Religious Conversion Disorder is a Psychological Malady

Religious Conversion Disorder is a psychological malady.
A psychiatrist at Valley Medical Center in San Jose, California wrote the Discover magazine article, “Paralyzed by Faith”. If you missed this intriguing article here is a summary.

I never heard of it before, but there it was, an article in the reputable Discover magazine. The title of the two-page article was called “Paralyzed by Faith”. A young Mormon missionary in Africa suddenly could not move his legs, couldn’t explain why and neither could the local doctors. He was flown home to the USA to get expert treatment but his disease still could not be diagnosed and therefore there was no treatment that could be recommended. Finally, an experienced psychiatrist had a hunch, which proved to be true. The young man was suffering from RCD, Religious Conversion Disorder.

The article claims this condition happens in general populations from 11 to 500 times per 500,000 people each year. That’s not very definitive. This disorder undoubtedly happens in both Mormon than Evangelical populations. We know this malady effects impressionable youth sent out to evangelize. They all face the same stress. Church leaders, family, and friends anxiously await to hear of their success in saving souls and converting pagans. To fail this mission is a personal failure; it is an indication that the young missionaries are not with God; they are failures and their mission is a failure.

It is estimated that there are 70-80 million evangelicals in the USA, so there might be a minimum of 1,540 evangelicals suffering from religious conversion disorder in any one year in addition to the Mormon population. The number of kids with Religious Conversion Disorder is significant. Are these kids just casualties of a conversion war and their lack of faith? Should some kids get a pass on their mandatory mission orders? It is true anyone can suffer from this paralyzing condition, which resembles a neurological disorder. The onset is fast and frightening to those affected and their families. It usually goes undiagnosed. It is more frequent in those religions that vigorously prosthelyze and send their youth into the field to find converts.

We have all been confronted by groups of these annoying evangelical kids, but remember, they have the right to of free speech in public places, and if they knock on your door you have the right to shut your door. Put yourself in their shoes. Their church and their family expect them to do this for the Lord. They have little choice. The most withdrawn and unconfident kids are expected, in some cases to leave home, travel to a foreign land, confront strangers, plead with them to reject their present religion and convert to the evangelical’s religion. I might add here that even nasty atheists don’t try to convert religious people to atheism by personal encounters and argument in public places and in their doorways. Atheists respect the right of all to believe what they wish without pressure to change.

Atheists are a strange lot; they’re disorganized, split into many small organizations, and the groups are independent but all have a common message. The message is not preached from a pulpit, it is not preached in the streets or on your doorstep. The atheist message is only heard in the defense of human rights, against infringement of the Constitution. If fundamental/evangelical religions were to back off and cease trying to make our government into a theocracy, the atheist movement would recede considerably and its voice would be diminished. Atheists are manning their gun ports because they have to defend their rights and the rights of all religions.

I pity the poor kid with RCD and I pity his family, which in this particular case were forgiving and supportive. They did not insist he return to Africa to complete his holy mission. The Mormon boy gradually recovered with counseling and time. I don’t know how other “missionary failures” made out. Were they forgiven? Were they scarred for life with their failures? I’ll bet many are, but who knows? Fortunately, all the missionary failures have a place to recover. Organizations such as CFI, Center For Inquiry welcome them with open arms without pressure tactics, without pleading, or threats, or bribes. CFI Indiana has several such enlightened members.

I Don’t Dislike Religion

I Don’t Dislike Religion

I don’t dislike religion. I believe some people need it and some don’t. I do have a problem when religious leaders mislead their congregations, in order to control them, or lie to them for political reason. Today I see pastors ignoring and denying science because they fear it will weaken their position of leadership. The fundamentalists and evangelicals have a right to be alarmed because science does indeed threaten their belief system. Moderate religious leaders also have a dilemma about where to draw the line on the acceptance of science, especially evolutionary science.

The Indianapolis Star posed a question to three Indianapolis pastors concerning their willingness to accept change or, encourage their congregations to withstand change. The pastors missed an opportunity to address this conflict between traditional superstition and changeable science.

Indianapolis Star “Faith Forum”, Sat. May 26.
“In Matters of Faith, change is not a black-and-white issue.”

The question proposed to three Indianapolis pastors by The Star was this: “Should religious leaders be willing to adapt their faith to keep step with church members, or should religious tenets be everlasting to withstand the forces of change.”

Three Indianapolis religious leaders responded to this issue with predictable results. They all claimed change is good as long as it does not conflict with established church wisdom. Nothing new here, no original thinking, no insight into long standing church problems, no controversy over the conflict between science and superstition, no admission of past church inflexibility, and no admission to sins of intolerance based upon ancient dogma. Had American Jewish, Muslim or Hindu leaders been asked for their opinion, the replies would have been similar.

Frank Mansell, a Presbyterian Pastor, wrote, “To always adapt to cultural shifts suggests little integrity to core beliefs and tradition. By cultural shifts does he include scientific progress? And, what’s wrong with adapting to scientific shifts? And then he expressed the balancing opinion; “To only subscribe to ancient tenants without considering modern approaches suggests recalcitrance and stubbornness.” By “modern Approaches”, does he include factual scientific approaches? The pastors were careful to avoid the underlying conflict between the changing world of science and Bronze Age religious dogma. As he well knows, religious beliefs are threatened by the public’s growing understanding of science, especially when it clearly contradicts church doctrine, such as evolution and creationism. Church doctrine traditionally has resisted science and only reluctantly allows changes. When it does not, it becomes out of step with science and the needs of humanity.

Ethan Maple, a United Methodist Pastor offered the second opinion. He wrote, “there are aspects of every faith that are shaped by culture and history”, but “ there are fundamental beliefs that should not bend to the demands of an ever shaping world.” What does he mean by an “ever-shaping world”? Does he mean the “ever-shaping world of science?” Without specifics, it is difficult to know what he really meant. He says he believes in a “never-changing God”, but does that still mean the never-changing God that commanded Christians and Jews to stone disobedient children, non-virgins, and those who labor on the Sabbath, as once was preached and believed. No? Has God changed his mind? Why have these practices been abandoned? Did the ancients misread the scriptures and God’s intent? Does the Reverend Maple read and interpret scriptures correctly when the ancients did not? The Reverend writes, he “does not like flip-flopping based upon the whims of the world” Again, does he mean whims of science world? Does new scientific knowledge, such as in evolution, mean he should now interpret the scriptures differently? Does new scientific knowledge mean the ancient church fathers mistook poetic metaphors for the word of God?

Callie Smith of the Christian Theological Center offered the third opinion. She writes “change has sometimes left us grieving and afraid.” She adds, “But change can come as a friend.” She believes religious leaders should be willing to adapt to change, but adds, religious leaders should help their followers to “withstand the forces of change.” She, like the other pastors, accepts change but resist it as well. They have missed the whole point of the Indianapolis Star’s question, which asked the three religious leaders if they should adapt their faith to keep step with church members. In other words, if their church members are prejudiced against new science, or minorities, or women, or other religions, would and should they go along with their congregation’s prejudices or speak out against them? Would and should they try to convince their congregations to abandon prejudicial views? Would and should they educate their followers to advances in natural and social science that contradict scriptures? The question, as asked by the Indianapolis Star, was not answered by the three pastors.

Granted, the Star question was so vague it left the three pastors plenty of room to maneuver and avoid the main implications of the question. In my opinion, most Christian pastors preach a traditional message about salvation through Christ. They are not interested in keeping step with their followers. They believe their duty is to lead their congregations and have the congregations keep in step with them.

Most pastors do not believe it is their duty to enlighten their flock about scientific truth and social justice. Their duty is to preach from an ancient book in order to save souls.

Another Letter From a Long Suffering Friend

Another Letter From a Long Suffering Friend.

At my request, my friend Richard agreed to share a few stories bout his cancer treatment. Some of the stories are heartbreaking due to the suffering Richard had to endure. Many other cancer patients have similar stories about the course of their disease, its treatment, and the loving care given by doctors and nurses. Richard’s story is unique in that Richard is an atheist, who was treated at a Catholic hospital. Praise of his caregivers was paramount in his stories, but this story has a twist, which I believe you will enjoy. Richard had a bedside visitor, a Catholic priest, who asked if he could pray for Richard. So, what’s an atheist to do? What would you do? I have not decided what I would have done.

Richard’s story:

I was rereading “Moby-Dick” recently and came across a passage early in the book which reminded me of Father John.

The passage is from Chapter 9 “THE SERMON” in which Father Mapple is introduced as the clergyman in charge of the Seaman’s Bethel in New Bedford and is about to begin his sermon in front of the whalers including Ishmael and Queequeg who have just met and become friends. After some shuffling and changing of seats, all became quiet in the chapel with every eye on the preacher. “He paused a little; then kneeling in the pulpit’s bows, folded his large brown hands across the chest, uplifted his closed eyes, and offered a prayer so deeply devout that he seemed to be kneeling and praying at the bottom of the sea.”

Father John came in to see me the evening of my first full day on the Oncology ward. Father John is a black African Catholic Priest and heads the Chaplain’s office at St. Vincents Hospital and has the distinctive English accent typical of educated Africans. He is a relatively small man, unimposing and with a gentle voice, a firm handshake and very kind eyes. He, unlike the casually dressed nurses and staff, was in his clerical collar and black Priest’s garb. He was the antithesis of the “fire and brimstone” type of TV evangelist and I did not expect that he would be comfortable attempting a “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” type of message. He greeted me effusively with a huge welcoming smile and asked how I was feeling. I explained my circumstances in brief and we chatted casually for a few minutes. He did not ask me my religion or lack thereof or if I had any particular preference in terms of denomination but following some introductory talk he asked if he could pray for me.

As a non-believer, this is sometimes a tricky question. Reactions seem to run the spectrum from non-committal acquiescence to a “Christopher Hitchens” type refusal. I tend toward the former, as I am loath to offend others in the matter of religion so long as I am not being attacked and the other person seems to have a sincere desire to be of some service. I don’t see the point of carrying the “New Atheist” attitude to the point of alienation. If someone wants to pray for my recovery I welcome the offer. If they want to pray for my lost soul because I am such a sinner and on my way to Hell, that is a different matter.

Father John was clearly sincere and his eyes and entire demeanor bespoke kindness, which is a quality I have come to value more and more as I have aged. I nodded my assent and he took my hands in his and closed his eyes, as did Father Mapple. HIs prayer was not spoken aloud so that I have no specific idea of his conversation with God but it was not silent either. I could see his lips moving and hear his prayer but not loud enough that I could make out the words. I assumed that Father John was simply exercising his routine with new patients on the cancer ward and that he probably had a canned prayer which he had performed hundreds of times and that it would take a minute or two. After several minutes of intensity, sweat beads began to form on Father John’s forehead and upper lip and his prayer became, if anything, even more intense. I could see the strain on his face. He seemed to be imploring God to take notice of me and render me some comfort and special dispensation. His actions were bathed in sincerity and his grip on my hands tightened as he emphasized the points to God as if he were a defense attorney making his final argument to the Court or the jury when his client’s life was hanging in the balance.

After several minutes, he slowly relaxed and wiped his brow and smiled at me. He said, “I believe God will look after you.” At no point did Father John ask if I were Catholic and did not seem to care. His mission was between him and God and Father John was pleading my case. I appreciate religious people who are good and kind to others. I don’t really care what they believe if it results in kindness and compassion. Father John came back to see a couple more times during my stay of November and December and seemed to be genuinely pleased at my progress which he had gleaned from the nurses. I don’t mind that he believed that God had intervened on my behalf. Father John is a wonderful example of the positive things that religion is possible of inspiring and is a positive asset to the hospital and to his calling. I wish all Christians and all religious persons of whatever persuasion would follow his example.

Richard had a rich and fascinating experience, and I think he welcomed the chance to share it with me. The priest no doubt, believed God had answered his prayer(s). Richard, of course, did not and neither do I. Richard and I share many scientific and philosophical convictions about religion and belief in god. I also share Richard’s attitude concerning the well meaning but ineffective prayer session and the well-meaning priest. It is in shocking contrast to the current political maneuvering of Bishops hoping to impose their beliefs upon non-Catholic taxpayers and to restrict women’s rights. The Catholic Church needs to place all their efforts on cleansing their own house and putting an end to child abuse in their ranks. Richard’s compassionate priest is what religion should be all about, giving psychological comfort to the needy, not politicking for advantage.

A Representative Atheist in a Class of Christians

A Representative Atheist in a Class of Christians

This blog is essentially a letter to me from my friend Richard, describing his experience as one of three representative atheists participating in a graduate class, “Responding to the New Atheists” at The Christian Theological Seminary here in Indianapolis. He had a rewarding and enjoyable experience and was treated with respect by the class. No doubt the students learned much from this intellectual, soft spoken and pleasant atheist in their midst. They learned that a person does not have to believe in god to moral and honest. He noted that none of the graduate students were part of the Republican base of far right evangelicals. Perhaps that is why he was received and treated so well.

One of the graduate students had written to Richard and asked further questions concerning his experience with the bizarre beliefs of other religions. Richard replied as follows. His letter was forwarded to the other graduate students.

Richard wrote to me: I am forwarding an exchange of messages which has taken place outside of my “New Atheist” class at the Christian Theological Seminary. I thought you might find it interesting. I had raised a subject in class which we did not have time to explore in depth and was asked to expand on it as well as my own world view in terms of religion. The result is attached.

Dear Classmate,
Thanks for the opportunity to continue this conversation. I sought out chances to attend a service involving deadly serpents because of my fascination with bizarre beliefs of others whether Christian or some other religious group. I spent several years throughout the ’60s in the South and was able to attend services in W. Virginia, Alabama and Georgia. Each of these congregations was small, closely knit and related to the preacher either directly or indirectly. The largest group consisted of less than 50 members and the small church facility was, in each case, in an out of the way location. The services were irregular and not advertised to the general public. The services were Christian in every respect in the sense that there was a traditional sermon based on scripture, Christian hymns were sung and the name of Jesus as lord and savior were was invoked consistently. The people were all friendly and emotional, much like Pentecostal services I have attended here in Indianapolis and elsewhere. Clearly there were no “outsiders” other than myself at any of the three snake handling sessions I attended. In each case the preacher knew that I would be there and we had met in advance so that he could ask me any questions and satisfy himself that I had no ulterior motives and meant him and his flock no harm. 





When I was invited, along with everyone else, to an “altar call” to handle the snakes, the level of emotion had already become quite high and several were speaking in tongues as the preacher held up several snakes at a time without any fear. I saw a couple of other men in the group move forward and take up one of the rattlesnakes and the intensity level was as high as I can ever remember. Others would, I suppose, have described it as being “filled with the spirit of the holy ghost”. I was just feeling “very intense” or I would not have moved out of my seat. I felt some kind of obligation to the preacher in the form of thanking him for his allowing me to attend and also an obligation to my own intellectual curiosity to get as much out of this experience as possible.

As I walked from the back to the front, I had second thoughts about how stupid it would be for me to go through with this but I didn’t want to “chicken out”. When he asked me if I were a born-again Christian, I answered “No” and he said, “well then you better not take up these serpents because they (not God) know the difference.” This gave me an out, an excuse to turn around and go back to my seat without seeming to be a total wuss. In fact, I didn’t have the guts to pick up a large live poisonous rattler and handle it. I had an instant impulse that I would never again have this chance and should go for it, damn the consequences, but the short walk to the front gave me enough time to “sober up” and push back the intensity level so that when I got there I was trying to figure out how to get out of doing this incredibly stupid thing. The preacher gave me the excuse and I grabbed it. If he had not done so, I am sure I would have just slunk back to my seat, somewhat humiliated and swimming in a pool of embarrassment for my “lack of faith”. In fact, the prospect of picking up a writhing rattler was something that, when push came to shove, I was just too afraid to do. It had nothing to do with my being an atheist…it had to do with my being a rational person and finally allowing my brain to overcome my emotion and intensity.

The other two times I attended services, I did not respond to the general call to “take up serpents” but others did without incident. The call was an opportunity to demonstrate one’s faith as set forth in Mark 16:16-18, to wit: “16: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be dammed. 17: And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18: They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover.” (KJV). 



In the early part of the 20th Century, this language in re the “taking up of serpents” came to be taken literally and seriously throughout much of the old South ranging as far north as Kentucky and as far west as Oklahoma. Never large congregations but small, mostly homogeneous groups of followers often related directly or indirectly. The ideal was to demonstrate one’s faith and to test the strength of one’s faith.

In the first few decades, dozens of preachers died and hundreds were bitten. Hands were disfigured and gnarled and fingers were amputated. Many preachers were bitten so many times that they developed immunity to the venom and became famous for their demonstrations of faith in the lord’s mercy and protection. Eventually, all of the states passed laws against the “taking up of poisonous serpents” in religious services but just like the experience of the Mormon Church when it got a new revelation and tried to ban plural marriage, the “true believers” ignored the ban and continued to practice in the old original “true” way. They just continued in secret and in “out of the way” locations, trying to stay under the radar.

My experiences were with three of these “illegal” services. Irregular, no advertising, congregations sworn to secrecy but each convinced that they had the one true expression of their faith. After all, Mark 16:18, quoted above, does provide Biblical authority, printed in red as the literal word of Jesus, just as strongly as any other words of Jesus according to the Gospels. There is very little of this going on now but in the backwoods of W. Virginia and Arkansas and virtually the entire “old South”, there can still be found remnants of the true believers. They have faded into the woodwork of fringe religion. They concentrate on a single verse and focus their beliefs and services on that verse. A similar instance of focus, although highly publicized, is the mission of the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas. The “congregation” consists of the extended family of the Rev. (disbarred attorney) Fred Phelps and the mission is to demonstrate at the funerals of dead members of the military. They are not especially anti-war at all. They consider dead soldiers to be the agents of a godless and corrupt government which tolerates homosexuals in contravention of the specific prohibition of such activity as found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy calling such activity an “abomination” deserving of death. They demonstrate at funerals to gain attention to their cause and to publicize their website “God Hates Fags”. Those religions, which focus on faith healing and venerate the speaking in tongues, also have concentrated their focus on the same verses from Mark. 





The second part of Richard’s letter concerned the KKK, Klu Klux Klan. Richard’s knowledge of the notorious Klan is extensive and fascinating. Here are his words.

As to the Klan, I have been fascinated with the fact of the strength of the Klan since the Reconstruction era and especially the power and influence they held in Indiana particularly in the ’20s when virtually every public official was a Klan member or in the pocket of the Indiana Klan…until the tragic Madge Oberholser death here in Indianapolis with which I assume most of us are familiar.

The Klan had or tried to have a substantial comeback in the deep South in the ’60s and they received a huge shot in the arm with the passage of the Civil Right Act of 1964 and the subsequent legislation on voting and public accommodations. They operated openly and in costume in Montgomery, AL during the years I was stationed there in 1963 and again from 1965 through the end of 1968 as an instructor at Squadron Officer School.

I was a leader in the local Unitarian Fellowship (which many of the locals considered to be a communist cell) and detested the Klan and everything they stood for. I never attended a cross burning rally since I had no “contact” and to do so would have been above my pay grade in terms of danger. However, they were emboldened enough to hold a giant public rally on the steps of the Alabama statehouse. George Wallace was Governor at the time and had no objection. He did not speak but he was clearly supportive of their anti-federal government “tyranny” positions. The Klan at various times concentrated their wrath on blacks, Jews, Catholics and homosexuals and often all at the same time. They always considered themselves to be Christian and could rather easily justify their hatred of these groups to selected verses in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. The Bible lends itself to this kind of support for selective hatred. Otherwise, it would not have been possible for both the backers of the abolition movement and the pro-slavery movement to have relied so heavily on the Bible for their moral and ethical positions.

The statehouse rally was well attended by both Klan members and supporters AND others who, like myself, were not supportive but were curious to see the Klan in action out in public. Several hundred wore their robes and Klan regalia and carried signs, just like Fred Phelps and the Tea Party today. The signs left no doubt as to the targets of the bias and hatred. I felt sick to my stomach when I saw small children, in full Klan regalia, holding up signs saying “God Hates Niggers, Jews, Fags and Race Mixers”. I thought of this obscene spectacle as I read Dawkins’ thoughts on indoctrinating small children with “religion” as being or having the potential to be “a form of child abuse”. There was nothing secret about the statehouse rally. It was fully covered in the media and the Klan members were not reluctant to show their faces even in full costume. It was the participation of the children that was so depressing. They didn’t know any better and were simply being obedient and respectful to their parents. Still, their worldview was being constructed in a perverted manner, which many, if not all, would have difficulty in overcoming in later life. 




The last part of Richard’s letter concerns his personal 
beliefs concerning religion and a belief in God.

By now, I suspect the question of “what I believe” is rather obvious. I am a non-believer. I do not say, “There is no God” although I believe it is highly unlikely. I do not attempt to prove that there is no god even though I believe that no gods have ever existed or ever will exist. Just as amoral means “without morality”, a-theist means “without belief”. I am a skeptic and a scientific rationalist and a secular humanist and can call myself a Unitarian since Unitarians have no dogma and no creed and concentrate on “works” as opposed to “faith”. It is quite possible for an atheist to be a Unitarian and many are.

I have attended services in many of the world’s famous churches and cathedrals throughout the world including St. Peter’s in Rome, Notre Dame in Paris, St. Paul’s in London, the Washington Cathedral in DC and dozens of shrines and temples in the Far East, specifically in Japan and Taiwan. I am not a believer in anything supernatural, whether connected to religion or not and believe that miracles do not now and never have existed.

For events which appear to have no rational explanation, my position is that the non-supernatural explanation exists but has yet to be discovered…but will be in time. I admire the ethic of Jesus, whom, like Jefferson, I believe to have been a human being and one of perhaps thousands of Jewish rabbis who were put to death by the Romans as “enemies of the State” and “subversives” during the period of Roman subjugation.

I believe that, just as Marx was not a Marxist, Christ was not a Christian but that Christianity was invented by his followers, primarily Paul which is why the religion is so patriarchal and so much emphasis on obedience and the subjugation of women. I like the Sermon on the Mount, the Golden Rule and the command to Love thy Neighbor. I think about 90% of the Bible should be discarded and ignored and, fortunately, in the West, that is approximately what most of us have done.

The problem with Islam is that every attempt to have a serious Enlightenment Period has been stamped out and factions of largely conservative groups have prevailed. The early portions of the Koran are very Peace like and Tolerant; the latter parts are very aggressive and warlike and intolerant. Take your pick. Just like the Bible, one can always find a verse to validate one’s own pre-existing bias and prejudice. Everyone is a “cafeteria Christian”. Not everyone admits it or even recognizes it. The Muslims are much more serious about their religion than are most Christians and I see that as a continuing serious potential problem in so far as beliefs are translated into action for that segment of Islam which is radical and eager to die a martyr’s death so they can be transported directly to heaven/paradise without having to first go through the metal detectors and take off their shoes. 



For anyone interested in an authoritative look at Islam from the inside, I highly recommend anything by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, especially “Infidel” and for a devastating critique of the treatment of women under Islam, “The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam”. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain myself at some length. I know we have limited time in class to do so and that many others are eager, justifiably so, to have their voices heard. I appreciate the chance to attend and am enjoying myself immensely…just don’t bring any rattlers to class. I have learned my limitations in that regard. (bolded words and phrases are mine not Richard’s) 





Best wishes to all my fellow classmates. Richard

Thank you Richard for allowing me to post your experiences in the Graduate class and your extensive experiences concerning a few radical religious beliefs. The Klu Klux Klan is the tragic result of mixing religion with politics. We have destroyed all but a few hidden remnants of it. Other radical evangelical religions still persist. Some are relatively harmless but some are lethal to democracy. Mixing religion with government such as what the radical right currently attempts to do under the auspices of Almighty God is one of the greatest dangers our nation faces. Superstitious beliefs when accepted by gullible believers effects only them. They may lose their children to curable diseases and should be held libel under the law. But, we cannot let these kinds of superstitious beliefs guide and force the rest of us to accept or tolerate its insanity. Richard speaks clearly about radical religion and reminds us all to beware. 


THE LEFT HAND OF GOD’S PREJUDICE

The Left Hand of God

The following letter, shared with me by a friend, was originally written to his daughter. It is a private letter filled with love and understanding as only a loving, educated parent could write. I have his permission to share the letter with you. You are privileged to have the opportunity. I hope you will take the time to read and ponder it. My friend Richard has just won his first battle with throat cancer having endured months of radiation and chemo therapy, and much suffering. He still takes nutrition through a feeding tube, dreams of eating a steak and baked potato with lots butter and sour cream. His body has been dealt a severe blow but his mind continues to be as inquisitive, skeptical, receptive, and eager to learn as it ever was. I plan to follow my friend and learn from him, in all humility and admiration. From time to time I will share his “wisdom letters” with you. Richard is a freethinker, a non believer in superstition, a revered member of the Center For Inquiry Indiana located in Indianapolis. His letter is informative, but his love of his daughter shines through the information and makes clear his strong support for the LGBT community who also have parents who are hopefully as supportive as Richard.

Craig,
This is a message I sent to my daughter Toni who is in a long-term lesbian relationship with a partner in the largest law firm in Houston. Both are openly gay and doing very well but Texas is not one of our more”gay friendly” states. The analogy of being gay to being left-handed has always seemed to me to be glaringly obvious and this is my message to her in regard to that dynamic.
Richard

Dear Daughter,
If we exclude China, the bias and prejudice against left-handedness pre-dates Christianity especially among Eastern and Pagan religions. However, it did not have a serious influence on Western culture until the Middle Ages and really picked up speed in the 16th Century with the impact of the invention of the printing press which enabled the wide distribution of the Bible to millions who previously had no ability to read it for themselves.

The ancient Greeks and Romans regarded the left side generally and the left hand specifically as inferior and profane and in medieval times use of the left hand was associated with witchcraft. Throughout recorded history, in virtuallyall parts of the world, the right has been associated with all things good and pure while the left has been shunned as unholy, evil and relegated to inferiority. This bias has historically pervaded virtually all cultures except the Chinese. This includes cultures as diverse as virtually all of Africa, North American Indians, the Maoris in New Zealand, the Aborigines in Australia, virtually all of South America, the Dutch East Indies, and all of Medieval Europe in addition to the whole of Christianity and Islam.

In the Koran and the Bible, the elect and God’s favorite sit on his right hand side and the damned on his left. In Matthew 25:33, the author has Jesus place God’s followers (the sheep) on its right and the non-followers (the goats)on its left hand side. The Catholic Church held for over a thousand years that being left-handed made one a servant of the Devil and that anything left-handed was Evil. Muslims forbid the touching of any holy scripture with the left hand.

Jesus takes his place on the right hand of God. In pictures of the Last Judgment, the Christian God shows his disciples their new heavenly abode with his right hand and points with his left to Hell. The three monotheistic religions which trace their roots to Abraham all treat the left as demonic, diabolical and the earthly path to Hell.

There are over 100 references in the Bible to right-handedness in a positive context; see e.g. Psalms 118:15-16 “15 The voice of rejoicing and salvation isin the tabernacles of the righteous; the RIGHT hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 16 The RIGHT hand of the LORD is exalted; the RIGHT hand of the LORD doeth valiantly.”

The word “left” in many languages is associated with evil, trouble or the devil. In Latin which is the root of all the romance languages, “left” comes from “sinister/sinistre”. The Greek root “dexter” gives us the word “dextrous” (skillful) and means “on the right”. On the contrary, the standard words for left always have a negative connotation: e.g. Left itself (from Old English’) means weak, worthless and womanish. The Italian mancino and sinistre mean dubious, dishonest and sinister; the French ‘gauche’ means ‘awkward, clumsy and/or unsophisticated. The Latin ‘sinister’ is the English ‘sinister’. In many parts of Africa, left means ‘hated’ and in Japan it means ‘crazy’. Is it any wonder that schools in Western culture until recent decades used to “correct” (meaning ‘with the right’) left-handed students often with methods ranging from humiliating to brutal. Is it any wonder that parents were convinced of the potential damage in allowing their left-handed children to continue in their “evil” practice throughout the 19th Century and well into the mid-20th Century.

In primitive parts of the United States, the left-handed bias persists especially among religious but marginally educated families even to this day. As a general rule, however, we have overcome our ignorance toward left-handedness and do not officially accept the Bible driven correlation of left with Satan. Now, at least, when a parent is seen to be “correcting” their child because of his or her preference for using the left hand, we understand that the “preference” is natural and normal. That it is a “variation” and not a “deviation”. That the “preference” should not be beaten out of the child for fear of demonic possession as was common in 19th Century America and in Western culture generally. In short, we as a people are much smarter than we used to be and less superstitious and less gullible…at least in terms of left-handed bias and prejudice. How much longer are we going to allow the continued ignorance of much of our population about gays?

Love, Dad

Thanks Richard – What kind of world would this be if it had more Richard’s in it? Richard is proof, “You don’t need God to be a loving person and live purposeful and brave life.” Richard’s point is, of course, that being gay is A natural occurrence on the planet earth. Ignorant humans make horrible mistakes when they condemn other humans for being different. If being different were a crime, we would all be guilty. Those who claim to be followers of Christ, if he ever existed, have been misled by their leaders and should not tolerate the preaching of hate. Stand up Christians, I can’t hear you criticizing intolerance in your ranks.

HOPE FOR AMPUTEES (But Not From God)

HOPE FOR AMPUTEES? (But not from God)

Atheists, have you ever been asked, “What would it take for you to give up your skepticism and believe in God?”

Here is the best answer I’ve come up with. “I would reconsider my dis-belief in God if the prayers of amputees were answered and they grew new arms and legs.”

I figured I was in no danger of having to eat my own words or having to fall to my knees in prayer. It just ain’t going to happen and even evangelicals who claim prayer can work miracles know amputees will never grow back their parts no matter how much they and others pray for them.

Now for the shocker in medical research news: “Amputees Have Hope!” Well, not right now, but sometime in the near future. “Pixie dust and stem cells offer hope.” Not just for amputees, but theoretically for anyone who needs a replacement body part, esophagus, lung, or heart. Think about it, consider what’s involved in the regrowth of a finger. An amputee would have to regrow new muscles, bones, arteries, veins, nerves, tendons, ligaments, cartilage, etc. Yes, even a finger is a complicated structure with many types of body tissue involved.

This medical breakthrough was first reported several years ago in the press and in medical journals, and then mostly forgotten. But since then, research has gone well and results are better than anyone could have hoped for.

Before I tell you about these amazing research trials I’d like to tell you about their significance. Sometime in the near future, perhaps ten years hence, doctors will be able to attach a little dome around the stump of an amputated limb, add a recipe of chemicals and a few zaps of electricity to stimulate the growth of a new limb. How will the religious world take this breakthrough? Will they condemn it because science is infringing on godly matters? Will that scientific accomplishment destroy the faith of true believers? Probably not. Religion has already survived greater reversals such as science’s correction of flat earth concept, the structure of our solar system, the age of the universe, and the theory of evolution. As a wise person once said “belief systems not based upon fact will not be dissuaded by fact.” Theologians and religion’s apologists are a stubborn lot who readily admit when science conflicts with God’s word, science must be wrong.

Most rationalists, like me, believe religion will continue to lose more of its following as people become more educated and feel more secure. Poverty and insecurity insure the survival of religion. If religions cannot or will not offer their followers food, health, and security in this life, what always remains is an afterlife reward. In addition, as people become familiar with the physical sciences, such as astronomy, biology, and paleontology, they will gradually reject religious fantasies, as adult minds now reject the Easter bunny and Santa Claus. “God induced miracles” will be recognized as placebo tricks played upon gullible believers.

Concerning the regrowth of limbs and body parts: Forty years ago when I worked in an army hospital, a frequent operation was to harvest veins in the leg to be transplanted for clogged coronary arteries. This was done usually with success. Auto-grafts from one part of a patient’s body to another part of his/her body were useful because of the absence of tissue rejection. Also, pigs skin grafts were found to be a effective temporary protective covering for burn patients who eventually grew back some of their lost skin. Skin auto grafts were improved upon by punching small holes in the tissue enabling the surgeon to stretch the graft over a larger area inducing additional skin growth. Teflon, stainless steel, a variety of plastics, and mesh have been used successfully for many years. A big breakthrough occurred when the value of stem cells was recognized. Stem cells had the ability to grow into any other kind of body cell. Stem cells were harvested from placental blood, aborted fetuses, and human eggs starting an ethical/religious controversy. Another source of stem cells is from the patients themselves. A limited number of stem cells are present and circulate in our bodies to be used to repair damaged body parts. Stem cells are difficult to obtain but remain the most ideal way to stimulate repair and regrowth of body tissue.

Recently Discover Magazine revisited an old story about a corporal who lost most of his leg muscles due to a bomb explosion in Afghanistan. The doctors recommended amputation but the patient refused. He successfully strengthened the muscles by exercise but years later still had pain and no real use of his leg. One day while watching a science program on TV he saw a story about someone who regrew an amputated finger by sprinkling “pixie dust on the stump.

Pixie dust was a name given to a material obtained from pigs. The injured soldier received a sheet of pixie dust made from ground up pig bladder extracellular matrix, ECM. Extra cellular matrix is the stuff that occupies the space between body cells. It contains powerful proteins that awake the body’s latent ability to regenerate tissue. After six months, the soldier’s leg muscle had grown back by 80%. Today it is stronger than the uninjured leg. As a result of this positive research and surgery, the government has committed 80 million dollars for continued research to help 1.7 million patients who are missing limbs and other body parts.

Have you heard about the attempt to grow a new esophagus? The esophagus, once damaged by chemicals or surgery is highly prone to form scar tissue and other complications. Experimenters rolled up a sheet of ECM into tubes and implanted them into experimental animals. Amazingly, new functional esophagi grew back without scar tissue or infection.

I mentioned the bio-dome above. In order to enhance an ideal regenerating environment as in the mother’s womb, researchers have covered the entire end of an amputated limb in a plastic dome, added growth factors, amniotic fluid, water and electrical current in an attempt to recreate conditions that exist in a living embryo. ECM was better able to form muscle, fat, bone, tendon, and intracellular tissue. Eventually, implanted pixie dust totally disappeared and was replaced by the specific body tissue that is needed and was there prior to amputation.

New implantation technique and material can be used for rotator cuff repair, hernia repair, blood vessel repair, esophagus repair, and outer lining of brain lining repair, and intestinal repair.

How does ECM work? Apparently ECM contains normal stem cells, which have the potential to grow into any and all kinds of body cells. Using Stem cells from the patient’s own body is even better. They avoid rejection, promote healing and lessen the chance of infection. A limited number of stem cells normally circulate in blood vessels and have the potential to reach every part of the body, and become any tissue that the body needs. Stem cells have the memory and the knowledge to become any kind of cell.

Pixie dust is not magic, it’s not supernatural, and it’s not the result of prayer. It is just plain old medical science, funded by your tax dollars and adventurous private capital. I have no doubt that those who promote intercessory prayer will claim God has answered their prayers by growing new limbs and body parts on those who have been the recipients of their prayers. Currently, faith healers claim to lengthen congenitally short legs and arms through prayer right before your eyes on their healing TV shows. I have seen, what appears to be the lengthening of a leg by four inches, an inch per second. Of course we have to take their word for it because no medical and anatomical proof is offered.

As you already know, I do not accept the non-documented regrowth of amputated limbs as proof of God’s existence. I’m still waiting for good proof with an open mind. Why is God so reluctant to make himself or herself known to skeptics? And, why are the faithful so adamant that they have scientifically proven the existence of their god through intercessory prayer, while at the same time demanding documented scientific proof from other religions. Are Catholic, Muslim, and Hindu healing shrines, filled with crutches, braces, and wheel-chairs testimony to the validity of that religion’s truth and the existence of its God(s)? Unexplained healings occur in all religious faiths and, believe it or not, in non praying populations.

I remain willing to rethink my disbelief in God when I get good scientific evidence he/she/it exists. I’m a patient guy with an open mind.

Roy Story #12 – Roy and the Kangaroos

Roy and the Kangaroos

This is another story from Roy’s father who recorded his son’s adventures in his journal. The kangaroo story is true and actually happened to me.

Roy and the Kangaroos

“Never turn your back on a buck kangaroo.” That is what they told Roy his first day on the job at The Kangaroo and Wild Swine Building. It was a warning that Roy would soon come to better understand.

Some kids want to be firefighters, policemen, or doctors, but my son Roy loved animals and always wanted to work at the zoo. He hoped to be a zoo curator or director one day and this was his first step toward that goal.

As a summer replacement keeper, Roy was assigned to the Kangaroo and Wild Swine Building for two weeks. The building housed kangaroos and wart hogs, but also walaroos, wallabies, dingoes, anteaters, and a variety of small antelope called duikers. Roy was fulfilling his childhood dream of being a zookeeper but had no idea of the adventures in store for him.

After a week of cleaning animal cages, Roy realized that he had become somewhat of an expert on animal spoor, including their tracks, but mainly their droppings. He could tell blue duiker scat from common duiker scat; he could identify gray kangaroo scat from wallaroo and wallaby scat. How many other people in the world recognized giant anteater scat or siaga antelope scat when they saw it? Roy’s sister Millie, and his mom and I had a good laugh when Roy bragged, tongue in cheek, about his skill. Each day at the zoo presented another adventure, but an encounter with a giant buck kangaroo was one of the most dangerous.

Roy’s first chore each morning was to clean all the cages, inside and outside the building. Roy usually finished the cleaning by noon, had lunch and then prepared the food for his charges. The last cage that he cleaned that memorable day belonged to a very large and grumpy red kangaroo buck. He had been separated from the other bucks and does because of his aggressive dominance and his eagerness to fight and his desire to mate; he did not distinguish between kangaroos and keepers; an upright object would do if another kangaroo was unavailable. Having been born in captivity, he had no fear of humans, and isolation justified his grumpiness. Old Red, as he was called, was unpredictable and could not be trusted. He was fast and strong. His method of fighting was to grab, box and claw with his front claws and lean back on his tail and kick with both strong hind feet and their long sharp claws. In the wild, he would have been well able to defend himself against dingos, the wild dogs of Australia. Those were the reasons that Roy was warned not to turn his back on Old Red.

Roy’s rake and water hose were usually enough to keep the cantankerous kangaroo at bay while he cleaned the cage, but Roy was a daydreamer and often got lost in his thoughts. So it was that day as Roy raked scat from the grass into a pile in the far corner of Old Red’s cage. It was a warm day, lots of sunshine, and a constant line of visitors strolling by the outdoor cage fronts. Roy was daydreaming about his trip three years earlier, to the island of Tasmania with a high-school friend, who lived there. He saw plenty of walaroos and wallabies, and some gray kangaroos, but the largest of kangaroos, the big reds, were found in Australia. Red kangaroos can weigh in at over 150 pounds, and when standing are over six feet tall.

Roy was lost in his thoughts when he heard a “woof” and a “snort” behind him. A little boy, accompanied by his parents, was standing behind the wire fence spoke out to Roy, “That big kangaroo wants to say hello.” He knew what it was instantaneously; it was Old Red and he was ready to settle a score. Roy figured that the big guy was irritated because he was excluded from female company. He often tried to take out his aggression on careless keepers.

Roy slowly turned to face Old Red, who had already risen up to his fighting position. Roy first thought of climbing the nearby fence, but it was too high and there were no hand and foot holds. Roy resorted to something he had always done before in his youth when confronted by a dangerous wild animal. He talked to it in his special way.

In a soft non-threatening voice he said, “Hi there Old Red. How’re you today? Still in a bad mood, are you?” Roy knew the big buck could not understand his words, but Roy spoke softly with his hands at his side. “Now don’t you get annoyed at me. I’m your friend. I’m the guy who feeds you each day…and I’m the guy who sweeps up your sh–, scat. Surely you’re not angry with me.” Roy knew that his body language was extremely important; he had to appear non-threatening, yet confident.

Their eyes met for several seconds before Roy turned his head. He knew that a direct gaze was considered a threat to most animals. He kept his eyes on Old Red with his head slightly turned, ready for a fast retreat if required. Old Red held his upright pose for a moment and then, with a big exhale of breath that sounded like a wheeze, he dropped to all fours. He vigorously scratched both floppy ears with his front legs, or were they arms, Roy never was sure. Roy was relieved because he knew that scratching behavior is a way of relieving tension when animals are not sure what else to do.

Roy kept up with the small talk and very slowly reached out with one hand toward Old Red’s head. He stopped inches from his face, but when the kangaroo did not seem to protest, Roy reached a little further until his fingers touched a big floppy ear. Roy gently scratched the ear, and when Old Red lowered his head for easier access, Roy scratched more vigorously, and then gently pulled on the big ears. Roy had no way of knowing if anyone had scratched Old red’s ears before, but it was obvious that the big guy liked it.

Roy slowly picked up his broom and hose and walked back to the cage door with the kangaroo following behind. Roy stepped out of the cage and locked the door behind him. Old Red came to the bars and allowed Roy to reach in and scratch his ears again. It was the beginning of a love affair between the old kangaroo and the first human that had showed it such care and kindness. Roy made a quick trip to the kitchen at the end of the building and returned with a present for Old Red, a bunch of fresh, cold, carrots. The big buck accepted them with a soft grunt and eagerly ate them one at a time from Roy’s hands.

Roy shared his adventure with Maggie and me, and sister Millie that evening. We were fascinated with what had happened and Millie was eager to visit with Old Red herself the next day. I brought her to the zoo and she got her chance to scratch Old Red’s big floppy ears as he finished off a dish of chopped vegetables.

Later that week Roy had another adventure to tell his sister and us. He had the great privilege to witness a marsupial birth, one seldom seen by human eyes, a spectacular event that usually slips by without notice.

The day had progressed as any other summer workday. At closing time it was Roy’s routine to transfer all the animals from their outside cages to their inside quarters for the night. As soon as he finished, he ushered the few lingering visitors out of the building and locked it down.

After one final check on the animals, and a special carrot for Old Red, he would have been on his way home if it had not been for a very tiny new addition to the zoo. As Roy walked down the center isle of the building checking the animal cages on both sides of him he suddenly stopped in his tracks. He thought to himself, “What was that?”

He retraced his steps back to the cage front of the gray kangaroos. A little doe was standing close to the cage front and seemed occupied with something on her furry lower abdomen. At first it looked to Roy like a tiny red blob, almost like a little drop of blood.

Perhaps the kangaroo had injured herself. However, the tiny red blob suddenly moved. Roy slowly approached to see what it was. He could hardly believe his eyes, when he realized that the little squirming red blob was actually a newborn kangaroo! It was tiny and reddish pink, about the size of a green pea. The embryonic looking little joey had just been born and now, was struggling upward from its mother’s birth canal through her thick fur, trying to find her pouch.

Roy knew that the journey of a newborn kangaroo was quite amazing. He knew that joeys are marsupial and are born prematurely by most mammal standards. Instead of developing in the mother’s womb, they are born early as tiny, blind, hairless, embryo-like babies. They have to make a long and perilous journey through a forest of thick fur to find a pouch with a well-hidden opening circled by a circular sphincter muscle. Once the joey finds the opening to the pouch, it must struggle through it into the warm pouch, and locate the functional nipple that will feed it. Twins are seldom born and when they are one usually does not survive.

Roy remembered how amazed he was when he read that the joey’s mouth actually becomes attached to its mother’s nipple. For the next several months the mother secretes just the right amount of nutritious fatty milk into her little baby, until it is able to suckle for itself. If all goes well the joey grows rapidly until it is strong enough to scramble in and out of the pouch. Eventually, when her joey grows larger, the doe will have to dump it out of her pouch and not let it back in so she can raise another baby. Apparently, the joeys are reluctant to leave the security of their mother’s pouch, and keep trying to get back in even when they are too big to fit. Roy laughed when he first saw an older joey try to climb back into a too small pouch. Often its legs and tail would hang out and trip up mother.

As Roy watched the joey’s progress, squirming and grasping like a tiny inchworm struggling through the dense fur, he realized that all was not as it should be. The joey had missed his mother’s pouch and now, unfortunately, mom was confused. Her maternal instincts no longer helped her and she could not understand what this little pink thing was on her chest. Roy watched in horror as she casually reached over with a large clawed hand and scratched her baby off. It fell to the cage floor without its mom ever noticing.

Immediately, Roy reached into the cage, gently rescued the tiny baby, and carefully wrapped it in his handkerchief. He ran back to the little office and kitchen at the end of the building and phoned the zoo vet for help.

Soon the other keepers and the zoo veterinarian arrived to see the joey. It was a rare sight for everyone because there is no practical way to know when a kangaroo is pregnant, and no way to know when she will give birth. When it does happen, it usually goes unnoticed. Roy was lucky, he just happened to be checking the doe at the right time. Few people have ever seen a newborn kangaroo or watched it struggle to its mother’s pouch like had Roy.

The zoo veterinarian conferred with the head keeper and finally decided what they had to do with the tiny joey that now had been squirming in Roy’s handkerchief for the past half-hour. Because there was no way they could keep it alive outside its mother’s pouch, they planned to capture the mother and put the newborn in the pouch near her nipple. The rest was up to the baby and nature. They could only hope for a satisfactory outcome. There was no record that this procedure had ever been done successfully before.

The vet volunteered Roy to go into the cage first and grab her tail. Roy was thrilled at having been offered the opportunity. The doe was fast and strong. Roy chased her around the cage three times before he managed to grab her tail. He held it up with both hands as directed so she could not kick the others as they rushed into the cage and pinned her down. It took four keepers to hold her still as the veterinarian searched in the thick fur for the small opening into her pouch. He opened it, and carefully placed the squirming joey next to a nipple. That was the best they could do under the circumstances. They left the cage and hoped that the joey would find the nipple, attach to it, and survive.

During the next month, Roy watched for signs of life in the doe’s pouch, but he never saw anything unusual. He was sad and had to assume that they had failed in their attempt to save the joey. Roy knew it was a well-intentioned effort and he felt privileged to have been a part of it. The experience enhanced his love of animals and reinforced his desire to help the wildlife of our planet survive in spite of habitat destruction and human ignorance. That evening we were fascinated with Roy’s new adventure. I took careful notes for my journal that already contained many of Roy’s unusual and exciting adventures.