of rights, limit food
e college students, deny the United States
over state/church separation cases, exclude
nher institutions from any government super-

The skillet calls the kettle black. What the evangelicals do overtly, the
established churches do covertly. One is no better than the other. With the
evangelicals the method of "shove it down their throats" is used. With the
mainline or established churches, the more suave and sophisticated "give it
to them with palliatives" is the method. The American Atheist can turn to
neither group. A plague should be upon both their houses. The enemy is
religion and because the Atheist did not fight until lately, it may be that the
war is lost.
~

Page 11

Frimaire 188 i12/80)

Austin, Texas

-f

'1

The other day a newspaper writer referred to our ancient

English Christmas customs, and amongst these, the use of the
Christmas tree. One does not look for strict accuracy from the
ordinary journalist, but in this instance he would doubtless
reflect the general opinion on the matter. And this opinion
may be taken as an illustration of the way in which knowledge
of the origin of a custom - once the custom is establisheddies out. and an altogether false belief develops. As a matter of
fact. the use of the Christmas tree in England was practically
unknown before it was introduced from Germany by the
Prince Consort. Nor, as a Christmas tree, does it appear to be
very ancient in Germany; although the practice of decorating
trees at that time of year is a very old one. During the
nineteenth century its growth, all over the world, has been
very rapid, but I fancy it is now undergoing a decline.
Other customs connected with Christmas have a more
widespread antiquity, although there is nothing specifically
Christian about them. Or, to put the same thing in a more
correct form, they are Christian in the same sense that they
are heathen, in the sense that heathenism and Christianity
are parts of a world-wide mythology, no one part of which has
a greater claim to truth than any other part. Indeed, in some
respects, Christianity is further from the truth than many
other creeds; for, while one can see plainly their meaning and
their modes of origin, Christianity has been so overlaid with
gloss and interpretation that. in its present form, it resembles
an elaborated falsehood of so complex a character that its
original nucleus is only discernible with considerable difficulty.
It is not. however, seriously questioned today that most, if
not all, of the customs associated with Christmas, including
the date at which they are carried out, are of pre-Christian
origin. The use of mistletoe is a direct heritage from the
Druids, who placed it, at the time of the winter solstice, on the
altar as representing the spirit of the tree. The decoration of
the house with evergreen was also intended to provide a
resort for wood spirits, so that they might. as one writer puts
its, "remain unnipped with frost and winds, until a milder
season had renewed the foliage of their darling abodes." The
feeding and merry-making are perpetuations of customs that
ancient peoples possessed long before Christianity, as such,
was heard of. The burning of the yule-log is a practice that has
descended from the hearth fire associated with ancestor
worship, and which was rekindled once a year from the everburning village fire. And the date of the birth of the god Jesus
- not fixed until some five hundred years after the alleged
event - was also the birth-date for Bacchus, rylithra, Horus,
and numerous other deities, and for exactly the same reasons.
All this, however, by the way. The perSistence of the tree in
Christmas and Christian religious festivities points to a much
wider and deeper truth than that of their obvious affinity with,
Page 12

pre-Christian beliefs. The whole structure of Christianity

connects it with the world-wide belief in vegetation gods and
solar gods, the two being, naturally, very closely related. The
festivals of Christmas and Easter have no other reasonable
origin, except their connection with the death and rebirth of
vegetation. Both are, in the truest sense of the expression,
nature festivals. And Frazer has proven to demonstrate - to
all whose minds are open to proof - that the sacrifice of Jesus
is, not as orthodox Christianity has represented it, the sacrifice
of one god to placate another; but the creation of a god by the
act of killing, for the purpose of renewing vegetative life.
Why is this so? Before answering that question, it is
essential to recognize how widespread is the worship of
vegetation gods and tree gods, the two being closely associated. So far as I am aware, there does not exist a people
anywhere who have not a belief in vegetation gods of some
kind or other; which gods are credited with a very profound
influence on human affairs. It is needless to give a large
number of specific examples; but those who desire to see how
widespread is this belief may consult an exceedingly wellbalanced essay by Mrs. J.H. Philpot, The Sacred Tree, where a
good store of well-chosen examples of tree-worship, in all its
forms, is presented within a small compass. The folk-lore of
Europe is full of references to tree-deities, while with primitive
peoples there often goes the custom of addressing an elaborate apology to the spirit of a tree before cutting it down.
Grimm says, indeed, that in Teutonic mythology Temple means also wood. What we figure to ourselves
as a built and walled house resolves itself, the fur
back we go, into a holy place, untouched by human
hand, embowered and shut in by self-grown trees.
There dwells the deity, veiling his form in the rustling
foliage of the boughs. (Teutonic Mythology, i. 9.)
.
And Robertson Smith says, quite accurateiy, that the tree
not merely the symbol of the god, but his embodiment The god inhabits the tree or raised stone, not in the
sense in which man inhabits a house, but in the sense
in which his soul inhabits his body. In short, the whole
conception belongs, in its origin, to a state of thought
in which there was no more difficulty in ascribing living powers and personality to a stone, tree, or animal,
than to a mere being of human or superhuman build.
(Religion of the Semites. p. 85)

is

Finally there is reason to believe that many of the fully

developed deities, such as Bacchus, Osiris, etc., were originally vegetation gods.
But how did men ever come to worship trees? That is a
question the complete answering of which would take us right
back to the origin of religion. And, a theory which adequately
accounts for the origin of gods is the one that is so brilliantly
sketched by Spencer in the first volume of his Principles of

Frimaire 188 (12180)

American Atheist

Sociology. It is not necessary to state this theory in full; it is

enough for my present purpose to say that the idea of god
owes its origin to the belief in a ghost or double, suggested by
dreams and enforced by other experiences. By a gradual
elaboration the ghost becomes the god, and the powers that it
possessed as a ghost are continued by it as deity. I do not mean
by this all gods were originally ghosts; but that. unless people
had acquired the notion of gods in the manner suggested by
Spencer, they would never have created gods by other means.
For the gods are obvious copies of men, and no other theory
has yet been presented which fits so well with the facts, and
which is, by analogy, so probable. For god-making is not one of
the lost arts. Among many people it is still in active operation,
and the various stages of the craft can be easily discerned.
If we refer to primitive peoples we find that all the operations of nature are credited to the activities of spirits - and
spirits mean to them simply ghosts. The spirits are the ghosts
of the dead. If the crops are plentiful or scarce, it is because the
tribal ghosts are pleased or angry. The same service is paid to
the host of the dead that is afterwards paid to the god, and
exactly the same services are expected of it in return. It is
presented with offerings, it is praised, it is asked to do things,
and its good or ill-will is divined, as its devotees realise their
desires or not.
Taking this point as established - and the proofs that the
gods come from ghosts are ample - we can take the next step
in searching for the origin of tree worship in the company of
Mr. Grant Allen. In an essay on The Attis of Catullus, that
extremely suggestive writer put forward a very probable
reason why the ghosts, or gods, should have become peculiarly identified with vegetation. In the first place, the tumulus
over a dead body is freshly-turned earth, and surface earth
that has been collected from round about. Next, food is
scattered over the grave to feed the ghost. Animals are killed
on the grave, and their blood soaks into the grave. These, with
other circumstances, give obvious reasons why vegetation
should grow more richly on the grave in its neighborhood than
elsewhere. For example, it is still a custom in some of the
hebrides for milkmaids to pour a little of their milk, morning
and evening, on the fairy mounds. Naturally, these mounds
are of a richer verdure than elsewhere. But the verdure is not
attributed to the milk, but to the fairies. And when we note that

.'" Sft.'{S HERt ~ I'\E \\~~ &~N

\~CI\~siwG STE~~\\..'('
~ST F~W '(E.~\\.S~O~~EP.,(.1Wl', lAQcEMY,L---rrT'"~

these fairy mounds are, when examined, nearly always found

to be primitive graves, we have a clear object lesson in the
truth of what has been said. Using the same mode of
reasoning, primitive man does not, then, attribute the better
growth on the grave to the better-fed soil; it is due entirely to
the ghost. It is the life of the ghost manifesting itself in
vegetation. If a tree springs up and flourishes, it is the abode of
the ghost; and this at once gives a simple explanation of the
existence of sacred trees and of tree-worship all over the
world.
This leads to one more step that brings us in peculiarly close
connection with the Christian myth. From the belief that the
fertility of crops depends upon the activity of the ghost or god,
to the practice of creating a ghost or god for th express purpose
of caring for the crops is an easy and natural step. And there is
no doubt whatever that gods have been made for precisely
such a purpose. The argument is that if plants grow best
where the man is buried, to bury a man where a good crop is
desired promises success. Mr. Frazer will supply anyone who
consults his works with abundant instances of the custom of
annually killing a victim, and either burying him or her whole
in the center of a field, or sharing the flesh out and burying a
portion in each field belonging to the village. In these cases
man is simply creating a god by the fact of killing the creature.
And when we bear in mind that. as Frazer has also shown, the
primitive king is a direct descendant of the ancestral ghost,
and is thus already divine, there is given the reason why the
selected victim is crowned with royal honors and treated for
the time being as a royal personage - as in the case of the
New Testament Jesus.
For this story brings us into direct touch with the Christian
myth. It is a later version - mixed up with a great many other
details, as is naturally the case with late versions - of the
primitive practice of creating a god for the special purpose of
looking after the people's welfare in this or that direction. The
importance of Mr. Frazer's researches lies in connecting the
Jewish myth, not merely the myths of comparatively developed peoples, with the actual practice of savages. The true key
to religion lies in anthropology. It is in the practice of the most
primitive of our ancestors, and in that of the most primitive of
our contemporary races, that it is possible to'find an adequate
explanation of the most advanced form of religious belief.;Jf

iAAT5 'CAUSt 1" E

.,.-,.r:.~---

N~'ON
i=o.oJ't\

'i~

1'Ultl'~C.

SO cl! T----

~~ L4~T\~4,..-n:.
A\.!e
)IVO~ce i~ Wlil rs

\J, .. ~,.. __,-$~-

... --

(~~"

'( AH'? HERE: i-r

T~F=llMQA ANt)
Mo~e PEOPU: P\~' 1"u~,~
To ~ELi c..iOH - ANt> JI'\OR~
OH
S(\'{S

\tJ REW4ll>N ~

~;,.'
.-

AR,"

POPPiI'CG.(rr ~
-'-"1*f).--

Austin, Texas

Frimaire 188 (12180)

Page 13

POLEMIC DIVINITY

Ralph B. Shirley

THE BIG BANG THEORY AND CREATION

This theory proposes that the universe began from a
condensed glob of matter which exploded sending material in
all directions at an evenly distributed rate, making a homogeneous and isotropic universe. All areas look the same and
have equal physical properties.
Many believers in divine creation and even an Atheist here
and there think that if the "Big Bang" theory of the formation
of the universe is true then that provides some evidence that a
"god" created the universe. Their thinking on this is nothing
more than an assumption. Once an Atheist makes this
assumption he is then in the position of having to disprove this
particular theory. It is not logical to assume anything in the
first place.
Apparently some people think that the "explosion" took
place in one instant of time similar to the time mentioned in
the biblical account in Genesis.
Whether the theory is correct or not. I do not see any way
that it can prove divine creation, or the biblical version of
creation, for the following reasons, which I will make as
concise as possible.
1. As to the Bible The formation did not take place in a few
days as stated therein. There is also no way that a "day" can
be translated into a number of millions of years or billions of
years and make any sense when compared to the true facts.
2.As to the Bible: It was not an orderly creation as stated
therein, but an enormously violent one.
3.As to the Bible: There is no mention in the Bible about
an explosion. Bible apologists are always trying to reconcile
the primitive, simple and erroneous statements of the Bible
with proven scientific facts and currently accepted theories.
But, as usual, it cannot be reconcilled with this theory either.
4.As to the Bible: The Bible states or implies that nothing
was in existence prior to the god or gods (Elohim, in copies of
the original Hebrew transcripts is actually the plural of Eloh or
god) creating everything. This is far different from the Big
Bang theory which holds that matter was already in existence
in the form of a solid, highliy condensed glob.
5.As to any formation of the universe: whether the theory
of formation of the universe is the Big Bang theory or the
Steady State theory or some other theory, the interpretation
can always be made that there was a "beginning." If no time
limit is placed on forming the stars and planets, then even if a
universe took billions of years to form, one could still say that it
had a "beginning."
The Steady State theory provides that new matter is
constantly formed and that there was no beginning and there
will be no end.
By either of these theories the univers e still took billions of
years to form. The average person may think of an explosion as
occurring in one instant of time - perhaps as quickly as you
can say "Let there be." But. of course, this is not true with
respect to the type of explosion described in the Big Bang
theory. According to that theory the explosion started about
ten billion years ago and is still continuing today. This, 'it is
said, accounts for the presently expanding universe.
6. According to both the Big Bang theory and the Steady
Page 14

State theory, and I would imagine, any other theory that may
be proposed, the universe is not and never has been a
comleted "creation." All scientists agree, as they must, that
stars and even galaxies have been and are still being destroyed by explosions and that new stars are being formed
continuously. They, in fact, have a system for assigning an age
to each star. This is not accounted for by the Bible tale.
Our sun was not formed at or near the time of the "Big
Bang" because it is estimated that it is a "middle aged" star.
And the earth is estimated to be about four and one half billion
years old - far less than the estimated ten to twenty billion
year age of the primal explosion. According to the Bible the
earth was the first matter to be created.
7. If the universe had been created by a "god" then it
would not make any difference if the Big Bang theory can be
disproved. Disproving that would not prove that there was no
creation. The "god" could create the universe in any way that
he wanted. Certainly it would not be any more difficult for him
to create it by the Steady State method than by the Big Bang
method. And there could be other ways of making it of which
no one has thought. But of course christians want the most
widely accepted theory to be as close to the biblical tale as
possible. They are not satisfied with the biblical "Let there be"
method - they want a method that is accepted by scientists.
The opinions of scientists concerning the Big Bang theory
differ widely and are constantly changing. Some envision an
oscillating universe in which the expandinq-univarse will
contract back into its original hot mass and again expand in
another explosion and repeat this without end. Others think
that the expansion will continue forever.
None of the theories or opinions can actually be proven at
the present time although some evidence can be given for
each theory. The evidence, of course, is provided by observation and that is as imprecise as is its interpretation.
Whatever the answer is, it would be presumptuous, to say
the least, for any scientist to conclude that he had thought of
every possible manner for new stars and planets to form, after
existing ones had been destroyed and had concluded that it is
not possibles.
8. The Big Bang theory contradicts the Bible tale because
according to that theory the universe took billions of years to
form - not one or two days. It did not start from nothing but
from a condensed mass of material; the earth took billions of
years to form after a universe was in existence rather than
being the first body to be formed. No one (other than religious
crackpots) believes that the earth existed before the sun,
around which it revolves, as stated by the Bible.
9. You can be sure that if the majority of scientists
abandon the Big Bang theory and adopt a new one, the Bible
apologists will immediately explain that by a proper interpretation of the Bible YOu can easily see that this new theory
had always been embodied within the passages of the Bible
(and that the Big Bang theory was never suggested by it). Then
the entirely new theory will "prove" that the universe was
created by a "god"; and also, no doubt, that the god's name
was Yahweh and that he had a son named jesuchrist.
~

Frimaire 188 (12180)

Austin, Texas

ON OUR WAY

Historians, many of whom in past

centuries were highly devout, recounted the events of their time in glowing
words, also apotheosizing with them
the part of religion. thus truth was
twisted, suborned and denied a hearing. Had the truth been told, everyone
today would know that theocratic tampering kept the people of Europe fighting in religiously fomented wars during more than fifteen hundred years.
Between the wars Europe was in constant uproar, peace only a dream, all
because the people of Europe's nations permitted the church to have the
final word in matters of civil and military government.
Toprevent the above kind of happenings here in America, our Founding
Fathers cautioned us in unmistakable
terms to keep state and religion strictly
separated. But, for as long as religion
will exist, its nabobs will as always try
to infiltrate our state and its governmental machinery. In one way or another this is NOW going on, assisted
by sundry members of both Houses of
Congress, most recently by a Senator
from North Carolina who introduced a
resolution which, had it passed, would
PREVENT the Supreme Court from
protecting the legislative functions of
Congress!The Senator a sworn defender of the Constitution! Our American
Atheist Center is on watch against
tinkering of this kind, and has been
very effective but only to the extent the

Center's fiscal condtion permits. Legal

procedures, especially if initiated at
Federal level are costly. All American
Atheists can be proud of their Center's
dedicated personnel which could
serve even more effeciently - and
without necessity for personal sacrifice -were we of its membership to
give them our enthusiastic and financially generous support. They're our
front line fighters; but isn't it our fight
first of all?
Every circumstance of life in our
United States today cries out that our
liberties are endangered by a force of
whose existence we've for 200 years
been forewarned. Don't tell me it can't
hurt us. This force has veritably mushroomed, suddenly and unexpectedly,
during the past fifty years. We failed to
note its advent because largely occupied with the-building of a continental
shrine to self-reliance and freedom
during the two centuries that followed
our nation's birth in 1776. We've
grown, are strong, but not invulnerable. We withstood tragic lapses in
this work: no few wars, but these
didn't really break up or do away with
all our efforts. We, it seems to me, only
took wars for pesky interruptions to
which we had to attend because they
were delaying our aims.
. The crisis I'm talking about is more
serious than any shooting war no
matter how bloody, costly, won or lost,

Austin, Texas

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

Ignatz Sahula- Dycke

because it threatens to kill the mind,

reason, judgment and sanity of every
single man-jack of us. Were this particular crisis to spread, you'd fare better
in Khorneini's Iran than up to your
neck in this one between the Atlantic
and the Pacific. The American citizen
is a tough cookie in many ways, but for
reasons good enough also a very soft
touch, and here I'm talking about his
falling for the mealy-mouthed evangelist who rakes in contributions without
being taxed on them. Is it possible today - for anyone to deny that religion
is a business enterprise just like any of
the others? The only difference is in
the profits. Religion's profits are enormous, and untaxed. Every dollar taken
in is practically net profit I UNTAXEDI
This soft-touch American, having all
his life listened to fables of christianistic concocting about the joys of an
everlasting afterlife, can't thus brainwashed help but be nonplussed when
by chance forced to c~nsider that dying is the factual endin'g of the adventure of existence begun at birth. To say
that this simple fact of dying shocks
every believer when he dares to speculate about it is putting it mildly because it brooks no evading, and spoils
religion's comforting myth of eternal
life. The inevitable conclusion - no
matter what mental calisthenics the
de.jected believer now resorts to always turns out to be that life is made
up of the period sandwiched between
birth and death, and that any belief to
the contrary looms as pure fantasy
and self-delusion. Facing this simple
truth calls for the kind of courage that
everyone isn't able to muster, and
sentences all who are fainthearted to
start searching for an out. When such
people chance to meet an evangelist
whose preaching meshes with their
yearnings for escape, they fall for it.
This, in churchly parlance is "saving",
and thus the saved are "born again".
Why the human animal. whoforthe
most part appears to be more intellective and inquisitive than any of the
world's other organisms, permits itPage'15

self to live by cliches, (in 19801)especially cliches such as those of religion

which
tend to kill individuality and creativity is a phenomenon that
very few can dissect as cleanly as any
Atheist.
Now it has to be premised for purposes of this gentle diatribe against
the futilities of theological dogmas
and, generally, of religionary beliefs,
that there are two classes of humans:
the one that has learned to ignore
religion's fantasies, and the other one
that yet hasn't. This latter class is
more numerous than the first, and in
most respects not nearly as intelligent
if rated by the myths that it continues
to take for truth. This class exists
generation after generation because
the progenitors of its every new member permit its indoctrination in religious bunk almost as soon as it is born.
Nevertheless, the religions in today's scientifically
impartial days,
know they're in deep trouble. the outpouring of news about the current
resurgence of religion is nothing but
propaganda - the result of the
churches' efforts to stave off their
eventual defeat. Sure, the churches
have lots of money, and money talks,
but there where people prosper, money no longer speaks as sonorously as
before. Only the world's needy and
miserable pay attention to religion's
cliche-y palaver today. Tbe stockades
and pens which once contained docile
flocksof bunk-believersnow needstronger gates. The communications explo-

sion has awakened to stark facts even

the peoples whom fanatical missionaries only a few years ago could reach
only by wading through marshes and
scaling steep cliffs. This current situation has even the recently "annointed" pope hopping madly about (in his
white shift, gold chained cross, crimson sash and skull-cap) dressing up
the gates with new hasps and hinges.
All to but little avail. That the future
belongs to Atheism is inevitable. AIready for some years significant numbers of clerics, even bishops, both
catholic and protestant, assent to being Atheists - conclusive proof they
cling to their surplices for the money
in it. So, now, in numerous places
religion hangs on with only the god of
money to rely upon - as Nietzsche
reported so many summers ago having found old god himself defunct from
a cortical thrombus of truth and fact.
Nothing ofthe above is to mean that
stupid adherence to religious dogmas
and other such brainstorms is soon to
end; I wish that it would. Nor do I think
that Atheism is slated to replace religion; every new child that arrives on
earth makes that highly conjectural.
Envisioning all of the world's people
as growing up alike is an utter impossibility. Finally, I trust there'll always be
a difference of taste among them;
hence some of them will always remain supetstitious and, consequently,
religious.
In attempting to comfort those who
credit Judeo-christianity with having

discovered monotheism, I'll graciously

skip mentioning Akhenaton, leaving
the field and whatever plaudits to
Moses. But let's remember that long
before Yahwe spoke to Moses on Sinai, the world's people of all races
listened to and (it's said) conversed
with and worshipped numerous gods
- thousands of them the records say
- and, little by little rejected them all
one after another as useless until only
one remained. If, as heretofore mentioned, it's true that this last remaining god is now dead, it looks as though
from now on all calls for divine help
will go for naught. Still and all, the
news of god's demise hasn't penetrated the backwoods yet. Churches of
all kinds and types are constantly being erected for the "benefit"
of
adults; and Sunday schools continue
to dish out the same old porridge to
helpless little kids. For what reason?
Only one. But not for the glory of god.
Solely because it pays.
Because people are getting disgusted with all tripe and trimmings of this
kind, it's slowly phasing out. Already
one nation in the world now actually
FORBIDSgod-worship. It isn't Russia.
And until our IRS begins taxing the
god-business, chances are excellent
that religion will grow more and more
pushy here in our USA - encouraged
by the increasing contributions from
born-again fools who think they're
this way buying a pass through the
pearly gates to, so help, an imaginary
heaven!
,'':.
~

************************************~********************************

Page 16

Frimaire 188 (1 2180)

Austin, Texas

NATURE'S WAY
GERALD THOLEN

"THE IRRESISTIBLE FORCE~

The science community of America
has made great strides in the past feW
decades.Currently it isexploring,examining, and solving many important problems. Bio-chemistry is actually touching upon the originating substances of
life itself! Our nuclear wizards are
identifying the particles of energy/substance which have long evaded the
questioning mind. Space exploration
will soon be as commonplace as 'short
hops' in jumbo-jets. What more could
a scientific enthusiast envision as we
methodically watch secret after secret
unravel in quick. succession?
But ... there is one void. That area is
called "WHY!" Why do certain scientific events occur and why do they
persist in occurring? WHY do things
'exist?' Ironically, we know a great
deal about the universe, but - on
close examination, I find that we do
NOT know the most important of all
considerations; WHY IS THEREA UNIVERSE?
It has been my good fortune, of late,
to have read the works of and correspondedwith a small number of dedicated scientific personalities. These
people are very knowledgeable in their
fields and I feel honored to have been
able to communicate with them. However, in all the material that has come
to my attention there is still that underlying absenceofthefinal answer -WHY?-

certain eventsoccur.Scientifically speaking, I felt that my whole world of

physical enlightenment had come to
an end and I became somewhat remorseful because I felt that I had been
cheated by his death.
However, it later occurred to me that
I was harboring an intolerable illusion.
Why should matters of great significance wait eons for the birth of a 'great
genius' when, in fact, the only true
requisite that separates genius from
layman is dedicated interest! It was
thoughtful study that revealed relativity to Albert Einstein - not a science
class or a professor .... It will be dedicated interest that will el!.!:.ntually reveal the 'whys' of existence to some
yet unknown enthusiastic student.ot
science.
For the better part of my life I have
been avidly interested in the 'father of
all sciences' - physics. The great
illusion that I had held regarding scientific method was that years ago I had
failed to realize that NO ONE can instill
originality or inventiveness in someone else .... My inability to attend great
schools of physical study had not been
the ultimate end to my scientific education as I had assumed. I still retained
one prime ingredient that would final-

I thought for a time that I would not

be so lucky as to live long enough to
finally understand the 'why' of things.
Only once every.hundred years or so
does an Einstein come upon the scene
to reveal such deep dark secrets to us.
I was saddened that the Einstein of my
day, Albert himself, had died before he
could uncover this great secret for me.
I'm sure that if he had lived long
enough he would have provided answers to why things exist and why

Austin, Texas

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

Iy qualify any person as being a legitimate student of his particularly inspirinqfie+d- I still had my devoted interest
in the field of physics. The realization
that there are NO books nor teachers
to adequately tell us WHY things
'exist' or WHY things occur seemed to
pile the entire problem in MY lap as
much as it did in anyone else's. If a
problem is going to be deciphered the
answer is going to come from the
three pounds of gray matter possessed by anyone of thousands of interested individuals who will simply sit
down and concentrate on the usual
few evidences that we have in any
particular subject area.
I have therefore been attempting to
relate certain 'knowns' in the field of
physical existences to people who
may in a position to promote study and
evaluation of a totally new universal
concept. In time I feeUhat all such
studies as we are presently engaged
in will be enhanced by a new and
possible answer to the question, 'Why
do things exist?' Here is what I found.
The complexity of scientific study
quite often overwhelms the mind to an
extent that even scientific 'knowns'
are often disregarded. For example -:
the first law of physics, capillarity.and
the-fact that no two bodies can occupy
a given space at the same time. This all
has to do with why 'things' existl To
begin with, energy in SOME form is
necessary to provide any existence or
any occurrence. In other words, NOTHING occurs spontaneously WITHOUT
'cause'. Even such totally 'inert' substances as rocks were formulated
through processes requiring energy.
This brings us head to head with
physic's first law and Einstein's
E MC2. For example, matter and/or
energy have always existed and that
energy and matter are interchangeable; therefore, if matter/energy have
always existed AND if no two bodies

Page 17

can occupy a given space at the same

time - there "ecessarily has always
been ONE constant, and only one in
cosmological space. All other aspects
of universal existence, being either
matter or energy, are transmutable.
The single physical constant can only
be pressure - derived through the
competition of matter / energy particle
vying for occupancy of available space
.... This displacement pressure I regard as gravity ... the key to all existences.
I have written several papers of
explanation and drawn simple diagrams showing HOW gravity functions .., and WHY. As yet, no one in the
field of physical science has given
credible recognition to this hypothesis. At the same time, ALL physical
scientists must necessarily ascribe to
the fundamental laws and principles
that emphasize its legitimacy.
"Big Bangs", universes, galaxies,
stars, and even atoms need "cause"
for their formative existences .... If
such phenomena as these undergo
physical change, as we know they do,
there must be a compelling force to
cause such change and that 'force'
must be constant to assure similar
occurrences throughout observable
space. As lStateaearlie~1I
measurable existences are transmutabl.e ..~
only infinite constant in space must
necessarily be the pressure one existence exerts on all others and vice
versa.

Why do I claim that this pressure is

gravity - as we know it? Earlier on I
referred to a commonly known yet
overlooked phenomenon called capillarity. Capillarity, as we define it, is
usually perceived in a two dimensional state and regarded as the manifestation of surface tension generated
when a 'solid' is placed in a 'liquid'. In
a three dimensional sense we must
accept that a similar, but three dimensional, tension is apparent in all directions when a 'solid' substance is introduced into an area of 'fluid' substance
... fluid meaning any substance, liquid
or gaseous, that is capable of flowing
and which changes shape at a steady
rata-when
acted upon by a force.
Therefore, the substances of space,
i.e., energy or sub-atomic particles,
exert surface tension or pressure upon ALL 'solid' objects in space! This is
not conjecture, it is simple fundamental physics. So simple is it, in fact, that I
believe it has been completely overlooked in the overwhelming intricacies of cosmological science.
Immediately, whenever or wherever I 'explain' my hypothesis, I'm asked, "How can this possibly relate to
falling objects or the formation of stars
and atoms?" In the case of falling
objects (bodies in space tending to
move toward each other,) I refer again
to 'capillarity,' whereby two bodies
experiencing pressure from a surrounding 'fluid' will also experience a drop in
that pressure in a line directly be-

tween the two bodies. The drop in

pressure between them will ultimately cause them to move toward each
other unless they are prevented from
doing so by contrary motion or by
some greater opposing influence. In
other words, all inSignificant objects
(bodies) influenced by Earth's g~avity
are compelled to move toward the
center of the Earth. If it were possible
for them to actually reach the center of
the Earth they would then experience
'gravityzero'becausegravitationalpressure
would be equal from all directions .
Gravitational influence would necessarily continue onward to the 'center' of
any 'object' because of the transpiercing ability of sub-atomic particles
through any substance of atomic or
molecular composition.
In the case of stars and atoms, they
are simply accumulations
of 'substance' that are being restrained
through coefficient resistances by yet
smaller particle/energy substances .... This cyclical action needs no superficial and mysterious energy source to
occur. All it has ever needed wils the
basic restraining tendencies of other
surrounding substances!
There has ALWAYS been substance
... substance has ALWAYS occupied
space ... therefore, there hasALWA'rS
been pressure applied to ALL substance ... We've been calling it gravity!

-------~

~l"'~'1S~ je. SiftS - A

A i&f.J-A

11\~ L-()~

Frimaire 188 (12180)

Page18

FROM
D - A .I J,

Austin. Texas

THE AMERICAN ATHEIST RADI$SERIES

THESOLsnCESEASON

In 1968, the first year of broadcasting for the American

Atheist Radio Series, we sent out. all over the United Sates,
copies of what we called "The Solstice Season" program. We
printed it in our literature and distributed it in a small
broadside.
When TheAmerican Atheist magazine was issued later (we
could not afford to publish it in 1968), we reprinted the article
as the featured radio program script in December. Since then,
for a number of years it has been repeated yearly in the
magazine.
We are happy to do so again this year. We hope that our new
subscribers will come to love it as much as have our old
subscribers and the listeners who have requested a repeat of
it in our American Atheist Radio Series.
This is Madalyn Murray O'Hair. American Atheist. back to
talk to you again.
Someone stole something from me. I don't like it. What was
stolen from me - and from you - was one of the most
beautiful holidays in the world. Robert G. Ingersoll (an
American Atheist hero of earlier days) was also angry about
this theft. Let me read to you what he had to say about it.
He wrote a very famous "Christmas sermon." It was printed
in the Evening Telegram newspaper, New York City, New York,
on 19 December, 1891. The ministers of the day attacked the
newspaper and demanded a boycott of it. The Telegram
accepted the challenge and set off an issue across the country.
The paper printed the Rev. Dr. J.M. Buckley's attack, and
Robert Ingersoll's answer. It developed into a real donnybrook.
Let's hear what Ingersoll had to say:
"The good part of Christmas is not always Christian, it is
generally Pagan; that is to say, human and natural.
"Christianity did not come with tidings of great joy, but with
a message of eternal grief. It came with the threat of
everlasting torture on its lips. It meant war on earth and
perdition thereafter.
"It taught some good things, the beauty of love and kindness
in man. But as a torch-bearer, as a bringer ofjoy, it has been a
failure. It has given infinite consequeces to the acts of tinite
beings, crushing the soul with a responsibility too great for
mortals to bear. It has billed the future with fear and flame,
and made god the keeper of an eternal penitentiary, destined
to be the home of nearly all the sons of men. Not satisfied with
that. it has deprived god of the pardoning power.
"A nd yet it may have done some good by borrowing from the
Pagan world the old festival we know as Christmas.
"Long before Christ was born, the sun god triumphed over
the Powers of Darkness. About the time that we call Christmas
the days began perceptibly to lengthen. Our barbarian ancestors were worshipers of the sun. and they celebrated his
victory over the hosts of night. Such a festival,was natur.al and

Austin, Texas

beautiful. The most natural of all religions is the worship of the

sun. Christianity adopted this festival. It borrowed from the
Pagans the best it has.
"I believe in Christmas and in every day that has been set
apart for joy. We in America have too much work and not
enough play. We are too much like the English.
"I think it was Heinrich Heine who said that he thought a
blaspheming Frenchman was a more pleasing object to god
than a praying Englishman. We take our joys too sadly. I am in
favor of all the good free days, the more the better.
"Christmas is a good day to forgive and forget. a good day to
throwaway prejudices and hatreds, a good day to fill your
heart and your house, and the hearts and houses of others
with sunshine. "
Would you believe that such a warm Christmas sermon
could cause religious people to launch a vicious attack on a
newspaper for publishing it? Ingersoll used the word "borrow." He said that Christians borrowed the Pagan holiday. I
use a stronger word. They stole it. They stole the most
beautiful holiday of man - and for what?
They claim that this is the birthday of Jesus Christ. Let's look
at their scholars and their history and see if this is a fact. You
most probably all know of A. T. Robertson, the late professor of
New Testament Greek at the Southern Baptist Theological
Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. He had written a standard
textbook on the so-called Broadus Harmony of the Gospels
and it is used in every school of religion across tbe land. In this
book is summarized all the findings of religious scholarship in
relationship to Jesus Christ and, among other things, the date
of his birth.
After a lengthy explanation of when Jesus Christ may have
been born, Dr. Robertson sets the date at - hold on now - the
summer or early fall of the year B.C. 6 or B.C. 5. Did you hear
that? He set the date in the summer or the fall. Recently the
idea of the first week in January has gained some following ..
But no one who is a religious scholar any more accepts or
believes Decebmer 25th ..
One must calculate from the possible death of Herod, or the
appearance of the so-called star in the East. which could have
been a comet recorded by the Chinese or a conjunction of the
planets Jupiter and Saturn. But the Greenwich Observatory
says that the conjunction appearing as a single star was very
unlikely. Or one can judge the "time of the universal peace",
that is the "time of no war" about which the heavenly host
sang. But there was never any stoppage of war in that time.
One can guess from the so-called ministry of John the
Baptist. or the age of Jesus upon his entry into the ministry, or
the building of the Temple of Herod, or the closing of the
temple of Janus, or the so-called census of Augustus Ceasar.
All of these lead the poor theologians in ever-increasing
directions away from the idea of Christmas and the year
"zero" or "one" of our present calendar.

Frimaire 188 (12180)

Page 19

Actually the idea of December 25th is untenable. All the

ancients in Christian history had various days for Christ's
birth. Clement of Alexander, who was closer to that alleged
event in time, said It was May 20th. April 20th and January
6th have always appeared as possible dates. Why did the
Christians want the twenty-fifth
of December? Why that
particular date? Why did they deliberately steal this very
important date from the pagans?
There are four points in our calendar which we use and
which we call "Solstice" or "Equinox" points, two of each. The
latter is easy: we say that the equinox is when the sun crosses
the equator of the earth and day and night are everywhere of
equal length. The sun does not actually cross the equator, we
all know that. But with the earth's natural tip on its natural
axis as it whirls around the sun, this seems to be so. Then,
either one or other part of our old ball of earth gets the most
sun. But on these two occasions, the days are equal in length
everywhere and this occurs about March 21 st and September
23rd by our current calendar.
The Solstice is something different. We don't go around the
sun in a circle; we tour around it - on our earth - in an
ellipse, which is a flattened circle, or oval. When we are in the
points furtherest away from the sun, we have another
phenomenon. That. along with the 23 inclination of the earth
causes the solstices. Twice a year, when the sun is at its
greatest distance from the celestial equator, about June 21 st
when the sun reaches its northermost point on the celestial
sphere, or about December 22 when it reaches its southernmost point, we call these moments the solstice. The solstice in
December is the time when the days of the year, in our
hemisphere, are the shortest.
Primitive ~an and pagan man were not idiots, you know.
They saw this. Apparently at the first. they feared the days
would get shbrter and shorter and shorter and finally - what
if there were only night! What a frightening thing, when the
sun was so necessary for life, from common observation. So
when the day came for the sun to overcome the darkness, and
for the sun to cause the days to be longer --' even if Just a
minute longer - it meant that there was not' going to be
eternal night. The sun had won a fight again. Darkness had
had to recede and slowly the days would get longer and longer
until spring and summer, with food growing ag.ain and the life
cycle being renewed again, would be everywhere on the
earth.
And so every primitive culture had a festival or a feast on
this day. It was celebrated in China, in India, in South America,
in Mexico, in Africa, in every single place where man could
watch days and nights and seasons. There were presents
given on this great day, exchanged as a svmbol.for the sun
had brought the most precious gift of all to man: the warmth
needed for life and a recycle of the seasons again. The ancient
men noticed other things too. Certain trees stayed green all
year round, a promise of the abundance of spring and summer
to come again after winter, a reassurance that all the greens
would return in their seasons. The light of the sun and the
twinkling light of stars became important in symbolism as well
as in fact. The mysterious parasite, mistletoe, ever .green,
intrigued primitive man. It all needed to be celebrated,to be
noted with awe. If one could not give life as the sun did - one
could give else, such as a sharing of food or the precious few
personal items they had. But, above all it was a timeof revelry.
Life had been renewed. It was the most joyous of all human
occasions. There was universal singing and dancing and
laughing and well being. It was wild and wonderful and

human and warm. It was the best of all festivals. It was the
gayest of all feasts. It was the warmest and best of all
collective human activities.
The Christians were no fools. If they permitted the pagan
holiday to continue to exist. it could challenge the basis of the
mournful Christian religion, with its great emphasis on death.
First came edicts outlawing the pagan holiday. But nothing so
wifdly wonderful and natural as this could ever be outlawed.
And then the solution came: incorporate it into the Christian
rei igion. Oh. it took some time. It took many yea~s to effect the
change. It took much propaganda. It took many reprisals and
sanctions against those who continued with the old festival':
But, eventually the Christian religion won 'the day. There were'
changes in calendars too. When the Gregorian calendar was'
changed to the present day calendar, Solstice - or Christmas
- shifted a few days also, so that December 25th, by our'
calendar, came officially to be designated as a Christian day.
it took a thousand years, and more, to rob the poeple of the
earth of this grand holiday and to replace it with a personalized
myth story of a "new god born", a god of a horrible, punitive,
new religion called Christianity.
But. it is even easier now, with mass media. There are many
of you in the listening audience old enough to remember
Armistice Day. That was the day that World War I ended and it
was celebrated for thirty years or more until a second world
war broke out. After we veterans came home from that second
war we found that there was no more Armistice Day. Instead,
there was a Veterans' Dav. All the people in the listening
audience tonight who are twenty-five years old or younger,
never even heard of Armistice Day. They only know Veterans'
Day, for that is all that they were ever taught.
That's how it is with Christmas. That is how it was with the
Solstice. Finally, no one ever heard of the Solstice and its
festivities - and everyone came to believe that the Christians
were celebrating the birthday of Christ and that was all that
this holiday had ever been..
But Bible scholars know better and Atheists know better
and we celebrate that old and wonderful and joyous season.'
We even sell Solstice cards for-this season otSolstice and the
New Year [which, really, are both one day]. l.et meread to you
what we print traditionally on our Solstice.cards.
Joyful and cheerful, with mistletoe and siqns-nf-the season
the greetings are to wish one and all the glad tidings of a
wonderful'Winter
Soltice season. The legend inside the card
says:
December 25tH by the: Julian calendar. was the winter
solstice. This day, originally regarded by the peqenses the day
of the nativity of the sun, the shortest day of the year -...:...
when
the light began its conquering battle against darkness,) wa~
. celebrated universally in all ages of man. Taken overbv the
Christians as the birthday of their mythological Christ. this
ancient holiday, set by motions
the celestiel bodies,
survives as a day of rejoicing that good will and love will have a
perpetual rebirth in the minds of men - elien a~ the sun has a
symbolic rebirth yearly. "
,.'.,.
This informational broadcast is brought to you, as a public
service by the Society of Separationists, Inc., a non-profit,
non-political, .educational organization dedicated
the complete and absolute separation of state and church. Thi's series
of American Atheist Radio Programs is continued through
listener generosity.
I will be with you next week, same day of the week, same
time, same station. Until then, I do thank YQU for listeping and
"goodbye" for now.
.

Frimaire 188 (12/80)

Page 20

a'

'to

oc

Austin, Texas
;'

':J

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Iq,~ktRck~~~~~~~

f1J[J MW'U!JUt~ CU@(!]

TO :lOIN
AMERICAN
ATHEISTS

1.

To stimulate

concerning

and

religious

promote

beliefs,

freedom

creeds,

of thought

dogmas,

tenets,

practices.
2.

To collect

religions
origins
3.

and disseminate

and promote

information,

a more thorough

data and literature

understanding

on all

of them,

their

and histories.
To advocate,

labor

for,

and

promote

In all

lawful

ways,

the

complete
and absolute
separation
of state and church;
and the
establishment
and maintenance
of a thoroughly
secular system of
education
4.

available

to all.

To encourage

the

humane

ethical

ing and

interdependence

sponsibility
5.

svstem.

figure

public

acceptance

sympathy,

and the

in relation

corresponding

To promote

in which

perpetuation

and

to members

and of all problems

and enrichment

(and other) life.

7.
To engage in such social, educational,
as will be useful and beneficial

man IS the

progress

of humanity.

the study of the arts and sciences

the maintenance,

re-

to society

a social philosophy

and happiness

of a

understand-

who alone must be the source of strength,

ideals for the well-being

affecting

and

the mutual

of all people

of each, individually,

To develop and propagate

central
6.

development
stressing

of human

legal and cultural

of American

activity

Atheists

and to

society as a whole.

Definitions
1.
Atheism is the Iif& philosophy
are free from theism. It is predicated
Materialism.
2.

American

unreservedly
a system

Atheism

(Weltanschauung)
of persons who
on the ancient Greek philosophy of

may be defined

accepts the supremacy

of philosophy

dent of a" arbitrary

and ethics

assumptions

as the mental

attitude

which

of reason and ai ms at establishing

verifiable

of authority

by experience,

Indepen-

or creeds.

3.
Materialism
declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent
conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent. Immutable
and impersonal

law;

human life; that man -

that

must create his own destiny;

development

there

finding

is no supernatural

his resources

within

and that his potential

is for all practical

purposes

interference
himself

in

can and

for good and higher

unlimited.

Send $15.00 for one year's membership and you will

receive the first newsletter, a membership card and a certificate.

SOLSTICE

,:-:

GREETINGS