Author: Richard L. Fricks

Richard L. Fricks is a novelist, former attorney and CPA, Fictionary Certified StoryCoach Editor, and creator of The Pencil-Driven Life. He lives in rural North Alabama near Boaz, where much of his fiction and reflection remain rooted. His work explores story, inherited purpose, faith and doubt, family pressure, moral contradiction, consciousness, ordinary life, and the practice of beginning again with a pencil.

Newsom-DeSantis debate is about the future of America

Here’s the link to this article.

STEVE SCHMIDT

AUG 5, 2023

Photo credits: (L) Justin Sullivan/Getty Images and (R) Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty Images

I’m going to make a prediction.

The forthcoming debate between Gavin Newsom and Ron DeSantis, hosted by Sean Hannity on Fox News, will humiliate Ron DeSantis. It will demonstrate how extreme Florida politics has become, and effectively end Ron DeSantis’s life in national politics.

Gavin Newsom, on the other hand, will emerge from the Fox lion’s den unscathed and victorious with his national stature cemented.

MAGA extremists have no idea how to handle California’s razor sharp and habitually underestimated second term governor, who is a first rate communicator, fearless on issues of liberty and freedom, and aggressive on the debate stage. Newsom will maintain an affable bearing and friendly smile, while skewing the absurdities and delusions of the Tallahassee Mussolini, who seeks the presidency of the United States to “slit throats.”

Gavin Newsom has a very different temperament and character. Here is a true story about Gavin Newsom. He gave me the best parenting advice anyone has ever given me, and I will always be grateful to him for that:

James Redford produced and directed an HBO documentary called ‘The Big Picture: Rethinking Dyslexia,’ in which Governor Newsom is featured. Newsom subsequently created a brilliant children’s book about dyslexia that has helped multitudes of American parents and kids deal with the challenges and opportunities facing dyslexic kids.

Many years ago, I found myself having a conversation with Newsom about my then five-year-old son, who had just been diagnosed as dyslexic. There was a room full of people who were eager to talk to the Lt. Governor, but he didn’t excuse himself from the conversation. He said there would definitely be obstacles to face and overcome, but that, in the end, my son would come to realize that his learning difference was  “his great gift.” Whatever anyone else may think of what he told me, I regard it as brilliant, and more importantly, true. More than that, on every occasion I have seen him since, he has asked how my son is doing.

He is a good man. He is decent, and he cares about leaving the world better off. He cares about leaving America stronger for our descendants. He understands the concepts of obligation and responsibility that defend liberty that Ron DeSantis disdains and denigrates with his actions and performative cruelties. This will all come through during the Hannity debate. Newsom’s fearlessness of the MAGA mob will give courage to decent Americans — even those who disagree with him on some issues — to take a stand against the smallness, vindictiveness, and appalling disregard for the American way of life that DeSantis demonstrates through word and deed.

The American creed and the MAGA creed are oppositional, irreconcilable and diametrically opposed. The MAGA creed is a grotesquerie that imposed a dogma of obedience and submission upon the weak-minded who believe jingoism is patriotism and progress is revanchism. The concept of individual responsibility has been replaced by a gospel of grievance and resentment. It is accompanied by a shrill chorus of victimization and whining that has abandoned grit, perseverance, duty, responsibility and self-respect in favor of their opposites.

Today, the taker reigns supreme inside of the MAGA delusion-sphere in which a vast audience of brittle sheep have been coddled in their hallucinations, as opposed to being confronted directly with reality through a medium that used to be called “The News.” The world that Gavin Newsom is entering believes the lies they have been fed. The propaganda has been ceaseless and effective. Generally speaking, there have been few antidotes offered against it, and it has spread far and wide.

The Hannity audience is as deluded as it gets. No doubt vast segments believe Portland and Seattle were destroyed as thoroughly as Hiroshima by Black Lives Matter and Antifa. They have been primed to be abused with lies, lies, lies and more lies. It is tragic, but also predictable because the lie is a feature of every autocratic system and movement there has ever been. The lie is to the tyrant what gravity is for everyone else. It anchors everything. Everything is touched by gravity, as all things are touched by the lie — until the moment the veil is pierced with the truth. In this regard, Gavin Newsom is playing the role of a Cold War president speaking directly to the Soviet people without the filter of state propagandists interfering. What Hannity’s audience will hear is a profound moral choice laid out. Gavin Newsom will be making the case for America.

A twisted theology has taken root in America over the Trump era. Its despicable apostles have become the everyday voices of extremism to which we have become desensitized, at our peril. The rhetoric of fascist Charlie Kirk calling for prison or the death penalty for President Biden isn’t just a federal crime, but an inherently political proposition. The MAGA right is now explicitly embracing the murder, assassination, mayhem, street violence, and disorder that it had previously intimated. Listen:

Revenge. Intimidation. Threats. Retribution. Death. Is this what we want? Is it possible this is what the American people will choose on the eve of the 250th anniversary of American independence? Does the coalition of the extreme and apathetic outnumber the patriotic, tolerant and decent? Is thuggery appealing? If not, why are Biden and Trump running even in the polls? Shouldn’t we the people talk about such things?

Ron DeSantis may be the worst presidential candidate of the last 50 years who has received any attention whatsoever from the national media. He is a most peculiar man — to say the least.

Rarely, if ever, is the sheltered Fox crowd exposed to the concept of complexity and pragmatism. The governor of California is afforded no such luxuries, given that he has one of America’s most complicated jobs. He will be a worthy messenger from the world where there isn’t much appetite for civil war, shooting protesters, locking up political opponents, or excusing the most reckless and depraved behavior possible as essential to protecting America.

This debate will be one worth watching. It is always worth watching when America is being defended against treachery and corruption. The argument matters. The principles matter. I can’t wait to watch.

Testing our Tolerance for Tedious God-Talk

Here’s the link to this article.

By David Madison at 7/28/2023

Why would a good, wise god put up with it?


The authors of the four New Testament gospels had a simple goal: to promote belief in the Christ they worshipped. Scholar Charles Guignebert, in his 1935 classic work Jesus, wrote: 

“It was not the essence of Jesus that interested the authors of our Gospels, it was the essence of Christ, as their faith pictured him. They are exclusively interested, not in reporting what they know, but in proving what they believe.” 

In other words, they were not historians, but propagandists. In fact, intensive critical study of the gospels has demonstrated that these documents do not qualify as history. Their authors don’t identify their sources, but it’s even worse than that. Matthew and Luke copied major portions of Mark’s gospel without mentioning that’s what they’d done, i.e., they plagiarized—and changed Mark’s text to suit their own agendas.

As I pointed out in my article here last week, the author of John’s gospel is, by far, the worst offender. This would be obvious to any churchgoer—no matter how devout—who bothers to carefully compare the gospels. John imagined a theologically obsessed Jesus. I have often pointed out that this author is guilty of theology inflation, and in this article I invite readers to study John 14-17, with critical thinking skills fully engaged. In these four chapters, this author created a Religious Fanatic’s Training Manual, a prototype cult playbook for making sure that followers remain dedicated to the holy hero who commands their loyalty.   

These four chapters come at the end of the last supper. Jesus has washed the feet of the disciples, but omitted any mention of the famous eucharist scene found in the earlier gospels. He has also predicted that Peter will deny him three times. Then this extensive theology monologue begins. A critical reader—a curious reader—would want to know: how did the author of this gospel know that any of this is true? To the devout who might object, “But he was inspired by God to write these words,” the same question applies: How do you know this is true? You may have been taught this from your earliest years, but by what means can it be verified? “I take it on faith” comes right out of the cult playbook, by the way. Countless cults have kept people in their thrall with this mindless advice. We also have to ask: Why did the earlier gospel writers fail to include this major Jesus monologue—weren’t they inspired too? Was there a flaw in their inspiration?

Chapter 14

At the outset, the author wants his readers to know that their holy hero is the real thing—in fact, the only real thing, 14:6: “Jesus said to [Thomas], ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’” Other cults, other religions, are useless. Fear of death has always been a motivator for attaching oneself to a set of beliefs, to a religious icon, hence that promise is here too, 14:2-3, KJV: “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.”

This chapter is big on promises, 14:9, “Whoever has seen me has seen the Father”, 14:11: “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me,” 14:13: “I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.”  

And this major promise, tied to the hero’s ego, 14:19-21: 

“In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me; because I live, you also will live. On that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. They who have my commandments and keep them are those who love me, and those who love me will be loved by my Father, and I will love them and reveal myself to them.”

There is also a text that no doubt played a role in development of trinitarian theology—“god in three persons”—14:25-26: “I have said these things to you while I am still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and remind you of all that I have said to you.” This sounds great, but it would seem that the Holy Spirit has done a sloppy job of “teaching everything,” given the long, painful history of Christians

disagreeing with each other—sometimes to the point of warfare and bloodshed. Dan Barker has pointed out that Christians today are deeply divided on a huge range of social and political issues, so much so, as Barker puts it, “there is either a multitude of gods handing out conflicting moral advice, or a single god who is hopelessly confused” (Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist, 1992).

Chapter 15

Full-blown cult fanaticism is obvious here—and well as the holy hero’s full-blown ego, 15:1-4: “I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine grower. He removes every branch in me that bears no fruit. Every branch that bears fruit he prunes to make it bear more fruit. You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you.”

Those who are in the cult have “been cleansed”—and a grim fate is in store for anyone who isn’t fully, enthusiastically devoted to the cult, 15:6: “Whoever does not abide in me is thrown away like a branch and withers; such branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned.”

Cults are often despised, because of the weird beliefs and behavior—publicly displayed—of those who belong. This author expected such rejection, but that’s a consequence of being selected by the holy hero—so it’s actually a good thing, 15:18-21: 

“If the world hates you, be aware that it hated me before it hated you. If you belonged to the world, the world would love you as its own. Because you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hates you…If they persecuted me, they will persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also. But they will do all these things to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me.”

Chapter 16

By far the vast majority of Jews at the time of Jesus did not believe claims of the breakaway sect that Jesus was the messiah. Thus it’s no surprise that the author of John’s gospel portrays Jews as the enemy—even accusing them of being children of the devil (see 8:44—a text that has caused so much damage).  He begins this chapter with a warning, 16:2: “They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, an hour is coming when those who kill you will think that by doing so they are offering worship to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father or me.”  And more ego, 16:15: “All that the Father has is mine. For this reason I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.”

The cult is assured that suffering and pain will be annulled: 

“So you have pain now, but I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take your joy from you. On that day you will ask nothing of me. Very truly, I tell you, if you ask anything of the Father in my name, he will give it to you. Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be complete.”

The disciples buy into it all—they set the example for other cult members to follow— 16:30: “Now we know that you know all things and do not need to have anyone question you; by this we believe that you came from God.” There is no need to ask questions: classic cult propaganda. 

But to avoid being fooled, duped, the opposite approach is necessary: question everything.

Chapter 17

Now back to the crucial promise, the eternal life gimmick, expressed in Jesus’ prayer, 17:1-3: “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son so that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all people, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.” Yes, this cult is tuned in to the “only one true God.” 

This is the essence of cult fanaticism, that god himself gave this cult to Jesus, 17:6-8: 

“I have made your name known to those whom you gave me from the world. They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. Now they know that everything you have given me is from you, for the words that you gave to me I have given to them, and they have received them and know in truth that I came from you, and they have believed that you sent me.”

I challenge churchgoers: please read John 14-17 carefully, analyzing every sentence, every claim, and answer honestly: “Is this what your Christian faith looks like?”  And go beyond this: question everything. Are these chapters based on revelation, imagination, or hallucination? How would you know? The apostle Paul bragged in his letters that he learned nothing about Jesus from the people who had known him—everything he knew about Jesus came to him through visions/hallucinations.

Did the author of John’s gospel operate any differently? There is no evidence whatever—none at all—that he had any way of knowing the “real words” of Jesus. He claims at the very end of the gospel, 21:24, that the “beloved disciple” is the one who witnessed and reported all the events described. But this disciple is not mentioned at all in the earlier gospels; we suspect that he is an invented character, also derived from the author’s active imagination—active decades after the death of Jesus. 

Cold, hard, blunt fact: there is no contemporaneous documentation (e.g., letters, diaries, transcriptions contemporary with Jesus) by which we can verify any of the words of Jesus found in the four gospels. That’s why, for a long time now, I’ve used the term Jesus-script. In the ancient world it was common for writers to make up the speeches attributed to leaders and heroes. 

It was also common for theologians to wildly imagine the wonders of the gods they adored. The New Testament is an example of that, and there are many chapters—such as John 14-17—that make us wonder why a good, wise god couldn’t have intervened to put a stop to excessively bad, manipulative theology.  

David Madison was a pastor in the Methodist Church for nine years, and has a PhD in Biblical Studies from Boston University. He is the author of two books, Ten ToughProblems in Christian Thought and Belief: a Minister-Turned-Atheist Shows Why You Should Ditch the Faith, now being reissued in several volumes, the first of which is Guessing About God (2023) and Ten Things Christians Wish Jesus Hadn’t Taught: And Other Reasons to Question His Words (2021). The Spanish translation of this book is also now available. 

His YouTube channel is here. He has written for the Debunking Christianity Blog since 2016.

The Cure-for-Christianity Library©, now with more than 500 titles, is here. A brief video explanation of the Library is here. 

The Boaz Stranger–Chapter 22

While Kyla made a congealed salad and tried her hand at Mom’s green bean casserole, I called Enterprise Car Rental. Since I had purchased insurance, all I had to do was return the Explorer, or, if it was inoperable, arrange a rollback. If I needed a replacement, I’d have to come to their nearest location. That was Guntersville.

A few minutes before 11:00 AM, Kyla dropped me off at Walmart. The rep I’d spoken to had instructed me to use duct tape to secure the damaged rear door. He asked if I’d taken pictures. I hadn’t. He also inquired whether I’d called the police. I hadn’t done that either but revealed an officer had come to the ER and taken my statement.

Exiting the parking lot, I almost called Lillian. I’d noted her phone number at the bottom of her email. I was indebted to her not only for my rescue but for the return of my iPhone. The OtterBox protective case had done its job and earned a lifelong customer, even if their products were expensive.

I opted to postpone my call, subconsciously plotting a drop-by visit to deliver a Hallmark thank-you card, a box of chocolates, and a bouquet. Strike the flowers. A potted green plant would be more appropriate. Come to think of it, strike the chocolates also. She’s dieting or thinking of dieting, according to Kyla. Although I hadn’t taken a Vicodin since midnight, my thinking remained unique, akin to chit-chat. Maybe the drop-by wasn’t a good idea either. For now, I’ll keep the card idea for further review. I turned right into Circle K since the Explorer was flashing “Low Fuel.” I’d promised to return it with a full tank.

I completed my purchase, rejoined 431’s northbound traffic, and replayed last night’s voice mail from Rosa. She and Rob had met Leah and Lyndell and their families in Roanoke, Virginia for the long Thanksgiving weekend. This had become a tradition for at least ten years. Rachel and I had never attended. Rachel’s idea, not mine.

“We made it before dark, no problems. The grands should be here in a few hours. Hickory Hill is still beautiful. Wish you were here. Call Rob when you get a chance, he’s not feeling well, so he’s thinking about taking the City’s offer.”

I would love to visit the rustic and secluded cabin in the mountains to the northwest of Roanoke. I’d prefer to be there with just my children and grandchildren. As always, I looked forward to the photos Leah and Lyndell captured every year.

Coming into Albertville, I stopped at Raceway and bought a bottle of water to swallow three Tylenol. Both my head and neck hurt, but enough of Vicodin and its hilarious hallucinations. I am now more convinced than ever that we have little control over our thoughts. They just appear out of nowhere. Like the one that confused me when I reentered 431.

Why was Rachel’s ‘wall’ diary in my briefcase? I’m certain Kyla said Lillian found it and the pistol receipt when she’d returned to the Explorer. I’d left the diary in my bedroom, or so I thought. When I entered Micaden’s office yesterday afternoon, I didn’t see how it had traveled to my briefcase. If it hadn’t, how did it get there after my altercation at Walmart? Unless it didn’t. I wondered if the Vicodin was affecting my memory, or my ability to construct cohesive ideas. I couldn’t help but consider whether my sister and Lillian, or one of them, had found it in my bedroom when they were stripping me down and settling me into bed. If so, why would Lillian say it fell out of the backseat when the unlatched briefcase had opened? Was it unlatched? I hated being confused. If it wasn’t the Vicodin, maybe my head injury was worse than I thought. The car horn from a Toyota Camry scared me. I admit the light at the Highway 431/75 intersection had already turned red.

The rest of the drive was uneventful thanks to my extra precaution and turning on WQSB radio. There’s nothing like country music on Thanksgiving Day to highlight all your blessings. The twang and the drawl made me focus on the road. And trigger a memory from twenty years ago. Leah’s trademark statement concerning country music came during a period of teenage rebellion, but I have to say, she nailed it. It was something like, “listening to country music in reverse, you get your dog back, your truck back, your house back, your girl back, and you stop drinking.” I slowed even more before going down the mountain and fought back random and ridiculous thoughts of getting my girl back.

Enterprise’s holiday staff was nearly as limited as its car inventory. I had wanted another SUV but had to settle for a mid-sized compact. However, it all worked for my good. The Hyundai Elantra is exactly what I need; it’s much more comfortable than the Explorer and should use a lot less gas.

***

My iPhone rang as I eased up the mountain. It was Rosa. “I was just about to call Rob.” I lied.

“That’s why I called. We’re on our way to Roanoke Memorial Hospital.” I thought I heard a siren.

“You mentioned he wasn’t feeling good. How’s he now? Are you driving him?” I was asking too many questions.

“Rob’s in the ambulance. We’re trying to keep up.”

“You’re not driving, are you?” Truth be told, neither Rob nor Rosa should operate a motor vehicle.

“No, I’m riding with Lyndell. Leah stayed at the cabin with the children.”

“What’s going on? What are Rob’s symptoms?”

The siren sound faded. “It’s classic stroke. His face started drooping and his left arm grew numb. We were eating a snack lunch and his speech got slurry. Lyndell helped him to an easy chair and tried to have Rob repeat ‘my name is Rob Kern.’ He couldn’t do it. Leah dialed 911 immediately.”

I pulled into another Raceway and parked to avoid distraction. “Do you want me to catch a flight?” Rosa had always treated me with such respect. Our relationship had grown closer since Rachel’s death. My mother-in-law knew I’d come in a heartbeat.

“No, the EMTs encouraged us since we had called for help so quickly. Maybe it’s a just a mild one.” I wondered if she was trying to convince herself, Lyndell, or me.

“Okay, but you keep me posted. I’ll answer anytime you call.” Rosa didn’t respond directly. She was probably wondering why I hadn’t answered last night’s call.

“Lee, we’re here. Say a prayer for Rob.”

“Okay.” What was I to say? “And tell Lyndell to call me when it’s convenient.”

Instead of leaving Raceway, I sat and imagined the scene in Roanoke. What if it wasn’t a mild stroke? What if they hadn’t acted fast enough? Hadn’t Rosa in yesterday’s voice mail said Rob hadn’t been feeling good? What if Rob died? I didn’t want to think about that, but I considered the legal ramifications.

My mind replayed Rosa’s message. The first time I’d heard it, something had struck me as odd. I grabbed my iPhone from a cup holder and listened again. Her last statement got my attention: “he’s not feeling well, so he’s thinking about taking the City’s offer.” The ‘so,’ implied cause and effect. A causes B. My shortened version: since Rob is sick, he will sell the Hunt House to the City. I laughed to myself, feeling like a 1L. There would be an effect caused by the effect: the lawsuit dismissed. That would be a good thing. Right?

A large semi swung through the parking lot and blasted its air-horn, insisting I pull forward a few feet. A causes B. I admit I had oddly parked. My mind flipped back to legal mode. I needed to brainstorm the real estate closing. There seemed to be only two scenarios; I didn’t like the second.

The first closing would take place while Rob was alive and legally competent (I didn’t know if he’d executed a durable power of attorney). Here, Rob and Rosa would do what they wanted with the money. I’m certain they wouldn’t blow it in Las Vegas. They would probably put it in the bank until their deaths and then their wills would control.

The second closing would take place after Rob died. I forced myself to think it through. Assuming Rob hadn’t changed his will, the proceeds would be divided three ways: a third to Randy, a third to Rachel (since she’s dead, Rob’s per stirpes provision would dictate this third be distributed to Leah, Lyndell, and me), and a third to the Southern Baptist Missions Board.

I looked at the time and needed to get rolling. I reentered 431. Two new thoughts entered my mind. What if Rob had changed his will? Of course, it was his right to do so. My second thought revealed another assumption I’d made years earlier: that Rob and Rosa owned the Hunt House as joint tenants. But what if the title is solely in Rob’s name? The answer came quickly. Rosa would inherit the real estate, assuming she survived Rob. But there would be a delay in distribution. Probate, the legal process of administering a person’s estate after death, is inefficient. I made a mental note to talk to Rob about the Hunt House deed. I certainly was no expert in wills and trusts, but I could still give him some excellent advice: consult an estate planning attorney.

My mind changed gears again when I approached the Guntersville Walmart. If it hadn’t been for the empty parking lot (they were closed for the Holiday), I would have stopped and bought Kyla a replacement crock-pot. Yesterday, I had never made it inside Boaz Walmart to make the exchange, and I’d forgotten to remove it from the Explorer. Maybe because it was no longer in the backseat. Maybe Lillian had returned it to Kyla. I’d have to ask, but that could wait.

I found a classical music channel on the radio and concentrated on my driving. I’d already had too many horns blowing at me since I’d left Kyla’s. She had instructed me to be at the Church’s Family Life Center between noon and 1:00 PM for the most food choices, including Mom’s green bean casserole. I was hungry, so I took her advice.

08/08/23 Biking & Listening

Biking is something else I both love and hate. It takes a lot of effort but does provide good exercise and most days over an hour to listen to a good book or podcast. I especially like having ridden.

Here’s my bike, a Rockhopper by Specialized. I purchased it November 2021 from Venture Out in Guntersville; Mike is top notch! So is the bike, and the ‘old’ man seat I salvaged from an old Walmart bike.

Here’s a link to today’s bike ride.

Something to consider if you’re not already cycling.

I encourage you to start riding a bike, no matter your age. Check out these groups:

Cycling for those aged 70+(opens in a new tab)

Solitary Cycling(opens in a new tab)

Remember,

Photo by Suzy Hazelwood on Pexels.com

Halfway through today’s ride I started listening to:

Here’s a link to this show notes page.

Here’s the novel I’m listening to: Expelled by James Patterson

Amazon Abstract

One viral photo.
Four expelled teens.
Everyone’s a suspect.

Theo Foster’s Twitter account used to be anonymous – until someone posted a revealing photo that got him expelled. No final grade. No future.

Theo’s resigned himself to a life of misery in a dead-end job when a miracle happens: Sasha Ellis speaks to him. She was also expelled for a crime she didn’t commit, and now he has the perfect way to keep her attention: find out who set them up.

To uncover the truth, Theo has to get close to the suspects. What secrets are they hiding? And how can he catch their confessions on camera…?

Here’s a few photos from along my pistol route:

Religion as Undue Influence

Here’s the link to this article.

John MacDonald | February 28, 2023 | Kiosk Article

If we approach the phenomenon of religious life through the lens of brainwashing and indoctrination, or what is more commonly called undue influence, a rich organizer opens up for study. Undue influence is the most established term used in the legal system for brainwashing-type phenomena. I look at these ideas through the lens of Steven Alan Hassan’s doctoral dissertation “The Bite Model of Authoritarian Control: Undue Influence, Thought Reform, Brainwashing, Mind Control, Trafficking and the Law” (2020).

One of the most important lenses to see cultic undue influence is “illusion of choice,” where it feels like you are making choices, but really you aren’t. We see a prime example of this in Christianity with the idea of “Christ in you,” and “he (Christ) who is in you is greater than he who is within the world.” We can see a full expression of this with Jehovah’s Witnesses, where it is not the individual thinking, but the individual as a vehicle for the ideology. Hassan comments:

Businesses are penalized by law for fraudulent claims or omitting vital information, but religions are exempt from this fundamental obligation. For example, the Watchtower Society’s members have to spend time every month proselytizing, and they do so by offering to study the Bible. However, those approached may be unaware that the Bible the Jehovah’s Witnesses use is denounced by Jewish and Christian scholars as theologically unsound. They should be warned. Jehovah’s Witnesses use their own “New World Translation” which lacks Biblical scholarship (Phillips, 2015). Furthermore, potential recruits are urged to be baptized by the Watchtower Society yet are seldom informed that the group forbids blood transfusions and has a practice of disfellowshipping (shunning). Members may be shunned if the elders believe a member has sinned, even for petty acts like sending a birthday card to a nonmember. Researchers assert that if an organization is to have the benefits of non-profit status, it should be required to be transparent and practice informed consent. Deceptive recruitment violates people’s religious freedom and should be illegal, and the organization’s leadership penalized. This means that a way to legally define and measure undue influence must be found. Members should have the freedom to question the leaders, the doctrine, and the policies and have the freedom to leave the religion with harassment, threats, or experiencing trauma (2020, p. 9).

Cults operate by deconstructing one’s sense of self and belief systems to then create the person anew out of that fertile soil, which Hassan characterizes as “to drastically reinterpret their life’s history, radically alter their world view, accept a new version of reality and causality, and develop a dependency on the organization, thereby being turned into a deployable agent of the organization operating the thought reform program” (Hassan, 2020, p. 3). And this is exactly how religions work—in Christianity’s case demonizing what the apostle Paul called your fleshly/worldly nature, seeing that nature as evil and replacing it with a new spiritual nature.

The replacement religious ideology is arbitrary, but because the mind is usually on autopilot, it is not scrutinized as such and so remains intact. In Thinking, Fast and Slow Daniel Kahneman, who won the Nobel Prize in Behavior Economics, says with Amos Tversky that it was “demonstrated that most human beings depend on unconscious heuristics to make fast decisions and, only when necessary, use slow, conscious data analysis” (Hassan, 2020, p. 13). Thoughtful critique necessitates going to the core of the religious beliefs of the individual, not getting weighed down in the periphery, or with random insults.

Hassan points out we can see analogous cases where people have been subjected to undue influence in other areas:

The Brandle/Heisler/Steigel model:

This model is based on domestic violence relationships, stalking, and sexual assault. It assumes that undue influence parallels these other religious situations.

There are eight factors:

  1. The victim was kept unaware.
  2. The victim was isolated from others and information.
  3. The Influencer tried to create fear.
  4. The influencer preyed on vulnerabilities.
  5. The influencer tried to create dependencies.
  6. The influencer attempted to make victims lose faith in their own beliefs.
  7. The influencer tried to induce shame and secrecy.
  8. The influencer performed intermittent acts of kindness.

(Hassan, 2020, p. 18)

It should be obvious to anyone that this is the very heart of Christianity. The potential convert is supposed to do a thorough self-inventory until they come to see how broken they are, which then provides the ground for the reconstructive starting point: the Sinner’s prayer. Religious self-help groups function in the same way, like through the 12 Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) getting you to start alcohol abstinence by admitting that you are completely lost in an addiction that you can’t fight unless you let God transform you.

There is no difference between a religion and a cult, just that religion is a cult grown larger. In this way, we can see the features of the brainwashed cult member achieved in religion. Hassan comments:

The “thought reform” or “cult” model of Margaret Thaler Singer, PhD developed from her work on the tactics used by cults and cult leaders and has been widely referenced. The model proposes six stages: creating isolation, fostering a siege mentality, inducing dependency, promoting a sense of powerlessness, manipulating fears and vulnerabilities, and keeping the victim unaware and uninformed. The model also specifies certain tactics as follows:

  1. keeping the victim unaware of what is going on and what changes are taking place;
  2. controlling the victim’s time and, if possible, physical environment;
  3. creating a sense of powerlessness, covert fear, and dependency;
  4. suppressing much of the person’s old behavior and attitudes;
  5. instilling new behavior and attitudes; and
  6. putting forth a closed system of logic, allowing no real input or criticism.

Hassan argues that Robert J. Lifton has been instrumental in identifying the most effective look-fors in identifying environments of brainwashing/undue influence. To begin with, we can see the hallmark of the religious mindset in the first of the eight concepts below: that the in-group has the only way to view reality.

(1) Milieu Control

Milieu control involves seeing the group way as the correct and only way: “I am the way and truth and life: No one comes to the father but through me,” Jesus says. “There is often a sequence of events, such as seminars, lectures, and group encounters, which becomes increasingly intense and increasingly isolated, making it extremely difficult both physically and psychologically for one to leave” (Lifton, 1961 p. 421).

(2) Mystical Manipulation

One only needs to watch Steve Martin’s movie Leap of Faith (1992) to see the lengths to which the divine is created out of whole cloth. This can range from overt lies to overemphasizing the importance of coincidence. Yes, it’s unlikely that you will experience a healing that defies medical explanation, but in a planet of 8 billion, it’s not odd that someone will hit the lottery. Really illustrating this is that the probability of you existing at all comes out to 1 in 102,685,000—yes, that’s a 10 followed by 2,685,000 zeroes! The odds of you being alive are basically zero, but we know that there is nothing miraculous about you existing. Ali Binazir explains that there is an extremely unlikely chain of events that would have to occur for you to exist (Spector, 2012).

Typical with religions and cults is to identify specific persons as being mouthpieces for God, such as Billy Graham, and cultists trust the “prophet’s” revelations infinitely more than that of the next person, as the cult leader is said to be a mediator for God. Hassan adds:

This can be understood as a misattribution error in the person influenced—that he or she wrongly attributes “divine” forces to what is basically trickery. The person thinks the influencer is reading their mind, or that there are magical forces at work, for why things happened the way they did. Another example is a person who comes to a cult “Bible study” but does not realize that the person who invited him was instructed to learn all about his background and report it to the leader. So, when the Bible study is conducted, key teachings would be made, designed to give the new person the subjective feeling that God knew “all about him” and his struggles and was directing him to become involved. (2020, p. 29)

(3) Demand for Purity

Historically, one of the traits that has been useful for control is inspiring guilt. A culture of purity thus fosters dependence and obedience. Cults specifically target the weak and broken because they are more open to the idea that they are fundamentally flawed, and so are ripe soil in which to plant the new ideology. This is what Jesus means when he says “blessed are the poor in spirit,” which has nothing to do with money, but rather with the blessednes of those who feel spiritually broken and destitute and who thus crave a new approach to life. The apostle Paul talks about how the law was given to make the hidden sin nature conspicuous, for this would awaken the Law written on our hearts and inspire repentance. Hassan comments: “Establishing impossible standards for performance, creates an environment of guilt and shame. No matter how hard a person tries, he always falls short, feels bad, and works even harder” (2020, p. 29).

(4) The Cult of Confession

Religion is egotism, such as the idea that my being tempted by someone who isn’t my wife is part of a cosmic battle for a tug of war between God and the Devil for my soul. For what’s the alternative? The alternative is that I am an insignificant evolutionary accident. The cult is interested in every aspect of the person’s life and sees the person’s thoughts and deeds as very important and in need of cultivation. Hassan says there is “a breakdown of healthy boundaries of self/group where the cult or controller believes it is their right to know absolutely everything about the individual’s life, and this person has no right to keep any secrets which includes negative thoughts and feelings about the controller” (2020, p. 31).

(5) Sacred Science

Of course, it is obvious that religions were once cults, and cults are bizarre and silly, so you see the increased drive in religion to legitimize themselves as real science. Hassan says: “The belief that the group’s dogma is absolutely scientifically and morally true, with no room for questions or alternative viewpoints, sacred science can offer considerable security to young people because it greatly simplifies the world” (2020, p. 31).

(6) Loading the Language

A large part of entrenching someone in the religious mindset is to orient the language about it. We see this, for instance, in politicians working God into their speeches, as though it legitimized them to admit that they were superstitious. Hassan comments:

Unlike a healthy use of a large vocabulary to help navigate the world, a person influenced by thought reform has a vastly reduced set of words and concepts. The term loading the language refers to a reification of language—words or images becoming sacred or divine. A much-simplified language may seem cliché-ridden but can have enormous appeal and psychological power in its very simplification. Because every issue in one’s life—and these are often very complicated young lives—can be reduced to a single set of principles that have an inner coherence, one can claim the experience of truth and feel it. (2020, p. 32)

Stephen Colbert famously satirized “truthiness,” the idea that the truth value of something comes from its sounding true rather than being true. Jacques Derrida called this the metaphysics of presence.

(7) Doctrine over Person

Ultimately, what happens to many religious people is that their experience contradicts religious dogma and predictions, which births doubt. Talk of an all-loving and all-powerful God who has a plan for your life is fine and nice, but it is also egotism, and hardly squares with a world where 3-year-old children regularly die from cancer and starvation. The argument to God from beauty—”How can you look at the beauty of a sunset and there not be a divine artist?”—is analogous, and we can ask if a spider finds the sunset beautiful, too. Likewise, doubts are placed in the mind of a schizophrenic about his delusion that he is in a secret relationship with Drew Barrymore when he goes to the bar expecting to meet up with her and she doesn’t show up. Hassan comments: “The pattern of doctrine over person occurs when there is a conflict between what one feels oneself experiencing and what the doctrine or dogma says one should experience” (2020, p. 33).

(8) Dispensing of Existence

I’ve always wondered about Christian women dating secular men. What are they going to do without them in the afterlife? (Of course, Jesus responds that there is no marriage in the afterlife!) Members of the out-group, especially former members of the cult, are seen as being a defective use of a human life, and so are demonized, which can inspire all forms of negative responses from cult members.

Analysis

Deconstructing or deprogramming an underlying narrative is neither true nor false. A child being a good friend in school is neither correct nor incorrect, it’s just that the individual and the system functions in a healthier manner (to use Friedrich Nietzsche’s model) if the child is being friendly. So, if a child is being a problem, it may be that the underlying narrative is that the child sees naughty children get more attention from the teacher than well-behaved children and so becomes the center of attention. Deconstruction here involves identifying and challenging the underlying narrative. The naughty child is “correct” in that his underlying narrative yields the results that he wants (attention from the teacher and peers), but his approach is unhealthy and causes systemic (classroom) and individual stress. The child needs to be deprogrammed of his unhealthy attention-seeking narrative and taught that there are healthy ways to get attention. The same holds true for religion. The Christian approach is predicated on the assumption that the Christian interpretation of the evidence makes the most sense, and alternative interpretations are trivialized. So it’s a kind of egotism, which we already knew because the individual has to believe that the author of all reality cares what little insignificant you thinks and does, and there is a war between the forces of good and the forces of darkness to win what you believe.

To see the interpretive underlying narrative, the believer has to assume his religion is correct, because otherwise every act of worship could be angering the true deity (Pascal’s wager be damned!). But there is a deeper internal underlying narrative. Who’s to say? Since we’re only guessing without evidence, perhaps God sent Jesus to preach love of meekness, poverty, master (God), and enemy as a test to see who has the true warrior spirit of wealth and power, so that whoever follows Jesus fails the test and goes to Hell, while whoever maintains warrior values despite Jesus’ empty threats of Hell actually proves their warrior hearts and gains paradise. There are no uninterpreted facts from the point of view of deconstruction/deprogramming, and so weight needs to be restored to other possible interpretations to lessen the force of the popular narrative. Derrida wasn’t just being a jerk or obscure, he was arguing that restoring weight to marginalized interpretations is the way to justice—for example, when we see the violence the previously valued traditional definition of marriage does to LGBTQ+ rights, it’s an occasion to deconstruct the traditional definition and reconstruct it in a more just, inclusive way.

Religiosity is fundamentally irrational, guessing without sufficient evidence, and apologists often point to gaps in scientific knowledge to insert God in that gap, though 100% of the mysteries of reality that have been solved, have been solved by science, not God. To believe in theism means to believe that God can do anything—except appear and say hi and remove all doubt!

Because religion ultimately rests on a foundation of superstition, the secularist needs to be like a sleuth with liberal theists, wading through the theists’ “naturalistic smokescreen” to get to the superstitious elements, frameworks, and foundations. If the liberal theist does not believe in life after death, this is not an issue to focus on. Remember, religion always needs to legitimize itself, because unconsciously it knows that it is illegitimate, and so will bend over backward to present itself as a science. We should not infer that someone is wise about the existential religious questions just because they are a liberal theistic critical historian of religion. To give an analogy: someone can be competent on the piano, but not on the violin. Regarding liberal theists, Richard Carrier comments:

But even liberal-minded, progressive Christians like Justin Brierley are still echoing ancient anti-empirical sentiments. Of course the reason the “response” to this observed defect in Christianity is still never to promote actually reliable methods is that that erodes faith—for reasons only obvious to atheists. Reliable methods + correct information + time = atheism…. That this is fundamental to Christianity is proved by how it infects even its liberals. As I just noted, even Justin Brierley “lets his Bible tell him to consider as ‘blessed’ those who choose to believe things without evidence,” explicitly citing John 20:2, thus demonstrating that the ancient Christian Bible’s anti-intellectualism is corrupting the minds even of its most liberal of devotees. And that’s a problem. This is why all religion is bad for us. As I wrote before, Brierley’s “religion has literally taught him to praise the rejection of evidence-based reasoning,” which is “dangerous as all hell,” a “disastrously bad effect” of his religion on his mind. And we see this across the whole of modern Christendom. It still preaches hostility to sound inductive logic, and elevates in its place completely unempirical deductive systems of logic instead, the ones most easily corrupted to sell anything as true. And even when Christians pay lip service to sound methods of inductive logic, they completely misuse them, rendering them totally unsound. (Carrier, 2022)

References

Carrier, Richard. (2022, June 1). “A Primer on Christian Anti-Intellectualism.” Richard Carrier Blogs. <https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/20432&gt;.

Hassan, Steven Alan. (2020). “The Bite Model of Authoritarian Control: Undue Influence, Thought Reform, Brainwashing, Mind Control, Trafficking and the Law.” (Publication No. 28263630) [Doctoral dissertation, Fielding Graduate University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Lifton, Robert Jay (1961). Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of “Brainwashing” in China. W. W. Norton & Company.

Spector, Dina. (2012, June 11). “The Odds Of You Being Alive are Incredibly Small.” Business Insider. <https://www.businessinsider.com/infographic-the-odds-of-being-alive-2012-6&gt;.

You may regret reading this

Here’s the link to this article.

Avatar photoby ADAM LEE JUL 31, 2023

A man doubled over, holding his head in regret | You may regret reading this
Credit: Alex Green, Pexels

Overview:

The religious right’s legislative strategy of the moment is to restrict abortion and gender transition because some people might later regret them. But why don’t they apply that same logic to other major life decisions?

Reading Time: 5 MINUTES

“Abortion regret” has been a linchpin of the anti-choice strategy for decades. Before they had the power to ban abortion, conservative legislators tried to guilt and shame women out of seeking termination. They spread bogus narratives and required doctors to read scripts full of misinformation that abortion causes depression. They even floated the idea of allowing women to sue their doctors, even years later, if they changed their minds and decided getting an abortion wasn’t the right decision.

More recently, the religious right has adopted the same strategy with transgender people. Conservative pundits say that a small number of people who transition regret the choice and try to undo it. They consider this an adequate reason to ban or severely restrict surgery and hormones for everyone.

Now, it should be said: if conservatives really stand for “freedom”, then whether or not people regret these things should be irrelevant. Real freedom means having the right to make our own choices and then live with the consequences. It doesn’t mean paternalistically restricting people’s choices in the belief that we know better than they do.

However, there’s a better argument to prove that this is a bad-faith strategy. Namely, they aren’t trying to discourage people from making other decisions that millions regret, because those choices line up with the conservative vision of the world.

Let’s look at some examples:

Getting married. Although Christian conservatives treat marriage as the ideal state of human existence, actual humans seem to disagree. In 2021, the U.S. had 1,985,000 marriages and 689,000 divorces, or slightly more than one divorce for every three marriages.

Clearly, a large fraction of people regret getting married. Does that mean we should ban marriage, or make it harder for people to marry? Should we have legally required premarital counseling, or mandated waiting periods?

By Republican logic, the answer would be yes. However, conservatives aren’t pushing for this, but the opposite. The next step in their culture war is seeking to repeal no-fault divorce laws. In other words, they want to make divorce harder. Instead of making it easy for people to undo a choice that they regret, conservatives want to force them to live with it. They want to keep people stuck in marriages that they don’t want to be in.

A fact that probably has a lot to do with this is that 70% of divorces are initiated by women. The Republican opposition to abortion and LGBTQ rights are just prongs of their overarching goal, which is the restoration of patriarchy. They want to bring back a world where straight white men ruled over everyone else, and getting rid of anything that allows women to be independent brings that goal closer.

Getting a tattoo. In most states, you can get tattooed the day you turn 18. But while a tattoo is permanently etched into the skin, most of us grow, mature and change over the course of our lives. A tattoo that feels deeply meaningful to a person when they’re young may seem dated or downright embarrassing to them ten or twenty years later.

According to one survey, about one in four people with tattoos regret getting them. Should we consider outlawing or restricting tattoos to stop this regret?

Cosmetic surgery. Although conservatives are fixated on transgender people getting hormones and sex-change operations, millions of cisgender people also get surgery that alters their bodies. They get liposuction, breast implants, tummy tucks, calf implants, facelifts, chin implants, nose jobs, lip fillers, hair plugs, Botox injections, and more. We might also call these “gender-affirming” procedures, insofar as they bring people closer to what they consider the ideal appearance for their gender.

Some cosmetic surgeries are done to fix serious defects or disfiguring injuries, but others are merely for vanity. Even teenagers are getting these operations. (One hair-raising example that I’d never heard of before and that I came across while researching this article: doctors giving estrogen to girls to keep them from growing too tall.)

By some figures, the regret rate for plastic surgery is almost two-thirds. There’s no shortage of stories about celebrities who get addicted to surgery and regret the results.

If protecting kids is the goal, shouldn’t Republicans be slapping harsh restrictions on these procedures? Putting onerous regulations on plastic surgery clinics? Calling for prosecution of parents who allow their kids to get it?

Getting knee surgery. Research suggests that as many as 20% of knee-replacement patients are dissatisfied with the results. That’s a shockingly high percentage for major surgery, far higher than reported regret rates for abortion or gender transition.

As with plastic surgery, you’d think that conservatives would be against this. Should we force elderly patients to go through counseling and a waiting period? Requiring orthopedic doctors to read scripts about how these operations are dangerous and unlikely to go well?

Playing football. What parent would choose to inflict brain damage on their children? But that, like it or not, is the consequence of playing tackle football and other violent sports.

The brain is soft and squishy as a bowl of Jello. Whenever a person takes a hard hit to the head, their brain slams against the inside of their skull, bruising and tearing the delicate connections. Even hits that don’t cause concussions, when they’re repeated thousands of times, cause cumulative damage.

CTE—chronic traumatic encelopathy—is the result. The symptoms aren’t pretty: dementia, mood swings, impulsive and violent behavior, and suicidal tendencies. Athletes with CTE, and their families and loved ones, undoubtedly rue their choice to play these sports. To save people from this suffering and regret, we should give serious thought to banning football and any other sport that entails frequent blows to the head.

Buying a home. According to a 2022 survey by Zillow, 75% of recent homebuyers have regrets. Some people regret buying a house that was too expensive or needed too much maintenance, others that they didn’t look longer or search harder before buying.

What is the government doing to protect people from these regrets? Should homebuyers be able to sue sellers if they regret their decision? If this isn’t something the state should intervene in, why does it have an interest in other, equally consequential decisions?

Joining a religion. In the last few decades, there’s been a spiritual exodus in America. Millions of people are leaving the religions they grew up in. Some are switching to other faiths, while others are giving up on organized religion entirely. Of these ex-believers, many speak eloquently about the trauma they suffered from abusive, controlling, high-demand belief systems.

If you join a church and later decide it didn’t meet your needs, or even that it inflicted psychological or physical harm on you, should you be able to sue that church to compensate you for your regret? If not, why not?

Having children. In a society that holds family as a sacred ideal, it’s intensely taboo to admit this, or even to talk about it. Nevertheless, surveys consistently find that a minority of parents regret having children:

When American parents older than 45 were asked in a 2013 Gallup poll how many kids they would have if they could “do it over,” approximately 7 percent said zero. In Germany, 8 percent of mothers and fathers in a 2016 survey “fully” agreed with a statement that they wouldn’t have children if they could choose again (11 percent “rather” agreed). In a survey published in June, 8 percent of British parents said that they regret having kids. And in two recent studies, an assistant psychology professor at SWPS University, Konrad Piotrowski, placed rates of parental regret in Poland at about 11 to 14 percent, with no significant difference between men and women. Combined, these figures suggest that many millions of people regret having kids.“The Two Reasons Parents Regret Having Kids.” Gail Cornwall, The Atlantic, 31 August 2021.

Regretful parents cite all manner of concerns: from a lack of free time and money, to exhaustion and burnout, to the especially grueling challenges of raising special-needs children. Some people regret having kids with an absent or abusive partner, while others never wanted kids but had them to appease a partner who did.

Having children is the most personal decision a person can make. No other choice has such immense and intimate consequences, whether for better or for worse. That’s why it’s so abhorrent for any outside force to interfere in it, one way or the other. It shows the extreme hypocrisy of political parties that cite “regret” as a reason to ban abortion, but feel no concern about forcing people to have children whether they want to or not.

The Boaz Stranger–Chapter 21

“Lee, Lee, wake up.” It was Mom, and we were in Panama City. My twelve-year-old self had been at the beach outside our hotel, lying on my stomach for hours. Mom, Dad, Kyla, and Lillian had gone to a mall and left me alone. “You need to take this.”

I opened my eyes and wondered why Kyla looked so old, and why I needed the pill and glass of water she was holding. “Sunburned?” I knew that’s what it was because I’d already seen myself in bed in this very room for a week after we’d returned from vacation. How was I still on the beach and why was Kyla’s hair streaked with gray?

“Lee, you’re dreaming. Sit up and take this.” The old Kyla raised her voice. She set the pill and the glass on my nightstand and started tugging at my tee shirt. She forgot my shoulder.

“Shit.” 2020 rushed inside my old bedroom like a wave at high tide. “What time is it?”

“Almost midnight.” It was then I noticed Kyla’s face matched that of a ghost. She had some sort of white cream smeared everywhere there weren’t eyeballs or a mouth. Her night gown reminded me of Mother. “Your prescription says you can take one pill every four to six hours as needed for pain. You’ve been groaning and moaning ever since Lillian left.”

That last fact was confusing. It wasn’t connected to anything else I knew other than Lillian had delivered me home. Painfully, I sat against the headboard and realized I was nearly naked. Underwear and a tee-shirt. The weird thing is I had no memory of undressing and crawling into bed. Heck, I didn’t recall walking inside Kyla’s house at all. I swallowed the pill. “I’m sorry to be so much trouble.”

Typical Kyla. “Why start now?” Without missing a beat, sis continued. “Mark it down in your little book. Tomorrow we’re going to have a talk about what’s going on. You hear?”

I nodded. “Okay.”

“If Lillian’s theory is correct, you’re fighting a losing battle and a mild head wound and a bruised shoulder are the least of your troubles.”

I was in no mood for this conversation, but ‘theory’ had my attention. “What did Lillian say?”

“Later. You get some rest. I’m headed upstairs but here’s a whistle if you need me.” Kyla left. I inched my body back horizontally.

I was asleep before she was halfway up the stairs. The Vicodin kicked in soon afterwards, followed by a speed of light return to 1970. During the next several hours, I experienced a virtual replay of my last two years of high school.

Lillian was the first girl I ever saw naked. In person. It was New Year’s Day 1970. Until that experience, I had always viewed my sister’s best friend as just a member of our household, like Mom, Dad, Kyla, and Kyle. She was part of the family, just another sister. I think it was my infatuation with Rachel that had blinded me to the metamorphosis happening right before my eyes.

Our pond froze six inches deep. According to Dad, it was the worst ice storm since March 1960. Lillian and Kyle had already spent two nights at Harding Hillside. After a big breakfast on the first day of the new year, Mom suggested we bundle up and get some exercise. That seemed to connect with Lillian and Kyla. They quickly raced from the kitchen to her upstairs bedroom. Mom asked me to grab her camera from her desk. Years earlier, she’d fashioned an office of sorts from an upstairs closet.

When I entered the hallway, Kyla’s door was open, and I heard laughing and singing but continued. It didn’t take a minute to find Mom’s camera. I tiptoed back to Kyla’s room, planning on executing one of my best scare tactics. When I peeked my head around the door frame, the most unbelievably gorgeous site of my young life met me. Apparently, Kyla was changing inside her walk-in closet, but there stood Lillian facing away, towards Kyla’s bed and the room’s sole window. I even recall how the incoming light created a shadow on the floor that matched Lillian’s hour-glass figure.

She must have heard my mind revving like a car engine. She turned and saw me, doing nothing except slipping inside the thermal top she was holding. I’ll never forget her smile and her boobs, not to mention anything else. That day, I learned Lillian was a young goddess. She might have a teenage mind and a queen-size Southern drawl, but her body was the epitome of a Playboy’s luscious centerfold.

My dreaming, hallucinating was more like it, had continued nonstop until 4:37 a.m. according to the digital clock/radio on my nightstand.

It might have been a hard fall on the ice that morning that changed the directory of my life and my Vicodin adventures. It wasn’t my head slamming against the pond’s concrete surface when I was showing out for who? No, not Mom and Dad. Instead, it was the unplanned and totally unexpected experience of seeing the naked Lillian that changed the trajectory of my life. At least for the next two years.

I doubt if I would have ever had the courage to ask Lillian for a date. I was more of a nerd; no way am I a narcissist. That was my understanding of what a guy had to be to have the courage to ask out the prettiest girl in the universe. Yes, that’s how star struck I was. Fortunately, I didn’t have to conjure up the courage or attempt the impossible transformation toward loving myself to the extreme. On the twentieth day of January, Lillian asked me to the Valentine’s Dance.

It seemed like a five-minute fight to crawl out of bed. There were four of us entangled, me, of course, along with a sheet, a thermal blanket, and a quilt. The latter was one of Mother’s beautiful designs. I wondered why I was sweating.

At 4:59, I exited my bedroom and inched toward the kitchen. Exhausted, but proud. Somehow, I’d been able to slip inside the sweat-suit Kyla had left hanging over my rocker, not to mention my bathroom adventure of off-loading pee, washing my face, and brushing my teeth.

***

Kyla was sitting at the kitchen table sipping coffee and reading Chambers, her since-middle-school devotional. Kyla’s faith had always been a strong flame. I’d also read Oswald Chambers’ My Utmost for His Highest. That daily practice stopped when Rachel killed herself. My faith had weakened since my youth, flickered after her overdose, and slithered away to hide under the proverbial basket after she hung herself. That eventually prompted my research into the overwhelming facts of pain and suffering. Ultimately, the truth of reality doused my faith forever.

“Fresh coffee.” Sis said without raising her eyes.

“Thanks.”

“Why are you up so early?” I poured a cup and wondered if Kyla was wishing I hadn’t disturbed her.

“Too tired and worn out to sleep.”

“Uh?” Kyla said, laying Chambers face down on the table.

“The bananas were too ripe.” Why couldn’t we siblings have a normal conversation, absent the jokes, digs, and sarcasm? Before she responded, other than giving me her best quizzical look, I leaned back against the kitchen sink and shared street slang for Vicodin and Dr. Claburn’s hilarious story.

I thought about sharing a few of my late-night hallucinations but concluded that was off-limits for brother-sister talks. Kyla motioned me to join her at the table. “Promise me you won’t be mad if I tell you I snooped inside your briefcase.”

My mind had slowed a million degrees since last night’s light speed wanderings. Briefcase? It was on the back seat of the Explorer. It’s still in the Walmart parking lot. “Uh?” Kyla and I learned this word when we were quite young.

“After Lillian and I got you in bed.” Sis stopped and released her trademark yelp. It only appeared in those rare foot-in-mouth moments. “Man, did that sound sexual.”

“I understand. The two of you stripped me down. I don’t remember being gratified.”

“Ugh, that’s a mental picture I’ll burn. Listen, big brother. After you zoned out, Lillian suggested she return to Walmart and secure your vehicle. She had seen your briefcase lying in the seat. Also, she worried about the back door. It’s badly damaged. It doesn’t fully close.”

“So, the two of you preyed on my vulnerability, concocting a scheme to steal my money?” The Harding siblings are far from normal.

“Shut up and play civil. It was an innocent mistake. Well, mostly. When she grabbed the briefcase’s handle, the contents went flying. Apparently, you hadn’t snapped it shut the last time you used it. Long story short is that Lillian couldn’t help but see Rachel’s diary and a receipt from Micaden Tanner’s office. After she returned, the two of us talked, even engaged in a little speculation.” Kyla walked to the coffeemaker and refilled her cup. “Want more?”

“No. So, I might as well be interested in the story you two thieves have conjured.” My phrasing was still off.

“Lee, where in heck did you get a gun and why did you give it to Micaden Tanner?” Kyla’s question wasn’t bad. She’d already reasoned I could not have cleared airline security with a pistol in tow. But, not to credit smart sister too much, it appears she hadn’t connected the Hunt House to the mystery gun.

Oh well, I might as well take in some new partners. Over the next half-hour, I painted Kyla a rough picture of what I’d pieced together since finding Rachel’s basement-concealed diaries. This included search and discovery at the Hunt House Friday night. I started not to mention Rachel’s pregnancy and abortion, but these were the moon, the mountain, and the merciless ocean of the landscape I was painting. After relaying that Ray Archer must have killed Kyle Bennett, I warned Kyla about discussing these details with Lillian. I also promised to fabricate a story about the pistol.

“Big brother, I know you’re a little slow but hear me out before you write off your first lover.”

I wanted to lasso that calf and tie it up, neck and legs (the Vicodin?), but shook my head sideways instead. Kyla could be wrong on so many levels. “I assume we’re speaking of Lillian.”

“Well, duh, who else? Okay, let’s move along. The married woman who’s always had your back left here a little before midnight. While you were tossing and turning, moaning and groaning, she was a dog after a bone.”

“Did she find it?” At most, I guessed Lillian had followed up with the Boaz Police officer who had dropped by the ER. The sharp pain erupted from my shoulder when I made too-quick-a-reach for the sugar bowl. I hoped Lillian had not broken her promise to stay mum. My mind was still several thousand degrees below optimum processing.

“She did. With some help. Lillian is not dumb, nor is she untrustworthy. She called and got her investigator out of bed, and he awakened one of his contacts. You can read the email she sent about an hour ago.” Kyla pointed to the couch. Until now, I hadn’t noticed her laptop.

“Investigator?” Why would Lillian need an investigator? A couple of vague reasons started revealing themselves.

“Oh, sorry. Lillian said not to give you any of her personal information. She didn’t know if she could trust you.”

“Uh?”

“I’m kidding, you dote.” Kyla stood and retrieved her laptop. “Do you want to know the name, address, and phone number of the owner of a 2014 blue Chevrolet Silverado?”

“Shit, Lillian doesn’t fool around.” Five thousand degrees.

“Let’s not go there. Derrick Hart’s your man. Well, he’s the owner of tag number ‘USA4GOD.’” Kyla turned her laptop screen so I could see. Lillian’s email was open.

I scanned the three short paragraphs and then reread them more closely. Two things caught my attention. The first was the name of Lillian’s investigator: Connor Ford. Interesting that she was using the same guy Micaden had recommended I use. The second was Lillian’s admonition to Kyla for her to keep quiet about anything related to the tag number. I liked her last statement: “Lee will know what to do. Remember, he plays chess; we play checkers.” The Vicodin almost triggered another hallucination.

I looked over the laptop’s screen at Kyla. She was shaking her head sideways. “Do I want to know what you’re thinking?” She and Rachel had always said I over-think everything. “You need to give this information to the police. They can hunt him down and charge him with attempted murder. Right?”

I wasn’t interested in Kyla’s question. What I needed to know was something far more personal. “Sis, this might be uncomfortable for you, but I have to know. So, be honest. How long have you known about Rachel’s high school pregnancy and abortion?”

I wasn’t expecting such a quick and hurtful response. “Since eleventh grade.” Kyla’s eyes teared as she mouthed the words, “I’m sorry.”

“One last question, for now. I know you have things to do.” Today was Thanksgiving, and Kyla had volunteered to help with the community meal at the church. She used a napkin to wipe her eyes. “To your knowledge, who else was aware of Rachel’s situation?”

This time she paused, like she was alphabetizing a long list of names. “Jane, Lillian, and me. Ray and Rachel, of course, and their parents.”

“Kyle Bennett?”

Kyla shook her head. “Not that I know.”

Modern Liberalism Born of Enlightenment Thought

Here’s the link to this article.

James A. Haught | March 31, 2023 | Kiosk Article

[ Ethics-Morality | Freethought | Philosophy | Politics | Rationalism ]

Values that later grew into liberalism began stirring in the epoch now known as the Enlightenment, starting more than three centuries ago, chiefly in England and France. It was an era when kings still ruled brutally by “divine right,” and the church still sought to execute “heretics” holding irregular beliefs, or jail skeptics for blasphemy. Most people were agricultural serfs, working on lands inherited by wealthy barons and counts. The bottom-rung majority had virtually no rights.

But the Enlightenment roused a new way of thinking: a sense that all people should have some control over their lives, a voice in their own destiny. Absolute power of authorities—either the throne or the cathedral—was challenged. Reformers asserted that human reason and the scientific method can improve society and benefit nearly everyone.

The 1600s were a time of ugly intolerance, much of it stemming from alliances between church and throne. In England’s notorious Star Chamber, controlled by the Anglican archbishop, Puritan and Presbyterian dissenters were forced to testify against themselves, then sentenced to have their ears cut off or their faces branded with markings such as S. L. (for seditious libeler). One victim, John Lilburne, became a public hero because he wrote pamphlets claiming that all people deserved “freeborn rights” not subject to king or church.

Europe was emerging from horrors of religious wars and massacres between Catholics and Protestants. Catholic France persecuted Huguenot Protestants. Jews were attacked cruelly and banned from certain nations, including England. Sporadic executions of “heretics” and “witches” still occurred. England’s last accused witch was put to death in 1684. A few others were executed around Europe and the New World for another century.

This was the background that helped spawn Enlightenment reform.

England was shattered by civil war in the 1640s between Parliament and Puritans on one side versus King Charles I and Anglicans on the other. Charles was beheaded and the power of kings was reduced—expanding an erosion that began four centuries earlier when barons forced King John to sign the Magna Carta, yielding certain rights.

By the late 1600s, some thinkers began pondering society and government.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) wrote Leviathan asserting that people need a “social contract” to secure safe lives. In a dog-eat-dog natural state, he said, everyone suffers from “continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man [is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” Therefore, he said, people must yield power to a sovereign government to enforce order and protect them. Hobbes supported a king as the sovereign—but the tide away from absolute kings already was flowing. Hobbes raised awareness that the social order is made by humans, not by God.

In his many writings, Hobbes repeatedly affronted the clergy. A bishop accused him of atheism, possibly punishable by death. The allegation subsided, then flared again. Nearing 80 years old, Hobbes hastily burned some of his papers and eluded prosecution.

John Locke (1632-1704) hatched notions of democracy, arguing that all people, male and female, deserve a degree of equality. He dismissed the divine right of kings, and advocated separation of church and state to avert religious conflict.

John Milton (1608-1674) was more than an epic poet who wrote in four languages. He also supported popular government and attacked state-mandated religion. When Parliament imposed censorship on writings, he defied a licensing requirement and published an Areopagitica pamphlet claiming that all thinking people are entitled to free expression of their beliefs. “Books are not absolutely dead things,” he said. “He who destroys a good book kills reason itself.” The principle of free speech and free press was furthered.

In France, Baron de Montesquieu (1689-1755) championed democracy and envisioned an elected government with power divided between executive, legislative and judicial branches.

Francois Marie Arouet (1694-1788)—”that consuming fire called Voltaire,” as Will Durant called him—was a brilliant French writer who became a heroic champion of human rights. Endlessly, he denounced cruelties of bishops and aristocrats. Here’s an example: In the devout town of Abbeville, a teen-age youth, Francois de la Barre, was accused of marring a crucifix, singing impious songs and wearing his hat while a church procession passed. He was sentenced to have his tongue torn out, his head chopped off, and his remains burned. Voltaire wrote bitter protests against this savagery. He helped appeal the youth’s case to Parliament, which showed “mercy” by affording the blasphemer a quick death by beheading—with a copy of Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary nailed to his body.

Voltaire’s protest writings roused ferment across Europe and won reversal of a few cases. He freed Jean Espinas, who had spent 23 years aboard a penal galley ship because he sheltered a fugitive Protestant minister for one night. Likewise, he freed Claude Chaumont from a galley bench, where he had been sentenced for attending a Protestant worship service.

In The Rights of Man, Thomas Paine wrote that Voltaire’s “forte lay in exposing and ridiculing the superstitions which priestcraft, united with statecraft, had interwoven with governments.”

At first, Enlightenment ideas were somewhat suppressed in Europe, where kings and archbishops still prevailed, but they found fertile ground in America’s colonies. Brilliant radicals such as Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison read them ardently and adopted them as a pattern for the first modern democracy, the United States of America. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson summed up the essence:

All men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among these life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Less-known founding father George Mason incorporated the principles into the Bill of Rights, keeping church and state apart, guaranteeing free speech, and protecting each person from abuses by the majority. Similarly, the personal liberties were reiterated in the Rights of Man and the Citizen adopted by the French Revolution, and eventually in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that Eleanor Roosevelt helped craft for the United Nations.

Thus democracy became self-contradictory. A basic premise is majority rule—yet a bill of rights prevents majority rule. For example, the Christian majority cannot vote to banish minority Jews or skeptics. Personal beliefs are exempt from majority rule.

The Enlightenment was the seedbed that sprouted most of the liberal freedoms now enjoyed in democracies everywhere. It projected a model for humane, safe, fair modern life.

08/07/23 Biking & Listening

Biking is something else I both love and hate. It takes a lot of effort but does provide good exercise and most days over an hour to listen to a good book or podcast. I especially like having ridden.

Here’s my bike, a Rockhopper by Specialized. I purchased it November 2021 from Venture Out in Guntersville; Mike is top notch! So is the bike, and the ‘old’ man seat I salvaged from an old Walmart bike.

Here’s a link to today’s bike ride.

Something to consider if you’re not already cycling.

I encourage you to start riding a bike, no matter your age. Check out these groups:

Cycling for those aged 70+(opens in a new tab)

Solitary Cycling(opens in a new tab)

Remember,

Photo by Suzy Hazelwood on Pexels.com

Halfway through today’s ride I started listening to:

Here’s a link to this show notes page.

Here’s the novel I’m listening to: Expelled by James Patterson

Amazon Abstract

One viral photo.
Four expelled teens.
Everyone’s a suspect.

Theo Foster’s Twitter account used to be anonymous – until someone posted a revealing photo that got him expelled. No final grade. No future.

Theo’s resigned himself to a life of misery in a dead-end job when a miracle happens: Sasha Ellis speaks to him. She was also expelled for a crime she didn’t commit, and now he has the perfect way to keep her attention: find out who set them up.

To uncover the truth, Theo has to get close to the suspects. What secrets are they hiding? And how can he catch their confessions on camera…?

Here’s a few photos from along my pistol route:

James A. Haught: Religion fading as intelligence rises

Here’s the link to this article.

The Religion News Foundation, Religion News Service, Associated Press and The Conversation recently announced the creation of a global religion journalism initiative, an effort to expand religion news reporting in the United States and around the world.

The initiative is funded by a $4.9 million grant from Lilly Endowment.

The endowment says part of its mission is to “deepen and enrich the religious lives of American Christians” and to “foster public understanding about religion and help lift up in fair and accurate ways the contributions that people of diverse religious faiths make to our greater civic well-being.”

Columnist James A. Haught, former editor of West Virginia’s largest newspaper, The Charleston Gazette-Mail, said he “suspects that Lilly is trying to buy a whitewash to offset endless ugly headlines about religious horrors and cruelties around the world. I wanted to give the project a jolt. Half sarcastically, I offered to write ‘curmudgeon columns’ for the Lilly-funded enterprise. Here is my first one (which I assume is doomed to rejection).”

By James A. Haught

Supernatural religion is a colossal system of falsehoods. Invisible gods, devils, heavens, hells, angels, demons and other magical church entities don’t actually exist. They’re just concoctions of the human imagination. Yet they’re the basis of a trillion-dollar labyrinth of worship around the planet.

Widespread belief in such spirits shows a deep flaw in the supposedly logical minds of our species. It’s akin to fairy tale beliefs of children.

The most dishonest people are clergy who endlessly declare God’s commands, as if an imaginary being really gave commands. I wonder how many ministers realize, at least subconsciously, that they’re spouting lies?

Studies show that religious skeptics have higher intelligence than religious believers. Maybe that’s why brilliant thinkers throughout history have doubted religion.

In Ancient Greece, thinker Prodicus reportedly said: “The gods of popular belief do not exist.”

In medieval times, while the Holy Inquisition burned skeptics, Michel de Montaigne wrote: “Man is certainly stark mad. He cannot make a worm, yet he will make gods by the dozen.”

As American radicals launched the first modern democracy, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.”

Jefferson also wrote, in an 1820 letter, that ministers “dread the advance of science as witches do the approach of daylight.”

Thomas Edison scoffed: “Religion is all bunk.”

Albert Einstein told The New York Times in 1930 that he couldn’t believe in a personal god, adding: “Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism.”

There you have it. The brightest people have always known that supernatural church dogmas are untrue.

The Flynn Effect shows that the average American I.Q. rises three points per decade. Educated folks are getting smarter. Maybe that’s why religion is dwindling rapidly in the United States, as it has done in Europe.

At least one-fourth of American adults now say their religion is “none” — and the ratio is one-third among those under 30. Supernatural faith is dying, right before everyone’s eyes. A new secular age is taking shape. Scientific honesty prevails. Hurrah.

It may seem harmless that millions of older Americans still attend church and pray to imaginary spirits that don’t exist. But religion has a dark side that is profoundly harmful.

It has cropped up since the time of human sacrifice, Crusades, Inquisitions, witch hunts, holy wars and pogroms against Jews.

Today, the vile side of faith erupts in Muslim suicide massacres, child molestation by Catholic priests (and Protestant evangelists), opposition to the teaching of evolution, resistance to sex education and birth control, cruel hostility to gays, opposition to lifesaving stem cell research, etc.

Another vile aspect of religion is the adherence of white evangelicals to the Republican Party. Jesus was allegedly a liberal who urged followers to help the poor, feed the hungry, heal the sick, clothe the naked and aid underdogs.That’s the formula of the social “safety net” backed by Democrats. Yet, white fundamentalists vote overwhelmingly for the GOP, which seeks to slash the safety net. In effect, those believers oppose Jesus.

It’s fortunate that supernatural religion is fading as America grows more intelligent. Bring it on. The faster the better.

James A. Haught is editor emeritus of West Virginia’s largest newspaper, the Charleston Gazette-Mail.