'.

, ;;

( 'I

..

,'I"

,. '~/t'

1/ (; ... ~ "

'

J
,

... '

,~..

, ..

....

'J

$2.95

A 'Journal of Atheist News and Thought

November 1986

.. '.

*************************************************************************************************

AMERICAN ATHEISTS
is a non-profit, non-political, educational organization dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of state
and church. We accept the explanation of Thomas Jefferson that the "First Amendment" to the Constitution of the
United States was meant to create a "wall of separation" between state and church.
American Atheists is organized to stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry concerning religious
beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals, and practices;
to collect and disseminate information, data, and literature on all religions and promote a more thorough
understanding of them, their origins, and their histories;
to advocate, labor for, and promote in all lawful ways the complete and absolute separation of state and church;
to advocate, labor for, and promote in all lawful ways the establishment and maintenance of a thoroughly secular
system of education available to all;
to encourage the development and public acceptance of a human ethical system stressing the mutual sympathy,
understanding, and interdependence of all people and the corresponding responsibility of each individual in
relation to society;
to develop and propagate a social philosophy in which man is the central figure, who alone must be the source of
strength, progress, and ideals for the well-being and happiness of humanity;
to promote the study of the arts and sciences and of all problems affecting the maintenance, perpetuation, and
enrichment of human (and other) life;
to engage in such social, educational, legal, and cultural activity as will be useful and beneficial to members of
American Atheists and to society as a whole.
.
Atheism may be defined as the mental attitude which unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at
establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all
arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.
Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own
inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that man finding his resources within himself - can and must create his own destiny. Materialism restores to man his dignity
and his intellectual integrity. It teaches that we must prize our lifeon earth and strive always to improve it. It holds
that man is capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism's "faith" is in man and
man's ability to transform the world culture by his own efforts. This is a commitment which is in its very essence
life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation and impossible without noble ideas that
inspire man to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that humankind's potential for good and for an outreach to
more fulfillingcultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited.
*************************************************************************************************
American Atheists Membership Categories
Life
Couple Life*
Sustaining
Couple*/Family
Individual
Senior Citizen** /Unemployed
Student**

$500
$750
$100/year
$50/year
$40/year
$20/year
$12/year

*Include partner's name

**Photocopy of ID required
All membership categories receive our monthly "Insider's Newsletter," membership card(s), a subscription to
American Atheist magazine for the duration of the membership period, plus additional organizational mailings,
i.e., new products for sale, convention and meeting announcements, etc.

American Atheists - P.O. Box 2117 - Austin, TX 78768-2117

Vol 28, No. 11

November 1986

American Atheist
A Journal of Atheist

A Course in Claptrap
Nevin Hawkins

Editor's Desk
R. Murray-O'Hair
Director's Briefcase
Jon G. Murray

News and Thought

26

A short critique of some very, very silly

metaphysics.

Blasphemy! (part II)

Mr. Murray writes of the ramifications

of "Biting the Final Biscuit."

Ask A.A.

A discussion of tax-deductible donations may give you cause to write a few

checks before the end of the year.

A Special Section on Funerals

27

"Law and order" were not the order of

the day a hundred years ago when an
Atheist and freedom of speech were
tried.

Have you sometimes wondered how

to avoid religion at the very end of
life? Atheists of all kinds give their
perspectives on Atheist burials and
funerals. '
Plotting Atheist Funerals - The
grande dame of Atheism, Madalyn
O'Hair, lends her thoughts on how funerals should be conducted. - 8
An Atheist Cemetery - An account
of the only Atheist cemetery in the U.S.
and the philosophy behind it. - 16
When Atheists Die - Frank Zindler
gives some moving examples of how
well memorials can be held without religion. -18
Grave Robbery - The banditry of
the funeral industry is unmasked by
Brian Lynch. - 22
.
The Final Page - How do Atheists
react to death? Gerald Tholen provides
a few examples. - 25

Poetry

33

Report from India

Margaret Bhatty

34

The Indian government is trying. to

clean up the sacred Ganges. But is it
brave enough to stop the real source of
pollution - dead bodies?

Historical Notes

36

American Atheist Radio Series

Madalyn O'Hair

37

E. Haldeman-Julius was one of our

nation's earliest and most prolific Atheist publishers.

40

Book Review
There's trouble in Baptist-land.

Me Too

41

Letters to the Editor

42

Classified Advertisements

44

Cover Art by Christopher Dunne

ARE YOU MOVING?

Please notify us six weeks in advance to ensure uninterrupted delivery. Send us both your old and new addresses.

NEW ADDRESS: (Please print)

. OLD

Name
Address
City
State
Effective Date:

ADDRESS: (Please print)

Name
Zip

Address
City

_
_
_

State

_
Zip

Mail to: American Atheists P.O. Box 2117 Austin TX 78768-2117

Austin, Texas

November 1986

Page 1

American Atheist
Editor/R. Murray-O'Hair
Editor Emeritus/Dr. Madalyn O'Hair
Managing Editor/don G_ Murray
Assistant Editor/Gerald Tholen
Poetry/Angeline Bennett, Gerald Tholen
Non-Resident Staff/John M_Allegro, Burnham
P_Beckwith, Margaret Bhatty, Nawal El Saadawi,
Merrill Holste, Lowell Newby, Fred Woodworth,
Frank R. Zindler
Production Staff/Laura Lee Cole, Christina Ditter, Shantha Elluru, Keith Hailey, Brian J. Lynch,
Jim Mills, John Ragland, Virginia Schlesinger,
George Thomas
Officers of the Society of Separationists,
Inc.
President/Jon G. Murray
President Emeritus/Dr. Madalyn O'Hair
Vice-President/Gerald
Tholen
Secretary/R. Murray-O'Hair
Treasurer/Brian J. Lynch
Chairman of the Board/Dr. Madalyn O'Hair
Members of the Board/Jon G. Murray (Vice
Chairman), August Berkshire, Herman Harris,
Ellen Johnson, Scott Kerns, Minerva Massen,
Robin Murray-O'Hair, Shirley Nelson, Richard C.
O'Hair, Henry Schmuck, Noel Scott, Gerald
Tholen, Lloyd Thoren, Frank Zindler.
Officers and Directors may be reached at P.O.
Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768.
Honorary
Members of the Board/Merrill
Holste, John Marthaler
The American Atheist is published monthly by
American Atheist Press, an affiliate of Society of
Separationists, Inc., d/b/a American Atheists,
2210 Hancock Dr., Austin, TX 78756-25%, a nonprofit, non-political, educational organization dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of
state and church. (Non-profit under IRS Code
501(c)(3).)
Copyright 1986 by Society of Separationists, Inc.
All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in
part without written permission is prohibited.
ISSN: 0332-4310. Mailingaddress: P.O. Box 2117,
Austin, TX 78768-2117.
The American Atheist is indexed in IBt{1nternational Bibliography of Periodical Literature, Osnabrock, Germany).
Manuscripts submitted must be typed, doublespaced, and accompanied by a stamped, selfaddressed envelope. A copy of American Atheist
Writers' Guidelines is available upon request. The
editors assume no responsibility for unsolicited
manuscripts.
The American Atheist Press publishes a variety of
Atheist, agnostic, and freethought material. A
catalog is available free upon request.

The American Atheist is given free of cost

to members of American Atheists as an
incident of their membership. For a schedule of membership rates, please see the
inside front cover. Subscriptions for the
American Atheist alone are $25 a year for
one-year terms only. The library and
institutional discount is 50%_Sustaining subscriptions ($50 a year) are taxdeductible.

Page 2

EDITOR'S DESK / R. Murray-O'Hair

MIXED REPLIES
e at The American Atheist Center
W
have often toyed with the idea of a
book titled "Questions From Atheists"
which would answer typical questions Atheists have asked which have never been adequately answered. Atheists from around the
country and the world inquire with the same
questions. And we answer each individually
as often from our hearts as from our heads, if
at all. But some of the questions, poignantiy
full of necessity, so often asked, are nearly
impossible to answer patiy.
One such question, very often heard at
The Center, is "What do we, Atheists, do for
funerals?" Our culture's means of dealing
with death are so saturated with religion that
the Atheist, having opted out of theism
completely, is most often entirely excluded
from traditional expressions of mourning.
So we thought to face that problem perhaps not once and for all, but certainly
once. We thought to give Atheists a range of
options for composing funerals.
But as our authors considered the matter,
it became clear that our very Atheism prevented us from giving our readers a stylized
response to the trying circumstances of facing death. For in Atheism is a recognition of
the individual, an emphasis on his or her
importance that is in opposition to the religious emphasis on a god. Each unique person, our authors felt, needed a "final farewell" reflecting his or her life.It became clear
as we worked that we could only offer
examples, not guidelines.
We recognize that for grieving persons
such an approach is not entirely helpfuL
Individuals in pain may prefer to retreat to
the formulaic. But we did not feel that we
could offer the formulaic to alL
Perhaps this issue of our magazine will
open up a discussion of the facing of death
which will lead to better solutions, for the
individuals and the group, than have been
found in the past. We hope for this as we
present this multitude of approaches to you.
To begin is an article by the woman often
called "The Atheist," Madalyn O'Hair. In
"Plotting Atheist Funerals," she deals with
legal and individual aspects of disposal of the
dead. Concluding there is no single Atheist
response to death, she discusses how she
would have her own funeral handled.
We could not overlook a description of
the United States' only Atheist cemetery.
"An Atheist Cemetery" describes its approach and reproduces its application form.

November 1986

Frank Zindler gives a taste of funeral

ceremonies he has conducted. His poetic
examples are in "When Atheists Die."
Atheists have never been persons to
ignore reality - including the financial realities of death. Brian Lynch critiques the "funeral industry" in "Grave Robbery."
In "The Director's Briefcase," Jon Murray
presents "Biting the Final Biscuit," an
attempt to cover a number of aspects of
death, dying, funerals, and burials.
Finally Gerald Tholen provides "The Final
Page," a moving account of an Atheist's
reaction to death.
Interspersed are various delicate poems
reflecting an Atheistic attitude to death.
Pray forgive us for trying to lighten the
subject with a cartoon or two. Death is such
an emotionally-laden topic that any handling
of it is likely to upset, offend. Keeping in
mind that some may cry out against our
treatment as "tasteless," we felt a need to
encourage a more matter-of-fact handling of
death through a bit of humor.
We often try to schedule the publication
of special features with an appropriate seasonal event. For example, our feature on the
rearing of Atheist youth appeared in the
year's most youthful month, January; our
articles on weddings appeared during the
traditional month to wed, June. But we had
difficulty in choosing the "appropriate"
month for a "funeral issue." Surely, we
thought, the feature should not appear in
December, the month for celebrations; nor
February, the month for lovers; nor March,
April, or May, months for birth and renewal;
nor July, a month for Americans to celebrate.
October, the month of Halloween, seemed
gauche. In the end, by default, we settled on
November for our feature on Atheist funeral
procedures (we shy from the word services
with its religious connotations).
Perhaps we accidentally made the correct
decision. For in the various essays in this
issue you will see Atheists insist on the
recognition of death as a natural event, not
to be avoided, not to be feared, not to be
anticipated, but to be accepted - just as we
accept the small deaths of the fall season.
We watch lush greenery fallto provide room
and humus for a new generation - and
understand the necessity of the process.
Just so, the authors felt, we must not deny
the reality of and need for the end of individual lives, no matter how we express our
sorrow and respect for dead companions.

American Atheist

DIRECTOR'S BRIEFCASE / Jon G. Murray

BITING THE FINAL BISCUIT

frequently asked question of The AmerA
ican Atheist Center is, "What should
an Atheist do with respect to the many questions surrounding death?" If one is an Atheist and has a family member or person
known to one die, how should one comport
oneself? Ifan Atheist dies, what should those
who survive do with respect to disposal of
the body? Should there be a "service," and if
so, of what should it consist? These are all
complex questions because they involve a
highly personal and emotional issue. Individuals react differently when faced with a
death, whether their own potential one or
someone else's actual one. Generally, reaction to death as a subject is dependent on
one's total background and life perceptions
and on an individual fact situation. The
American Atheist faces, in dealing with the
topic of death, somewhat the same problem
as it faced in dealing with the subject of
marriage. Marriage is a highly personalized
matter of opinion and taste which differs
widely from individual to individual.
Even when it comes to taking statistics or
asking questions about death, the nature of
the subject matter, as a subjective consideration, interferes with the statistical process
and casts doubt on the validity of the conclusions reached. This same problem exists
when doing surveys about "god" beliefs or
concepts. Each person surveyed will define
"god" in his own unique way. A question
like, "What is death?" will likely net one as
many different answers as persons asked.
Varied Responses
In 1974 Warren Shibles, then an instructor at the University of Wisconsin - Whitewater, published a book entitled Death, An
Interdisciplinary Analysis. In that book,
Shibles starts out by attempting to analyze
fifty-fivequestions which were answered by
forty-nine of his students at the beginning of
an undergraduate philosophy seminar on
death in the spring of 1972 at University of
Wisconsin - Whitewater. Shibles's look at
the questions and their answers takes up the
first thirty-five pages of his book, and I cannot present that entire analysis in this
column. I can try to give the highlights of
what Shibles found from just one class of
students. Mr. Shibles has ten books on various philosophical and sociological topics in
print from The Language Press, but this par-

Austin, Texas

ticular title, Death, is now out of print.

Each student had his or her own concept
of the definition of the term death, from "3
cessation of bodily functions" to "like being
bored." To the question "Can you imagine
your own death?" half of the class answered
no. "Is death necessary, or is it a disease
which man may be able to conquer?" drew
an equally divided response from "it can be
eliminated completely" to "it is neither
necessary nor conquerable - it just exists."
The majority had "immediate personal
experiences with death," but when asked
"Have you discussed death (a) with your
family? (b) with others?" one-sixth had not
discussed death at all. "Most had discussed
it in terms of heaven, hell, reincarnation,
afterlife, and the religious context."
"Have you ever wanted to die?" drew a
yes answer from twenty-eight students. Most
of the reasons given centered around boredom or the "futility" of life.This was followed
by the question "Have you ever or do you
contemplate suicide?" to which twenty-two
students answered yes. The related question "Should one have a right to take his own
life?" drew thirty-two yes responses.
On fear of death, twenty-one out of the
class answered yes to the direct question
"Do you fear death?" Fifteen of the students
believed in "immortality" and that they "have
a soul." Seventeen believed in "reincarnation" and nineteen did not, while sixteen said
that they did hope for life after death, with
eight saying no. Twenty-six said that they
did not want to know when they would die,
and eight said they would like to know.
Forty-two said they would want the doctor
to tell them if they had a terminal illness,
while five said they would prefer not to
know.
With regard to the question "Do you
pray?" twenty said no, while nineteen said
yes. Then, curiously, to the question "Do
you think you can be punished for your sins
after death?" twenty-nine said no, four yes,
and three were not sure.
Next to last, question number fifty-four,
"Do you think most people are honest in
their statements about death?" was answered no by twenty students and yes by
only seven.
What can we conclude from all of these
questions to a single class of undergraduates
in Wisconsin? Little or nothing that can be
applied to the majority of the population.

November 1986

Attitudes on death and dying are personal,

fact situation determined, and even changing from time to time throughout a given
individual's lifetime.
As you can see from the samples given,
the reaction of the class to the topic of death
was a mixed one. Each student had a separate opinion on each question - an opinion
not necessarily related to any other question. Many of them have probably changed
their minds since 1972 ifthey could be found
and asked the same set of questions again.
This is an area, from my point of view, that is
not amenable to statistical analysis. It is easy
to ask questions of groups or persons large
and small that lend themselves to definite
yes and no answers without qualification or
personal experiences, outlooks, and interpretations being a valuable part of a complete answer to the question. One can ask,
for example, "Do you own a motor vehicle?"
and get a reliable count from the total survey, but if you ask, "Why own a motor vehicle?" that requires a qualitative rather than a
quantitative response. The answers will be
divergent and difficult to correlate and to
draw any substantive conclusions from.
I would say, however, that a safe assumption is that everyone has thought about the
subject of death at one time or the other whether or not they will admit to having
done so in a survey. It is a natural subject of
curiosity regardless of whether derived from
spontaneous curiosity or brought on by a
personal experience with death. The response to that curiosity is a subjective consideration and is not necessarily related to
an understanding of what "death" is from
any kind of scientific perspective.
Death's Definition
Death can be defined medically as the
permanent cessation of the vital functions in
the bodies of animals and plants, or slight
variations thereof. That is a pretty straightforward definition. Even more simply, death
is the end of life.That is alland nothing more.
Archaeologists and anthropologists for the
most part agree that death from natural
causes was inexplicable to primitive man in
the "savage state," that in all times in all
lands, if he reflects on death at all, man fails
to understand that it is a natural phenomenon, that in its presence he is awed or
curious. This indifference is not dictated by

Page 3

Ilt

iI

v ,

1\0.

, dread returning to that lonelq, silent house with no bitching, belching,

snoring, or farting."
any realization that death means annihilation of the personality. The savage conception of a future state is one that involves no
real break in the continuity oflife as he leads
it. There is universal refusal of savage man to
accept death as the natural end of li,fe.If a
man dies without being wounded he is considered to be the victim of spirits of some
sort. This animistic tendency was a marked
characteristic of primitive man in every land.
The savage explains the processes of inanimate nature by assuming that living beings
or spirits, possessed of capacities similar to
his own, are within the inanimate object. He
explains to himself the phenomena of human
lifein a like manner, believing that each man
has within him a kind of "mannikin" or
animal which dictates his actions in life.This
miniature internal "man" is the savage's
conception of a "soul." Sleep or trances are
then regarded as the temporary absence of
this "soul" and death as the permanent
absence thereof. Each person is perceived in
the primitive mind as having a dual existence, with the "soul" of dual "man" having
many names and forms. One common belief
is that the body's shadow or reflection is the
"soul." When a man is sick in many primitive
cultures he is said to have lost his shadow or
at least a part of it. This reflection or shadow
"soul" is thought, in many cultures, to be
subject to enemies or attacks giving rise to a

Page 4

host of associated superstitions. Most commonly in a cross-cultural analysis the "soul"

is perceived as being man's "breath" (or
anima, the root word for animal). The term
last breath and the use of the word breath as
a synonym for life expresses the savage
belief that there departs from the body of the
dying something tangible, capable of separate existence.
As a direct result of the inability of the
savage mind in all ages and in all locations to
comprehend death as a natural phenomenon, there results a universal tendency to
personify death, and myths are thus invented to account for its origin. The point of
this little anthropology lesson is that the attitude of even so-called "civilized" man
towards death has been in a great part dictated by the savage belief that to die is
"unnatural." This is the crux of the differentiation between the Atheist position with
respect to death and that of the theist. The
theist continues to build on a mythological
structure based on the false premise that
death is an "unnatural" act. The Atheist recognizes death as a natural process that is
simply the termination of life.Once that realization is attained, there is no need for the
fabrication of stories as to the cause or effect
of death. It is simply accepted as an inevitable natural phenomenon.
I see no need, as an Atheist, to become

November 1986

emotionally distraught over a natural phenomenon, no matter how closely it occurs to

me in terms of personal relationships. It is
simply not rational to allow the death of
another to significantly interfere with one's
own life. No one will deny that there is a
period of adjustment and remorse and a
sense of something being "missing" when
someone with whom one has a close personal relationship dies. It is the inability of
the vast majority to be able to cope with that
adjustment period without turning outside
of reality to some type of mysticism or chemical stimulation that fosters the continuance
of religion. I do not view being able to handle
death emotionally something for only the
tough "John Wayne" image individual. Coping with death is based on a realization of the
fact that it is a natural phenomenon and
nothing more. Once one falls into the trap of
thinking otherwise then all of the excess
emotional baggage of guilt, sin, souls, afterlife,reincarnation, and grief can pile up quite
easily. If the natural premise is relinquished,
one can build an incredible nightmare on the
ruins.
One of my fellow columnists in this very
issue of this journal seems to feel that a
gathering of those concerned upon an individual's death and some type of ceremony is
necessary to help them reorder their lives in
the absence of the deceased. This columnist
feels that one must "restructure" one's lifeto
compensate for the deceased individual. I
disagree. I don't think that any kind of gathering or ceremony is necessary at the time of
a death whatsoever other than the persons
who are required to dispose of the body in a
particular manner. Many kinds of gatherings
are possible, but they should not be thought
of in terms of a psychological crutch. It is an
emotionally unstable person indeed whose
life structure is so dependent on the existence of another that it would need to be
radically restructured upon the dependee's
death.
Disposal Concerns
Once an individual has died, the most
immediate consideration is disposal of the
body. The three simplest ways of doing that
are (1) burial in the ground, (2) cremation, or
(3) throwing the corpse into a body of water.
In actuality it would not make any difference
to the rest of the animals on the earth, other
than the human ones, ifthe body was simply
allowed to decay where it fell or simply
dragged off into the countryside and allowed
to decay and fall subject to scavengers. In
fact every other animal other than man falls
prey to scavengers and/or natural decay
upon death. Only man embalms or otherwise attempts to preserve or protect the
dead body. The disposition of the body after
death is in both a legal and practical tradition
the providence of the "next of kin" -

American Atheist

regardless of the wishes expressed by the physical proof that the individual is indeed
technological age, one can also be "immordeceased prior to death either orally or in a dead. This is an archaic hang-over from the talized," as the saying goes, on video- or
written willor testament. The surviving fam- days of lesser communication ability. Prior , audiotape. Second, I tell them that my death
ilymembers can do with the body what they to cameras, telegraphs, and telephones,
will be of no greater or lesser significance
willwithin the scope of current law, That is etc., relatives and those concerned, particuthan a dead leaf falling from a tree in the
not to say that the wishes of the deceased
larly in a legal sense as beneficiaries of an autumn and that it should not be granted
should not be taken into account. When my estate, had to actually travel to see the body any more significance by those who survive
grandfather died my mother saw to it that he to confirm death had occurred. In modern
me. In addition, I like to taunt their little
had a traditional funeral with a Presbyterian
terms it makes more sense for persons,
religious minds by asking them how they
minister officiating despite the fact that we especially families, to get together for other
intend to enjoy a heaven or suffer in a hell
were Atheists because that is "what he social reasons with each other while they are with no bodies, the "soul" being conceived
would have wanted." The disposal of his stillalive than to wait for a death in the family of as ephemeral. With what eyes will they
body was carried out in accordance with his to be used as an "excuse" to get together.
see their god? With what ears willthey hear
lifephilosophy - not his daughter's, which I
It has also disturbed me that many people
"angels" sing? With what sex organs, in the
think was correct. Her father did not "know"
can only express their true sentiments about
case of the Mormons, will they procreate?
what she had done, but it gave her peace of another after the person is dead. It seems to Their reply is usually stunned silence.
me that personal relationships should be
mind at the immediate time of her father's
Funeral Costs
such that one could tell another what one
death to carry out "services" in accordance
truly thinks about them to their face and not
with what she knew he would have desired,
One of the most enlightening books I have
As an Atheist, it makes the most sense to wait until after death. It does no good to tell
someone that you "love" them or "hate"
ever read regarding ceremonies associated
me to dispose of a dead body in the most
simple way possible. Digging a hole and plac- them in terms of the ongoing nature of a with death, that was a large part of the
development of my convictions concerning
ing the nude body therein and fillingin the personal relationship after they are dead.
funerals, was The American Way of Death
hole with dirt is the best method to my mind. One woman I knew' was a case in point.
Upon her husband's death she refused to by Jessica Mitford (Simon and Schuster,
Clothing the body or putting it into some
kind of protective receptacle or trying to attend the burial services because she had
1963). One of the things that shocked me
most in this book was the extraordinary
chemically preserve it is ludicrous. All of "hated" him for the entire duration of their
those things are superfluous. Cremation or marriage - or so she said. It would have amount of time, effort, and money that
"burial at sea" (as it is called) are also practi- made a great deal more sense for her to have Americans put into ceremonies for the dead.
cal, depending on the location and imme- expressed those feelings to him while he was A few examples from the book will suffice.
diate circumstances of the death. I see no alive.
These figures are all from the 1960s, so that
If anything is to be done in terms of a they will need to be updated in terms of
need for any kind of grave "marker" either; it
is just a waste of stone or other natural
ceremony or gathering for a death, the
inflation or current cost-of-living indexes.
resource. What is the sense of knowing occasion should not be a time for mourning
According to the 1986 Statistical Abstracts
where to return to stand "over" or "near"
or tears or sadness. It should be ifanything a of the United States, taking the 1%7 buying
the dead person? Speaking of wasting
time to reflect upon the accomplishments
power of the dollar as the constant, a 1984
resources, I must drive past a very large and character of the deceased during his life. dollar only has 32.1 cents worth of purchas, municipal cemetery on the way from my A ceremony, if there need be one for what- ing power today. That means that what one
soever reason, should only consist of the could buy in 1967 for $1.00, in terms of conhome to The American Atheist Center each
day. Today I saw the sprinklers watering the giving of a biographical synopsis of the sumer goods', costs an average consumer in
grass around the tombstones, despite the accomplishments and failures of the de- 1984 $3.12. With that adjustment in mind,
fact that Austin, Texas, is in the midst of a ceased's life from the point of view of the according to 1961 funeral industry figures
severe drought and our city council has deceased or as near as possible to avoid a from Mitford's book, the average undertakimposed mandatory water rationing. Why judgmental rendition of that biographical
er's bill in that year was $1,450.00. In terms
waste much needed water on the grass in a sketch. Some members of the groups
of 1984 dollars that would be $4,524.00.
cemetery? Cemeteries usually also occupy
attending such a ceremony may enjoy music According to the U.S. Department of
prime, should-be-commercial real estate.
or find it emotionally soothing. In that case, I Commerce census of business under the
I am occasionally accused, needless to feel that it is most appropriate to play the
heading of "personal expenditure for death
say, of being a hard, cruel, heartless, unfeel- favorite music of the deceased, which may expense," in 1960 Americans spent $1.6 biling, unloving person who lacks "emotion." I ' add to the understanding of the biographical
lion ($4.99 billion in 1984dollars) on funerals,
am none of the foregoing, but I see no need sketch for those in attendance.
as revealed in Mitford's book. The author
to become hysterical or show wild emotion
I am often asked by religionists what will goes on to add that that figure, averaged out
happen to me when I die. My reply is that I among the number of deaths in 1960,
at a death. When people cry, moan, engage
in the biblical-type "wailing and gnashing of willrot, simply that and nothing more. I often amounted to "$942.00 for the funeral of
teeth," and carryon at funerals, for whose add two concepts to that. First, I usually every man, woman, child, and stillborn babe
benefit is the display - the deceased? The draw an analogy to death as the destruction
who died in the United States." Mitford also
deceased is no longer capable of "caring"
of an ordinary audiocassette on which a points out that the "figure of $1.6 billion
about what is said or done in his or her , voice has been recorded. If that cassette is averages out to $1,160_00 for each regular
immediate vicinity. All funerals, from an set afire and consumed thereby, where did adult funeral." Mitford says that the DeAtheist analysis, are for the benefit of the the "soul" or "personality" that was on that , partment of Commerce figure is actually low
living, not the dead. The religionists, on the tape go when the physical receptacle was no because it fails to take into account such
other hand, hold funerals for the benefit of longer? It did not "go" anywhere. In a like "extras" as funds for "the burial of indigents,
the deceased to ensure the proper disposal manner, when a physical body permanently
shipping of the dead by train or plane, funerof the "soul," sending it on its journey to the . ceases to have vital functions, the individual al flowers," and the purchase of "graves and
hoped-for location. The practical purpose of personality that was associated with that
mausoleum crypts for future occupancy."
a gathering when a death occurs is for those
body ceases to be, except in the memories
She concludes that: "It would be a conservawho knew the deceased personally to have of those who knew the deceased. In this tive guess that these extras, if added to the

Austin, Texas

November 1986

Pag~5

"'"

Commerce Department's base figure of $1.6

billion, would bring the nation's burial bill to
well over $2 billion." In terms of 1984 dollars
that comes out to about $6.24 billion. The
most startling figure then drops like a bombshell out of the pages of Mitford's book on
the reader:
Personal expenditures for all higher
education - tuition, books, and living
expenses for 3.6 million students
enrolled in colleges and graduate
schools in 1960 - came to $1.9 billion,
which is a little less than Americans
spent to bury 1.7 million dead in the
same year. ... The cost of providing
medical care for the aged, the 17 million Americans who are 65 or older,
under a medical-hospital insurance
program, would be less than the
annual cost of dying in the United
States.
I am sure that the same situation exists
today - only exacerbated by population
and inflation figures and the fact that we
have a statistically "older" population now
which means more per capita deaths each
year in the 1980s than in the 1960s.
I was stunned when I read Mitford's book
in college, and I am still stunned to think that
the sick religious rituals surrounding death
mean more to Americans than education or
health for the living.
A Time To Change
In conclusion, I feel that we, as Atheists,

need to do what we can to lead the nation

out of its mania over death. We must demonstrate that no one "passes away" (where
to?), is dearly "departed," "gives up the
ghost," is "gone," is "missing," has "passed
over," has "gone to his/her reward," "rests
in peace," or any other religious term, but
has simply "died." It is up to each of us
through our personal actions at the time of
death of a fellow Atheist to make a point of
letting the survivors know that death is a
natural phenomenon and that we, as animals, are all simply part of a continuing life
cycle and nothing more. Death is a reality as
is birth, and it need not be "coped with" or
"adjusted to"; it simply is.
I can remember the showing of a home
movie of the burial of an Atheist inmate by
Arnold Via of Virginia, founder of the Prison
Atheist League of America, at a past American Atheist convention. (See "Recycling of
an Atheist," American Atheist, October
1983.) Mr. Via picked up the inmate's body,
wrapped in plastic, at the prison. He hauled
it to his acreage in the bed of an open pickup
truck, dug a hole in the woods, tied a rope
around the neck of the body and dragged it
to that hole, unwrapped it, kicked it in, and
then filled in the dirt. Many of the Atheists in
the audience were horrified and complained
later to both Mr. Via and officials at the
convention. I saw absolutely nothing wrong
with the way in which Mr. Via handled that
burial. He was simply disposing of the
remains of a dead animal and nothing more.
Many of you will say, "But he could have
done so with more dignity!" I reply, "Dignity
for whom? Did the corpse care?"

Hang up your spurs at the 17th

Annual National Convention of
American Atheists!
Held April 17, 18, and 19
(Friday, Saturday, and Sunday of Easter Weekend), the
1987 American Atheist Convention will take place at
the Radisson Hotel Denver.
As it is every year, the convention will be three days of
excitement, comradery, and
education.
But Denver - ski capital
that it is - can be a busy place
in April. So to make sure you
don't miss this experience, it's
best to make your arrangements
early.
The Radisson Hotel Denver is offering conventioneers the very special
rates of $44.12 per night - tax included
- for a single or double. A triple room will
cost just $55.29 per night again, tax

1987

~merican Atheists
Convention
Denver, CO

Page 6

Personally, I couldn't care less what is

done with my body upon death. The only
request that Icould imagine having is that no
religious ceremonies of any kind be conducted. Many Atheists express concerns
about having unwanted services of a religious nature performed over their remains.
It may be of interest here that even if you
make arrangements to leave your body to a
university, medical school, or organ bank,
that many of those institutions will hold
prayer services over the body prior to dissection, then cremate and/or bury the
remains with religious ceremonies. But what
if there were religious mumbling said over
my remains? Would I know the difference?
No, and neither would any other deceased
Atheist, and there is nothing that one can
really do legally to prevent such an occurrence.
As an Atheist, I plan to live my life to the
fullest, being cognizant all the while that if is
finite. The fact that I must die eventually
makes each day that I do live and enjoy life
without the mental reservations that inhibit
the religionist from doing likewise precious
tome. ~
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
A second generation Atheist,
Mr. Murray has been the director
of The American Atheist Center
for ten years and is also the managing
editor of the American Atheist. He
advocates "Aggressive Atheism."

included. Please make your accommodation arrangements directly with the Radisson Denver, 1550 Court
Place, Denver, CO 80202; (303) 893-3333.
Suggested carriers to the Denver Stapleton
Airport are United and Continental airlines.
And, of course, you need to make arrangements with American Atheists to attend.
Early registration will be just $50 per
person, or $25 for students and
elderly on a fixed income (I.D.
required). But after March 27,
1987, registration will be $60
per person ($30 for students
and elderly on a fixed income).
Send your registration to:
Convention Coordinator
American Atheist Center
P.O. Box 2117
Austin, TX 78768-2117
(Make checks or money orders for
the registration fee payable to
"American Atheist Convention."
Visa and Mastercard accepted.)

November 1986

American Atheist

ASK A.A.

In "Letters to the Editor," readers

give their opinions, ideas, and information. But in "Ask A.A.," American Atheists answers questions regarding its
policies, positions, and customs, as well
as queries of factual and historical
situations.
The end of the tax year is coming up, and I
am thinking about ways to pay less tax.
Could you please clarify what payments,
etc., to American Atheists are tax-deductible?
Shannon Gumps
Texas
(1) All levels of membership in American
Atheists are tax-deductible. Membership
fees are structured so that almost anyone
can afford them. (Those who are absolutely
unable to meet a membership fee are financially assisted.) Fees range from $12 a year
for Student to $750 for Couple Life. These
can be utilized by members to help themselves on the tax problem: Better to pay
$100 Sustaining membership fee each year
than to give it to the tax collector. If you are
retired and have money, better to take the
regular membership of $40 a year and
deduct that on your 1040 than to take the
$20 Senior Citizen/Unemployed (65+/restricted income) membership.
(2) All monetary donations to American
Atheists are tax-deductible.
,
(3) A Sustaining subscription to the American Atheist ($50 a year) is tax-deductible.
(4) A regular subscription to the American Atheist magazine is not tax-deductible.
(5) Purchases of books and other products from American Atheists are not taxdeductible.

Religion often sells books using a gimmick

that allows the buyer to take the cost of the
books off their taxes as a "donation" to a
charity. The television viewer is told that a
certain religious book, magazine, or other
article is "free," but at the same time is
invited to send in a "donation" (tax-deductible) for the book, magazine, or whatever.
This is a very clever way of getting books
tax-exempted. Why can't American Atheists use a similar gimmick? Iwould rather use
the money I save on taxes to buy more
books from American Atheists or give it
back to American Atheists as a donation.
American Atheists has stated several times
that books are not tax-deductible, and only

Austin, Texas

membership fees are. Why doesn't American Atheists use the same gimmick religion
uses to give its members a tax break? If you
think there will be problems with the religious ordering books and not paying, why
not restrict the tax exemption for books to
members only?
Dan Chilinski
Ohio
You hit the nail on the head. The above
method of book sale is simply dishonest and
is used almost exclusively by the most dishonest groups in the nation - the religious.
We do not care to emulate them, simply
because it is a measure of deceit. The intent
is not to sell a book; the intent is to get the
donation by advertising deceit. The books
are printed by mass methods so that the per
unit cost is insignificant to the church which
is offering it as bait. The sucker is then on
the church mailing list for further "hits"
which do not include giveaways. The banks
did this at one time, if you remember; the
"green stamp" method of sale in many grocery stores was of the same nature.
American Atheists does not desire to figure out dishonest schemes of tax evasion.
Currently, we are giving away books (and it
hurts) for a prompt return of magazine
resubscription and renewal of membership.
This is not at all widely advertised. We need
the money so damn bad that we are willing
to stand on our heads to get it. Now, if we
could only sell you heaven, we would never
need to deliver, and my gawd! how the
money would roll in.
You state that dues are tax-deductible
and that single subscriptions to the magazine are not. This is understandable. However, IRS regulations state that anything of
value received with a donation must be
deducted from the claimed tax deduction
(booklet, theater admission, etc.).
Is the magazine coming with the dues
considered to be a thing of value to be
deducted before claiming the tax deduction?
Or, on the other hand, is the fullamount paid
considered dues and tax deductible even
though the magazine is received as a result
of paying this amount?
I should appreciate your prompt reply as
tax deadline is fast approaching.
If the magazine must be deducted, please
let me know how much.

What we are talking about here is not

even applicable to most people. The IRS
permits you to automatically take a deduction of 2 percent, regardless of your income,
assuming that is how much people give to
charitable and nonprofit organizations. You
do not need to itemize this 2 percent, but
you must keep proof of donation. Assuming
that a family of four is living at the poverty
level, which is about $23,000 these days, the
IRS assumes that you have given $460 to
organizations like American Atheists, which
is 2 percent if you are at this $23,000 level.
Most "cause" organizations in the United
States receive $100 or more annually from 1
percent of their constituency. The other 99
percent contribute less.
If you are a senior citizen with a limited
income, your annual membership dues are
$20;for students, annual dues are only $12.
So the IRS permits you to deduct it all on a
1040-A (short form) ifyour annual income is
over $1,000 a year. Full-time students don't
have any income tax deducted up to a certain amount, but can deduct the $12 if their
taxable income exceeds $640 a year. Before
you can begin to "itemize" deductions, you
have to have deductions of over $2,000 a
year, excluding your own personal exemption. Most taxpayers do not make enough,
or have enough allowable deductions, to
worry.
The magazine is an incident of membership, and we place no dollar value on it for
filling that function. Actually, we lose money
on every magazine that goes out of The
Center. The cost of printing is about $3 per
magazine if one does not figure any of the
general overhead costs of The American
Atheist Center into production.
The magazine subscription alone is $25
per year, which does NOT cover the cost of
production and mailing, as indicated above.
American Atheists is a nonprofit, nonpolitical, educational organization, and it simply
absorbs the cost of educating and informing
Atheists. Those who actually assist us get a
tax break as - for example - a Sustaining
subscription for $50 a year, which may be
deducted as a donation also.
The revisions in the IRS regulations for
1986 now allow you to deduct up to 50 percent of your income for cause and charitable organizations, prorated for your tax
bracket. This is general advice which applies to most people. If your income and tax
situation is unusual, or if you have exceptionally complex tax preparation, consult
your CPA or attorney.

Elmont Tunison
New Jersey

November 1986

Page 7

PLOTTING ATHEIST .FUNERALS

MADALYN O'HAIR

IIWhat do we - Atheists - do with the

body?" Bury it, burn it, or sink it, of course.
But is there any single answer to the
problem of what or what not to say over it?

Page 8

November 1986

American Atheist

Part I
The unfortunate situation is that no one
knows anything at all about death. All we
know is life. All we have ever experienced is
life. No one has ever died and returned to
give information concerned with the state, if
there is such a thing, of "death."
We are familiar in a massive way with what
death means to those of us who are alive.
We see leaves die on bushes and trees every
year. We see annuals in our gardens die, as
do the vegetable plants we have placed
there. We see the death of pets. We manage
to somehow "get through" the emotionally
impactful times when we observe either afar
or close at hand the deaths of relatives,
friends, business acquaintances, or celebrities of our times. We slaughter, in great
numbers, animals for food and we eat their
cadavers.
As a particular branch of the primate
group of the animal kingdom, we really don't
have any idea what other animals think of
death. An oft repeated axiom is that humankind alone can contemplate death. But, no
one contemplates it, really, unless in a projected suicide attempt. Our instinctive approach is to avoid it at almost any cost.
It has been the business of nationalism to
exhort young men to go out and die in battle
for "old glory," for "fatherland," for "motherland," or for the symbolism of the moment.
Major philosophical schools have developed
around the opinion (and it is that: a mere
opinion) that an idea is greater than a man
and therefore man must lay down his life to
support the idea. This is the stuff of which
irrational goals and martyrs are made.
But in it all, the ultimate query is "What do
we do with the body?" What do we do now
with the organized physical substance which
we knew, until a moment ago, as Jim, or
Ruth, or Mother, or Dad? We uproot the old
plants, withered and dry, and put them in a
plastic sack to be thrown into 'the city
dumpster which regularly collects trash and
garbage. We do the same with a pet, or bury
it in a small hole we manage to scratch in the
ground on or near our property. Or the
more affluent may haul the corpse to a veterinarian and ask him to dispose of it. (He will
then probably throw it in his trash.) Those
persons who have attended funerals have
seen dead bodies lying in lined body receptacles politely named coffins (from the Latin,
cophinus - basket or receptacle), but often
have not followed that coffin to its ultimate
destination whether that is a hole in the
ground or a crematory oven.
Since we are uninterested in meeting the
idea of death head-on, an entire array of
words have been utilized to skirt the final
end. The body is "the remains." One would
ask of what? But the implication is that

Austin, Texas

something, a soul, has fled from the flesh and

all that remains is matter, not "spirit." There
are verbs, all indicating that there has been a
transition to "another world." The person
who has died has "crossed over ," "departed"
or "departed this world/life," "gone to his
(her) reward," "gone to glory," "expired,"
"left us," "passed away/on/over," "gone the
way of all flesh," "gone to his (her) resting
place," "gone west," "crossed the Styx,"
"been taken by death," "quit this world,"
"made his (her) exit," "gone out," "met his
(her) maker," "gone to kingdom come,"
"gone to a better place/land/life/world,"
"been gathered to his (her) father," "joined
his (her) ancestors," "passed over Jordan,"
"awoken to life immortal," "left us behind."
Even those phrases which indicate finality
shy from the verb die: "breathed his (her)
last," "kicked the bucket," "bit the final
biscuit."
Again, no matter what phrases are used,
the ultimate question is "What do we do with
the body?" We all know that it is going to
begin to decompose, and rather quickly.
First some bizarre temporary rigidity of the
muscles will occur, which we really don't
understand. Someone willsay, "Rigor mortis has set in." Then, the body will become
soft again and it willstart to leak certain body
fluids and liquids, as it begins to sag, decay,
rot, and stink.
Every culture has developed its own rules
and rationale about the treatment of human
"remains," and many of these rules or customs are enforced by the law. In the JudeoChristian ethic, which still saturates our culture with the idea that the physical body is
one day going to rise from the grave, there
has been an excessive emphasis, amounting
to a dread, a horror, of corpse desecration. If
the body isn't whole, it can hardly rise again.
This resulted, for many years, in widespread
indignation and intolerance of autopsies or
the use of the corpse as a teaching example,
through dissection, in medical schools.
A hangover of this was reported in Science
magazine of March 31, 1978.1 Congressman
John E. Moss of California had learned that
human cadavers had been utilized to assess
the protection afforded by air bags to passengers in car crashes. In great indignation
he wrote to Brock Adams, secretary of
transportation, stating that he found this
research to be morally offensive. An investigation revealed that most of the bodies came
from the "willed body programs" in diverse
states. The result of the complaint resulted
in an administration order "that the use of
human cadavers for vehicle safety research

l"The Quick, The Dead and The Cadaver

Population." Science, 31 March 1978, 1420.

November 1986

crudely violates fundamental notions of

morality and human dignity, and must therefore permanently be stopped." The six contractors who were working with the cadavers were ordered to stop by February 1979.
"What do you do with the body?" You are
not permitted to use it to experiment with air
bags. What are the people at Wayne State
University going to use instead? Those good
folks who brought you Ngo Dinh Diem and
his reign in Vietnam? They are going to use
"livingvolunteers - but at lower g's." Wayne
State, one of the six contractors, used about
ten to twenty cadavers a year in its crash test
program.
If the person with whom you are concerned dies in the hospital, you won't know
what-in-the-hell the personnel there does.
You will be shown to a waiting room while
the body is stuffed into a plastic sack, then
held in a refrigerated room until a mortician
can come and pick it up. For all you know,
they sling it around like sides of beef. The
temperature variance is for one reason only:
to inhibit the beginning putrefaction, the
decomposition of the organized organic
matter that was once a human being. If the
person dies at home, in an automobile accident, somewhere other than a hospital or
nursing home, the same procedure obtains:
A mortician or technical person is called, the
body is covered with some material, stuffed
into a body carrying vehicle, and sported off
to a mortuary.
Uniformly in the United States, what we
do with the body immediately after death is
to get rid of it, with all speed. We put it into
the hands of professional persons who specialize in body preparation, and usually the
less we know about the method used, the
better we feel. The body is made to look as
best as it possibly can so that the persons
who "are left behind" can carry out some
kind of observance to commemorate either
the life or the death of the person whose
corpse needs disposition.
Hospitals don't want the corpses stinking
up their rooms, near which others lay ill.
None of us wants a body rotting in the home
somewhere. Police gather bodies out of
wrecks, or off streets, so that ordinary activities can continue. In wars, if necessary, the
bodies are bulldozed quickly into hurriedly
dug holes in the ground, or carted off the
fields of death and assembled for boxing,
shipping, and burial.
Law Intervenes
How we act and what we do as the time
approaches to finally rid ourselves of the
body has come to be known as conducting
"a funeral." Who is entitled to supervise
these arrangements and to make decisions
concerned with the body? The dead person

Page 9

THE BELL'S FINAL TOLL

Barbara Marion Sinclair

So fleeting is a lifetime
And so full of sunshine When it chooses not to rain;
Scarcely are we born
Only to shed this mortal coil.
What precious moments we are not suffering
We spend in frenzied quest for pleasure;
As though life were a gag:
Tempting us ... abandoning us ...
Like a fleeting furlough.
Hardly is the fog of youth lifted
Before becoming the burden of maturity
That suppresses yet defines us:
Grains of sand upon the beach of humanity.

ecclesiastical cognizance, nor to sacerdotal power of any kind.

2. That the right to bury a corpse
and to preserve its remains, is a legal
right, which the courts of law willrecognize and protect.
3. Thatsuch right, in the absence of
any testamentary disposition, belongs
exclusively to the next of kin.
4. That the right to protect the
remains includes the right to preserve
them by separate burial, to select the
place of sepulture, and to change it at
pleasure.
5. That ifthe place of burial be taken
for public use, the next of kin may
claim to be indemnified for the expense of removing and suitably reinterring the remains.

This case was brought to a hearing in the

United States Supreme Court in April 1856
We carry with us little more
and was confirmed. The Ruggles report thus
Than the savage scars
came then to form the basis for funeral and
Of a drunk and arrogant yesterday;
burial law in the United States. quite apart
And the fretful futile scandals of last night.
from English precedence.
Legal interest in the corpse came to be
And now, like a vacant gallows,
accepted as inhering in the next of kin, being
An idle wind punctuates
the duty and right of prescribing ceremony
The life that was my eternity.
and disposing of the body. The rights have
developed to be those of (1) holding and
protecting the body until it is processed for
disposal, (2) selecting the place and manner
------------------------------. of the disposition, (3) prescribing the last rite
ceremonies, and (4) carrying out the disposiis no longer even a person, with a singular one way or another, at one time or another,
personality which sets him or her apart.
tion by placing the body in a grave, crypt,
the same situation will appertain: There
niche, or urn, or in a crematorium. These
There is simply a body, and all dead bodies must be a disposition of the body.
present identical problems: What do we do
In the United States, with no state reli- rights are protected by law, and the courts
with them? At the moment of death, all gion, and with an abandonment of the may intervene by injunctions, or award
responsibility for the rights of the dead per- Church of England during the time of our monetary damages for interference with
Revolutionary War, there were few ecclesi- them.
son are dictated by the laws of whatever
Legal writings attempting to enlarge on
nation in which he or she dies. Most st~tes in astical courts to pontificate concerned with
our union have or are making more clearly funerals or burial rites. In England, the habit these rights for the benefit of better underdefined legal definitions of "death." The dec- had been to place the bodies of the dead in standing have stated that the burial should
comport with the prevailing sense of decency
laration of Sydney, Australia, by the Twenty- "consecrated grounds," usually in churchSecond World Medical Assembly in August
yards or churches themselves. In the colo- in the community and that it would be nice to
permit the wishes of the dead person to be
1968, stated: "Death is a gradual process at nies and later the United States, the burials
the cellular level with tissues varying in their were relatively casual, with family grave- taken into account. There are long strings of
priorities of who does what when kith and
ability to withstand deprivation of oxygen
yards or municipally controlled cemeteries.
kin are at one another's throats over what to
supply." But medicine is one discipline and
A court fight in New York over the removlaw is another. Death has been set forth al of a body from one place of interment to do, and a number of cases developed into
legal brawls over what religious services
another (when a street in Lower Manhattan
legally as occurring when the heart stops
beating, ,the respiration ends, and there is a needed to be widened) resulted in a study of should rule, primarily when a next of kin was
dead bodies and burials. This was written by of a different brand than the deceased. If no
cessation of the animal and vital functions
the court referee, the Hon. Samuel B. Rug- next of kin is found, the duty for disposal of
consequent thereon. This is a very precise
the body falls on community officials.
time, not the continuing event that medical gles, and was printed in Bradford's SurroIn any event, what is done must be done
science now defines. The dichotomy shows gate Reports (vql. 4).2 The conclusions
reached in this report were later set forth in with all deliberate speed, and many states
up in our time when the law says the heart
have written into their Health Codes that
has not died, but medical science says the the case of Bogert v. City of lndianapolisi"
one can be charged with a misdemeanor if
brain is dead. Heroic survival techniques to
there is not a disposition of the body in a
1. That neither a corpse, nor its burkeep the popularly named "vegetable"
"reasonable time." The fact of decomposiial, is legally subject, in any way, to
existence, as with Karen Quinlan, or Baby
tion of the dead body is and has always been
Doe, are vigorously debated.
everywhere present. 4 Also, ifdeath is caused
Even here, the question is "What do we do
by infectious, communicable, or loathsome
with the body?" Shall we keep it alive? Shall
disease, the states often impose special pre2Appendix, p. 503 (1856)
we stop heroic efforts and dispose of it? That
cautions on body preparation as well as
concern is not relevant here, for ultimately 313 Ind. 134 (1859)

Page 10

November 1986

American Atheist

hermetical sealing of any body encasement.

tunately, American Atheists has recently
The opening of the West and the Civil discovered can be subject to a funeral in
War have both been factors which have which "nondenominational" religious mumchanged the mode of body preparation. The bo jumbo is carried out by the chaplain
smaller nations of Europe did not have the associated with the medical school. Most
difficulty of transportation of a dead body frequently unclaimed bodies, those who die
over long stretches of land as "remains"
at charitable institutions or in hospitals, are
were shipped back to the place of origin. used for this work.
This led to the widespread use of embalmAt the beginning of our nation, Justice
ing5 in our country. Whereas the undertakJoseph Storey, together with Simon Greening business had been a small sideline to leaf, published a report on the principles of
cabinetmaking and carpentry enterprises, it the common law in which they reviewed the
quickly developed into an independent, and offense of concealing, indecently exposing,
lucrative, business. These were all quickly throwing away, or abandoning a human
body:
brought under some state supervision
through the process of licensing for this
work. Later, a National Funeral Directors
The proper method for disposal of
the dead has been regulated by law
Association was formed and, after much
criticism of the industry in the 1960s, both a
from earliest times, on the continent
"Code of Ethics" and a "Code of Good Pracof Europe by the canon law, and in
England by the ecclesiastical law ...
tice" were developed. However, much scandal still attaches to "prearranged" planning,
In Reg. v. Stewart, the rule is
broadly laid down in the following lansince unscrupulous practices have develguage: "We have no doubt, therefore,
oped, most notably with the diversion of
that the common law casts on some
money. collected to other ambitions of the
one the duty of carrying to the grave,
promoters.
decently covered, the dead body of
As medical science becomes more and
any person dying in such a state of
more adept at using the still intact and
healthy spare parts of those who have died
to assist those in need of such organs, laws ---------------------------------become necessary to facilitate this, lest the
culture return to the ancient practice of
grave robbing. The practice, designated as
an ante marten tissue gift,was already much
in use in July 1968 when the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (UAG.A.) was approved
by the National Conference on Uniform
Laws and by the American Bar Association.
All fifty states and the District of Columbia
adopted the UAGA
by the end of 1971.
This brought a partial end to the question
"What do we do with the body?" for at least
some of it could be recycled for use by others still living.6
But what if one decides that the entire
body should be given to a university for
study by students of medicine? The human
body provides excellent raw material for the
empirical teaching methods used. Actually,
each student needs about three bodies on
which to practice during his year-and-a-half
courses in surgery and anatomy. Parts, ifnot
all, of the body as dissected simply are
trashed. But the residual that is left, unfor-

4In Arizona, a body may not be kept more

than forty-eight hours after death unless it is
embalmed or stored at below thirty-two
degrees Fahrenheit.
5The veins are drained of blood, and chemicals designed to disinfect and preserve the
body are injected. Orthodox Jews forbid
embalming.
6A sample "Uniform Donor Card" is given
on page 15.

Austin, Texas

indigence as to leave no funds for that

purpose. The feelings and the interest
of the living require this, and create
the duty:
. . . any disposal of a dead body
which is contrary to common decency
is an offense at common law.
What do we do with the body? Apparently, we must take into account the sensitivities of the survivors and the general
mores of the community in which the
deceased lived.
By 1938, in State v. Bradbury,7 a court
gave approval to cremation, distinguishing
between decent and indecent cremation. In
the case, in the small eastern city of Saco, an
aged brother had, when he found his sister
dead, tied a rope around her legs, dragged
her body down the cellar stairs, shoved it
into the furnace, and burned it. It was
impossible to get it all into the firebox at
once, but once the head and shoulders were
consumed by the fire, he forced the body

79A2d A. 657 (1938).

., know where I'm going to spend etemitq; in the qroundl"

November 1986

Page 11

farther in, and as more burned, he forced it

in farther until he was able to close the door.
He was charged with "indecently" disposing
of the body of his sister "by burning the same
in said furnace, to the great indecency of
Christian burial, in evil example to all others
in like case offending .... " The judge used
the criterion, "The first requirement of a
sound body of law is, that it would correspond with the actual feelings and demands
of the community, whether right or wrong."
What do we do with the body? Make damn
certain that whatever it is, the neighbors
approve.
And that is exactly what an internationally
famous Atheist couple did not do in the late
part of the nineteenth century. Elizabeth
Ney, originally of Westphalia, Germany, and
her husband, Edmund Montgomery, M.D.,
an Atheist philosopher, were living on their
plantation, "Liendo," near Hempstead, Texas, when their infant son Arti died of diphtheria in 1873. They simply placed a stack of
logs in the center of the grove of oak trees
near their home, wrapped the small body
with cloth, saturated it with oil, placed it on
the firewood, and set it all afire. There was
no funeral service, no ceremony of any kind.

When the fire burned out, they collected the

ashes into a leather pouch. No one knows
anything further.
Individual Opinions
As the founder of American Atheists,
members and other Atheists look to me to
develop a policy, a custom, or a rite which
can be used as a standardization for Atheist
funerals. But I don't know any more than
anyone else knows. I've never been dead. I
have, however, survived the deaths of other
persons. And, in the course of sixty-seven
years of livingI have attended about a dozen
and a half funerals. The most recent one was
during the writing of this article when it
became necessary to interrupt it in order to
attend a Roman Catholic funeral and a burial
in a military cemetery in San Antonio, Texas.
The funeral mass was so generic that it could
have been recited over the dead body of a
dog, as well as a human. There was nothing
to personalize it at all.
It should be apparent that if a decision is
made to have a ceremony, rite, wake, or
memorial concerned with the body of someone between the time of death and the dis-

A DEATH SONG
The following

is reprinted

from the

August 14,1886, Truth Seeker.

Dr. W. A. Barry died May 24th, at Jonestown, Pa. He served as surgeon in the late
war, and was with General Sheridan in his
famous ride to the front. A delegation of
twelve physicians and insurance men accompanied the remains to Reading, Pa.,
where the interment took place May 27th.
The only service was the reading of the following poem, written by John L. Stoddard,
and by Dr. Barry's request read at the grave:
When o'er my cold and lifeless clay
The parting words of love are said,
And friends and kindred meet to pay
Their last fond tribute to the dead,
Let no stern priest, with solemn
drone,
A funeral liturgy intone,
Whose creed is foreign to my
own.
Let not a word be whispered there
In pity for my unbelief,
Or sorrow that I could not share
The view that gave their souls relief.
My faith to me is no less dear No less convincing and sincere
Than theirs, so rigid and austere.
Let no stale words of church-born

Page 12

song
Float out upon the silent air,
To prove by implication wrong
The soul of him then lying there.
Why should such words be glibly
sung
O'er one when from his living
tongue
Such empty phrases never rung?
But, rather, let the faithful few
Whose hearts are knit so close to
mine,
That they with time the dearer grew,
Assemble at the day's decline;
And while the golden sunbeams
fall
In floods of light upon my pall,
Let them in softened tones recall
Some tender memory of the dead Some virtuous act, some words of
power,
Which I, perchance, have done or
said,
By loved ones treasured to that
hour;
Recount the deeds which I admired,
The motive which my soul inspired,
The hope by which my heart was
fired.

November 1986

posal of the body that it should be recognizable as related to the person and his or her
life. For this reason, why should the same
babbling be recited over everyone? If we
have half a dozen poems from which to
choose, that won't help, for certainly there
are more than half a dozen life-styles among
Atheists who are usually wildly independent
and individualistic. What mournful dirges
should we designate as music? I willnot stipulate any. I refuse to put words into your
mouths, rhythms into your ears. Suppose he
who died, in his life, was an insufferable,
chauvinistic, selfish, brutal, sadistic man albeit an Atheist. Should we feign what we
feel not? Suppose another had been warm,
supportive, kind, understanding? If we truly
loved him, need we flaunt this openly for all
to come into our private circle of intimacy?
At the Roman Catholic funeral which I
attended in late September, there was so
little reference to the man who had died that
no one would have recognized him. It simply
appears to me that we should at least say
something of this genre, ifwe say anything at
all:
We, relatives and friends of Ignatius
T. Wigglesby, gathered here, have
come together to commiserate one
with the other, that he has died and
that the bonds we knew exist no
more.
Ignatius T. Wigglesby - we all
called him Wiggie - with a name like
Ignatius, you know no one was going
to call him that. Well, he was born in
McComb, Mississippi, in 1932, and he
has died now, here in Houston, Texas,
this week. That means he was fiftyfour years old when he was killed in
this motor collision. We all knew him
only since he lived in our town about twenty years now. Marcie, here,
is his second wife and Jim and Bob are
his two kids. Wiggie used to hammer
on Marcie and the kids pretty regularly, and we all know about that.
(Pause) One or the other of us has
always had to come to the rescue or
put the kids up for the night - sometimes even Marcie.
He was a decent man, though,
when you add it all up. He worked as
best he could, and he was a good electronics engineer. He put himself
through the University of Texas, and
he always supported Marcie and the
kids. Marcie always was going back to
him, even with those lumps she took
- so he had something to offer.
He sure loved football, didn't he?
He had a bet with me on the Oilers for
next week.
None of us really knows if Wiggie
got out of life what he wanted to get.
He took some awful pride in having his

American Atheist

house and fixing it up all the time, like

he did. Everybody liked him on the job
- he was a twenty-year man at
General Electrics here. He did his
work well. He was skilled and competent.
(A small chuckle) He sure told
some good jokes, too. He was pretty
easy to get along with - unless you
were Marcie or the kids.
But, he's dead now. It willbe kind of
rocky here to get used to the idea that
he's dead. But that's it. He could have
used a few more years.
The coffin is closed because he was
pretty banged up. The kid in the
pickup who hit him was sniffing glue.
He's still in jail yet. Somehow, it
doesn't all seem right, but then a lot of
life doesn't.
Now if you'll all just get together,
we're planning to take him out to
Wake Forest Memorial since Marcie
wanted him buried there. The two of
them have a lot there. That's about all
I can say. Thank you all for coming.
Some small recitation such as this would
be a lot more honest than anything any of us
has ever heard at any funeral. Talking about
death, in general, is not going to help anyone
handle the grief one has, if one has any. Or,
help one over one's feelings of guilt ifone did
not really like the deceased because he was
a mean son-of-a-bitch. Atheists should handle reality even in death. We all survive
someone else's death; it's our own which
finishes the story for each of us.
What do we do with the body?
What music is to be used? Is the question
ever asked, "Why music at all?" W,hat if
there should be, instead, a recording played
of a football game being described by Howard Cosell? Why not have a primal scream
as the coffin lid closes?
How do you plan to clothe the carcass?
Where is it going? Do bodies need. to be
"covered" at all? Should the Judeo-Christian
obsession with the sin of nudeness follow an
Atheist also to his/her grave? Underclothing? stockings? shoes? Why not an overcoat, earmuffs, and galoshes? One makes as
much sense as the other.
Why the "dressing of the hair," and
makeup, especially with the closed coffin
idea currrently in vogue? Why not shave
under the arms then and spray on an underarm deodorant? Let us be as absurd as possible. Female corpses can have hair removed
from their legs with their favorite depilatory.
Should you let the tattoos show? After all,
they were put on by the former owner who
probably was quite proud of them.
What do we do with the body? Shave it,
powder it, perfume it, groom it, dress it in its
best clothes - and then put it some place,
away from our sight and our smell, to rot.

Austin, Texas

"Hello ... Mister FriCK?

won't be at work todoq

I'm calling to let 40u Know that Herbert Allison

he's dead as a doornail:'

Take it to a crematorium, dump it into a

body of water, bury it in a hole in the ground.
You really don't have any other options at
this point in history.
No matter what you do, it is dumb to
spend a lot of money. Dead bodies can't see
anything, feel anything, or know anything. A
quick, inexpensive disposal is all that is
necessary. Every living person knows how
others feel toward them. There need not be
an excessive display, at the monetary
expense of those who remain alive, upon the
occasion of a death.
More and more members advise the
National Office of American Atheists that
they have made anatomical gifts of their
tissues, willed their bodies to medical
schools, or requested cremation. These
solutions to the problem of "What do we do
with the body?" would appear to be the most
rational, scientific - and Atheist. The American Atheist Center highly recommends any
of the three to you - as you plot your future
demise.

Part II
Actually, all any of us knows about funerals consists of our own personal experience
with the same. One and all, they are awash
with emotion, hardly events to be analyzed
objectively. No person can look death in the
face and come away from the experience

November 1986

without it having an effect, momentary or

permanent, slight or profound, but always
emotional.
All of our burials today hark back to these
older practices of thousands of years ago inhumation, cremation, embalming, various
types of graves, cemeteries, preparation of
the body for burial, expressions of grief,
floral contributions, funeral processions,
funeral orations, gravestones and epitaphs,
consolatory and adulatory feasting, funeral
music. Recently I have been informed that
children are now excluded from many funerals so that they need not ,endure the
trauma. It appears to me that to exclude
children from anything puts them in a position of imagining what might happen; escorts
them into a world of unreality and makebelieve. Children should be privy to all
aspects of sickness, death, funeral arrangements, and body disposal. This is the stuff of
life, the duty of the living, and of death, the
lesson that there is a final end.
As I reviewed this month, my short acquaintance with death and funerals, "What
have I to do," I thought, "with a statement
concerned with Atheists and funerals?" I
know no more than anyone else. Who has a
right to pontificate, or to set down rules?
Certainly, we want to be rid of all the superstition, the religious trappings which have
accompanied the idea of death, but how to
do that? Ah, that's the rub.

Page 13

What do I mean by all these random thoughts?

Should there be a ceremony in my behalf? I have
thought long and hard about this. I would not need
one. I don't think those persons who knew me,
worked with me, or loved me would need one.
What should one do when an Atheist
dies? With alacrity, the answer comes, "Bury
him." But, Idon't think that is the immediate
answer. Paul Tirmenstein stipulated in his
will that his body should be picked up and
transported to the Anatomy Department,
University of Tennessee Medical Unit in
Memphis. Lloyd Thoren has an arrangement with the University of Indiana. Ernest
Kerpen willed his to the University of
California.
A problem is that one's body belongs to
one's relative(s) when one dies. Like a piece
of furniture, an old book, a well-worn coat, it
becomes to all extents and purposes the
property of the next of kin. Most usually
Atheist bodies are buried with extravagant
religious rituals as (especially) spouses act
out long-suppressed hostilities with crosses,
Bibles, priests, hymns, ministers, churches,
holy water, communion wafers, prayers,
printed religious announcements, and rosaries. The notices and descriptions received
at The American Atheist Center are sometimes nauseating. We had all thought for
forty years that Lou Alt's wife was an Atheist
- and so did he. The affidavit in our files tells
with what delight Ida burned his Atheist
library and how religiously she buried him.
After the Anatomy' Departments in the
medical schools are done, what is left of the
body is frequently taken to the school chapel
where a religious service is given over the
remnants before they are buried or burned.
How can one win?
You can stipulate until your pen runs out
of ink as to what you want done with your
body when you die. Your next of kin can
ignore anything you say, can tear up any
stipulations you leave. If they do not like
your will,all they need do is simply destroy it
and innocently tell everyone you left no will.
When you are dead, you cannot alter the
events that your death sets into motion. You
may say cremate, your next of kin can
ignore you. You may make prearrangements
with a mortuary, and your next of kin can
change them in any way. You may designate
your money is to go to your paramour, and
your wife needs only to tear up your will.
You can't win. When you are dead,
anyone can, really, do almost any damn

Page 14

thing he cares to do, not alone with your

property, but also with your body.
My Own Body
And then, I thought, what about me? I
represent Atheism to the world. Wouldn't
the religionists love to get their filthy paws on
my corpse? And, so I have told Jon and
Robin - no funeral parlors or mortuaries. I
don't want some religious nut to shove a
rosary up the ass of my body, or a communion wafer down its throat. My physical
body is the host of Madalyn O'Hair. Well,
that's not right. There is nothing indwelling,
no soul, no spirit, no essence, nothing. I am
simply all of the parts acting in concert under
the direction of a depository brain which has
stored both the record and the education I
received from the events of my life and the
genetically inherited factors, upon which I
have acted. The dead carcass is the carcass.
It should not matter if they shove a cross up
its ass, or spray holy water in its nose, or
screw it in the ear; when life is gone, it
doesn't matter what happens to the body.
What I don't want, as I think of it now, is for
the religious to get the satisfaction of corpse
mutilation or activities which would encourage them to assume that they have wrought
revenge for their god.
As I review what has been done with
corpses: What is the sense of draining out
blood? That is barbaric and useless. So what
if the face of the body is up or down or
sideways, east or west? What does it matter
if the body is flat on its back, curled on its
side, or in a fetal position? The idea of dressing up a body is bizarre. What is the need, for
example, of pockets in a shroud? Why a
metal or plastic casket which is not biodegradable? Why a concrete vault? This is an
extraordinary expenditure of money for no
reason. The body should be permitted to
decompose in the earth, at minimum. The
hundreds of thousands of square miles which
have been removed from farming, building,
and park areas in order to accommodate the
bodies of the dead is a scandal in our nation.
Fields of wheat should be planted there, or
- in town areas - market gardens should
be growing tomatoes, potatoes, lettuce,

November 1986

squash, cucumbers, and other vegetables. If

not food for the hungry, at least flowers and
shrubs for living beauty could be produced
from these fallow, neglected acres.
Everything done in funerals in our nation
today is for the preservation of the body, its
dressing, to prepare it for that moment when
the (Christian) rapture will carry the body
heavenward to a new life. Hairstyles and
cosmetics for the dead? Manicures and
cologne? We are carrying on insane traditions. A new suit, or a new dress - often
something the person could not have afforded when alive? Where will they walk in
shoes? This is a shameful waste. And why
should there be a different mourning mode
of dress for the relatives? Let us allay the
armbands, the wretched blacks of suit and
dress, the covered heads. None of this is
important. Ifone truly mourns the death of a
relative or comrade, the feeling within one
need not be posted without for the world to
see. It is too private to display.
I am appalled at the worries over who all
signs the guest book at the mortuary, counting the noses of those who show up and
those who don't. The arguments as to which
automobile follows the hearse and how
many are in the funeral procession, who
rides with whom, whether to hire the mortuary limousines, are indiscreet shocks to my
sensibilities. "And did you see, my dear, that
skinny little spray of flowers?" Does it matter
to the body laying there?
I have told Jon and Robin that when I die,
they should gather me up in a sheet,
unwashed, drag or carry me out and put me
on a pyre in the backyard and burn my carcass. Now, they can't do that; I know that.
When we visited in India, we were taken to
the outdoor crematoria of the poor. A large
number of bundles of wood are needed to
burn up a human body. The process takes
hours, the fire must be hot and constant,
and it smells like a barbecue. There are more
ashes and cinders from the wood than from
the body, of course. IfThe American Atheist
Center ever gets acreage and this can properly be done, it is still my preferred desire for
the disposal of my body. I know it will take
six to eight hours and someone has to tend
to the damn thing so that the fire doesn't go
out. If they can't do it themselves, then I
want them to throw the carcass in the back
of The Center's van and tote it down to San
Antonio where there is a crematorium. But I
want Jon to handle the process of loading
the carcass into the oven, himself. I don't
want any damn Christer praying over the
body or even putting his hands on it. It
served me well for decades and, as one takes
care of an old car that has been of service, I
want the same for my body. Again, I realize
that it really doesn't matter: A dead body is a
dead body, ifthat is a fallen leaf from a tree, a
dog killed on the highway, a fish caught in a
net, or a human being dead from some

American Atheist

cause.
Ordinarily, I would stipulate that - next
of kin willing, since the carcass belongs to
them - the body be given to an anatomy
class, or the spare parts used for transplanting. But I am diabetic and there is no sense in
trying to give away sugar- soaked organs
which may or may not work for the next
person. Also, it would hardly be fair to give
sixty-plus-year-old parts to a young body
struggling to survive and in need of vital
organs.
Ifwe lived near a sea, or an ocean, it would
be better if Jon and Robin could fling the
carcass into the water. The fish, the minute
organisms in the water could feed on it.
Except, of course, if I died from a disease
(such as cancer) that should not even be
transmitted to a fish.
I don't want the lives of beautiful flowers
sacrificed simply because I have died. No
floral tributes, please. I don't want a bunch of
numbnuts listening to my favorite music
when they don't even know why I loved it so.
I would prefer that blathering idiots not
attempt to encapsulate my life in eight sentences. I don't want anyone to endure a
moment of silence on my behalf. What do I
mean by all these random thoughts?
Should there be a ceremony in my behalf? I
have thought long and hard about this. I
would not need one. I don't think those persons who knew me, worked with me, or
loved me would need one. Whoever loved
me would continue to love me, in memory.
Those who hated me would continue to
hate. One cannot shut offlove -like turning
off a faucet which is running water. Love,
affection of all kind, persists. So does hatred.
I am certain that it will take most of the
day, when I die, for Jon and Robin to get rid
of the body, but I expect them to be back at
The American Atheist Center the next day
digging into the work. That's the only tribute
I need: to know that what I started continues
in competent hands.
I have begun American Atheism - the
intellectual stuff upon which a new culture
willbe predicated, and I should be remembered for that. What I would like very much
- ifwe have an American Atheist Center on
some acreage somewhere - Iwillmake certain comes into being. I want a little place
where I can go, now, and enjoy a small
corner of the outdoors. Iplan to put a flower
garden somewhere. I want to pick the trees
and the bushes. Iwant to make certain there
is a place to sit, where one can have a cold
beer and relax, where the sun will filter
through the trees and lay its gentle, warm
hand upon one's face. Iwant the bird feeders
always to be full and the plants always to be
watered. I don't want the hush of death on
anything; I would, instead, that the joy of life
be there - conversation, the bark of dogs,
the noise of children at play, birds chattering, the sounds of a brook. There should be

Austin, Texas

a statue of me there, of warm and piebald

marble, on which pigeons will probably
defecate, on which rain can fall and snow
can lay and sun can shine; some statue of me
with my mouth open - as it often has been
as I have given my opinions. Kids can climb
on it. Lovers can chisel their initials there.
During my entire life I dealt with ideas. Now,
Iwant some physical thing to remain in addition to my ideas and I want it in a little corner
of what I love so much: all of nature. I want it
outside - not inside, open - not closed,
inviting - not forbidding.
Jon and Robin willwrite something for the
magazine. "Grandma kicked off today. She
bit the final biscuit. Beside her name we now
can write kaput." What is important is how
we live, not the brief, fleeting moment of how
we die. We need to accomplish what we can
during the here and now of our existence.
Posterity will always take care of itself.
I have asked Jon and Robin to undertake
one negating activity. My oldest son, William
J. Murray III,has been a traitor to the principles upon which this, his country, was
founded; to his family with its ideals and
history; to his class; and to the cause of
American Atheism. Under no circumstances, for no reasons whatsoever, do I
care to have him in attendance for any activities related to my death, to the disposal of

my body, or associated in any way with my

memory, so far as Jon and Robin can preserve it. He is ethically unfit, and I have
asked them, and all Atheists, to exclude him
completely and absolutely from anything
related to me. One could call this a postnatal
abortion on the part of a mother, I guess; I
repudiate him entirely and completely for
now and all times. He can never recompense
for the harm he has done to the world, our
nation, or his family, in his support of regressive, reactionary, religious, militaristic fascism. He is beyond human forgiveness.
If, from all of this, you can define what you
want done-when you die, pick and choose as
you will. You are welcome to any and all of
these ideas. I am very fortunate in that I have
two progeny who willdo what I ask them to
do. You mayor may not have this certainty.
Your body, after your death, belongs to your
next of kin. If there is one thing you should
remember above all else, that is it.
Your estate belongs to those who survive,
also. A willcan be destroyed within minutes
of your death. When you die, all of your
controls are lost. Anyone can do any damn
thing he desires to do with your real or personal property, with your body, even with
the memory of you. I call this to your attention now - lest you forget, lest you forget.

UNIFORM DONOR CARD

UNIFORM DONOR CARD

OF

_
Print or type name of donor

In the hope that I may help others, I hereby make this anatomical gift, if medically
acceptable, to take effect on my death. The words and marks below indicate my desires.
I give: (a)
(b)

any needed organs or parts;

only the following organs or parts
Specify the organ(s) or part(s)

(c)

for the purpose of transplantation, therapy, medical research, or education;

my body for anatomical study if needed.

Limitations or special wishes, if any:

Signed by the donor and the following two witnesses in the presence of each other:
Signature of Donor

Date of Birth of Donor

Date Signed

City and State

Witness

Witness

This is a legal document under the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act or similar laws.

November 1986

Page 15

AN ATHEIST CEMETERY

o, you have lived your life as an Atheist

and you wish to be buried as an Atheist.
You want to be assured that no prayers will
be said over your body, that no cross willbe
concealed on your person. You don't want a
load of Christian (or mock-Christian) folderol said over your corpse. But you don't
trust ordinary funeral homes to follow your
wishes, since their specialty is quite the
opposite. What to do?
There is a very unique cemetery in the
United States, the founder and director of
which willsee to it that your body is buried
just the way you want: the American Atheist
Infinite Cemetery.
This cemetery was founded in 1982 by
Arnold Via, known for his work with the
Prison Atheist League of America. Situated
in Grottoes, Virginia, the one-and-one-halfacre tract was zoned for cemetery use in
1983. It received its first user, Frederick
Conway, soon thereafter. Mr. Conway, who
died while stillan inmate in the Virginia State
Penitentiary, was buried according to his
wishes: naked and unprayed-over.
Conway's burial was uniquely free of religious and pseudo religious pomp.
Via simply retrieved his corpse from
the state penitentiary, drove it to the
cemetery, and deposited it in a grave
without coffin or vault. A 1983penny
was dropped into the grave to help
date it should it be discovered by
future archaeologists. No speeches
were given because, as Via stated,
"It's absurd to talk to a dead man."
Via said at the time: "Funerals are
for the living. The Atheist motto is
'When you're dead - the game's
over.' " To those who are shocked
. by such simplicity, Mr. Via replies:'
"People think this is unusual only
because most Americans are buried
according to ritual. Atheists have
been buried in cemeteries with the
cross on one side and the Star of
David on the other. Their families
give them a religious funeral, to
which we object."
This cemetery is on Mr. Via's personal property, Rt. 1, Grottoes, Virginia. Grottoes is located in the central Shenandoah Valley, at the base
of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Nearby
cities are Harrisonburg, Waynesboro, Staunton, and Charlottesville.
Mr. Via willaccommodate the needs
of any Atheist; he willpick up a body
shipped to any funeral home in his
area or retrieve one from anywhere

on the East Coast. He adds, "Ifthey want me

to dissect them or bury them standing on
their heads, I will. No burial is too bizarre.
When you're dead, you're dead."
Arnold Via envisages the cemetery as
being not only a service for Atheists but also
a protest against the "funeral industry." As
an Atheist, Via realizes that there is no justification for financially ravaging a family for
the simple disposal of a corpse. There is no
charge for burial in the cemetery, only for
expenses involved. The total expenses for
the burial of Conway was $26: $5 for a plastic
sheet to wrap the body during transport, $4
for a rope to tie around it, and $19 for fuel.
Via noted at that time: "When you bury
someone for $26 while funeral homes charge
$4,000, $6,000, or even $10,000, you can
open up a big can of worms." Savings result
not alone from the abandonment of unnecessarily expensive coffins but from avoiding
embalming and vaults. (Embalming is not
required by law unless a body is shipped
across state lines and takes more than
twenty-four hours to reach its destination.)
Death is a natural process. And it is only

Page 16

Via stands at Conway's grave.

November 1986

natural that the dead be buried so as to help

renew the soil with the nutrients used during
life. At Via's cemetery this process is not
impeded by tombstones, markers, vaults,
etc. Via's point is to leave "everything as
natural as possible." "Perpetual care" (which
means prevention of any natural processes)
is not a function of this cemetery. "The only
thing that's perpetual is his [the deceased's]
non-existence. I'm trying to eliminate all and I mean all - invocations of religion." .
Via reports that at this time he has over a
dozen applications for spaces in the American Atheist Infinite Cemetery, half of which
are from members of American Atheists.
In case you're interested in having such a
simple, natural disposal of your body, Via's
application is reproduced opposite.
Churches have used cemeteries for hundreds of years in a punitive and discriminating way. In Via's own state of Virginia, for
example, a 1937 case* was significant.
Children converted to Reform Judaism, buried their mother in a designated grave, and
then asked permission to reinter their
Orthodox Jewish father next to their mother. Orthodox Judaism forbade it.
In New York in a 1926 case** a
husband and wife died and were buried in a cemetery maintained by the
Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn. Burial there was reserved for
those who died in communion with
that church. Their daughter, however, converted to another faith and
wanted to move the bodies to a
cemetery where she planned to be
buried. The Roman Catholic Diocese labeled this "desecration," and
the court agreed. A body in "consecrated ground" could not be put into
ground "unhallowed."
Arnold Via's American Atheist
Infinite Cemetery puts an end to
such nonsense. With no markers,
no vaults, the wishes of an Atheist
are interred with their bones in the
good sod of the Virginia mountain
country. There, religious relatives
can only bury their frustrations, as
nature claims its own and Arnold
Via protects its heritage.

*Goldman v. Mollen, 168 Va. 345,

191 SE 627.
**Yome v. Gorman, 242 NY 395,
(New York Court of Appeals).

American Atheist

AMERICAN ATHEIST INFINITE CEMETERY

Rt. 1, Box 580
Grottoes, Virginia 24441
Owner & Curator: Arnold L. Via
. The undersigned, being a member of American Atheists and/or the Prison Atheist League of America, Inc., joins with fellow Atheists
around the world in seeking rational and simple funeral arrangements in keeping with the ethical and scientific insight of Atheism.
Atheists feel that many customs and practices relating to burials and funerals are too extravagant and often impose an
unjustifiable emotional strain upon the living. We therefore favor economical funeral arrangements which can be simply
planned ahead of time.
I, accordingly, request Arnold L. Via to respect my nonreligious instructions in this matter as an Atheist. I offer the following principles for
his guidance:
(1) Use of costly caskets be avoided pursuant to state and local laws, and wherever possible, without embalming.
(2) Sympathy may be best expressed by some gift to a cause in which the dead had an active interest.
(3) Simple procedures are desirable.
(4) Following disposition of the body, or before burial or cremation, should the family desire to hold an intimate gathering,
that gathering should be brief, without elaborate formalities, and private.
My personal instructions for burial:
(1) Immediate burial: D
Immediate cremation: D
(2) I prefer a service:
Yes D
No D
(3) Embalming (pursuant to state and local laws):
Yes D
No D
(4) I suggest the remains (burial) or the ashes (cremation) be disposed of as follows:

(Use extra sheet for details if necessary, and be specific.)

(5) I prefer a local funeral director (Virginia): D
(6) I prefer Arnold Via (owner) for all arrangements:

(7) Donations to science and humanity. (Give directions):

(8) No memorial service on day of burial:

Memorial service held later: D

(9) Instead of flowers, a gift may be sent to the following:
(10) Please read the following (give source):
(Enclose copy)
(11) Kiss me good-bye:

Yes

No

Remarks: (Use extra sheet)

Signed:
Number (if PAL member):

Witnessed:
Witnessed:
Date:

Notary:

Austin, Texas

November 1986

Page 17

WHEN ATHEISTS DIE

Frank R. Zindler
are no Atheists in foxholes, and all
There
Atheists turn to religion when they are

dying." So says the ubiquitous mythology

against which Atheists struggle in America.
The way in which an Atheist reacts to the
reality of death is the most intensely scrutinized - and falsely reported - aspect of
the Atheist life-style in the context of the
larger, hostile Christian society.
It is a well-known "fact" that Dr. Madalyn
O'Hair herself turned to god on her deathbed. The fact that she is still, at the time of
writing, alive and well is irrelevant: Reports
of her conversion and death must surely
exist in hundreds of religionist files around
the world. Upon the actuality of her death,
these "reports" will be trotted out, and the
myth of the deathbed conversions of Atheists will be unleashed once again. But the
fact that she will not be given a "Christian
burial" will be at least circumstantial evidence of the falseness of the reports.
But what of the deaths of less well-known
Atheists? Will myths of their deathbed conversions be convincingly challengeable? Or
will those Atheists, for lack of an available
Atheist funeral ceremony, be subjected to
the posthumous indignity of a religious service - simply because the survivors fear
they would appear to be barbaric or unfeeling ifthere were no memorial service at all? It
is very important, in my opinion, that a dignified and honest memorial ceremony be
available for every Atheist who dies. It is
immensely important for the survivors to
have a focal point for their leave-taking, a
starting point for the restructuring of their
lives. And it is enormously important that
the larger community be made aware of the
fact that the deceased was a person who
could walk without emotional crutches - a
person who was comfortable with reality.
Just how necessary such a ceremony may
be Ilearned at the very end of 1981. Just a
few days before the New Year, one of my
closest friends - a fellow professor at the
college where Itaught in Upstate New York
- collapsed and died upon returning home
from jogging. Only a few years older than I,
he was thought to have been the very picture of fitness. Although it was well-known
that he was an Atheist, he was nevertheless
a very popular teacher and had no known
enemies or detractors. Suddenly, I found
myself in the unexpected situation of trying
to console his widow, Fran, and trying to
explain the unexplainable to his two children.

Page 18

As soon as the full reality of the situation

had sunken in, Fran asked ifIwould conduct
a memorial service. Although she was not as
Atheistic as her husband Walt, she also had
had little use for churches. When the most
liberal preacher in town offered to conduct
the funeral, she instinctively declined even though the preacher had long been a
friend of the family and had marched beside
them in Vietnam protests and had joined
with them in most of the other liberal causes
of the sixties and seventies. She knew that it
would be an obscenity for even this shadow
of an anemic faith to darken the last remembrance of the man with whom she had
shared her hopes - and doubts.
Without hesitation, I agreed to conduct
the ceremony. Ithen went home and set to
work - after a good cry. How does one
write an Atheist funeral service? Ihad never
heard of such a thing, although Idid have an
old "humanist" funeral service book. Hastily' Iread it. Although Ifelt Iwould have to
change almost everything in the ceremony
suggested in the book, it did provide a structure within which I could develop a memorial suitable for an Atheist. To this day,
I feel a debt to that book. At a feverish
rate, Iwrote what proved to be more poetry
than prose. Iselected music and dubbed it
onto cassette tapes, so my wife Ann, concealed in an alcove in the funeral parlor,
could play it at appropriate points in the
memorial service. Istayed up half the night
before the funeral, rehearsing my lines
aloud. It was almost impossible to get all
the way through the script without choking
up and starting to cry - Walt and Ihad been
that close. Finally, I felt that I had desensitized myself to the words, and Iwent to
sleep.
The next day, January 2,1982, the city of
Johnstown, NY, saw what perhaps was its
first Atheist funeral. The funeral parlor was
packed. People had to be placed in other
rooms out of sight of the main chapel. Persons even were seated on the second floor
and in the hallways. The sounds of the funeral were piped to them by the sound system, but they could not see the service. The
entire faculty of the college was there, as well
as many students, relatives - and almost
every clergyman in the region. Most of the
latter, Irealized in a rush of awareness, had
come to get anecdotal material to use in
sermons about the inability of Atheists to
deal with the reality of death.
Even my friends consider me to be a per-

November 1986

son somewhat overproud of his achievements. But of all the things Ihave done in my
life,there is none of which Iam prouder than
Iam of the degree to which Idisappointed
the clergy on that day - unless it be the fact
that Iwas able to conduct a service which,
despite its uncompromisingly Atheist nature, nevertheless gave solace to Walt's
mother - a devout Roman Catholic, but yet
a fine human being.
During the fifteen minutes just before the
ceremony began, we played Bach's organ
work, the Passacaglia and Fugue in C
Minor. The piece is meditative but impressive. People who could find seats sat down in
silence and listened to the mathematically
logical pattern of sound which engulfed
them.
At the appointed time, Irose and walked
to the podium. "Let us begin this sad and
solemn ceremony," I said, and asked the
assembly to listen to what Icalled a musical
meditation, the Etude in A Minor by Frederick Chopin. I sat down facing the congregation.
At once terrifying and emotionally cathartic, the powerful opening hammer-notes of
the etude seized the attention of everyone
there - including the clergy. As the lightning-flashes of descending scales alternated
and blended with the fateful, inexorably
returninq opening theme, the assembly
came face-to-face with the reality of death
and the significance of survival. "For now we
see through a glass, darkly," St. Paul once
said. But everyone, now - clergy included
- was seeing through a glass with increasing clarity, as the service continued.
After several short readings and very
short musical interludes (which served as
moments during which the congregation
could reflect on the words they had just
heard), Iread the final paragraphs from Bertrand Russell's youthful essay, A Free Man's
Worship.
United with his fellow-men by the
strongest of all ties, the tie of a common doom, the free man finds that a
new vision is with him always, shedding over every daily task the light of
love. The life of Man is a long march
through the night, surrounded by
invisible foes, tortured by weariness
and pain, towards a goal that few can
hope to reach, and where none may
tarry long. One by one, as they march,
our comrades vanish from our sight,

American Atheist

seized by the silent orders of omnipotent Death. Very brief is the time in
which we can help them, in which
their happiness or misery is decided.
Be it ours to shed sunshine on their
path, to lighten their sorrows by the
balm of sympathy, to give them the
pure joy of a never-tiring affection, to
strengthen failing courage, to instill
faith in hours of despair. Let us not
weigh in grudging scales their merits
and demerits, but let us think only of
their need - of the sorrows, the difficulties, perhaps the blindnesses, that
make the misery of their lives; let us
remember that they are fellow-sufferers in the same darkness, actors in
the same tragedy with ourselves. And
so, when their day is over, when their
good and their evil have become eternal by the immortality of the past, be it
ours to feel that, where they suffered,
where they failed, no deed of ours was
the cause; but wherever a spark of the
divine fire kindled in their hearts, we
were ready with encouragement, with
sympathy, with brave words in which
. high courage glowed.
Brief and powerless is Man's life;on
him and all his race the slow, sure
doom falls pitiless and dark. Blind to
good and evil, reckless of destruction,
omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way; for Man, condemned today
to lose his dearest, tomorrow himself
to pass through the gate of darkness,
it remains only to cherish, ere yet the
blow falls, the lofty thoughts that
ennoble his little day; disdaining the
coward terrors of the slave of Fate, to
worship at the shrine that his own
hands have built; undismayed b'y the
empire of chance, to preserve a mind
free from the wanton tyranny that
rules his outward life; proudly defiant
of the irresistible forces that tolerate,
for a moment, his knowledge and his
condemnation, to sustain alone, a
weary but unyielding Atlas, the world
that his own ideals have fashioned
despite the trampling march of unconscious power.
To allow Russell's message to sink in, and
to prepare the assembly for the eulogy, I
played one last musical selection, the Adagio from the Horn Trio by Johannes
Brahms. My introduction to the exquisite
but little-known work read as follows:
When words fail utterly,
we have recourse to music.
Let us listen to one last musical
meditation,
a part of the Brahms horn trio.
As we listen to this most intimate
composition

Austin, Texas

by a composer who was himself

quite free of supernatural beliefs,
We may be reminded of the effulgence
of an autumn sunset.
The hollow harmonies of the horn
calls
may remind us of the emptiness we
feel,
may resonate with our sense of
lossBut they may also suggest to us the
open spaces
our loved-one loved.
They may suggest the cosmic urgency
of minds calling out to other minds
for mutual support, for sustenance,
for love.
They may suggest the heroism we all
must summon up
as we resume the march of our own
lives,
diminished, now, by the loss of one
who yesterday walked beside us.

formed from the elements

of an insentient and uncaring earth.
He knew that the very elements
themselves
are but ashes left by the wreck of
stars celestial lamps which burned out
eons before our sun was born.
He knew that all is flux, and that
the only cosmic certainty is uncertainty.
As an Atheist and humanist, Walt was
not deluded
by thoughts of the supernatural.
He knew that ifthere is to be meaning
in life,
we ourselves must create it:
no supernatural force can aid us.
Walt knew that the creative vision,
the courage and the will for his
fulfillment
had to be found within himself,
and within his family and friends.

Let us listen.

He knew that a man must be strong;

he must not cower
before the darkling sky .
He knew that a man must be a man.

After the last chords of the French horn,

violin, and piano had faded away, I rose to
deliver the eulogy, the final segment of the
ceremony:
How difficult it is to find words,
to describe what we feel today!
How impossible it is to measure a man
with words!
We can find the circumference
of the largest palace,
the most magnificent of mansions,
by simple pacing with our feet.
But how can movements of the
tongue
mark off the measure of a mind,
or set a size to the soul
of which the poets sing?
Walt's personality was many-sided
and reached into many worlds.
He was a family man and father,
he was a teacher.
He was a lover of humanity,
and he ever sought for knowledge,
truth, and beauty.
Although a lover of the wilderness,
he knew the value of cities.
Although a lover of the intricacies
of scientific argument and discourse,
he knew the value of the most
humble
conversation at the breakfast table.
Although a lover of love, and of things
ineffable,
he knew the necessity of precise,
uncompromisingly logical thought.
As a scientist, Walt knew that humanity
is a transient phenomenon,

November 1986

The perception of beauty,

the experience of love,
the satisfaction resulting from the
exercise
of his creative powers for this existential triad,
Walt lived.
In the midst of this, he died.
Good-bye, Walt.
We shall not know your kind again.
After a few brief announcements, the
forty-minute ceremony was over, and a post1ude was played. I took my place with the
family in the receiving line past which the
several hundred mourners and observers
filed as they took their leave. As I looked into
the faces of the people who shook my hand, I
saw that almost all had shed tears - including some of the clergy. But more important, I
saw expressions of relief that our friend had
been accorded a send-off both dignified and
passionate. I saw people resolving to start
their own lives afresh, learning from the
experience and rethinking their basic philosophies.
Even the clergy, as they shook my hand,
could not help but blurt out words such as
"moving," "beautiful," "poignant," or even
"exquisite." But the face of Walt's Roman
Catholic mother I could not read, as she
thanked me formally for having conducted
the service. It was only the next morning, as I
visited Walt's home to see how the family
was doing, that I learned exactly what she
had felt but could not express at the funeral.
Preparing to return to her home in Chicago,

Page 19

she clasped one of my hands in both of hers

and said, "Your ceremony yesterday was far
better for Walt than any mass could have
been. Thank you."
Despite the depth of my own grief, there
have been few times in my lifein which I have
felt better than I did at that moment.
Only a few months later, at the very
beginning of May 1982, a second Atheist
funeral had to be conducted, this time for
the wife of my closest friend on the faculty.
Although my friend was a college professor,
he also owned a large apple orchard. Evelyn,
his wife, assumed a major part of the
responsibility for its care.
Eveyln's death was different from Walt's,
in that it was more or less expected. For
several years she had fought against an
especially cruel case of cancer. In the first
week of May, her pain ended.
As with Walt's funeral, Evelyn's too was a
crowded affair. But unlike Walt's memorial,
which had ended as somberly as it had
begun, Evelyn's funeral progressed from the
same A minor etude with which Walt's had
commenced to a piece from an American
musical - The Sound of Music!
How this remarkable situation came
about can be relived by reading the eulogy
delivered on the occasion:
Has anyone the words to describe the
loss
we feel today?
Has anyone the wit
to calculate the quantity
by which we are diminished?
Evelyn's death finds most of us unprepared unprepared to total up the books,
unprepared to say our last goodbye.
'
It finds many of us dissatisfied with
ourselves dissatisfied because we '
had not talked to her enough,
dissatisfied because we had not told
her
'
often enough of our feelings for her,
of our love.
This cutting short of a loving life
leaves us with a feeling of rage Rage, because for fifteen hundred
years
ecclesiastical powers discouraged
and forbade
the study of anatomy and surgical
medicine.
Could science have begun but ten
years sooner,
it is possible that a cancer cure
would have been found,
and Evelyn would be alive and well.
But despite the emotions which blind
us,
despite the feebleness of our vo-

Page 20

cabulary,
and despite the inadequacy of our
preparation,
We must try to express our thoughts
and feelings
about this gentle and humane
human being who has left us.
Evelyn spent many of her forty-seven
years as a mother:
she gave birth to four
handsome and beautiful children All of whom she loved as fully and as
deeply
as it is possible for a human being to
love.
All have grown upright and strong,
both morally and physically,
All have justified their mother's pride.
In all four, their mother lives on,
amplified and altered
by the particulars of their own
personalities.
Besides being a devoted mother,
Evelyn was a devoted wife.
All her married life she worked hard
and long,
with understanding and patience,
to make her household a home.
But more important than her life
as a mother and wife
was Evelyn's life as Evelyn.
She was not a person who existed
only
in the reflected glory of her family.
In her own gentle and quiet way,
she was herself complete,
a self-actualizing person,
a person from whom today
we seek to learn a lesson.
It is commonly supposed that heroism
is the lot
only of immortals such as Alexander or Galileo.
One does not expect to find heroism
in housewives.
BUT THIS SHOULD NOT BE SO.
In a very private way, Evelyn was
heroic.
Let me tell you the details.
More than three years ago,
Evelyn was found to have
an apparently inoperable cancer.
It was believed
she could not survive
for more than six months.
But she was resolved to live.
With the fortunate appearance of a
new drug,
and the power of positive thinking,
Evelyn progressed to the point
where surgery seemed possible.

November 1986

But the surgery left her seriously

incapacitated,
and the long and painful,
slow and inexorable
course of the disease unfolded.
Although she knew the grim probabilities,
she resolved to live as long as
possible.
She would watch the apples bloom
as many times as possible.
She would live to see the swallows
repeatedly return to their nest on
the porch.
She would be a lesson and model
to her family and friends.
She was a bottomless reservoir of
courage,
the most glorious of our animal
virtues.
Despite the most dehumanizing pain
and discomfort,
Evelyn rarely complained;
she did not seek for sympathy.
In the face of certain death,
Evelyn showed high courage.
She did not seek the soothing anodyne
of supernatural solutions.
Though bedridden physically, she
spurned
the emotional crutches
proffered by the purveyors of wishful thinking.
Evelyn knew that those who wish to
walk
must do so on their own no supernal power can aid them.
She knew that the creative vision,
the courage and the will
to seek fulfillment
must be found in ourselves
and in our fellow human beings.
She knew she must be strong;
she should not quail before the
cosmic chasm.
For three years,
Evelyn defied the forces
of decay and despair.
She clung to life
not with hysterical obsession,
but with a tenacity and resolve
redounding to true heroism.
Several days ago,
the swallows returned to the back
porch,
Supported and sustained by her loving family,
she watched the birds rebuild their
nest,
And she wondered:
would she see the apples bloom
again?
Alas, the cold we all have felt

American Atheist

has held the blossoms back,

and Evelyn could not see them:
the apples willnot bloom until next
week.
So when the buds burst into bloom
next week,
when perfumed boughs lure us
into orchards at the roadside,
we must savor the splendor twice
over:
once for ourselves,
and once for Evelyn.

its bright flowers

in the very midst of Death's shadow.
She would want us to turn
from shade to sunshine,
from sorrow to a happy appreciation
of what still remains to us.
She would want us to fling funereal
tradition
to the May Wind,
and listen to her musical selection:

The story I have told

sounds solemn and tragic.
But Evelyn did not view it that way.
She was ever cheerful.
She ever sought the light colors
and the sunshine.
She would have us do the same.

"Climb every mountain,"

from The Sound of Music.

Although she appreciated serious

music,
she would not have approved of our
beginning this memorial
with the somber sounds of Chopin.
Her soul was tuned to a higher pitch,
and she preferred the joyous
sounds
of American musicals.
She would want us to hear something
gay and light-hearted.
She would want us to hear something
which would tell us
that as long as our kind exists,
Joy willcontinue to grow

After the playing of that most unfunereal

selection, a brief valedictory was given:
Evelyn lives on in your memories.
She survives in the changes she has
wrought in your lives. The Evelyn who
still survives - take her with you.
Depart in peace; the ceremony is
ended. The memorial is just begun.
If one can describe a funeral as being
"successful," the two ceremonies I have
described were successful. "Funerals are for
the living, not the dead," the old adage has it
- and it is true. Both ceremonies assisted
emotional catharsis in the mourners and
provided a dignified and satisfying way to say
farewell. The survivors were given leave to
resume the living of their lives.
While yet they live, Atheists should gather

together materials for their own memorials:

poems, musical selections, excerpts from
essays, autobiographical notes, etc. They
should make their mortuary wishes known
to all their friends and family. Before they
die, they should find some one who will
promise to perform the ceremony, lest their
plans come to naught and sacred obscenities supplant them.
Atheists suffer enough indignity during
their lives; they should not have to be disgraced aft.er they die also. ~

Note: Frank Zindler is currently writing a

how-to-do-it manual for the conduct of Atheist memorial ceremonies. It is expected to be
finished before the end of the year.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Formerly a professor of biology and
geology, Frank R. Zindler is now a
science writer. A member of the
American Association for the
Advancement of Science, the
American Chemical Society, and the
American Schools of Oriental
Research, he is also co-chairperson of
the Committee of Correspondence on
Evolution Education, and Director of
the Central Ohio Chapter of
American Atheists.

rf"')0~
.~rk

41.

.1'_

DIAL~+ATHEIST
The telephone listings below are the various services where you may listen to short comments on state/church
issues and viewpoints originated by the Atheist community.

Tucson, Arizona
Atheist Hotline
San Diego, California
San Francisco, California
South Bay (San Jose), California
God Speaks
Denver, Colorado
Greater District of Columbia
South Florida
Atlanta, Georgia
Northern Illinois
Lexington, Kentucky
Boston, Massachusetts

Austin, Texas

(602) 623-3861
(602) 325-0908
(619) 465-8701
(415) 668-8085
(408) 377-8485
(408) 257-1486
(303) 722-1525
(703) 280-4321
(305) 474-6728
(404) 662-6606
(312) 506-9200
(606) 278-8333
(617) 969-2682

Detroit, Michigan
Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
Northern New Jersey
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Mid-Hudson, New York
Schenectady, New York
Columbus, Ohio
Portland, Oregon
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Austin, Texas DIAL-THE-ATHEIST __
Houston, Texas
Outspoken Voice of Freedom
Salt Lake City, Utah

November 1986

separation

(313) 721-6630
(612) 566-3653
(201) 777-0766
(505) 884-7360
(914) 626-4647
(518) 346-1479
(614) 294-0300
(503) 771-6208
(215) 533-1620
(512) 458-5731
(713) 522-5964
(713) 527-9255
(801) 364-4939

Page 21

GRAVE ROBBERY
Brian Lynch
f all human rituals, none is more pointO
less or insufferable than the funeral.
Looked at objectively, funerals are a waste
of time, money, and resources - a pompous and pretentious means of disposal. The
dead person doesn't care about the whole
affair, and the surviving friends and family
would be just as well-off if they simply disposed of the body and remembered the
dead one by his or her works and deeds.
Speaking for myself, Iwould much rather be
remembered for what I accomplished while
alive, than for the big party someone else
threw after I was dead.
This article will examine the American
funeral and funeral industry. I willshow how
ancient superstitions and primitive religious
mythology have been woven into a ceremony which paradoxically denies death and
exploits people confronted with the reality of
death. To accomplish these feats, an industry has grown which uses sophisticated
merchandising, psychology, and technology
to extract enormous profits by raiding insurance policies, savings, pension benefit pools,
and other available pools of wealth.
In the 1960s, author Jessica Mitford examined the funeral industry. The result of her
two-year study, The American Way of
Death, is an expose of dishonest (even
sleazy) business practices, exploitative sales
and merchandising practices, and insulation
from investigation by government officials.
The practices she documented in 1963were
still widespread in 1977 when the Federal
Trade Commission (FTC), under pressure
from dozens of senior citizen groups, consumer groups (including Ralph Nader's Public Citizen), and state PIRGs (Public Interest
Research Groups), attempted to regulate
the industry in the interest of consumers.
The Funeral Industry
Since the Reagan Administration has been
in-power, information about businesses and
industries has become less available. The
"laissez-faire" approach to regulation has
led to less fact gathering, since it was facts
gathered about business that led to increased public outcry for government to
regulate business in the first place. The last
year for which reliable funeral industry
information is available is 1984. In that year,
the Department of Commerce reported that
total expenditures on funerals were about
$9.6 billion.
That was broken down as follows: Funeral

Page 22

tition."
services and fees (paid to funeral directors)
- $3.6 billion;other services, flowers - $1.6
The first major "threat" to the established
billion; obituaries, transportation, clergy, funeral industry came in the early twentieth
burial clothing, etc. - $2.5 billion; cemetery
century from funeral directors who desired
charges (including vaults) - $1.9 billion. to compete through price advertising. In the
This is up about 50 percent from the mid- 1950s, insurance companies and banks
1970s. Most of the increase is due to infla- attempted to sell prearranged, prefinanced
tion, but nearly 20 percent is due to funerals as a cheaper alternative to funeral
increased death rates. The $9.6 billion went
home packages, but were minimally sucto 22,000 funeral homes, 500 crematories,
cessful because they couldn't overcome
and 12,000 cemeteries. Death rates have societal reluctance to confront death in a
been rising since the late 1960s from a mean
sales situation. In the late 1950s and early
of about 1.8 million per year to 1.9 million 1960s, maverick funeral directors began
annually in the early 1970s to nearly 2.2 mil- offering low-cost alternatives such as cremalion per year in the mid 198Os.Funeral costs
tion and burial at sea - attracting consumfor consumers range from a "rock bottom"
ers on the basis of price.
of $850-$900 in Texas, to as much as one can
Price competition is viewed as a threat for
spend.
two reasons. First, it lowers profits by focusCompetition to the funeral directors is ing consumer attention on something tangialmost nonexistent and has been stifled by ble and quantifiable (money), thereby reducthe industry, often through the enactment of ing the ability of the funeral director to
protective legislation. Memorial societies,
manipulate a consumer by playing on guilt
groups formed by individuals to assure quick and other emotional intangibles. Funeral
and easy disposal of dead bodies, are stifled directors find that consumers often feel
by protective trade agreements between
guilty for not having done more for the dead
cemeteries, crematoria, and funeral direc- person in life, so they seek to "atone" by
tors. In Texas, for example, no cemetery or spending lavishly on a funeral. This idea has
crematorium will accept a body unless it is been played up and reinforced by churches
brought to it by a licensed funeral director.
for centuries - enabling them to reap great
Also, embalming, while not required by any wealth - so that it is now one of the stupid
law in any state, is something consumers are
taken for grant~d notions in our culture.
forced to pay for. Since it is illegalfor funeral
Second, while the mean number of funerals
directors to charge for services not ren- per funeral company is about 100, the actual
dered, the cost of embalming has simply number depends on population density and
been included in the basic service package.
the demographics - a large number of old
The fact is, when someone has to pay for people in an urban area yields the most busiembalming, he or she will often decide to ness. About 0.3 percent of the industry (70
have an expensive "open casket" wake and
companies) does over 1,000 funerals annubuy more expensive caskets, more elabo- ally, while over 1,000 companies do less than
rate burial clothing, and other useless trap50. Most (over 68 percent) do between 80
pings to throw into the ground. Not to be - and 130 funerals annually. Active price
outdone, most cemeteries require the pur- competition would force many high priced,
chase of a vault (price $200-$3(0), and
inefficient firms out of the market; they
charge extra to install a tombstone or other
couldn't survive free, open competition. The
marker over a grave.
FTC noted that this "has resulted in a misallocation of societal resources and unnecesMarket Restraints:
sarily high consumer prices."
History And Analysis
From the inception of funeral trade associations nearly a century ago, a principal
"Free to choose" is not applicable to the
objective of members was to secure immunifuneral industry. In fact, no free market capi- ty from competitive pressures. Trade literatalist theories apply to this industry. In a ture has consistently denounced price ad1978 report, the FTC stated, "two serious
vertising as "unprofessional" and "unethiproblems faced by funeral consumers are
cal," since the oldest and largest industry
the unavailability of information and the association, the NFDA (National Funeral
absence of competitive alternatives ... it is Directors' Association), adopted a Code of
clear that the funeral industry itself is Ethics in 1884 prohibiting price advertising.
responsible for actively impeding compeStrong sanctions were imposed against fu-

November 1986

American Atheist

neral directors who did advertise prices,

including surprise inspections by state funera~ boards (which always uncovered violations of health, sanitation; and other regulations) and ostracism within the industry,
More recently, the industry has had to
compete with innovative marketing from
entrepreneurs. After the insurance industry
failed in its efforts at preneed selling of funeral packages, the cemeteries (which had been
selling pre need space for years) began to
expand their product/service line to include
a funeral as part of their total package.
The funeral directors oppose preneed selling for the same reasons they oppose price
advertising. A preneed customer can shop
around and negotiate a good price or package. By contrast, the usual funeral customer
is often in a state of grief, is confused, or is
time-pressured (to get rid of the corpse).
This makes him or her more vulnerable to
exploitation - the condition most likely to
enrich the funeral director. Additionally, a
preneed customer can lock in a fixed price,
and it then becomes the responsibility of the
pre need seller to manage the money received (which must by law be put into a
trust) until needed. Because of the economic upheavals and instability of the past
two decades, financial risk has reduced the
attractiveness of preneed sales to merchants.
The funeral industry has also been successful in most states at passing and enforcing antisolicitation laws, which forbid the
solicitation of funeral business. And through
state regulatory agencies, it has been able to
restrict the sale of funeral merchandise only
to licensed funeral directors, making it difficult for anyone outside the industry to offer
funeral services.
In the late 1950sandearly 1960s, memori-

/11.

(,

..

fll'

Austin; Texas

II,.

/"

0:===0

Ol()
II.

al societies formed and threatened the

industry's profits. Memorial societies are
groups of consumers who provide information and assistance to members, encourage
them to prearrange funerals, offer advice on
alternatives to ground burial, and present
collective purchasing power to funeral directors, attempting to negotiate contracts.
The industry response to these societies
has been one of total, vituperative hostility.
The funeral trade associations, industry
literature, and most funeral directors portrayed memorial societies as unfeeling, unAmerican and un-Christian. Industry leaders put strong pressure on members to
discourage cooperation with memorial societies, and in many states funeral boards
passed regulations forbidding funeral directors from contracting with a society without
permission from the board (which, of course,
they never got). Because the elderly are an
important target for the industry, horror
stories about memorial societies have been
regularly printed in magazines targeted at
older people.
When an individual funeral director has
contracted with a memorial society, he or
she is generally ostracized by the industry
and is frequently a target of harassment.
One common tactic is to accuse the individual of violating antisolicitation laws and to let
a case drag on for years. Other funeral directors can then truthfully tell clients that that
individual is in trouble with the state licensing board. Other tactics have included
industry boycotts of casket manufacturers
who sell to societies (or morticians dealing
with societies) and termination of membership in industry associations.
Other actions by the industry have been
directly aimed at stifling competition or cutting the industry in on any form of dead body

I,.

h.

110
II,.

,,,.

I,.
II.

,..

November 1986

disposal. These have included restrictive

laws concerning who may handle a: corpse
and restrictions on the availability of information to consumers.
In its analysis of the funeral industry, the
FTC reported that industry practices "constitute a course of conduct prohibited by
existing regulations, including but not limited
to: boycotts, threats, disparagement, blacklists, and misuse of state administrative or
judicial processes for purposes of harassrnent." The report stated that the restraints
on trade promulgated by the industry had
caused consumers "significant economic
injuries, forcing consumers to pay for unnecessary services and through unscrupulous
practices."
Government-Business

Relationships

One of the principle barriers to consumeroriented business practices within the funeral industry is the inherent conflict of interest
which arises when a state regulatory agency
or board is dominated by members of the
regulated industry. In twenty-seven states,
including Texas, only licensed funeral directors or embalmer licensees may serve on the
state board. In ten other states, the only
non-morticians allowed to serve are representatives from the Board of Health or
Department of Vital Statistics. Ten other
states only allow one to three public members. And only California provides for a
majority of non-morticians on its board.
Obviously, the absence of non-industry
representation on these boards is responsible for the poor regulation of the industry;
the board members have an economic stake
in their decisions. The reason why regulatory boards are established is to regulate the
actions of industry members - because private capitalists have never been able to consistently engage in ethical, legal business of
their own accord. But clearly the board is
superfluous if all or nearly all members are
from the industry.
Nearly all of the activity of the state
boards consists of processing license applications and handling complaints. As a
general rule, the FTC found, complaints
about overcharging or misrepresentations
to consumers were acted on very slowly or
dismissed as being "outside of the board's
jurisdiction," whereas price competition and
other actions by funeral directors which cut
profits were acted on almost immediately.
The state boards are required to make periodic inspections, but these never include a
look into the methods of dealing with customers. Instead, they look at the equipment
or check for cleanliness and methods. Lobbying has been another tactic employed by
the industry to get what it wants. The protection and promotion of the interests of the
industry have been carried out by lobbying
over the years. The two main thrusts of

Page 23

industry lobbying for the past twenty years

have been blocking proposals for itemization, and blocking proposals to add consumer representation to state boards, Other
efforts have been directed at restricting the
operations of cremation and other direct
disposal companies by placing them under
the jurisdiction of the boards. Also, the
industry has commonly lobbied for increased
death allotments from the Veteran's Administration and Social Security.
After analyzing the industry, the FTC
came out with a set of specific recommendations in 1978. They included: making price
information available to consumers, provisions for greater consumer involvement on
state boards, and FTC authority to prosecute violations of anticompetitive practices.
The industry immediately challenged the
FTC, claiming that the laws regulating its
activity were a matter for state legislatures
and regulatory boards - outside the jurisdiction of the FTC. The pricing proposals
were weakened to where a funeral director
was not required to inform consumers of
prices unless asked. No funeral director is
required to post prices, and they do not have
to give out written price information in many
states. The proposals to expand consumer
involvement on state boards were killed, but
since that time, consumer groups have been
able to force changes at the state level.
Finally, the courts have restricted the FTC's
jurisdiction to interstate cases only.

Atheist Alternatives And Solutions

The principal reason why we have a
greedy, unscrupulous funeral industry in the
United States is because of morbid fear of
death. Death is considered an improper subject for conversation, and religion has
encouraged a whole range of false, sick
beliefs about death . . . many of which are
exploited by the funeral industry. The funeral industry gets away with its practices largely because death is not a hot issue with most
people. They do not think about it, so when
they are confronted with it, they are unprepared. Persons do not study the laws relating to the handling and disposal of dead
bodies, so they are not on an equal footing
when dealing with a mortician.
Everyone will die someday. Therefore, it
makes sense for everyone to plan for that
eventuality. As an Atheist, I see no reason
for anyone to waste time and money filling
my corpse up with chemicals, nails, and
other paraphernalia to make me look "lifelike," then placing my remains in an expensive box and displaying me at an elaborate
but pointless ceremony - only to throw me
into the ground forever. I would rather have
organs donated to livingpeople who can use
them or have myself used by scientists to
further human knowledge.
Religious superstitions about the need to

keep bodies intact after death and the modern witch doctoring exercise called a funeral
have restricted what people perceive as
their choices and caused them to fall for
what the funeral racket offers. It makes no
difference to a dead person what happens
after death. Therefore, there is no need for
Atheists to be fleeced by the funeral industry.
Ultimately, it would make sense for the
funeral industry to be removed altogether
from private capital interests and to be
handled by public entities instead. That way,
if people wanted elaborate, ridiculous funerals, they could have them, and those of us
who know we do not need them could have
wills, trusts, insurance policies, and other
wealth distributed to those whom we willto
be worthy of receiving them - rather than
allowing a merchant to gouge out a large
share. ~
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Brian J. Lynch is the former Director
of the 'Massachusetts Chapter of
American Atheists and the current
Media Coordinator for the
national office. With a BSjBA from
Babson College, he has often debated
on such topics as religion, Atheism,
politics, the arms race, history,
and science.

A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH

Donnafred

NEW WORDS AND MUSIC

Donnafred

Consider fertile acres set aside

for millions of the waiting dead, denied
their right to earthly immortality
in living plants or some great growing tree
where seeds and roots and compost work together
stirred by nature's forces, time and weather,
to build a world more viable than this
where moulding bodies wait for heaven's bliss
or, if less fortunate, the fires of hell _..
Look on this graveyard and consider well
if you'd prefer a claustrophobic tomb
or if you'd rather sprout and grow and bloom.

Would "itbe cowardly for me to say,

"May I go first?" or selfish if I moan
in fear that you be taken while I stay
to face the problems of our world alone
to solve the puzzles I've not known before?
My trials and rewards would be' my own!
Now ruthless Death has knocked upon your door.
I had to let you go. Can my life be
still filled with love and beauty, even more?
There must be love somewhere again for me.
Oh, yes! My spirit shall be high and strong
enough to face my tasks courageously,

Nothing is wasted. May I always be

a part of nature's endless energy.

to find new words and music to the song

that I must sing through life, however long.

Barbara S. Cole

When time runs out

My final wish
Will be for just two seconds
To thank the world
For tolerance
Before the darkness beckons
A minute to smile on lovers
An hour for my friends
A day to leave my family
Page 24

November 1986

Before. my days all end.

And as for foes
I leave in peace
Words need not be said;
Revenge is hell
For the living
Thank heaven
I'll be dead.

American Atheist

THE LAST PAGE

Gerald Tholen
of all occasions in any perTheson'ssaddest
life is when someone (or some-

thing) that has been lovingly regarded dies.

This is especially true when that particular
death happens suddenly and rather unexpectedly. The feelings of the surviving, saddened person are, of course, relative to that
person's ability to sustain and adjust to the
realizations of such a loss.
It would seem "unnatural" for any person
- Atheist or religionist - not to be at least
temporarily dejected during such times.
However, falling into deep depression (or
melancholy) can neither remedy the situation nor be beneficial to the survivor's mental state. Therefore, the ready acceptance of
the death of loved ones or things should be
as much a part of the reasoning ability of our
brains as is the knowledge of the imminence
of death itself. Unfortunately, this seems
never to have been the true attitude of many
(especially religious) persons, and quite often
survivors appear to allow themselves to
become more or less permanently affected
by the deaths of certain persons or things.
At any rate, I have often wondered why
we - all people - seem to have difficultyin
dealing with the deaths of others. In a
rational sense I can only compare such
losses to the similar losses of other pleasurable "possessions" or valued things that we
become accustomed to in our lives.
It is a relatively simple matter for Atheists
to understand that godiots might manage to
opiate themselves when their friends or
loved ones die with the irrational idea that
death has "really not occurred" but that the
person has simply "passed on to another
life." They therefore feel the need to have
some sort of cultlike ceremony - usually
including a body parade called afuneral- in
order to publicly display their personal feelings toward the (now) dead friend or relative. But why do some Atheists act in a
somewhat similar manner? One can only
speculate. Is it that temporary depression
causes any person to automatically engage
in activities that actually serve no practical
purpose? Perhaps so! But I rather believe
that it is, in reality, a persistent monkey-see,
monkey-do response that we have come to
regard as "cultural tradition." Will we eventually come to realize that there are alternatives to what is, essentially, religious tradition?
It has never been considered humane to
allow the dead bodies of people or things to
"lie where they fall" - and rightly so. But all

Austin, Texas

other members of the animal kingdom do

just that! We humans, alone, have a different
method of dealing with the remains of those
valued beings that have died. We all have (or
will have) to experience these procedures at
some point in our lives. The question is:
What to do? I can (as always) only speak of
my own past, personal experiences.
On at least six occasions I have been
directly involved in the burial of individuals
who were of major consequence in my life:
my father, Raymond Tholen; my brother,
Lloyd Tholen; my uncle, John Basket; a very
close and dear friend who was a longtime
companion of my mother, Alton Rowland;
and two close friends whom others may feel
should not be included as "loved ones" Champ and Queenie, who were my pets
(dogs) and hunting companions.
Obviously, the death of my father (when I
was seventeen years old) changed my life
considerably. My family was not wealthy,
but we were not paupers. So, we managed
to maintain a relatively comfortable lifestyle. Dad's burial in 1947 was a religious
one. I recall many thoughts I had at the time;
one was, what was I to do now toward the
support of myself and the surviving members
of my immediate family? I also recall the
totally irrelevant nature of the church service and the subsequent funeral and burial.
Prior to his death, my brother requested
cremation, and that was effectuated. Irather
feel like he (Lloyd) was a closet Atheist in his
later years - but that is of little consequence now. He was afforded - at the
request of his immediate family - a religious
service without a coffin. I - a known Atheist
- was present. Could I not have been? I do
know that there were no overly-religious
intimations toward his life-style and final disposition. Was it because I - a flagrant Atheist - was there?
I was a pallbearer at my uncle's funeral. It
was conducted in a secular mortuary. One
might say it still contained religious overtones, but after the funeral we (the entirety
of family and friends) got together at my
cousin's house and did what Uncle John
liked to do best: drink beer, eat snacks, and
reflect on "the good times."
The burial of my and my mother's friend
Alton puzzles me somewhat. His family was
extremely religious. Yet, his funeral service
began in a secular mortuary also! Could it be
that he had actually been skeptical or Atheistic in his late affiliations with his religious
family and survivors? Ido not know. But, his

November 1986

(adult) children and survivors requested

that the Atheist Gerald be a pallbearer for
him also. I willingly obliged. Interestingly,
during the "service," the minister who.officiated seemed to have some manner of
respect for the fact that I - a thirty-someodd-year favorite, unofficial "adopted stepson" of Alton's - and possibly Alton himself
(in life) were unbelievers. Are we beginning
to experience a measure of social change
and coming into an era of social acceptance
for Atheists?
I willnot elaborate on the final disposition
of my two faithful pets and hunting companions. Most people would probably not
appreciate stories of relationships that are
possible between human and nonhuman
beings. I buried them of course - personally. No ceremony - no parade - but the
same cutting hurt that anyone feels at such a
time. No question in my mind - they were
Atheists! Except, of course, if one were to
take into account their feelings toward their
"god-like" me, whom they loved dearly.
The overwhelming conclusion of my
experiences, which would naturally include
the deaths of many other friends, relatives,
acquaintances,
and pets, is that when
someone - some person - dies, there is an
important factor in his or her final disposition that should be considered by us all. It is
to include that any of his/her vital (usable)
organs, blood, skin, etc., be donated to the
needy living. To borrow the essence of a
famous cause slogan: "A usable organ is a
terrible thing to waste!" After that, cremation or burial is simply a matter of rather
insignificant choice. One would also be wise
to note that ifyou want your Atheism known
and recognized - advertise it proudly while
you're alive.
This has been the most difficult piece I
have ever attempted to write. Yet, due to its
personal nature it may (or may not) be of
interest to any prospective reader. It has,
however, reaffirmed in my mind how beautiful it is to be alive and in reasonably good
health. It is also comforting to know that all
the wonderful memories of people, places,
and things that I continually recall will"live"
as long as I do. Ifa dedication is in order, let it
be to the living, for they have - or willhave
- the same kind of memories. ~
Thumbscrew and Rack - Torture instruments used by religion, explicitly illustrated.
25-p. shocker. $3.00, including postage. Product
#5232. AAP., P.O. Box 2117,Austin,TX 78768-2117.

Page 25

Nevin Hawkins

A COURSE IN CLAPTRAP
don't know why, but every so often I
Ienjoy
watching some hellfire and brim-

stone preacher, or reading some religious

material professing to have all the answers.
My latest indulgence into the world of nevernever land has to do with A Course in Miracles, * a self-study course of metaphysical,
spiritual psychotherapy (that's what it says).
Before relating its precepts, I want to
explain how this piece of garbage came
about. It seems that in 1965 a Jewish psychologist from Manhattan, Helen Schueman, began seeing visions and hearing
voices. After three months of playing with
ghosts and fairies, a voice told her to take
note of what was being Said. By the way, this
voice was none other than - you guessed it
- Jesus Christ! Over a period of seven
years of dictation, a year-long quiet spell (I
assume Jesus needed a vacation), and then
two more years of asking the voice to give
chapter headings and subheadings (I didn't
know Jesus was an editor, besides being a
savior, too), the 1,500-page manuscript was
completed.
At this point, I am sure you're beside
yourself with anticipation as to what Jesus
told our Ms. Schucman to write. So without
further ado, here it goes. According to
Judith Skutch, the late Ms. Schucman's
publisher, the Course describes god as
being absolute, the true reality, and creative
spirit. Everything being a part of god is also
spirit. In other words, physical reality does
not exist. Only spirit, with properties of light
and love, exists; it is limitless and extends
into forever. Therefore, Ms. Skutch says,
"We're talking about non-time and nonspace" (sounds like we're talking about nonsense to me).
So if their god did not create the physical
universe, who did? We did! That's right,
according to Ms. Skutch, people create
physical reality. She states, "The problems
we see, the injustices, the inequities where
often we feel victimized and persecuted are not real. We see a world we've made

ourselves as the projection of the ego, to Healing in Tiburon, California.

The Course's primary purpose is to instill
disguise the fact that we are indeed as God
created us, still spirit."
a person with a sense of inner peace to such
Consequently, if your family. were in- an extent that he just loves everybody and
volved in an auto accident and they were all everything. That sure sounds wonderful,
killed, you would have nothing to fret about, .doesn't it? Everybody loving everything. Of
because cars, people, and broken bones do course, everything doesn't exist; that is why
not really exist. They are just illusions of that you love it so much. I don't know about you,
stupid old ego of yours. Not only that, stu- but my definition of love is based in the condents of this numbskull philosophy believe a text of relating to someone who is real, as in
flesh and blood, not in some crackpot philosprojection of your mind caused the accident
in the first place. You created the world, the ophy that believes in denying reality. An
ostrich with its head stuck in a hole can
people, disease, earthquakes, and the drunk
that plowed into your car.
easily delude itself with phony phrases such
How, then, does someone achieve this as, "I love humanity" and "we are all one
insightful vision, beyond the chimera of the spirit." True love takes a commitment of
senses, and become one with the spirit? dealing with a person on a one-to-one level.
So that's it, kiss off reality and accept your
First, you have to have forty illusory dollars
to pay for the illusory books. Second, Ms. nonexistence in the pea soup of spiritual
smog. This is not a course in miracles, it is a
Skutch says,
course in malarkey. I think the real miracle is
that a quarter of a million copies of this tripe
It is a system for unlearning that which
we have taught ourselves and letting
are in print. ~
that voice within - the Holy Spirit ABOUT THE AUTHOR
tell us who we really are. The way in
which the Course suggests this be
A native of southern California, Nevin
accomplished is through practicing
Hawkins has survived the outrageous
forgiveness to achieve atonement.
slings and arrows of misfortune while
Atonement in this case means the
coming to Atheist maturity in a
correction of a misperception by
decision.
.
Judeo-Christian-saturated
culture.
Now, at a mature thirty-two, with a
I, too, believe its followers should practice
mishmash of employment and
atonement - for one, Dr. Gerald G. Jameducation tucked into his experience,
he faces real life - head on.
polsky, who teaches this lunacy to children
dying of cancer at his Center for Attitudinal

/lEtt I IIlye~ ellCN

KNU"P
THAT SII'ICEIf.
WIIZ

J.IIsr

~.

tJ

*This article is a commentary on an interview with Judith Skutch, president of the

Foundation for Inner Peace, which publishes A Course in Miracles. The interview
appeared in Science of Mind magazine,
March 1986.

Pag026

November 1986

American Atheist

BLASPHEMY!
uring the 1880s, the American SecuD
lar Union, one of the leading freethought organizations of its day, sponsored several traveling freethought speakers and raised funds to purchase tents in
which they could speak, since most halls
would not rent to "blasphemers." One of
these traveling educators, or "missionaries" as they called themselves, was C. B.
Reynolds.
It was on such a tour that C. B. Reynolds pitched his "Liberal Tent" in Boonton, New Jersey, on July 26,1886, intending to lecture there for several nights.
Two days later, on July 28, he was
arrested for the crime of blasphemy.
The Truth Seeker acted at that time as
the organ of the American Secular Union
and followed the Reynolds trial with particular interest and sympathy. In a threepart series, the American Atheist is
reproducing the news of the. trial as it
appeared in The Truth Seeker.
In Part I of this series, published in the
October 1986issue of the American Atheist, we saw that on Monday, July 26,
1886, C. B. Reynolds erected his tent in
Boonton, New Jersey, and prepared to
give his freethought message to the residents of that town.
The Liberal program proceeded calmly
enough that evening, as the Booth family
gave a musical introduction and, Reynolds gave his lecture to a "fair-sized"
audience. Copies of The Truth Seeker
were distributed. Late in the evening
there was some very minor vandalism
done to the tent.
But the next evening, Tuesday, the
tent was filled - and surrounded by "a
howling mob of some two hundred and

fiftyroughs, led and urged on by a pillar of

the church." The leaders encouraged
both shouting and stone-throwing. Reynolds and the Booth family completed the
planned lecture - but did so hurriedly.
After the crowd was cleared, it was discovered that two guy ropes of the tent
had been cut.
The leaders of the mob had taken no
pains to disguise their identities, and Mr.
Reynolds was able to identify them the
next morning, Wednesday, July 28, for
the purpose of a legal complaint. The
justice who received the complaint was
extremely reluctant to issue warrants for
the arrests of the rabble-rousers and did
so only after Reynolds deposited $5 with
him. Reynolds asked the mayor for protection during his lectures; the mayor
ordered the city marshall's presence at
that evening's presentation. That evening at the tent, before the planned lecture began, Mr. Reynolds was arrested
by that same marshal for blasphemy. Bail
was arranged that night, and Reynolds
returned to the tent to give his lecture.
But the crowd was so disruptive that he
was not able to complete it. Further, the
mayor and common council sent word
that "they could no longer guarantee protection or be responsible for the consequences ifthe lecture was not brought to
a close at once." Reynolds and his comrades abandoned the tent in order to
save their own skins from a literally howling mob. The next morning, Thursday,
the tent was found to have been nearly
destroyed. The main and auxiliary guys
had been cut, causing the entire structure to fall.The top ruined, the tent would
not be reusable before considerable

repair. On Friday Reynoldswas served

with an order forbidding him "to hold any
more of his so-called Liberal but unlawful
meetings within the corporate limits of
the town of Boonton."
"On Saturday, July 31,1886, Reynolds's
indictment for blasphemy was recorded
by a nearly illiterate judge - in the
crowded ballroom of the United States
Hotel. Mr. Reynolds was accompanied
during the proceedings by the editor of
The Truth Seeker, E. M. MacDonald.
While garbled testimony from individuals
unable to recount what Reynolds had
said was admitted against Reynolds, the
only defense witness was barred from
testifying because he did not positively
believe that there was a future, supernatural system of rewards arid punishments.
Bail was set to await the action of a Morris County grand jury.
On August 14, 1886, The Truth Seeker
published an examination of New Jersey's religious laws. It found that there
the Constitution adopted in 1844 guaranteed both freedom of speech and the
press and that "No person shall be denied
the enjoyment of any civilright merely on
account of his religious principles." Blasphemy was, however, a crime punishable
by twelve months hard labor or a fine not
exceeding two hundred dollars. Further,
while the Revised Statutes of New Jersey
did not exclude a nonbeliever from testifying, the common law excluded any person who did not believe "there is a God
who willpunish him if he swears falsely."
. So read on to learn what new disasters
became Atheists (not that these first
"freethinkers" were Atheists) in the "land
of the free."

PART II
Austin, Texas

November 1986

Page 27

__ A---,ugust 21, 1886

Boonton Again Awakened.
When C. B. Reynolds had procured the
affidavits necessary to a criminal prosecution of the good Christians of Boonton who
had wrecked his tent and to a civil suit
against the town for the damages caused, he
came up to this city to engage in the hard
preliminary work of arranging for the state
Convention. The Christians of Boonton
breathed freer when they knew the Infidel
had left the place, and they prayerfully
hoped he would never return. The taxpayers do not like the prospect of paying for
the tent, and the indicted rioters see the
county court in the near distance and the
state prison not far behind. But those who
thought that they had seen the last of the
Infidel were mistaken. On Wednesday, the
11th inst[ant]., Mr. Reynolds invaded the
place again, armed with hundreds of copies
of a small pamphlet on blasphemy, being the
Truth Seeker editorial of August i4th, with
some additional paragraphs addressed specificallyto the inhabitants of Morris county,
New Jersey. These he distributed in all the
stores, and in most of the houses. It is needless to say that the pamphlet was thoroughly
read.
The gossip and excitement resulting from
the arrest had in a good measure subsided,
but this second advent aroused the sleepy
little town, and for the balance of the week
blasphemy was again discussed. No violence was offered Mr. Reynolds, most of the
rougher element being at work in the silk
factory when the distribution was going on.
The justice of the peace who held Mr. Reynolds to bail was encountered upon the
street, and he extended his hand for a fraternal greeting. He got it, along with a pamphlet
which had the needless effect of lengthening
his Methodistical countenance about two
inches. In common with the rest of the
Christian population of Boonton, the justice
finds that blasphemy is a ghost of puritanical
times that will not down at his bidding. He
can arrest Mr. Reynolds, but he cannot keep
him out of Boonton.
Mr. Reynolds lectured for the Hempstead,
L.I., Freethought Association on the afternoon and evening of August 15th, and will
address the Liberals of Norwalk, Conn ..,
tomorrow, the 22d. Until after the state
Convention is held, he may be addressed in
care of this office. No further legal steps in
. his Boonton case can be taken till after the
Morris county grand jury have met, but in
the interim it is proposed to enlighten the
population of the county upon theological
matters and the relation Christianity sustains to law and liberty.
Mr. Ingersoll Will Defend Mr. Reynolds.
E. M. Macdonald, Esq., Editor of The
Truth Seeker:

Page 28

My Dear Mr. Macdonald: Mr. Baker has

handed me your letter asking whether I
would have anything to do with the Reynolds
case. Of course I shall help Mr. Reynolds. IfI
cannot be there in person, I am perfectly
willing to pay somebody who can be. I
believe in doing what little I can in defense of
the liberty of speech, and Ithink it the duty of
all Freethinkers to do what they can to teach
the world better than to decide metaphysical
questions by brute force.
Yours very truly,
R. G. Ingersoll.
The Boonton, N.J., Bulletin says:
E. M. Macdonald, the editor of The
Truth Seeker, says that Reynolds's
tent was "wrecked by Catholic and
Methodist roughs." A man who gets
so far from the truth as this when
"seeking the truth," is not a good
"seeker."
We judge by the comment appended that
the Bulletin questions the accuracy of our
statement. The facts are these. James Neafie, one of the men arrested for rioting, was
formerly a steady attendant upon Methodist
services. At present he divides his piety
between the Methodist and the Reformed
church. He is a little more Methodist than
Reformed. When H. G. Randall, another
arrested rioter, moved to Boonton, he
brought to the pastor of the Methodist
church of Boonton a letter from the Methodist church of the town which he had left.
These facts we obtained from the editor of
the Boonton Bulletin. George Hyler, the
coachman who was arrested, is also a Methodist. Allthese men are charged with inciting
to riot, and Mr. Reynolds knows that they
did take part in the partial destruction of the
tent by urging the rough element, who are
mostly members of the Catholic church, to
run Mr. Reynolds out of town. If it were not
Catholic and Methodist roughs who
wrecked the tent, we do not know who is
guilty. Certainly the tent was not wrecked by
Catholic and Methodist gentlemen.

August 28, 1886

More New Jersey Christianity.
From the Beverly Banner.
Last week an Infidel was mobbed at the
town of Boonton, Morris county, his tent
destroyed, and he narrowly escaped with his
life. The speaker began his remarks by
denouncing the Bible, and holding up the
Christian religion to ridicule. The ministers
of the gospel were sneered at as "lazy
cranks," and church people generally denounced. While this is a free country, and
everyone is his own master, and allowed to

November 1986

believe and follow such religion as his conscience dictates, still, when a man - if he
can be called such - takes a platform and
denounces that which is held most sacred by
all classes of people, it is time Judge Lynch
were allowed to take an upper hand in the
conquest. For, where is the class of people
who haven't their God? From the lower
classes of Central Africa to the highly civilized and cultured inhabitants of Europe
and America, each have their own idea as to
religion and to a God, and when a man who
has fallen so low as to take a public stand and
announce it as his belief that there is no God,
and no hereafter, and try to persuade, and in
some instances succeed, in inducing men
and women to follow him in his infamous
career, a tar-and-feather overcoat would be
too good for him.
Editorial Notes.
John P. Guild, in writing of Mr. Reynolds'
arrest, asks in the Investigator:
"Was it not Christians crazed by whisky
that tried to drown the voice of reason in
Boonton?"
No, it was not. The Christians were
crazed by Christianity.
So far as we have observed, no religious
journal has said a word about the arrest of
Mr. Reynolds in Boonton for blasphemy. We
have only a faint hope, however, that their
silence springs from shame. More than
likely, it proceeds from fear that some of
their readers would expect them to condemn the arrest, and that they are unwilling
to do.

October30, 1886
Reynolds Indicted For The Crime
Of Libeling A Ghost.
When the wisdom assembled as a grand
jury of Morris county, N.J., "arose" on
Tuesday, October 19, 1886, it left in the
hands of the young district attorney, Willard
W. Cutler, an indictment against Charles B.
Reynolds for blasphemy. This instrument of
torture, however, was not based upon Mr.
Reynolds's lecture at Boonton, but upon a
treatise which he has since written, printed
as a pamphlet and distributed at Boonton,
and which also appeared in The Truth
Seeker of October 9th and 16th. The indictment reads as follows:
Morris Co. Oyer and Terminer
and General
Jail Delivery, Oct. Term, A.D. 1886.
Morris Co., to Wit:
The grand inquest for the state of
New Jersey in and for the body of the
county of Morris upon their oath
present that Charles B. Reynolds, late
of the township of Boonton, in the

American Atheist

A JOURNAL OF FREETHOUGHT
~

13. No. 3t:l.} PUBLISHED WEEKLY.} NeW"York, Saturday,

CASTING

PEARLS

county of Morris aforesaid, on the

eighth day of October, 1886, at the
township of Boonton aforesaid, in the
county of Morris aforesaid, and within
the jurisdiction of this court, unlawfully and wickedly did willfully blaspheme the holy name of God by contumeliously reproaching his being and
providence, and by contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ and the holy
word of God, that is, the canonical
scriptures contained in the books of
the Old and New Testaments, and by
profane scoffing at and exposing them
to contempt and ridicule in that he,
the said Charles B. Reynolds, did then

Austin, Texas

BEFORE

SWINE-C.

AND REFORM.

Septeznber 4,1886.

REYNOLDS

and there publish, circulate, and distribute a certain scandalous, impious,

and blasphemous printed document
entitled, "Blasphemy and the Bible,"
by Charles B. Reynolds, in which
there were and are contained amongst
other things certain scandalous, impious, and blasphemous matter, and
things to the tenor and effect following:
"This Bible describes God as so loving that he drowned the whole world
in his mad fury, because it was so
much worse than he (knowing all
things?) ever supposed it could be. An
all-wise, unchangeable God, who got

November 1986

{33 CLINTONPLACE.} $8.00 per year.

IN

NEW

JERSEY.

out of patience with a world which was

just what his own stupid blundering
had made it, and knew no better way
out of the muddle than to destroy it by
drowning!"
And in another part of the aforesaid
printed document there are and was
contained, among. other things, certain other scandalous, impious, and
blasphemous matter and things of the
purport and effect following, to wit:
'The Bible God says his people
made him jealous, provoked him to
anger, and now he will raise the mischief with them, for he declares his
anger burns like hell. He will destroy

Page 29

them all 'were it not that I feared the

wrath of the enemy.'
"The almighty God afraid of his
enemies! Can the human mind conceive of more horrid blasphemy? Can
even a New Jersey Christian believe
such stuff was ever inspired by a God?
"WHAT THE BIBLE REALLY
TEACHES.
"The Old Testament records for
our instruction in morals the most foul
and bestial instances of fornication,
incest, and polygamy, perpetrated by
God's own pet saints, and the New
Testament indorses these lecherous
old wretches as examples for all good
Christians to follow."
And in another part of the aforesaid
document there were and are contained, among other things, certain
other scandalous, impious, and blasphemous matter and things of the
purport and effect following, that is to
say:
"Now, reader, take time and calmly
think it over. A Jewish girl becomes
the mother of God almighty - the
mother of your God. The child of this
young Jewess was God. Christ is
God. God cried and screamed,
squealed and kicked; God flung about
his little arms; God made aimless
dashes into space with his little fists;
God stared foolishly at his own little
toes; God smiled when he was comfortable and howled when pricked by
a nasty pin; God was nursed at Mary's
breast; God was wrapped in little
diapers; God lay in a cradle and was
rocked to sleep; God was quite sick
when cutting his little teeth; God
caught the measles, mumps, whooping cough, and scarlet fever; God
learned to walk and often tumbled
down, bumped his forehead, and
made his little nose bleed; God was
spanked when he was naughty.ietc.,
etc." .
Contrary to the form of the statute
in such case made and provided and
against the peace of this state, the
government and dignity of the same.
And the grand inquest aforesaid,
upon their oath aforesaid, do further
present the said Charles B. Reynolds,
late of the town of Boonton aforesaid,
in the county of Morris aforesaid, on
the 8th day of October, 1886, at township of Boonton aforesaid, and within
the jurisdiction of this court, with
force and arms disregarding the laws
of the state, and profanely deriding
and intending to bring the holy scriptures and the Christian religion into
disbelief and contempt among the
people of the state, unlawfully and
wickedly did compose, print, and pub-

Page 30

REYNOLDS INDICTED FOR THE CRIME OF

LIBELING A GHOST.
When the wisdom assembled as a grand jury of
Morris county, N. J., "arose" on 'I'uesday, October
19, 1886, it left in the hands of the young district
attorney, Willard W. Cutler, an indictment against
Charles B. Reynolds for blasphemy. This instrument
of torture, however, was not based upon Mr. Reynolds's lecture at Boonton, but upon a treatis which
he has since written, printed as a pamphlet and distributed at Boonton, and which also appeared in THE
TRUTHSEEKER
of October 9th and 16th. The indictment reads as follows:
lish, and did cause and procure to be
composed, printed, and published, a
certain scandalous, impious, and blasphemous libel of and concerning God,
and of and concerning the holy scriptures, and of and concerning the
Christian religion, which libel is published and contained in a certain
printed document, entitled "Blasphemy and the Bible," by Charles B. Reynolds, in which said libel so printed,
published, and composed, and so
caused and procured to be composed
and printed and published as aforesaid by the said Charles B. Reynolds,
the said Charles B. Reynolds did
unlawfully blaspheme the holy name
of God by denying and contumeliously reproaching his being and providence, and by contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ and the Christian religion and the holy name of
God ....
To the great scandal and contumelious reproach of God, his being and
providence, and of Jesus Christ and
the Christian religion and the holy
word of God, contrary to the form of
the statute in such' case made and
provided, and against the peace of the
state, the government and dignity of

November 1986

the same.
Willard W. Cutler, Prosecutor, etc.
This change of base on the part of the
Christians of New Jersey is a complete surprise to Mr. Reynolds. When the fanatics of
Boonton arrested him on July 28th, he was
indignant, and the most natural thing for him
to do, it seemed, was to enlighten the people
of that place as to what blasphemy laws are,
and as to who are the real blasphemers. The
first was done by circulating a pamphlet
upon blasphemy, in which was pointed out
the unconstitutionality, the barbarism, and
the foolishness of such laws; the second by
another pamphlet showing that Christians
and their Bible were the real blasphemers,
inasmuch as they ascribe to God sentiments, passions, and attributes which degrade him to the level of a Nero - an inhuman and bloodthirsty monster. This pamphlet, called "Blasphemy and the Bible,"
shows that the Bible is God's worst enemy,
and that, in circulating the book, Christians
are destroying his good character. And this
it is that makes the Christians of Morris
county angry. Owing to the stupidity of the
complainant and the justice who drew up the
first complaint against Mr. Reynolds, the
grand jury could find no ground for an
indictment. The witnesses they summoned

American Atheist

could not recollect enough of Mr. Reynolds'

lecture to work upon. To be revenged,
therefore, they pounced upon this pamphlet, and, selecting the passages quoted in
the indictment, and without specifying the
object of the pamphlet, they find a "true bill"
against Mr. Reynolds. The malicious wreckers of his tent are allowed to go free - the
district attorney refusing to call even one of
the long list of witnesses Mr. Reynolds left
with him for that purpose - while he is
prosecuted upon a totally different charge,
the obliging district attorney summoning
some fifty witnesses against him. This, we
suppose, is a Christian conception of justice.
The first notice Mr. Reynolds had that he
was indicted he read in the daily papers of
this city on Wednesday, the 20th. He at once
telegraphed to the district attorney to know
if this was so, if he was wanted to renew his
bail, and the amount of bail required. To this
the district attorney returned no answer. A
personal call upon Mr. Cutler succeeded
better, and Friday, the 22d, Mr. Reynolds
gave bail to appear on Monday, the 25th, to
plead to the indictment. Saturday Mr. Ingersoll telegraphed to the district attorney, but
to this message no answer was returned.
Mr. Ingersoll has but just undergone a surgical operation to remove an obstruction from
his throat, and under direction of his physicians must not speak above a whisper. The
mere statement of these facts ought to have
been sufficient to secure an adjournment,
but when Mr. Reynolds appeared in the
court on Monday morning, and gave bail to
appear for trial, Mr. Cutler moved that
Wednesday, the 27th, be the day fixed. Mr.
Reynolds told Judge Childs that it was
impossible for his counsel to appear at that
time. "That makes no difference," said the
judge; "get other counsel!" And he persisted
in setting the day for trial as Wednesday, the
27th, at half-past twelve.
Morristown is as orthodox a place as
Boonton, and the ire of its inhabitants runs
high against the Infidel. When Mr. Reynolds
was distributing his pamphlets upon its
streets he was threatened with arrest and
ordered to stop by the marshal of the place.
Whatever jurymen are drawn from Morristown are likely to be intensely prejudiced
against the defendant. One of the grand jury
men who indicted Mr. Reynolds said to a
Liberal of Boonton that Mr. Reynolds should
if possible secure a change of venue and
remove the trial to another county. "He
stands no chance in Morristown," said the
grand jury man. This seems to be the opinion of all the Christians of both Boonton and
Morristown - that Mr. Reynolds is as good
as convicted. In their imaginations they have
already heard the ruling of the judge that will
force the jury to convict; have seen the jury
rise and say, "He is guilty"; have seen the
officer remove the prisoner to the jail just
back of the court house; have heard the

Austin, Texas

jailer's harsh commands and the slam of the

iron doors as the victim vanished from the
sight of his friends - in their imaginations
they have heard this, and then gone home
and thanked God for his great mercy.
Morristown is essentially a Christian town,
and a sleepy one except when its people are
mad. It is some thirty miles from New York,
but a New Yorker going there imagines it to
be a good deal farther away than that. It is a
pretty place, up among the hills, and for this
reason a good many New York business
men live there, coming in to business every
day. Morristown makes a good bedchamber. The atmosphere is conducive to sleep.
A visitor feels as though he were in a church
or graveyard with a funeral under way. Outside of their religion the inhabitants worship
nothing so heartily as a lot of Revolutionary
relics shelved and labeled in an old house
where George Washington once made his
headquarters. A contemplation of ancient
times just suits the Morristown folks, and if
they could whip a few witches through the
street or hang them to the liberty pole ori the
common their happiness would no doubt be
greatly enhanced. It is a first-rate place for an
Infidel who values his liberty to keep away
from.
The physical condition of Colonel Ingersoll precluding the possibility of his undertaking to conduct the case, in which he
would have to talk perhaps for hours, other
counsel were sought. Tuesday was spent by
Mr. Reynolds in visiting the best lawyers of
New Jersey, but not one was found who
could attend to the matter. Charles Winfield, district attorney of Jersey City, Judge
Garrison, of the same place, and other distinguished legal lights, were offered retainers, but to no avail. Tired, discouraged, wet
from the constantly falling rain, and about
half sick, Mr. Reynolds made up his mind
that he would be pushed into jail before he
was forty-eight hours older, and telegraphed
to New York that the opinion of all the lawyers was that only Mr. Ingersoll himself
could save him.
Wednesday morning was rainy, and it was
at great risk to himself that Colonel Ingersoll
took an early train for Morristown, accompanied by Dwight Townsend, one of the
prominent men of this city. An assault and
battery case occupied the attention of the
court till nearly eleven, when Colonel Ingersoll rose and said he wanted to make a
motion before the court in the case of the
State against C. B. Reynolds. The motion
was that in view of the fact that only just then
had he seen the indictment against Mr. Reynolds, and as last week he had had a surgical
operation performed upon his throat, so
that until last Sunday he was able to speak
only in a whisper, as his physician positively
forbade him to try any case lest he should
permanently lose his voice, as Mr. Reynolds
was only notified on Monday of the time set

November 1986

for trial, and as he himself was not notified till

Tuesday, when he at once used all possible
endeavor to obtain other counsel, in which
he failed, he desired that the case might
stand over to the next term of court.
The court asked what action the prosecutor proposed to take in the matter. Mr.
Cutler, after some hesitancy, opposed. The
court, with marked fairness, said that though
the court had always held that the employment of distinguished counsel whose time
was generally occupied was no ground for
adjournment, this case seemed different.
Counsel had evidently made every endeavor
to procure other distinguished counsel, and
under the circumstances he would rule that
the defendant could not be deprived of his
constitutional right to counsel of his own
selection, and he would, therefore, order the
case adjourned to the next term, the third
Tuesday in January.
Bail having been renewed by Edwin Worman, Mr. Reynolds was at liberty to shake
the mud of New Jersey from his feet once
more, and he returned to New York.
And so the battle is still to be fought. It is
very evident that the desire of the people of
Boonton and Morristown is that Mr. Reynolds shall be placed behind prison bars as
speedily as possible, and, had the court not
taken the sensible and humane ground it
did, he would undoubtedly at the present
time be a convicted prisoner, doing hard
labor in a penitentiary. Mr. Reynold's reliance must be upon the ability of his counsel
and the fairness of the court, and not upon
any merciful public sentiment of the people
of Morris county. The rabble cry, "Crucify
him! crucify him!"

November 13, 1886

Mr. Reynolds And The New York "Sun."
The New York Sun of November 1st contained the following editorial article:
We are surprised to see that people
of Morris county, in New Jersey, have
taken the pains to procure the indictment of a strolling lecturer, named
Reynolds, for denouncing the Bible.
There may be an old blasphemy law of
the state which makes such a proceeding possible, but what is the use
of giving the fellow notoriety at the
expense of the inhabitants of the
county?
Of course, nothing could have gratified Reynolds more than his arrest,
with the prospect of a long trial, in
which he could figure as a martyr to
free speech, and so get an advertisement that would make of him a curiosity that other fools might pay money
to see and hear. With that view,
apparently, he has engaged Bob Inger-

Page 31

soli for his defense, and next January,

when his trial is to come off, he willbe
able to play the part of an important
public character.
In reality he is a creature of no consequence whatever, and is not even
singular in his hatred of the Bible and
of the Christian religion. There are
thousands of such blatherskites
about, and the publication of his indictment is likely to set their tongues wagging faster than ever. We may see
them hiring halls all over the Union,
and more especially in the states with
blasphemy laws, in the hope of courting prosecution, after the manner of
Reynolds, by denouncing the Bible, as
if it had done them actual physical
injury. Some men of this sort are to be
found even in the smallest community, where their vanity is tickled by the
attention they receive, because they
run counter to cherished objects of
veneration, and in New York there
are hordes of them. They flatter themselves that it is a sign of intellectual
superiority to oppose commonly received opinions, and to treat the
beliefs of other people with contempt,
and they are pretty sure to find fools
enough to gratify their delusion, either
by listening to them with open mouths
or by taking the trouble to dispute
with them, as if they were worthy of
serious consideration.
Orators like Reynolds can do the
Bible no harm, so far as the cause of
religion is concerned. Accordingly,
when Bob Ingersoll and his disciple go
out of their way to speak disrespectfullyof the Bible and get angry against
it, there is no occasion for good peopie to be disturbed. Let them alone;
suffer them to talk as they please, for it
is not such as they who are the enemies of whom the household of faith
has reason to be afraid.
-.
Evidently the writer of this is not acquainted with the temper of some of the Christians
of Morris county, New Jersey. If he were he
would know that their blasphemy law is one
of the most precious of their heirlooms from
ancient times. All the notoriety they would
give Mr. Reynolds, if they had their way,
would be a star chamber trial and the quietest possible journey to Trenton; and the
gratification of Mr. Reynolds over his arrest
consists so far in the fact that he is still out of
prison. For his liberty he is very thankful, but
. for that he is indebted to Col. Robert G.
Ingersoll, and not to a feeling of mercy
implanted in the hearts of the Morristown
Christians by anything the Sun has said or is
likely to say.
Heretofore the Sun has been a stickler for
"the rights of the poorest, humblest individ-

Page 32

ual in the land as well as those of the richest

and most powerful." Much space in its
columns has been well used in reverting to
the doctrines of Jefferson, and maintaining
their sufficiency for a governmental basis.
More than once has the Sun upheld the
"sacred right" of free speech in politics, and
this abuse of Mr. Reynolds seems to be a
sudden as well as great departure from the
policy heretofore supreme in its editorial
rooms. The departure is as dishonest as it is
great. There are, it is true, thousands of
outspoken Infidels in the country, but they
are not quite so loud-mouthed "blatherskites" as this writer for the Sun; and many
halls are hired for lectures, but the purpose
of the lecturers is, not to get arrested for
blasphemy, but to enlighten the people upon
the wickedness of just such religion as
inspires the author of this diatribe against
Mr. Reynolds. We are not going to advertise
the "consequence" of Mr. Reynolds. He is a
gentleman widely known in respectable circles, and if the editor of the Sun does not
enjoy his acquaintance, the loss is not Mr.
Reynolds's. What difference does it make,
however, whether the injured and oppressed
in this case be a small or a great man? The
infernal principle of religious persecution is
at the bottom of the matter, and ifthe victim
had been so illustrious a man as Colonel
Ingersoll himself, the outrage could not be
deepened. The Sun has shouted loud for the
"sacred rights" of free speech - we now
know with how much sincerity - but when a
practical test is made, it is found on the side
of oppression, and governed by the pitiful
policy of expediency! How different from the
conduct of the man it slurs as "Bob" Ingersoll, who defends a man he has never seen
but once or twice, because he believes in
doing what little' he can in defense of the
liberty of speech, and because he thinks it
the duty of all Freethinkers to do what they
can to teach the world better than to decide
metaphysical questions by brute force! The
editor of the Sun is not a Christian - unless
recently converted - but who now willever
attribute such sentiments to him?
What a miserable spectacle it is - a great
organ of democracy and freedom advising
against a blasphemy prosecution because
the victim is "a creature of no consequence!"
Would the prosecution be right if Mr. Reynolds were a creature of such great consequence as the editor of the Sun? By the logic
of our Jeffersonian organ, it would not only
be right but commendable. Does the editor
of the Sun believe in blasphemy laws for
creatures of great consequence, but none
for creatures of no consequence? Why this
discrimination in favor of the unknown and
lowly? In this country there should be no
classes, says the Sun: and it goes further and
says there are no classes. Yet here we find it
making by implication two distinct classes,
and a distinction with the difference that one

November 1986

class is to be imprisoned for blasphemy and

the other class to go free because of the
personal insignificance of its members.
When the Sun shines for all (at two cents per
shine) it will pay to be a creature of no
consequence.
The spirit of this editorial writer is the
meanest that ever moved a pen. Compared
with him, the fanatics of Boonton are honorable men, and John Calvin was a moral hero.
The Boonton Christians went about their
work in as manly a way as their pusillanimous natures permitted, and Calvin never
snuffled over his victims. This fellow has not
a word in condemnation of the injustice of
religious persecutions, and if expediency
allowed he would probably cheer on the
prosecution, and enjoy the agony of the victim. As it is, the prosecution is inexpedient,
and should be discontinued, because the
victim is of no consequence whatever!
Ifthe Morristown courts only would agree
with this fellow, Mr. Reynolds might rejoice
over his insignificance.

December 18, 1886

Mr. Reynolds's Program.
To the Editor of The Truth Seeker, Sir:
The sickness of my wife rendered it necessary that I should accompany her home
from New York, instead of devoting myself
to the agitation of the repeal of Sunday laws,
as I had purposed. Since our arrival home,
she has needed all my care and attention.
Having myself contracted a severe cold, I
have lacked my usual energy and been
unable to reply to correspondents, or to
carryon the work of the New York Freethinkers' Association.
But Mrs. Reynolds is gaining now, and I
propose to buckle on the armor anew.
Under any circumstances, friends may rely
on my being fully prepared for trial for the
terrible crime of "blasphemy," at Morristown, N.J., the third Tuesday in January.
Of course I look forward to the trial with
some anxiety. The orthodox are resolved to
convict, if within the scope of possibility.
They realize the growing power of Infidelity,
and are marshaling all their forces, determined to make vigorous effort to check its
progress. If they can imprison the exponent
of Freethought; if they can establish a
precedent, that the utterance of any words
derogatory to or in opposition to Christian
faith is unlawful, it will be a great victory for
orthodoxy, because they believe it would
deter any from gi~ing utterance to Infidel
opinions.
As the law stands, I think it quite likely the
court willconvict. But I can very much better endure the penalty than to make the
slightest of our principles or rights; for I am
confident the enforcement of the blasphemy
laws would insure their speedy repeal in

American Atheist

every state in the Union in which they exist.

I would take this opportunity to return my
grateful thanks to the friends who have sent
my wife and self letters of cheer and sympathy, and so generously contributed to my
defense fund.
Between now and time of trial I shall be
glad to filllecture engagements. My new lecture, "Religious Persecutions of the Nineteenth Century," gives facts that cannot fail
to arouse from apathy all who love justice
and liberty, Address me, Box 104, North
Parma,NY_
C R Reynolds

February 5, 1887
Mr_ Reynolds's Case.
The trial of Mr. Reynolds has been postponed tillthe May term of the Morris county
court, This decision was arrived at after profound consideration by the court and district
attorney. Mr. Reynolds renewed his bail Mr. Edwin Worman, of Boonton, affirming
that he would risk five hundred dollars that
Mr. Reynolds would be in Morristown on the
first Tuesday in May - and is now prepared
to go about his master's business (Liberal
lecturing) for the next three months.
It is our opinion that the legal authorities
of Morristown are ashamed of themselves,
and will never press the case to trial. They
have, perhaps, considered that God is able
to take care of himself without the interposition of the Morris county legal luminaries.
Or it may be that they have read the statutes
forbidding a non-resident of New Jersey to
sue for libel, and doubt their ability to prove
that the Jewish Jehovah is a naturalized citizen of this country. At any rate,' it is the
opinion of several of the Morris county officials, as well as our own, that District Attorney Cutler will never try the case. ~

Q&A
Q: How many fundamentalists does it take
to open an abortion clinic?
A: One - who is pregnant.
Q: How many fundamentalists does it take
to watch a porn movie?
A: Three, but they call themselves a censorship committee.
Q: What is the difference between a fundamentalist education and brainwashing?
A: Brainwashing is illegal.
Q: How many fundamentalists does it take
to form a Literary Society?
A: Ten - nine to pile up the books and one
to strike the match.

POETRY

THE MAGIC OF BAPTISM

Child you are evil,
you have sinned.
Who,Me?
Yes you, that's who!
Come, I will dunk your
reproachable head in water,
to please the offended
omnipotent God;
to cleanse and to
save you:
"Uga Bugga Buggumium;"
(magic words)
"lea Dulpa, I'm a Dopa."
Splash!
Sinner? Who me?
But I'm only three
days old.
What a strange
God he must be.
Shut up kid!
And pray, you
guilty little twit!
Guilty? Who, me?
What a strange Gooo ...
Slap!
Oh, you're absolutely right.
What a great
God he must be.

speak less
about the past
nothing changes it
those who are alone
have too many moments
to think
to recall
to remember
a life of panic
where nothing
is easy
yet
it's good
to be here
STILL.
Janet R. Griffin

James Holland

SMALL PRESSES HAVE DEFINITE PREJUDICES

&

there ought to be
a test to see if one
is a bona fide poet. It
would save
syllabification
and face. The page asks for
magical realist poetry
strong w/passion
though ordinary experience isn't
out & I study current issues &
take myself to task for
sins of past omission. Am I
ordinary
or experienced enough to handle rhyme &
classical themes & diction &
multiple simultaneous nocturnal emissions
of not more than 75 lines
with wit? Blank white verse please
no limits except epics & nearly all rejections suggest
revisions & Small prejudices have
definite presses.
Connie Brooks

- from Marcia Miller

Austin, Texas

STILL

November 1986

Page 33

REPORT FROM INDIA / Margaret Bhatty

CLEANSING THE GANGES

n June 14, Rajiv Gandhi launched an was marked by the usual rhetoric from poliambitious project to restore the
ticians without which we can't seem to get
Ganges river to its pristine purity. Fittingly, off the ground. Nine girls in regional costhe function took place in the Hindu holy city , tumes brought brass pots of water drawn
of Benares, now known as Varanasi and also from nine other major rivers and emptied
referred to as Kashi. To the pious the them into a large one filled with Ganges
Ganges is Ganga Mata, Ganga Mayya, or water. This was to symbolize an ideal that
Mother Ganges, and Benares the most
still eludes us: national integration. In his
sacred of Indian cities.
speech the prime minister urged us to
All major Indian rivers enjoy a certain sta- uphold the unity and integrity of India by
tus of sacredness and form a "pantheon of shunning the forces of separatism, violence,
rivers." But there is no explanation for the parochialism, and regionalism.
special sentiment attached to Benares. The
The opposition parties had called a
agnostic reformer Buddha first preached his shutters-down
strike in the city which
doctrine here, and it is still a place of pilgrim- received only a partial response. But it
age for Buddhists. The city probably as- remains to be seen whether the Ganges Projsumed its eminence during the subsequent
ect will finally fall foul of bigotry. The pious
revival of Hinduism and the persecution of are unprepared to see their ancient tradiBuddhists which virtually drove the religion tions changed for any valid reason. The
from India.
government might succeed in forcing indusA great deal of superstitious belief centers
tries to conform to anti-pollution measures
on the magical qualities of the Ganges. Many and establish sewage treatment plants along
believe it supernaturally cleanses itself of all the river's course. But this still leaves the
contamination, both spiritual - in the form most obnoxious source of pollution - the
of sins washed off by sinners - and material
disposal of the dead.
~ in the shape of disease germs and filth.
Considering the total lack of concern for
Were this possible, the exchequer would the purity of a river called Mother, how can
have been saved a sum of Rs. (rupees) 84 we explain the intense religious emotion
crores in this project. (A crore equals ten roused by the Ganges in most Hindus?
million.)

Ironically, as Benares prepared itself for

Mother Ganges
the colorful inauguration, two major sewers
In his book, The Discovery of India,
burst, pouring quantities of raw sewage into
the sacred stream. This was in addition to Jawaharlal Nehru describes the Ganges as a
the six major and sixty-one minor drains that
river which
already feed one hundred million liters into
it. Also, holy Ganga Mata takes to her broad
has held India's heart captive and
bosom the half-burnt corpses of 10,000 Hindrawn uncounted millions to her
banks since the dawn of history. The
dus, along with 60,000 animal carcases.
Each year more than 30,000 funeral pyres
story of the Ganges, from her source
are lit on the city's cremation ghats and the
to the sea, from old times to new, is
ashes floated down the river.
the story of India's civilization and culture, of the rise and fall of empires, of
According to tradition, the bodies of chilgreat and proud cities, of the advendren and sadhus (holy Hindu mendicants)
tures of men. . . .
.
are not cremated but consigned to the
waters. Along almost its entire course of
The pious, however, do not take such a
1,560 miles, the Ganges receives raw sewage and industrial effluents from the cities on secular view. They cite countless scriptural
myths telling of the divine origin of the river.
its banks. Upstream from Benaresitself,
chemicals are poured into the holy river A Hindu is cleansed of allsin when bathing in
from coalyards, a paper mill, an insecticide
its waters, and even repeating "0 Ganga! 0
, plant, and glassworks. Each year over 70,000 Ganga!" with reverence earns atonement
pilgrims and tourists to the city put an addi- for sins of three former existences. To be
cremated on its banks gives one a direct
tional strain ori its already over-extended
passage to heaven. Often, the sick and the
water and sanitation systems.
The inauguration of the Ganges project
aged will renounce the world and go to

Page 34

November 1986

Benares or other sacred spots along the

river to achieve this end.
Bathing in the Ganges, drinking its water,
and carrying it home in vessels for use in
religious ritual confers great merit. Its shelf
life is said to be a whole year! This, despite it
being the most polluted river we have.
The origin of the cult of water in Hinduism
is not easily explained. But with the climate
of the peninsula, its heat and drought, and
the dependence on a single monsoon season
for rain, we can see why water assumes
almost mystical significance.
Indologist Nirad Chaudhuri, in his controversial book, The Continent of Circe,
traces the water cult to the Aryans who
migrated to the subcontinent more than
2,500 years ago. As a pastoral people coming from central Europe, their tribal memory
was of the Danube, Dnieper, Don, or Volga.
They settled first in the land of many rivers,
now the Punjab, and the Ganges formed one
boundary .of their earliest kingdoms. Unused to the torrid climate, they came to attach ritual purity to bathing and the use of
water in religious ceremonies. Today, Hindus going on pilgrimage use the word tirtha,
referring to the place of pilgrimage. But its
original Sanskrit meaning was "a bathing
place on a river bank."
There are four very sacred places along
the Ganges for ritual bathing. One is at
Hardwar where the river breaks through the
Siwalik Range, 300 miles from its source in
the Himalayas. An important cyclical bathing festival was held here earlier this year.
Over three million Hindus converged on the
place to take a holy dip. The auspicious
times for bathing are fixed by astrologers
studying the conjunction of planets, and during eclipses.
Monastic sects of sahdus, who have
renounced the world and go nude, first descend into the water and thus purify it for the
pilgrims. Over 500,000 of them were present
in Hardwar this time. In the rush to get to the
water during the auspicious hours, a stampede took place and about fiftypilgrims were
trampled to death.
The second sacred place is lower down
the Ganges, at Garh-Mukteswar. The third
is at Allahabad where the Jumna (Yamuna)
joins it, along with a mythical river from
Vedic times called the Saraswati. The fourth
holy place is Benares. The 1954 bathing at
Allahabad was regarded as a perfect auspi-

American Atheist

cious time, one that will not come round

again in 108 years (140, according to other
scholars). Between two to five million pilgrims swarmed to the riverside after the
march of the naked sadhus. In the stampede
over five hundred died, but the number was
probably higher since many bodies were
carried away by the river. For many of the
pious, this appalling death was a passage
straight to heaven.
Travelogue writer Eric Newby describes
the crowd in his book, Ganga: Sacred River
of India. The sound of the concourse is like
the "whirring noise of a great nest of winged
insects that has been disturbed," he says.
All the bathers - lepers with fingers like charred rope; Brahmins
wearing sacred threads, 96 handbreadths long; enormous banyas
(merchants) and their equally enormous wives; high court judges; old
Harrovians; old Etonians; old Paulines; Indian Army officers with bushy
moustaches who were cadets at
Sandhurst, and their madams - all
these and the little bands of peasants,
men and women from the villages of
India, who make up the vast majority
of the pilgrims - all submerge themselves in the Ganga, Jumna, and the
Saraswati, drinking the water, taking
it in their cupped hands and letting it
run three times through their fingers,
healthy and diseased, rich and poor
together. For this is the water that
washes all sin.
Nirad Chaudhuri compares the movement of millions of Hindus to the river to the
march of the lemmings:
The spectacle is awe inspiring, and the
disgust which such blind obedience to
superstition would otherwise have
roused is inhibited by the mere scale
of the obedience. I do not think anybody who has not seen these Hindu
movements willfind it easy to believe
that a collective idee fixe can produce
a hyperkinesis of this order. The spectacle has become so familiar that the
people of India no longer even try to
understand it.
Ritual bathing in Benares is a continuous
process at its five most sacred flighted ghats
leading down to the river, each to be visited
in a special order in a day. Other ghats are
reserved for washermen, for landing goods
and passengers from boats, and for burning
the dead. The city is fullof temples, ashrams,
and resthouses for pilgrims.
The Lord Of Death
To die in Benares is to achieve paradise.

Austin, Texas

To be cremated there and have one's ashes

scattered on the Ganges also assures one of
heaven. Night and day, the dead are brought
into the city by bus, bullock cart, rickshaw,
and train, or on foot. Death makes all equal,
wiping out caste distinctions, for Yama, the
Lord of Death here, is the lowest of the low,
an untouchable even among the untouchables, aDorn - but a Raja nonetheless, for
he controls the traffic into heaven. A funeral
pyre can be lit only with fire taken from the
pit in his palace courtyard overlooking the
burning ghat. This fire has not gone out for
thousands of years. Legend also says that
the Dom Raja's family were formerly Brahmins who angered the god Shiv so that he
condemned them to this gruesome vocation
forever. Mourners must satisfy his demands,
otherwise the departed soul willsuffer. People pledge their land and possessions, but he
usually takes payment in cash and grain.
Each body needs forty kilograms of wood.
Considering that two hundred bodies are
cremated in a day on this particular ghat
alone, the depletion of fuel is mind-boggling
in a country where ecologists predict our
forest resources willrun only another twenty
years.
The Dom Raja's servants usually do not
let wood be totally consumed in one pyre. It
is tossed into the river, along with the halfburnt remains of the corpse, and later
retrieved by boatmen to sell again. Dogs
raised on human flesh swim out and feed on
the body along with swooping kites. Nothing
is wasted. Vagrant children snatch away the
coconuts placed on the pyre by mourners
and gleefully eat them. The poor carry off
embers to cook their food, and bathers and
washermen hold out their wet clothes to dry
by the heat of the flames. The next day,
when the ashes have cooled, the Dom Raja's
henchmen sift through them for melted gold
and jewelry worn by the dead person.
The Dom Raja is among the richest men in
Benares, but no one will mix with him. He
maintains forty-five servants and a huge
horde of relatives from his gruesome earnings. But he hankers after a social life in
which he could wear his seventeen expensive western suits and speak English. His
late father carried a gold-tipped trident in the
streets warning people to avoid his polluting
person. But the present Raja cannot break
away from his vocation, It is his dharam his caste duty, his Fate, decreed by god and
therefore immutable. The stench of the
burning pyre often makes it hard for him to
swallow his food, he declares, but he cannot
escape his destiny, so he deadens his senses
by drinking heavily.
The government intends to erect two
electric crematoriums near this ghat - a
move which has roused strong feeling among
those who refuse to see their rites and rituals
changed for any reason whatever. There is
already a group of bigots preparing to fore-

November 1986

stall this scheme. The Raja's huge clan

declare they will lay down their lives to
defend their hereditary right as guardians of
a sacred tradition.
Our metropolitan cities have crematoriums which are used by all communities. But
most of the orthodox Hindus prefer the funeral pyre. Those who can afford it then
carry the ashes to the Ganges, other sacred
rivers, or to the seashore, and cast them on
the water.
We have a crematorium here in Nagpur
which closed down within weeks of being
commissioned because no one was prepared to use it. Undoubtedly, any effort to
try and change people's customs in order to
keep the Ganges clean is bound to prove an
uphill task. And where those efforts threaten
benighted belief there are fanatics enough,
all prepared to fight to the finish. ~
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
In 1978, your editors, assisted by
Joseph Edamaruku, editor of an Indian
Atheist publication, combed India
seeking writers who would
consistently offer an interpretation of
Indian religious events. Margaret
Bhatty, in Nagpur, a well-known
feminist journalist, agreed that she
would do so in the future. She joined
the staff of the American Atheist
in January 1983.

"If I didn't need IT to pee through,

I'd whack the damn thing off!"
Page 35

HISTORICAL NOTES
100 Years Ago ...
The following appeared in the November
6, 1886, Truthseeker under the title "Agnosticism in a Tennessee Court":
"In the circuit court, Monday, Judge
Logan presiding, an incident occurred of
more than usual interest. A case, involving a
small amount of money (an appeal from a
justice), in which Mr. Harvey, a well-known
operator in marble in this county, was the
defendant, was on trial. When Mr. Harvey
was called to the witness-stand, Mr. Green,
counsel for the plaintiff, asked to put him on
his voir dire, when the followingsubstantially
occurred:
Q. Mr. Harvey, do you believe in
the existence of a God?
A. (witness evidently surprised and
thinking a moment) I do not believe in
God, but I do believe in God, the
power that controls the universe.
Q. Do you believe in a future state
of rewards and punishments?
A. I believe that every human being
suffers in this lifefor every violation of
natural and moral laws. Not accepting
the Bible as a divine revelation, I know
nothing about the future. I do not
know whence I came or whither I am
going. Therefore I cannot say that I
have any belief as to my future state.

Q. Do you believe in a conscience?

A. Most certainly I do. I believe that
every sane man has an innate sense of
right and wrong to guide his conduct.
BY THE COURT: Mr. Harvey, do
you believe in the binding obligation of
an oath in a court of justice requiring a
witness to tell the truth?
A. I do.
The court, after some deliberation,
held that the witness was not competent to testify, and he was directed to
stand aside.

to the culture of the race was the sense of

sin. As its worst this took the form ifthe idea
that the nature of man was inherently vile that merely to be born was to be accursed
with the unescapable evil heritage of Adam
- that man, once a being of perfect innocence, had fallen and was punished for his
fallboth in life and after death. For centuries
the human race lay under a terrible spell the spell of this haunting notion of inborn
evil. It obscured the viewpoint of reasonable
ethics. It did not make men better, but it
afflicted good men with the feeling that they
were bad - so that, as Lecky says, they
abused themselves unnaturally in 'language
of reprobation which would be exaggerated
if applied to the murderer or the adulterer.'
The sense of sin operated also to diminish a
true regard for virtue: sin was far more readily recognized and more prominently proclaimed than virtue; and virtue, indeed, was
held to be but a small thing even at its best in
comparison with the general, the overwhelming, the almost total depravity of the human
heart. Over the lives of ordinary men this
sense of sin cast a shadow of senseless fear,
which added to the pangs of superstition
(rather than conscience) the chief terror of
all, that of the most cruel and revolting punishment in a future life. It was of course the
great enemy of toleration and charity - for,
if a man was so powerfully impelled to
upbraid himself as a sinner, he would the
more quickly and the more mercilessly suspect, denounce and persecute his fellow
man. The belief in demons and witches was a
horrible outgrowth of this grotesquely exaggerated sense of sin. In this we cannot help
seeing that Christianity fell below the attitude of the ancient world. The operations of
what we describe somewhat vaguely as conscience were clearly recognized by the
ancients. They had intelligent distinctions of
right and wrong. Their writings celebrated
virtue. They marked well the values of character. It must be said that Christianity monstrously confused, if it was not able to destroy, such values and such reasonable
distinctions."

30 Years Ago ...

"Exceptions were taken by counsel for
defendant, and an appeal taken to the
Supreme Court."

60 Years Ago ...

This remarkable editorial by E. HaldemanJulius, originally titled "The Sense of Sin,"
appeared in the November 1926 HaldemanJulius Monthly:
"One of the contributions of Christianity

Page 36

The "Live News and Comments" section

of the Progressive World often contained
equal amounts of editorial comment and
news. This selection is from the November
1956 issue of that magazine:
" 'Religion is gaining ground,' but 'morality
is losing ground,' says Rev. Dr. Henry P. Van
Dusen, president of Union Theological
Seminary. This conflicting condition is one
of the most surprising and overlooked facts

November 1986

in America today,' he declared. Well, if religion and morality can't get along together,
one of them will have to go."

5 Years Ago ...

Censorship was one of the hot topics of
1986, and to hear the media speak about it,
one would think that censorship had never
reared its head since Comstock's day. But it
has been around as long as religion has;
witness this excerpt from the Jon G. Murray's "Editorial" of November 1981:
"A 1980 survey of 1,891 school officials,
sponsored by the Association of American
Publishers, the American Library Association, and the Association of Supervision and
Curriculum Development, covering the
school years of 1978 and 1979, showed that
one-quarter of those surveyed said one or
more books, films, or magazines were challenged in their area during those years. Half
of those challenges resulted in one of the
following actions:
"a) Restricted circulation of the offending material. For example, in Whiteville,
North Carolina, the county library has an
"adult" shelf. The library issues restricted
cards to those children whose parents don't
want them bringing home "adult" books.
"b) Removal of the material altogether.
The American Heritage Dictionary, for
example, has been removed from school
libraries in parts of Texas because it contains colloquial definitions of words such as
hot, hooker, coke, clap, def/ower, tail, ball,
knocker, nuts, and bed.

"c) Cutting offending parts of any

books, films, or magazines. For example, a
principal in Romeo, Michigan, scissored the
bosom from a recent Time cover photo ...
"d) Destroying the offensive material.
Book burnings are now widespread. Christian groups in Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky,
Tennessee, Texas, and Illinois, to name a
few, have burned books and records and
even color televisions ...
"A full 75 percent of those reporting in this
survey said that there was a change in their
area in censorship and that it was on the
increase."
The Bible - a dirty book?
You'll agree it is after reading The X-Rated Bible (456
pp.), available for $9.00 from:
A. A. P., 2210 Hancock Dr.,
P.O. Box 21 17, Austin, TX
78768

American Atheist

AMERICAN ATHEIST RADIO SERIES / Madalyn O'Hair

E. HALDEMAN-JULIUS
When the first installment of a regularly scheduled, fifteen-minute, weekly American Atheist radio
series on KTBC radio (a station inAustin, Texas, owned by then-president Lyndon Baines Johnson) hit
the airwaves on June 3, 1968, the nation was shocked. The programs had to be submitted weeks in
advance and were heavily censored. The regular production of the series ended in September 1977,
when no further funding was available.
The following is the text of American Atheist Radio Series program No. 156, first broadcast on
August 16, 1971.
have been looking for appropriate bioIgraphical
material to give you on a man
named E_Haldeman-Julius, for he was both
a blessing and a curse to the Atheist movement in America. I have presented one program on his writings, and I now have found
sufficient biographical material that I can tell
you something of him.
Emmanuel Julius was the son of a Russian
Jew, born in Odessa, who had migrated to
the United States. On both his father's and
his mother's side Emmanuel Julius came
from a line of distinguished rabbis. He was
born in Philadelphia on July 30, 1889. He
attended school up to the age of thirteen and
he worked at various jobs even during this
school time. He was only about fifteen years
of age when he conceived the idea of a series
of cheap reprints of classic material. By that
time he was a socialist.
He left Philadelphia for New York when
he was seventeen years old and soon, after
taking menial jobs for that newspaper,
began as a reporter for the New York Call. It
was a Socialist paper and he was soon writing for other such papers, especially those in
Milwaukee and Los Angeles.
.
At that time a popular Socialist weekly out
of Kansas was doing well. It had the name
Appeal To Reason. And at about this time
Emmanuel Julius married into wealth; a
banker's daughter, Marcet Haldeman, became his bride. She was a niece of Jane
Addams. The year was 1916. His bride gave
him enough money to purchase the Kansas
weekly, which he did - and she also gave
him enough funds to put into reality his
dream of having cheap reprints of classic
material, a project he named "Little Blue
Books." These books, about the size of a
person's hand, were covered with a blue
paper and sold for a nickel or a dime. The
first one printed was Edward Fitzgerald's
Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. And the
paperback book industry as we know it now,
started then.
Also, Haldeman-Julius, for he had combined his wife's name with his own, took

Austin, Texas

another unprecedented step in book history

in America. It was actually an advertising
revolution, for he bought entire pages of
advertising in the main body of the leading
newspapers. These full-page advertisements
became known to everyone in America, and
he was soon selling as many as several million copies of each of his Little Blue Books.
By the mid-thirties he was a nationally
known publishing figure. But he made the
Appeal to Reason a personal organ and lost
some of his Socialist subscribers.
He
changed its name to the Haldeman-Julius
Weekly and later to The American Freeman. He frequently wrote the entire issue
himself. He added several other journals and
changed names with frequency, always losing money on the ventures, taking his earnings from his Little Blue Books and sinking
them into the magazines.
In one year he lost $30,000 on one magazine without blinking an eye. His purpose
was to introduce new authors or give a
medium to writers who were not acceptable
to the conventional magazines. Above all, he
was interested in liberal ideas and in "debunking." One of his most interesting
exploits was a series of articles and booklets
exposing the various fundamentalist preachers who had attracted attention during the
twenties.
He was at the Scopes trial in 1925 in Dayton, Tennessee, when the theory of evolution was attacked. He became a close friend
of Clarence Darrow and published booklets
by him and debates in which Clarence Darrow was featured.
He often risked his paper on a cause. One
of these was the seemingly hopeless task of
having Eugene V. Debs freed from jail, and
for three years, 1918 to 1921, he turned the
Appeal to Reason into a battleground for
this purpose; which was finally successful.
Finally, he concentrated on Roman Catholicism. In 1926 he employed Joseph
McCabe, a former priest, to write for him on
religion and science. McCabe, who lived in
England, already had a reputation because

November 1986

of his accounts of his life in a monastery.

McCabe literally wrote hundreds of pamphlets for Haldeman-Julius.
There had
never been such a systematic attack upon a
church by one man in the United States.
Atheists were amazed at the temerity of
Haldeman-Julius in issuing such works, and
his friends had some fears for his personal
safety. He soon found that American newspapers refused his advertisements. He was
always convinced -that this refusal came
from Roman Catholic pressures on the
newspapers. No man in America was more
hated by the Roman Catholics. In later years
he published three books of cartoons drawn
by James Erickson and Harry Fowler with
most virulent editorials by himself directed
against the church. He personally felt, however, that he was interested in keeping state
and church separated and reserved the right
to examine doctrines which were offensive
to reason.
Although he attacked the Roman Catholic church and the fundamentalists, he
rarely said anything about the Jewish religion, being himself a Jew. He explained this
in the following way:
Jesus wasn't the Jewish Messiah,
as theologians recognize, and he
saved nobody. The notion of salvation
is puerile. The Jew remains a member
of an ethnic group which has a tragic
and amazing history. The Jewish Atheist and Agnostic remains a Jew. The
Jews can never swallow the Trinity,
the Divine Birth of Jesus, or the
immaculate conception of his mother.
With the advent of Father Coughlin, he
became more conscious of his own people
and championed the cause of Zionism.
Haldeman-Julius was responsible for Will
Durant's The Story of Philosophy. This
work appeared in part in his magazines and
was originally a series of Little Blue Books.
They attracted no more attention than the
other Little Blue Books. They were obtain-

Page 37

able cheaply, five cents for each of the nine

essays. By an arrangement with Simon and
Schuster, they were issued in one volume
and became a best -seller, laying the seeds of
Durant's fame and fortune.
Upton Sinclair could find no publisher for
some years. Haldeman-Julius took him up,
first publishing the famous book The Brass
Check, and then issuing novels and plays of
Sinclair's. He issued new materials by John
Cowper Powys, Frank Harris, Bertrand
Russell. He published articles by numerous
authors who were not known to the public
- Louis Adamic, James T. Farrell, Erskine
Caldwell, Fulton Oursler.
The Little Blue Books reached 1,900titles.
He started a series of Big Blue Books, and
these ran into 1,000titles. Hundreds of these
were written by Joseph McCabe and Dr. D.
O. Cauldwell. The works of Dr. Cauldwell
anticipated those of the Kinsey Report, for
he handled studies of phases of sexual life
scientifically and through personal investigation.
He faced prosecutions under libel laws
and postal laws. At the end of his life he was
unmercifully hounded by the Internal Revenue Service.
He continued to write himself, and his
books ran into several hundred volumes,
with titles such as The Outline of Bunk. His
chief writings were contained in his periodicals and illtwenty-seven volumes he put out,
titled Questions and Answers. He wrote
autobiographical material titled My First 25
Years and My Second 25 Years.
Haldeman-Julius had several gods: one
was Voltaire, the other was Robert Ingersoll.
He was originally influenced by H. L.
Mencken but turned against him finally for
his anti-democratic stand.
Because of his association with so~ialism
in his journals and because of his allegiance
to Atheism, he inextricably wound them
together so that they were related in the
public mind. Atheism exists across the politica~field in America, and it was a disservice
to this position in respect to religion to have
it associated with a particular political idea
- and one that has been in disrepute in our
nation.
The Big Blue Books were 128 pages, of
normal book size. Studies in Rationalism
was the first of these and appeared in 1925.It
had about sixty essays in it and was barred
from Canada because of an essay titled
"Crazy Jesus." We are trying to get a copy
of that essay for this Radio Series. Another
title was An Analysis of the Pope's Encyclical of December 31, 1928: The Danger of
Catholicism to the Public Schools. The most
amusing title I find in this long list is Herbert
Hoover - The Fatuous Failure in the White
House. Can you imagine anyone writing a
book with a title like that about Nixon? The
White House is too sacrosanct today.
One of the most popular of his writers was

Page 38

William J. Fielding. Mr. Fielding received an

anti-theist award of the year this year in New
York and I was there for the occasion. One
of his reissued books now is Shackles of the
Supernatural, and Fielding had about 150
Blue Books to his credit.
As to Haldeman-Julius' personal life, it
was mostly devoted to reading and writing.
He lived and published from Girard, Kansas,
and employed about fiftypeople in his plant.
I would like to finish this with some of his
quotations. Before I get into that, I must tell
you of his death. He was found one morning
dead in the private swimming pool of his
estate in Girard, Kansas. He was sixty-two
years old. Considerable speculation arose at
that time that the harassment by the Internal
Revenue Service had driven him to desperation and the taking of his own life.His widow,
Sue Haldeman, immediately discontinued
the. American Freeman magazine, noting
that it had been his personal voice and
should cease when his voice ceased. His
death was on July 31, 1951.

Question: In one of your volumes of

Questions and Answers, you tell
about Voltaire's "amusing definition
of a clergyman," but you don't give us
his exact words. Please supply them.
Answer: In his Phil~sophical Dictionary, Voltaire, in 1764, wrote as follows under the heading of "Clergyman":
"A generic title under which is
designated any Christian who consecrates himself to the service of God,
and feels himself called upon to live
without working at the expense of the
rascals who work to live."
I also like Ambrose Bierce's description of a clergyman in his famous
The Devil's Dictionary:
"A man who undertakes the management of our spiritual affairs as a
method of bettering his temporal
ones."
William Wycherley, in his play The
Country Wife, in 1673, got a lot of
blister into a single line:
"He has the canonical smirk and
the filthy clammy palm of a chaplain."
Another celebrated writer, Mary
Wollstonecraft, is equally vigorous in
this sentence from her A Vindication
of the Rights of Women, written in
1772.
"Idle vermin who two or three times
a day perform in the most slovenly
manner a service which they think
useless, but call their duty."
After long meditation, fasting, and
prayer, I'd say their job is to make the
stupid more-stupid, the ignorant more
ignorant, the nutty nuttier, and the
fanatics more fanatical.
Question: Can you give me some
pairs of proverbs that contradict each
other?

E. Haldeman-Julius
And now I would like to read you some of
his quotes from his Questions and Answers,
which were so much in demand during his
life.
Question: What's your toughest job?
Answer: Turning mental jellyfish into
thinking men and women.

November 1986

Answer: Two heads are better than

one. - Too many cooks spoil the
broth.
Hitch your wagon to a star. - Do
not attempt the impossible, a bird in
the hand is worth two in the bush,
A bird in the hand is worth two in
the bush. - Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Out of sight, out of mind. Absence makes the heart grow fonder.
You can't teach an old dog new
tricks. - You're never too old to
learn.
Opposites attract. - Birds of a
feather flock together.
Question: Did the Medieval monks
solve the problem of how many angels
can sit on the point of a pin?

American Atheist

Answer: The debate went on for centuries without anyone suggesting that
measuring devices be put to use. After
all, these recipients of God's revelations surely ought to know the dimensions of the private part of an angel's
anatomy, and knowing that, even a
school boy could bring out a yardstick
and find out how many could sit on the
point of a pin,

Keep X in Xmas!!!
Tasteful
Xmas
from
See
Sharp
Press

Question: You say that Mark Twain

was critical of God. Can you give a
quote?
Answer: Mark Twain found it hard to
believe in:
"A God who could make good
children as easily as bad, yet preferred
to make bad ones; who could have
made everyone of them happy, yet
never made a single happy one; who
made them prize their bitter life, yet
stingily cut it short; who gave his
angels painless lives, yet cursed his
other children with biting miseries and
maladies of mind and body; who
mouths justice and invented hell,
mouths mercy and invented hell,
mouths Golden Rules and forgiveness
multiplied by seventy times seven and
invented hell; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the
responsibility for man's acts upon
man. "
Question: Were there early in history
any non-believers?
Answer: Xenophanes, who lived
about 2,500 years ago, was an outspoken and enlightened rationalist
who said, among other things:
"Homer and Hesiod have ascribed

Cards
come
in
.full
COLOR!
ORDER

Austin, Texas

......

5 for $5 1111:
12 tor $10 ~:::
30 for $20
All prices ppd.,
with envelopes.

FROM:

See Sharp Press

Box 6118
SF, CA 94101

to the gods all things that are a shame

and a disgrace among mortals, stealing and adulteries and deceivings of
one another . . _ Mortals deem that
gods are begotten as they are, and
have clothes like theirs, and voice,
and form _ . . yes, and if oxen and
horses or lions had hands, and could

Mom 'Needs Your Help

The American Atheist is sponsored by a nonprofit, educational
organization - American Atheists. And whilethe American Atheist serves its mother corporation
as an educational tool, it also is a
deficit to American Atheists. It
raises no revenues.
It only educates and informs by
being present in over a thousand
public libraries, in the offices of
congresspersons,
and in thousands of private homes.

~::::
:.:.:.

But it doesn't help support its

"mother."
Ifyou enjoy the American Atheist, if you find it educational and
rewarding to read, ifyou want it to
continue its outreach - please,
give a little to "Mom." After all, it's
tax -deductible.

Ask for our

free catalog
of Anarchist
materials.

paint with their hands, and produce

works of art as men do, horses would
paint forms of gods like horses, and
oxen like oxen, and make their bodies
in the image of their several kinds. __
The Ethiopians make their gods black
and snub-nosed; the Thracians say
theirs have blue eyes and red hair." ~

Yes! I want to give Mother a hand.

Enclosed is my contribution to the American Atheist Deficit Fund in the amount of

$--I enclose 0 Check or 0 Money Order made

payable to "American Atheists."
Or, charge my credit card:
o Visa OMastercard,
Card#:
_
Bank No'; Letters:
Signature:

American Atheists
P.O. Box 2117
Austin, TX 78768-2117

November 1986

Name:
Address:

Exp. Date: __
-'--

_
_
_
_

City/State/Zip:

Page 39

BOOK REVIEW
The Truth in Crisis
The Controversy in The
Southern Baptist Convention
by James C. Hefley
Dallas, Texas
Criterion Publications
238 pages, $7.95, Paperback
for readers, the author of
Unfortunately
this book is as religious bound as those
he attempts to analyze. When the inmates
are in charge of the asylum definitions go
askew.
When one opens the pages of this book it
is to enter a strange, strange world. The
language is different, the ideology depicted is
not of this world, men are driven by tortured
definitions of dogma, and strife is churned
up over the imaginary.
The purpose of the book is ostensively to
analyze the "shift to the right" of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), an organization of 14.6 million members, governed by
36,000 ministers of this unusual faith. That
shift took place, the author thinks, during
the 1979-85 time frame. (Born-again Jimmy
Carter was elected president of the United
States in 1976.) An attempt to analyze the
organization is hindered by the intrusion of
personal anecdotal references of the author
concerned with individuals prominent therein. Whether a church is failingor succeeding
apparently is measured strictly in regard to
the number of baptisms, weekly, monthly
and yearly, as well as how much money any
given church can put into the SBC "Cooperative Programs" of outreach for Jesus.
The current schismatic dispute, the author thinks, centers on the nature of Biblical
inspiration, as [mis]interpreted in a free-for. all way by this large Baptist group. It all
. harkens back to the first Abstract of Principles written in 1859 by a minister who
believed in "the plenary (full or absolute)
inspiration of the Scriptures." A later dogma
(confession) was set forth in a nineteen-page
booklet titled Baptist Faith and Message
adopted by the Southern Baptist Convention in 1925, reaffirmed in 1963, and based
on the 1859 principles. The two disputing
factions desire to interpret thisbook either
strictly (the Conservatives) or tongue in
cheek (the Moderates). One particular, hairy
sentence speaks of the Bible displaying
"truth, without any mixture of error, for its
matter." Hence, when the interpreting gets
to the Bible itself that book is considered to
contain either "textual truth" in what is
quaintly described as "the original auto-

Page 40

graphs," or "message truth" that which is

interpreted by the reader under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, a "faith message"
which god revealed through errant writers.
The Conservatives affirm the authoritarian
approach of Biblical inerrancy. Ah, but stay.
There is more than meets the eye for inerrant means without error only while infallible
is that which cannot lead astray. The text,
however written and under whatever circumstances, was protected from error of
any form - historical, scientific, doctrinal,
theological, or philosophical - by god.
(Are you following this? Look alert as we
go. There will be a short quiz at the end of
the discussion.) Attempting to find the root
reason for the dwindling Moderate approach
the author skims, but lightly, over the rationalizations which liberal theists were
forced to make in order to live with both
reason and religion. Ultimately, JudeoChristianity was so decimated by this
approach that those who understood what
was happening decided for "a leap of existential faith to the God beyond reason."
What they found was authoritarian fundamentalism and the abandonment of reason.
The Conservatives are bound into acceptance of it all; the Moderates still try to make
errors, contradictions, absurdities, and illogical positions palatable through rationalization. For logical consistency the Conservatives are right; the Moderates do deviate
from the fundamental principles of JudeoChristianity. If Jesus Christ, ultimately, is
going to save your soul, it is idiotic to fight
over whether or not he walked on the water.
In the United States the battle was symbolically over "evolution," actually over literal acceptance of the Bible in whole part,
and it was here that the Conservatives stood
firm. Beginning in 1921,in Baylor University,
those who denied Genesis history were
driven out. And in this book we see, generations later, the remnants of sanity routed .
Those who fear the expanding fields of
science, education, and knowledge retreat
to surer ground, fighting to maintain their
ignorance and their flight from the reality of
life. With no understanding of this, the
author recites a confused and chaotic situation involving the Baptist leaders striving for
positions of influence in the hardening milieu
with just several hardcore fanatics stirring
the stew. The author, seeing nothing but the
trees, cannot describe the forest.
He plunges ahead with a blow-by-blow
description of "How The Conservatives
Came to Power" - helpless to generalize
because he cannot get beyond the particular
elements of the fight. It is true, in the SBC as
elsewhere, that the insistence of just a hand- .

November 1986

ful of crazies can carry the day as the "intellectuals" shy from the fight because it might
be "dirty." Rather than engage in the necessary arguments, they submit to the ignominy
of feigned belief. This is clearly shown in the
chapters titled "How The Conservatives
Kept Winning" and "The Moderates Strive
for A Comeback." The Conservatives,
meanwhile, having done their homework in
respect to Bible and nee-Christian criticism,
evaluated it as undermining the basic principles of Judeo-Christianity
and simply
sloughed it all off. The basic simplicity of
their solution won support.
What has been at stake is enormous
wealth and power. The basic Cooperative
Program allotment for 1985-86 is set at
$120,600,000. Operating resources of all of
the SBC agencies very easily reached
$400,000,000 for the same year. The budgets
of state conventions and local assocations .
are not included. The pension assets of the
Annuity Board are approximately one and
one half billion dollars. The SBC also runs
the world's largest religious publishing house
and supervises a number of colleges and
universities. Its press circulated 13,366,161
periodicals in 1984 (last year reported.) The
political strength, the power over the lives of
the flock is enormous. And yet, certain of
them can see that "Satan might be behind
the controversy" of Moderates v. Conservatives, or that "the Devil must be laughing" at
it.
The author; as irrationally religious as
those about whom he writes, attempts a
prophesy as to the results of the coming
schism as he holds to the perceived idea that
"God's will must be preeminent."
He concludes the book with doubt in his
mind: "We do not know what history and the
sovereign willof God will bring us." And, of
course, with attitudes and opinions such as
this, one can feel the Conservative tide
coming.
It is extremely significant to our nation,
that two of the immediate past presidents of
the SBC, James Draper and Charles Stanley, are both supporters of Pat Robertson
for the presidency of the United States.
And that tells us a helluva lot about the
Southern Baptist Convention.
The book is recommended as an eyeopener.
The Joke of Christianizing China - by B.
W. Williams. Originally written in 1927, this
1983 reprint remains an educational tool.
40 pp. Product #5520. $3.00 including postage.
American Atheists
P.O. Box 2117
Austin TX 78768-2117

American Atheist

ME TOO
"Me Too" is a feature designed to
showcase short essays written by readers in response to topics recently covered by the American Atheist or of
general interest to the Atheist community.
Essays submitted to "Me Too" (P.O.
Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117)
should be 700 to 900 words long.
am a member of American Atheists and
Iam
highly impressed with the educational

value of our voice, American Atheist.

An unspeakable crime - another - is
being committed in the southwestern U.S.A.
Tens of thousands of indigenous peoples
(Hopi and Navajo [Dineh]) are being forced
offof their land (theirs since time immemorial) by corporate (Mormon-owned) and
governmental lust for the coal and uranium
under these people's feet. The Big Mountain
(and surrounding area) people's forced relocation willmark the largest Indian removal in
this century and the largest mass uprooting
of U.S. citizens since the Japanese were put
into concentration camps during World War
II.
How is this happening in the bowels of the
country known as the "leader of the free
world"? Here, in telescoped form, is the
story, and why it is of concern to all Atheists.
About sixty years ago, oil was discovered
on Dineh land, i.e., desolate areas (remnants) thought to be worthless and therefore left to them by the U.S. government.
The Dineh elders, in a unanimous decision,
voted to not lease the land out for exploitation. Undaunted, Standard Oil presently
used its enormous influence to have a "tribal
council" formed that would be a yes-man to
the energy titans. The sham was a brilliant
success: Thousands, if not hundreds of
thousands, of acres have been signed away
by the "tribal councils" - funded and operated by the BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs) so that energy corporations could reap billions of dollars while raping the land. Ironically, the American. Indian is the most
brutally impoverished group in the U.S.
Now, at this very moment, there is a "land
dispute" raging between the Hopi tribal
council and the Navajo tribal council. This
feigned dispute between the two is a clever
subterfuge concocted by the BIA and the
Mormon church. The BIA is only an arm of
the Department of the Interior, i.e., the federal government, and Atheists know better
than anyone else does the magnitude of
power the Mormon church has in the federal
government.
In essence, the Mormon church, owner of

Austin, Texas

Peabody Coal, Inc., is trying to killtwo birds

with one stone: rake in billions of dollars
through mineral exploitation on the one
hand, and destroy traditional (Indian) culture in order to convert more people to its
"faith" on the other - all in one stroke.
I, a member of the Big Mountain support
group, was one who met with eleven Dineh
elders - genuine leaders - and here, in
gist, is a tiny sample of what they had to say:
The various churches have moved in on us
in our crisis and have declared war (again)
on our culture. They proselytize no end,
calling our religion (actually, what is called
our "religion" really isn't; our religion [love of
Earth] is undefined, and as such, is not a
religion in the Western sense, and is more
correctly called "way of life") "paganistic,"
"devilistic," and forever urging us to burn
our sacred objects and give our souls to
Jesus Christ.
Indeed, the law firm being used by the
non-Hopi, non-tribal council to expedite the
strip-mining is Mormon church-owned. In
fact, the non-Hopi, non-tribal council is
almost exclusively composed of those who
have given in and converted to Mormonism.
Oftentimes Isee outrage (justifiable) in the
pages of our journal over the tax-free status
of churches. Guess what? This genocidal act
(#3.79681.1()57), this "American apartheid"
being done in your name, is being carried out
by the BIA, and has cost OVER 100 MILLION DOLLARS TO DATE. Yes, you are
paying so that the Mormon church (and a
host of other parasitic capitalists as well) can
plunder coal and uranium (for nuclear weapons) and convert the "pagans" at the same
time.
As you read these words, political prisoners are languishing in Arizona; resisters who
haven't been carted off to jail are perpetually
harassed, e.g. water cut off (think about the
implications for people living in arid environs), fences built all around them, 90 per-

cent of their livestock (only means of subsistence) confiscated, and diurnal (now
nocturnal) visits by helicopter gunships and
F-16s(?) flying 200 feet over their heads. (At
least they don't need alarm clocks to get up
in the morning!) Needless to say, and true to
form, the U.S. government demonstrates
once again the travesty that is the Constitution, especially the First Amendment, for all
but a select few.
We, as Atheists, know that it is our duty to
fight religious tyranny wherever it rears its
ugly head. Atheists must not, cannot, stand
idly by thinking that the tragedy of Big
Mountain is just one more sad chapter in the
history of the Indian. No. As Yuri Pishchik
wrote in the August 1986 issue of American
Atheist, '.'Atheism has come to be seen not
just as the negation of religion, but as the
affirmation of positive social and moral
values." The Hopi and Dineh people have
heroically resisted Mormon aggression, and
we must support them 100 percent in their
efforts.
Atheists have a glaring need to get more
involved - much more vociferous and
unyielding on issues of (all) social, political,
and economic justice in general, and on Big
Mountain, in particular. Atheists, as enlightened - and therefore compassionate human beings, must not fail to see the intimate interrelatedness of seemingly disparate
issues and events. We need to help the people at Big Mountain right now, for the situation is explosive. But, before that, we need
to educate ourselves. For starters, a fullblown expose in an upcoming issue of American Atheist would be salubrious. I also have
plans to make this a burning issue in the UN,
and the vast experiences of our organization
in dealing with bureaucrats could prove
decisive.
- Bret BaUade
Maryland

"Not now! After 40u die! You get qour reward in heaven after uou're dead!"
November 1986

Page 41

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Coping
Please allow a stranded Atheist to express
himself to his fellow freethinkers. By stranded, I mean that since 1982 I have shared my
existence with a "born-again Christian."
My ordeal began in 1977when I suffered a
C4-S spinal cord injury. Considering my
rationalist disposition, I immediately ascertained my prognosis of permanent disability,
and, after not having the question "why?"
answered by anything or anyone, I decided
to recover as much of my life as I could.
My spouse, by contrast, attempted denial
for five years. Then in 1982 she snapped,
much as Moonies, Rajneeshees, or any of a
plethora of nee-Christian strains of religion
do, into a totally irrational, slavish following
of various charlatans. Now, by divine revelation, she has become one of the repositories
and expounders of an "uncorrupted" and
unchallengable "truth."
Now I will answer the question of why I
feel trapped in this situation. I am totally
disabled from my shoulders down. There is
no feasible means of regaining my independence; hence, I must remain in my situation
listening to many more evangelists than is
healthy for a rationalist. I long ago gave up
the attempt to educate my wife, but if there
are any others out there whose situation
resembles mine, hang in there. I'm having a
similar problem and am coping.
-,
M. A. McKenney, Jr.
Virginia

Reactions To Murray's
"Declaration"
I read Jon Murray's comments in the July
1986issue ["Declaration of an Honest Man"]
and was in agreement with him for the most
part. However, I think he perhaps missed
one point:
It takes intelligence to be an Atheist. Most
people are simply not intelligent enough to
understand Atheism. The media, the clergy,
or religionists, etc., probably haven't enough
brains between them to grasp the concept of
Atheism. People tend to believe what makes
them the most comfortable. Most people are

Page 42

the product of countless generations of cultural indoctrination - "brainwashing," if

you will- and old habits die hard. Someday
the entire world will be enculturated to eat
only hamburgers, fries, and cola.
If you want to make Atheism more palatable, you will have to concentrate your
efforts on the enculturation facet of human
development. We need our own schoolsperhaps even our own little world, which
may well-nigh be impossible. As long as our
children are subjected to the constant barrage of religious nonsense, this pattern of
enculturation will prevail.
Religion: "Never have so many made so
much out of so little."
Morgan Allspach
Ohio
Jon G. Murray's July 1986 editorial is the
best I've ever read in my three year membership of American Atheists and American
Atheist magazine. Mr. Murray's article first
of all made me angry on two accounts, but
after spouting off I calmed down. I reread the
sections I had at first disagreed with. I also
reread the July 1984 article concerning the
rigged debate with Jon and Jerry Falwell.
I was able to share Mr. Murray's comments regarding anger at the television, my
own low boiling point, lack of tact, and the
general stupidity in America today, especially in Southern California. I'm from the
East Coast (New England), and after livingin
flake-land for six years, I can see why
schools are so backward here. Everybody's
out sunbathing, and teachers still dish out
A's and B's.
What first struck my nerve was Jon Murray's comments about democracy in American Atheists. But after reflecting a moment, I
realized that the pope doesn't accept halfCatholics. Ifyou're not one hundred percent
with him, you've virtually excommunicating
yourself from the fold. An army cannot win a
battle with volunteer bursts up a hill. Someone has to give an order to attack when
feasible. So Murray is correct. Splitting hairs
among Atheist members only weakens our
power to affect future legislation. In any pro
fession, solid membership moves those in
control to give in.
Mr. Murray's second point of friction with
me took several readings before I decided to
agree. The act of not shaking hands with
Falwell or any minister caused me to wonder
whether this act might indeed rupture future
progress for our organization. It made us
look bad to the opposition. But thinking
about whom Icould never shake hands with,

November 1986

I came to the conclusion I could never shake

the hand of a National Rifle Association
member. When Murray said on page 3 of the
July 1984 American Atheist, "I'm sorry; I
don't shake hands with ministers," he was
again correct in responding thusly because
he believes ministers represent cumulative
human misery. An NRA member represents
cumulative animal misery in my mind.
Finally, I saw a great comparison. To me,
Jon G. Murray is another Eugene McCarthy.
Both men fail to conform and show contempt for sentimentality and (political) rituals. McCarthy also failed to give free publicity to reporters, so reporters paid him back
by emphasizing his arrogance and insensitivity. After Hubert Humphrey won the Democratic nomination for President in 1968,
George McGovern shook his hand in congratulations. Eugene McCarthy did not. Jon
Murray and Eugene McCarthy are honest
and do not deceive the public. Therefore,
just as McCarthy gave us an intimation of
what the American people could be like if
they had a leader worthy of them, Jon G.
Murray has shown likewise that we should
keep him as a leader worthy of us.
Gerald Lunderville
California
Each month I eagerly look forward to Jon
G. Murray's "Director's Briefcase."
I enjoy his articles immensely, especially
his latest, "Declaration of An Honest Man."
Like Mr. Murray, I, too, am fed up with
intellectual arguments with stupid theists.
I've had enough to last a lifetime. They're
meaningless and a waste of time.
Where Iwould differfrom Jon Murray is that
instead of advocating "aggressive Atheism" I
would be advocating "militant Atheism."
It's time to "get it on" with.these freaks,
which I'm sure will happen anyway.
Force may not be intellectual, but it definitely gets things done.
Stephen Cole, Sr.
California

More On The Bible

There is one issue facing the Atheist
movement today that has been neglected.
We have avoided the Bible. Aside from
occasional quotes from Ingersoll or Paine,
we do not refer to Bible criticism at all. However, for the Christians, it is their number
one weapon. It is held up as the basis for
attacks on abortionists. The Bible is the

American Atheist

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

sword and shield of the creationists who are
attacking our public school system.
When Robert Ingersoll took on the fundamentalists of his day, he did not take them
to court. He attacked the Bible and destroyed its credibility by showing that it was
a sham and a fraud. When he was finished,
the belief in an inerrant, inspired Bible was at
an all-time low. He dealt the doctrine of Hell
such a blow that, in this country, today, itisa
dead issue.
However, we are facing a time when the
belief in a perfect, inerrant Bible is at an
all-time high. We must teach the public
about the mistakes of Moses allover again. If
we could destroy the credibility of the Bible,
then we would have deprived the fundamentalists of their chief weapon.
We do have some Bible experts among
us. For example, the writings of Merrill
Holste should be assembled together and
published by the American Atheist Press.
My suggestion is that we produce a short
series of books - several titles - designed
to bring the modern Atheist up to date concerning Bible criticism and archaeology.
Right now, the Bible should be our number
one target, because it is one battle we can
win! We can remove one weapon from the
fundamentalists, because it is their weakest
point. We must show up the Bible for the
fraud and sham that it is!
John C. Parker
Connecticut
In recent columns of the American Atheist magazine, you have indicated that it is
time for American Atheists to turn away
from tactics of attacking religion based on
Biblical error. I agree with you on ,this point
and look forward to the new approach.
However, it occurs to me that Atheism is
above all an intellectual position. Unlike religionists, Atheists do not come to their
beliefs through faith, but rather through reason, research, and education. I feel that an
important part of that process is to examine
the concepts and tenets of religion, along
with the basis of religion, such as the Bible
and other documents. I know that I came to
my Atheism through such a process. I first
began to doubt that the god message that
was being presented to me was accurate, so
I decided to investigate the message for
myself. The more I investigated, the more I
was able to determine that the message was
not only incorrect, but that it was a deliberate lie.
I came to this conclusion with the help of
many books and articles that attack religion

Austin, Texas

based on its concepts and the error of its

holy teachings. I think that American Atheists would be making a great error in removing or even de-emphasizing these texts. Not
all Atheists, nor all inquisitive minds, are at
the same level of understanding. Perhaps,
like the American Bridge League, we have to
understand that there are novices, juniors,
and life masters amongst our ranks.
So yes, it is time for American Atheists to
develop new approaches in the struggle
against religious oppression. But let us not
discard our old teachings, for they have
served us well to bring us to this point.
Charles D. Peer
California

Of Astro-Nuts
Author Frank R. Zindler's article, "Of
Astro-Nuts and Ark-Onauts: Noah's Ark in
the Space Age" (July 1986 American Atheist) proves - IF any further proof were
needed - how stupid and gullible even
some well educated and well trained and
supposedly intelligent religious believers can
be/are. Like silly-ass-tronaut hero James
Irwin, no less!
If god wanted to destroy all in his creation
who became "wicked," then why didn't he
simply and easily cause only all the wicked
ones alone to simply die in their sleep one
night and spare the good and the innocent
ones? Why should a god have gone to the
trouble of causing a destructive Great Flood
- miles deep! - as the means of extermination or execution?
Obviously, the religious don't THINKprobably out playing BINGO when brains
were being passed out.
Andy Vena
Pennsylvania

know. Maybe a god created it, maybe

not. I cannot think on that high of a
plane."
The agnostic-Atheist: "Man cannot
possibly know the answer to such a
question. It probably always existed.
There isa very slight miniscule probability that a god created it, but since
there is no evidence for this possibility, it is best discarded like all possibilities with infinitesimally small probabilities."
The true Atheist: "Those half a
dozen words, 'How did the universe
get here,' make no more sense than
these: 'Flibbedy fioop blibbedy bloop
mibbedy moop.' The words 'get here'
always have to do with some matter
being transferred from one location in
the universe to another location in the
universe. What possible meaning
could there be in asking what part of
the universe the whole universe came
from to be placed in the part of the
universe that the whole universe now
is in?"
Only the last answer shows true sanity.
Ed McCravy
South Carolina
NOTICE
"Letters to the Editor" must be
either questions or comments of
general concern to Atheists or
Atheism. Submissions should be brief
and to the point. Space limitations
allow that each letter should be two
hundred words, or preferably, less.
Please confine your letters to a single
issue only. Mail them to:
American Atheist
P_O. Box 2117
Austin, TX 78768-2117

The Four Types

After several years of reading, corresponding, and thinking, it has finally occurred to
me that everyone is one of four basic types
- the theist, the regular agnostic, the
agnostic-Atheist, and the true Atheist. It can
be determined to which of the four classes a
person belongs by listening to his or her
response when asked, "How did the universe get here?" Typical responses are:
The theist: "God created it, of
course."
The regular agnostic: "I do not

November 1986

Page 43

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISEMENTS

Classified Rates: 25 per word, $6.00 minimum. No boxes available.

Frequency Discount: (For classified) 10%
for three insertions, 20% for six.
Payment: Classified ads must be paid in
advance.
Publication policies: The American Athe
ist reserves the right to reject or cancel any
advertisement at any time for any reason.
No advocacy advertising will be accepted.
Samples of products may be requested.
Tear sheets of ads willbe sent to all clients.
We require street addresses for all advertisers using box numbers.

Organizations
American Atheist Addiction Recovery
Groups, Inc.: America's only alternative to
AA faith healing. Publishers of the world's
only monthly newsletter for Atheist alcoholics and other addicts and their families and
friends. Membership/subscription:
12 issues/$25. Sample/25. AAARG!, P.O. Box
6120, Denver, CO 80206-0120.

I\

American Gay Atheists - AGA membership is restricted to Atheists and only Atheists. Membership rates set at $15/year.
Write: P.O. Box 66711, Houston, TX 77266,
or P.O. Box 248, Vlg. Sta., NYC, NY i00l4.
Outspoken Voice of Freedom: (713)527-9255.
Publications
Atheism and Children: A dandy collection
of American Atheist essays on how to rear
Atheist children in a religious world. Edited
by Jon G. Murray. 71 pp. (Product #5348)
$4.25 including postage. AAP., P.O. Box
2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117.
Atheist Anarchists will be interested in
The Match, called "The Apex of Atheistic
Anarchism." Available at the astonishingly
low price of only $6/year. Write: The Match,
P.O. Box 3488, Tucson, AZ 85722.
Back Issues of the American Atheist are
available. $1.50/copy. For a complete list
write: Back Issues, American Atheist, P.O.
Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117.

READER SERVICE

SEND A GIFT SUBSCRIPTION!

To send a special gift subscription* of American Atheist magazine, enter the name and address of the recipient here:
Name_~_~
_
Address

(Please print)

City

-'- __

State

--'"._Zip

By taking advantage of this special gift subscription offer, you save

$5.00. You may send the American Atheist magazine to anyone in the U.S.
for $20.00 for a period of one year. (For orders outside of the U.S. add $5.00
for postage.)

TO SUBSCRIBE TO AMERICAN
A THEIST MAGAZINE OR TO RENEW
YOUR PRESENT SUBSCRIPTION!

State
1 year subscription.

Texas state residents please add 5%% sales tax.

Page 44

$25.00 (outside U.S. add $5.(0)

Greeting Cards for Spring, Summer, Fall,

and Winter celebrations. Completely secular and quite Atheistic. Samples for 75.
AAP., P.O. Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768.
Atheist Videos: A complete catalog of
thirty-minute Atheist programs available on
videocassette (Beta or VHS). Send $1 to
AATVF, P.O. Box 2117, Austin, TX
78768-2117.
Apes Evolved From Creationists:
Give
your feelings on "scientific creationism"
simply with this bumper sticker. Only $1.50
including postage. (Product #3271) AAP.,
P.O. Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117.

TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE

AMERICAN ATHEIST ORGANIZATION.
Membership categories are (check appropriate box)
0 Senior Citizen*/
Unemployed, $20/year
0 Student", $12/year

o Life, $500
o Couple Life**, $750
o Sustaining, $lOO/year
o Couple**/Family, $SO/year
o Individual, $40/year

0 Info packet only; free

*Send photocopy of J.D.
"Include partner's name
Membership includes the American Atheist Newsletter and the
American Atheist magazine (both monthly) - plus all the regular
additional mailings that are made by the organization.
Enter your name and address (or attach your old magazine
address label) here:
_

Address

_
_
Zip

Missionary Boiling Alive in kettle over

bamboo fire is 8Yz", handmade ceramic,
simmering potpourri to fillyour home with
delightful fragrance. $26 ppd, includes potpourri pkg. and 10 candles (at my cost).
Wendy Tobler, 13555 Bunton Rd., Willis,MI
48191.

Name_~-~---------------(Please print)
Spouse or Partner

Enter your name and address (or attach your old magazine
label) here:
Name_~-~----------------(Please print)
Address
City

Products

City
State

_
Zip

I enclose check or money order, or authorize a charge (VISA or

MASTERCARD only), for the above orders' totaling $
_
.MCjVISA #
_
Bank Code
Signature
Date

November 1986

Exp. Date

_
_
_

American Atheist

The Hemlock Society's book of self-deliverance for the

dying, Let Me Die Before I Wake, has now gone into its
fourth edition, having sold over 60,000 copies.
When first published in 1981, a year after Hemlock was
formed, it was sold only to members. This policy was
dropped after protests from individuals and, most important, also from libraries that if a book was publicly
distributed individuals could purchase it in stores and
libraries had the right to offer it to borrowers.
In 1984 the Grove Press and the Hemlock Society
signed an agreement for Grove to act as distribution
agent to both stores and libraries. This resulted in a major
increase in both library use and sales to the public. The
book is highly controversial since it includes information
on fatal doses of many common drugs and poisons.
Although an exact figure cannot be put on it, hundreds of
terminally ill people have successfully taken their lives
with the aid of the information in the book. Self deliverance, which is the appellation used for the suicide of
those who are terminally ill,is - and should remain - a
private act, the Society's founder proclaims, even when
Hemlock's proposed Humane and Dignified Death Act
becomes law. This legislation would permit a dying
person, with two independent witnesses, to sign a legal
form stating that the person would take moral and legal
responsibility for his own death. The form would contain
a request for the attending physician to obtain a second
opinion confirming that the patient was dying, and then,
with the patient's agreement permit the physician to take
the patient's life. The proposed "Right to Die" initiative
act is to be placed on the California state ballot, in 1988.
The Roper Organization, earlier this year, published
the results of a poll indicating that 62 percent of
Americans approved of doctors allowing terminally ill
patients to die ifthe patients request death. The same poll
also showed that 76 percent of the respondents thought
doctors should be legally bound to honor the wishes of a
living will.
Currently no state permits death to be induced (except
for capital punishment).
Derek Humphry, the founder of the Hemlock Society,
advocates both passive and active voluntary-euthanasia.
He defines passive euthanasia as the right of a person to
be allowed to die without heroic efforts to keep him alive
with surgery, drug therapy, or life-support machines.
Active voluntary euthanasia, then, is actively helping
someone to end his life.

Price $11.00 (including postage and handling)

Paperback, 132 pages

Cut and Mail to: American Atheists, P.O. Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117

Yes, I wa nt
copy(ies) of Let Me Die Before I Wake
at $11.00 each, including postage and handling.
(Texas Residents please add 5%% sales tax.)

o I am enclosing a check
o Charge my credit card:
o Visa

or money order for $

o MasterCard

Name

Card #

Address

Bank No.lLetters

City

Expiration date

Signature

State

Zip

_
_

11/86

(5506)
Magazine

AMENDMENTI

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING

>

t'T1

cx:l

ir:
-l

~
~

~
C-

-l

>
....
r:/)
::t:

V1
V1

<

3:

~
~

t'T1

cx:l

z-l

-l

~
~

"Tj

10

U
~
~
~
~

-l
~

o
~
~
~

::r:
~

u,

o
~

::r=

o
....
0:::
~

::r=

t'T1
C-

When we abandon the thought of immortality we at least have cast out fear. We gain a
certain dignity and self-respect. We regard
our fellow-travellers as companions in the
pleasures and tribulations of life. We feel an
interest in them, knowing that we are all
moved by common impulses,and touched by _
mutual understanding. We gain kinship with
the world. Our neighbors and friends and we
ourselves are travelling the same route to a
common doom. No one can feel this universal
relationship without being gentler, kindlier,
and more humane toward all the infinite
forms of beings that live with us, and must die
with us.

..-

o
....
o
z

10
""C

10

::t:
..ee
..-

..--lz
o

-l

::t:1
t'T1,

Clarence Darrow
The Story of My Life

0:::

"Tj\

10

t'T1
t'T1
t'T1

V1
V1

><
t'T1

0:::

c,

10

::t:

o
..-

tT1

~O ~O 'H:)33dS

'Ih.

r:/)

~O WOa33~.::l

3H.l

DNIDaI~gV

~O ~~03~3Hl.