Newsletter Blogs

The Salt Lake Tribune

Our speaker at the January 14th meeting, Terry Orme, Editor and Publisher of the Salt Lake Tribune, thinks Utahans, and even Mormons, want their news from a broad arena of sources, including their church. He says, “They get enough from their church on Sundays.”

The beginning of the Legislative session, this year on January 25th, gets the Tribune writers excited. They feel that reporting on the Legislature is the most important thing they do. Pat Bagley has said that it will be “like shooting fish in a barrel.”

For this upcoming session, the Tribune is taking polls to ask questions to decide what we, the readers find pertinent to the work of the Legislature. Examples of these questions are:

1. Do we want the state to try to take over millions of acres of Federal land? Are we willing to lose $14 million in the resulting lawsuit?
2. What issues should we be considering associated with Medicaid expansion? The Legislature is entering its 4th year having failed to act concerning expanding Medicaid. It seems to be frustrating at best and inhuman and cruel at worst.
3. What is the Legislature’s roll in solving the problem of homelessness? Homelessness is being dealt with in SLC. But it’s a regional or even a state-wide problem.
4. There are at least a couple of questions related to the prison. Is the relocation of the prison a settled question? Is there a part in providing Medicaid coverage to the prison population that helps with recidivism?
5. Should the state fund a water pipeline from Lake Powell to St. George?
6. What is our best use of education resources? Utahans want more money spent on education and don’t like being last in the nation in terms of spending. But year after year, the legislature does not change the amount the state spends on education. Does the state need computers for every child in school?
7. Should the state be in charge of an alcohol sales program?
8. What are the issues concerning Senator Lee, and Governor Herbert attempting to cut funding for Planned Parenthood?
9. Is the economy really doing better? Are the Tribune’s readers getting raises?
10. Who is responsible for the air in Salt Lake? It seems to be getting worse. Nothing has been done so far. What do we have to do to get clean air?
11. What position do we take concerning medical marijuana and why?
12. Do we maintain the death penalty, even with the limited availability of the required drug cocktail?
13. What should be done with the “literally miles” of video camera footage from police body cams? Should it be available to the public? Last year there were 14 people killed by firearms which were controlled by police. In 2015, of the first three Utah homicides, all were officer involved homicides.
14. How can gerrymandering be dealt with? Salt Lake County has been cut into so many legislative districts that the voters are disenfranchised. Mr. Orme thinks this is the biggest issue in our state.

The Tribune will have poll results of these questions in the paper for the legislature to see. Then after the session, the Tribune wants to discuss what happened at the session. Did lawmakers follow the wills of their constituents? The goal of the Tribune is to give people enough information to hold the legislature and governor accountable.

The question, however, always is, “Will they listen?”

Accountability is a big issue with our legislature. Decisions are made behind closed doors. The legislature can’t meet with their constituents because they are hidden away. The public may never know how their representatives vote on an issue. Last year the legislature passed the Government Records Access and Management Act (GRAMA). This bill restricts access to public information and was rushed through. The Tribune tried to get open meetings and formed a group to push all together for accountability. After the public strongly demonstrated against it, the GRAMA bill was repealed.

Editorial note: We need the Tribune to continue to help us keep our Legislature responsive to our community. We are grateful to Mr. Orme for his discussion with us and his work at the paper of record.

—Lauren Florence, MD

---

Magic of Reality
~Book Review~

I have been a Richard Dawkins for a long time having read Ancestors Tale, Greatest Show on Earth, Unweaving the Rainbow, etc. Some of my friends find these books too filled with Biology jargon.

Along comes Magic of Reality which Dawkins seems to have written to a different target audience, people with little or no background in the natural sciences. The message is the same, only the language has changed.

This is a powerful book emphasizing the overwhelming evidence that could/should be used to change calling the “Theory of Evolution” to the “Law of Evolution.”

If you have tried Dawkins before but found the language difficult I highly recommend this book!

—Wayne Wilson

---

Chapter Happenings

Humanists of Utah is ready to start up a 2016 Discussion Group! To be held the last Sunday of every month—beginning February 27—at 1:30 p.m. Our first discussion will be led by Board Member and Humanist Minister Elaine Stehel, at Mestizo Coffeehouse (631 W North Temple in Salt Lake) on the topic of Humanist Ethics. Please e-mail elaine@humanistsofutah.org with questions, comments, or suggestions for upcoming discussion topics.

Calling all lovers of everything Darwin! We need your expertise on our 10th Annual Darwin Day Planning Committee. If you are interested in meeting periodically throughout this year to make our 2017 event spectacular and memorable, please send a letter of interest to the Board at board@humanistsofutah.org. We will try to have our first planning meeting in March 2016.

–Elaine Stehel

---

President’s Report

Greetings freethinkers, now that it’s February, I’m already getting anxious for spring. I know it doesn’t look very promising outside right now with all the snow we have. But I’m starting to notice the daylight hours getting a little longer and that’s encouraging. Plus Home Depot is tempting me now that they have this year’s seeds already out. As I may have mentioned before, I’m going to get more active in supporting the grow local/buy local concept. But for now my focus needs to be on our Darwin Day celebration.

This February’s Darwin Day will be the ninth. You have probably already received a message or two from other board members regarding Darwin Day and other matters. Please take the time to respond to our Survey and let us know what kind of programs you would like to see. We are hoping your feedback will help us make improvements that will increase attendance and membership and make for a more enjoyable schedule of events. So your input will be very helpful.

Also in the messages will be calls for volunteers for the various projects we will be planning. Bob Mayhew is planning a bus trip to the Cleveland Lloyd Quarry for later in the year, plus Elaine Stehel is planning to get a monthly discussion group going again. Plus, during the year we will be participating in the Pride Festival and hopefully some of the street fairs this summer. So we could use a few volunteers to help out.

Getting back to Darwin Day, the fact that it is the ninth has made us mindful that next year will be a sort of a milestone being the TENTH annual celebration. So the Board is planning to make this event extra special. To accomplish that we will be forming a committee soon after this year’s Darwin Day to plan the “Tenth Annual Darwin Day with Humanists of Utah”, and we’d love to have you join us in the planning.

But, I’m getting ahead of myself here with talk of the tenth Darwin Day.

We will be hosting the Ninth Annual Darwin Day on Thursday February 11^th. We will start at 6:30 with a reception with some finger foods to munch while we mingle. There will be a literature table and a table with some Evolve Fish items for sale. At 7:30 we will present Dr. Alan R. Rogers, Professor of biology and anthropology at the University of Utah as our speaker (See more details elsewhere in the newsletter.) Then after Professor Rogers gives his presentation, we will serve our traditional birthday cake with Darwin’s image on it. I’m looking forward to our annual celebration of science and hope to see you there.

I can’t sign off though without saying something about the Ranchers and their occupation up in Oregon. I don’t want to spend a lot of time right now deriding their actions and goofy thinking (I could write a tome). But it does kind of make me laugh when I think of what they really want. They want free resources to run their business. I mean, what business wouldn’t like free resources? They want free forage for their animals, but I’m sorry, there are no free rides folks. When I had a cabinet shop years ago, it would have been great if ANY of the “resources” I needed to run the business were free. But it just doesn’t work that way.

I’m not sure, but it may be that the rangeland cattle business is on its way out, especially during drought years when forage gets pretty scarce. Perhaps the scarcity of forage due to the drought is what’s driving them to want more access to areas where there’s still something for their cattle eat.

Anyway, bye for now, and I hope to see you next Thursday, where the thinking should be a bit more rational.

—Robert Lane
President, HoU

---

---

 

 

 

The Right Side of History

By whatever name we’re called—and we have many names,
Like humanists and secularists—we all have similar aims.

One is a world that’s rational, that looks at actual facts,
At objective evidence to inform our thoughts and acts.

Too many in this world, though, do not accept this view
And embrace their ideologies which to them are true.

They hold back much needed progress as climate change deniers,
Preaching to the world that climate change scientists are liars.

Anti-evolution creationists are hell-bent on winning,
Believing that Genesis records the world’s beginning.

How many patriarchs are there who populate the Senate
Who believe in “legitimate rape” as a guiding tenet?

Birther Donald Trump and many others still pursue
The idea that Obama is not native born; and, too,

That Obama’s socialistic and a Muslim; they insist we see
That he wants nothing more than to destroy democracy.

And still too many people think that men choose to be gay.
The disregard the evidence that they were born that way.

The list of false beliefs goes on and on, there is no end.
They skew debate and everything on which our lives depend.

I think the number of ideologues will decrease
As non-rational beliefs dwindle, promising us peace,

And that sometime in the future there will by no mystery
About who today is on the right side of history.

—Earl Wunderli

---

President’s Report

Happy new year everyone, I hope you had a pleasant holiday season.

Looking back on 2015, for me it was a rather busy year in spite of my being mostly retired. I could spend some time reflecting positively and negatively on the year. There is plenty to reflect on both personally, locally, nationally and worldwide. And, have no doubt I will have a lot to say about subjects like Donald Trump, terrorism, the environment, etc. in the month to come. But for now I would rather contemplate the coming year.

Personally, I had sort of a wow experience as I realized that I will soon be (no doubt) getting notices of my fifty-year high school reunion. Now I’m feeling like a real geezer (with apologies to those who don’t like the word geezer.) It should be interesting see who shows up. I remember last time Amy and I sat at a table where two of the wives (obviously Mormon) were determined to sit with mostly folded arms determined NOT to have a good time. It was held at a country club with all the decadence of a cash bar. But enough about the past for now.

In regards to our Humanists of Utah schedule, we have as our January guest speaker, Terry Orme, editor and publisher of the Salt Lake Tribune. Interestingly, my wife Amy knew Mr. Orme when He was doing the concert reviews and such. Her father John O’Connor was an editor on the city desk at the time and from what I’m told, Terry would pass on extra tickets to concerts to John for his daughters. So I’m looking forward to meeting and hearing from Mr. Orme and I hope you will join us.

In February we will be hosting our ninth annual Darwin Day celebration. This year it will be held at our usual venue in Eliot Hall at the Unitarian Church. As usual, there will be a reception before the speaker with catered finger food and a birthday cake for after the speaker.

I know I’m getting ahead of things a little bit, but one reason I have been excited about our Ninth Darwin Day event is that next year will be our tenth. That seems to me to be a milestone of some note. Hopefully the tradition will go on for many years. It has also been a dream or aspiration of mine to eventually form a foundation that could help make sure in goes on indefinitely. Now I realize forming a foundation is no simple task. It takes a lot of work and funding to plan and implement such a project, but I certainly think it is worth the effort.

That’s about all I have to say for now except to ask that you let us know what we can do to get more of you to join us more often. You know, we rarely here from some of you and we would like to see you.

Thanks to all for your support.

—Robert Lane
President, HoU

---

 

Passport to Hiroshima

At our November General Meeting we were pleased to have Toshiharu (Tosh) Kano as our guest speaker. Tosh and his wife currently reside in the foothills of Mount Olympus, and he “enjoys a quiet life with their two dogs (Indie and Speedy), cats, and a yard family of birds and squirrels.” He gave us an entertaining (but somewhat terrifying) account of what it was like to be in Japan near the end of World War II, and its following occupation. He was still in his mother’s womb when Hiroshima was bombed by a nuclear weapon on August 6, 1945; his mother and family were less than one-half mile from the hypocenter of the blast. It is somewhat of a mystery as to how they survived being that close, when so many thousands nearby were incinerated. 

Tosh was born a few months later, and the story of he and his family’s survival is well documented in a book recently completed by him called “Passport To Hiroshima.” One fact emphasized in his talk (and in his book) is that the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, as terrible and destructive as it was, is a child’s toy compared to the thousands of nuclear weapons stockpiled by the Superpowers in today’s world, each one a thousand times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb.

Tosh, who describes himself as Shinto and Buddhist, considers it to be his mission to help to bring peace to today’s world, in the hope that nuclear weapons will never again be used in war. To quote a passage near the end of his book: “War has no sharp edges. It does not begin on this day nor end on another. It is especially so with nuclear war. The world is altered forever by the presence of a monster ironically named, as though to feign innocence, “Little Boy.” Having once been unleashed, this dragon lives forever. Though chained by law within the deep abyss of international treaties, and intents and guarded by the angel of peace, the beast still lives. We must never allow it to break free of its restraints.”

One might expect that the survivors of Hiroshima would be bitter toward the United States, but a quote from Tosh’s father, Toshiyuki Nekomoto/Kano, says “I will honestly say, no. They don’t hate the United States, but the war.” He also stated “Let bygones be bygones. Let us not have hatred against each other but better understanding and live together in prosperity, peaceful and united.” This was certainly a thought-provoking presentation for our monthly meeting, giving us much to ponder as we observe today’s headlines from around the globe.

—Art King

---

The First War on Christmas

How did the first settlers celebrate Christmas? They didn’t. The Pilgrims who came to America in 1620 were strict Puritans, with firm views on religious holidays such as Christmas and Easter. Scripture did not name any holiday except the Sabbath, they argued, and the very concept of “holy days” implied that some days were not holy. “They for whom all days are holy can have no holiday,” was a common Puritan maxim.

Puritans were particularly contemptuous of Christmas, nicknaming it “Foolstide” and banning their flock from any celebration of it throughout the 17th and 18th centuries. On the first December 25 the settlers spent in Plymouth Colony, they worked in the fields as they would on any other day. The next year, a group of non-Puritan workmen caught celebrating Christmas with a game of “stoole-ball” — an early precursor of baseball — were punished by Governor William Bradford. “My conscience cannot let you play while everybody else is out working,” he told them.

Why didn’t Puritans like Christmas? They had several reasons, including the fact that it did not originate as a Christian holiday. The upper classes in ancient Rome celebrated December 25 as the birthday of the sun god Mithra. The date fell right in the middle of Saturnalia, a month-long holiday dedicated to food, drink, and revelry, and Pope Julius I is said to have chosen that day to celebrate Christ’s birth as a way of co-opting the pagan rituals. Beyond that, the Puritans considered it historically inaccurate to place the Messiah’s arrival on December 25. They thought Jesus had been born sometime in September.

So their objections were theological? Not exclusively. The main reason Puritans didn’t like Christmas was that it was a raucously popular holiday in late medieval England. Each year, rich landowners would throw open their doors to the poor and give them food and drink as an act of charity. The poorest man in the parish was named the “Lord of Misrule”, and the rich would wait upon him at feasts that often descended into bawdy drunkenness. Such decadence never impressed religious purists. “Men dishonor Christ more in the 12 days of Christmas”, wrote the 16th-century clergyman Hugh Latimer, “than in all the 12 months besides.”

When did that view win out? Puritans in the English Parliament eliminated Christmas as a national holiday in 1645, amid widespread anti-Christmas sentiment. Settlers in New England went even further, outlawing Christmas celebrations entirely in 1659. Anyone caught shirking their work duties or feasting was forced to pay a significant penalty of five shillings.

Christmas returned to England in 1660, but in New England it remained banned until the 1680s, when the Crown managed to exert greater control over its subjects in Massachusetts. In 1686, the royal governor of the colony, Sir Edmund Andros, sponsored a Christmas Day service at the Boston Town House. Fearing a violent backlash from Puritan settlers, Andros was flanked by redcoats as he prayed and sang Christmas hymns.

Did the Puritans finally relent? Not at all. They kept up their boycott of Christmas in Massachusetts for decades. Cotton Mather, New England’s most influential religious leader, told his flock in 1712 that “the feast of Christ’s nativity is spent in reveling, dicing, carding, masking, and in all licentious liberty…by mad mirth, by long eating, by hard drinking, by lewd gaming, by rude reveling!”

European settlers in other American colonies continued to celebrate it, however, as both a pious holiday and a time for revelry. In his Poor Richard’s Almanac of 1739, Philadelphian Benjamin Franklin wrote of Christmas: “O blessed Season! Lov’d by Saints and Sinners / For long Devotions, or for longer Dinners.”

So Christmas was finally accepted at that time? No. Anti-Christmas sentiment flared up again around the time of the American Revolution. Colonial New Englanders began to associate Christmas with royal officialdom, and refused to mark it as a holiday. Even after the U.S. Constitution came into effect, the Senate assembled on Christmas Day in 1797, as did the House in 1802. It was only in the following decades that disdain for the holiday slowly ebbed away. Clement Clarke Moore’s poem “A Visit From St. Nicholas”—aka “’Twas the Night Before Christmas”—was published in New York in 1823 to enormous success.

In 1836, Alabama became the first state to declare Christmas a public holiday, and other states soon followed suit. But New England remained defiantly Scrooge-like; as late as 1850, schools and markets remained open on Christmas Day. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow finally noted a “transition state about Christmas” in New England in 1856. “The old Puritan feeling prevents it from being a cheerful, hearty holiday; though every year makes it more so,” he wrote. Christmas Day was formally declared a federal holiday by President Ulysses S. Grant in 1870.

—PIQUE Newsletter, 12/15
Reprinted from Week Magazine12/20/11

---

President’s Report

It would seem inappropriate for me to use my December President’s Report to criticize religion. But I just can’t help it. Those of you who know me know that I don’t shy away from disparaging religion, but you may also know that I prefer to counter the effects of religion as best we can by advocacy for our humanist aspirations and the advocacy of science. Plus, some of the discussions and arguments become the same ones over and over again and somewhat tiresome.

But recent events, both worldwide and right here at home, have gotten under my skin to the point that my head will explode if I don’t vent a little. This venting could easily turn into a tome, so I’ll try to just touch on three things, the Paris terrorist attack, the Colorado Planned Parenthood shootings and the Mormon effect here at home. My, oh my, I took a break from writing this report and in the time that has passed I have become aware of the latest shooting in San Bernardino. It has derailed my train of thought. It is difficult to get back to what I was going to write about, but I’ll try.

In regard to the “worldwide” event, I’m referring to the killings in Paris (there were bombings elsewhere too). I don’t want to dwell on condemning these horrible acts. That should go without saying. But I do want to comment on the continued cries that “this isn’t about Islam.” I understand that the average moderate religious individual is not responsible for the actions of others. Although I think the moderates could and should do more to counter and resist the murderous elements amongst them. But there are those of their same basic religion that are using THEIR own version, their interpretation of their religion to justify their actions. It is about religion, not everyone’s religion, but religion none the less.

If we move on to the Planned Parenthood shootings in Colorado, we don’t have to look to deep to see religion involved here also. It is my opinion that the people who doctored the video about Planned Parenthood regarding fetal tissue awhile back are partly to blame for this incident. For me, it is almost like inciting to riot, but in a more sneaky way.

Finally I want to write about the “Mormon effect” as I sometimes call it. I am sure you are aware of the “uprising” the LDS church’s edict about children of married LGBT couples being excluded from rituals and baptism until age 18 is causing. Plus, they also have to disavow their parents and their parents’ lifestyle to be accepted. It is kind of like the Old Testament where some group or tribe of people are to be cursed for seven generations. You know, punished for the sins of the fathers or mothers. Pretty pathetic beliefs if you ask me. But I also got a little black humored chuckle over this. I understand this is serious and very hurtful for many in this situation. Exclusion can be difficult to deal with. It happened to me when I told the bishopric that I was not going to accept being made an elder in the church and would not accept a mission call. The “Mormon Iron Curtain” came down and most the Mormon neighbors wanted little to do with me. But I did not care because I had little in common with them and would soon join the U.S. Air Force and leave happy valley for four years.

Getting back to the chuckle I got, it was also because when my children were born we decided not to have them blessed by the church as all their grandparents requested and were appalled that we did not. It is funny because my children have actually thanked me that the church didn’t have their names.

Thanks for letting me rant about religion. We are hosting our annual December Social on the tenth. So be sure to come and bring a friend. I am looking forward to it.

—Robert Lane
President, Hou

---

Mentoring Reconsidered

Dr. Mary Jo Hinsdale, author of Mutuality, Mystery and Mentorship in Higher Education, is the Director of the McNair Scholars Program at Westminster College. She spoke to us on October 8 concerning mentoring “outsider” students.

While this PhD is highly academic, her talk was quite personal. Through the program she directs, she seeks to find ways for people less well-represented in higher education to be successful in the academic field. These students have been marginalized and minoritized by society and academia. Most have experienced myriad microagressions.

Dr. Hinsdale told stories of students, especially Latinos, who feel that there is no space for them in the predominately white university system, as if they don’t belong there, especially because they are so often thought to be part of the service staff. Advanced degrees may utilize knowledge practices that have remnants of colonial times. These contemporary resonances of colonialism are barriers to progress of each individual and of academia in total.

Thus, mentoring the outsider is deeper and more risky than a protocol or list of ways that a mentor may interact with a protégé. The McNair program attempts to induce trust in both the mentors involved as well as the protégé’s they work with. Both groups are changed by the interactions. Thus, the word “mutuality” in the title of Dr. Hinsdale’s book.

As Dr. Hinsdale says, building trust is complex and is more than having a cup of coffee. It takes time to create a trusting relationship with a protégé, and mentors must realize they can never truly know another’s experience. Thus the word “mystery” in the title of her book.

As W. Brad Johnson says in his book On Being a Mentor, “Mentoring is a personal and reciprocal relationship in which a more experienced, usually older, faculty member acts as a guide, role model, teacher, and sponsor of a less experienced, usually younger, student or faculty member. A mentor provides the protégé with knowledge, advice, counsel, challenge, and support in the protégé’s pursuit of becoming a full member of a particular profession.”

78% of the graduates of the McNair Scholars Program have either attained advanced degrees or are in graduate programs. The ultimate goal of this U.S. Department of Education TRIO program (started in 1987) is to diversity the professoriate.

Dr. Hinsdale ended her informative talk with some practical ideas to exemplify the Will Rogers quote: “Go out on a limb–that’s where the fruit is.”

Mentoring is a personal and reciprocal relationship in which a more experienced, usually older, faculty member acts as a guide, role model, teacher, and sponsor of a less experienced, usually younger, student or faculty member. A mentor provides the protégé with knowledge, advice, counsel, challenge, and support in the protégé’s pursuit of becoming a full member of a particular profession.

77% of the graduates of the McNair Scholars Program have either attained advanced degrees or are in graduate programs. Eight alumni have already attained the PhD, and seven have earned professional doctorates. The ultimate goal of this U.S. Department of Education TRIO program (started in 1987) is to diversity the professoriate.

Dr. Hinsdale ended her informative talk with some practical ideas to exemplify the Will Rogers quote: “Go out on a limb—that’s where the fruit is.”

Going out on a limb requires a mentor to signal openness and conduct a relationship that allows for mutual connection. A mentor must be curious about the protégé all the while respecting who the protégé really is. A mentor must want the protégé to succeed and take their ideas seriously. Mentors have to be willing to adopt an “inquiry stance”, lay down their defenses and be willing to share power and voice critical understanding of privilege.

From this discussion of Dr. Hinsdale’s work, we see that her book, which can be found on Amazon or in the Westminster Bookstore, elaborates the complex process that is mentoring and the wide range of skills which are required to mentor well and with satisfaction.

—Lauren Florence, MD

 

---

President’s Report

Sometimes I have a hard time thinking of something new to write about each month. Plus lately I’ve been extra busy. But I know a couple of individuals who are struggling with serious health problems. Plus, they are struggling with obtaining needed resources, in one case, and obtaining disability benefits in another. So this awareness of the “struggling” I see reminds me of a good subject (well related) to write about. That being the lack of a Medicaid plan for Utah. Still, after all this time, nothing. I mean, they have had quite a bit of time since the first opportunity to implement something came available a few years ago. But the decision makers are happy to pat themselves on the back for being fiscally responsible. As if that were really the case as they try to lure business with tax breaks and allow other corporations to pollute without much in the way of any useful restrictions. But I digress.

So, what does it say about our culture here in Utah that everything is business as usual while people want for basic health care? It would appear to me that there is a total lack of empathy (from conservatives) for the needs of a large number of fellow human beings. This seems a bit odd to me because on the one hand the dominate religion here, LDS, does do a lot of charity work and giving. But on the other hand we have those in our state government who are almost all of the LDS faith that refuse to get anything done for the needy. It does seems that the bottom line, profits, matters of money are more important than the needs of some who are struggling and even desperate for help. And recently we’ve seen local media reports make reference to statistics that state that a number of people have died due to the lack of action on the part of our legislature.

Sometimes it’s a little baffling to me that we Americans haven’t come to some sort of collective awareness, that if we provide a few of those basic needs like food shelter and basic health care, we will have a healthier society in general. Why don’t we understand COLLECTIVELY that if people aren’t stupefied by poverty and ill health they might be more productive, happier, and less prone to destructive or criminal behavior? I know some will cry about the evils of socialism, but some aspects of socialism are worthy ideals when implemented rationally.

I’m well aware that providing health care for those who have little or no means to pay for it is an expensive endeavor. But I think it can and must be done, for all the moral and practical reasons that are so blaringly apparent to all. Except, of course to certain uncaring conservatives.

—Robert Lane
President, HoU

---

Dear Minister Elaine

We are doing an episode on Polyamorous weddings/commitment ceremonies (triads or larger) or even those who are planning a proposal. We will be shooting in the next few weeks so we are hoping to find partners who have imminent plans [and] would allow us into their lives leading up to the big day to shed light on committed polyamorous relationships! Would you know of anyone who might be interested? After speaking to so many wonderful polyamorous families who fear coming forward, I am passionate about finding partners who feel they are ready to talk about this on a national platform. MTV is committed to telling stories that will influence tolerance and respect and address biases that we may not even know we have. Check out their campaign: http://www.lookdifferent.org/about

—Z.P., Casting Director for MTV True Life

 

Dear Z.P.,

While I have been certified to provide officiating services to non-theistic Utahns since 2011, I have not yet been asked to officiate at a Poly/Open wedding or commitment ceremony. I do, however, strongly believe that polyamorous families, especially those in committed relationships, raising children with multiple partners, need to have their voices heard! They are out there, but as you point out, far too many are living in fear of coming forward in their communities.

I’ve chosen to answer this question of yours publicly through our Humanists of Utah monthly newsletter, in the hope that someone will see that MTV True Life is interested in telling their stories! Thank you sincerely for working to break down the barriers that our society has erected to exclude non-traditional families from public recognition, understanding, and support. All families deserve to be open and honest about who they are, and who they love!

Please submit questions relating to humanism, ethical living, complicated life decisions, etc. to Minister Elaine Stehel at ministerelaine@gmail.com

—Elaine Stehel

---

Health Care Reform Task Force

You have all heard or read about the Utah Legislatures efforts to create an acceptable health care plan for those individuals falling within the “coverage gap” as a result of the federal Affordable Care Act.

The Gang of Six and Utah House of Representatives have been toiling away for months…behind closed doors…and finally coming up with UTAH ACCESS +.

Would you believe they then invited the general public to a meeting in the House Building to present the “fruits of their labors”? Well, Robert and I took advantage of this open-ness and attended on Tuesday, October 6, in the afternoon.

The Main Room 30 was packed so two overflow rooms were made available with audio and video accessibility; but we were provided only with audio. I was pleased to see numerous white T-shirts in all three rooms, as the Alliance For A Better Utah suggested we wear. During the session their reactions, like ours, as to what was going on were quietly voiced now and again.

A clipboard was passed around for anyone to sign either Pro or Con on the UTAH ACCESS +. Within a short period of time there were quite a few signatures, people hoping to be called upon for a comment or question. (at the end of two hours only a few  private citizens had the opportunity to speak).

An Agenda also was furnished listing all those who were invited to participate. This was a long list of those from the medical field; such as the Utah Hospital Association, Utah Medical Association, Utah Pharmacies, on and on…17 in all. Oh, I thought, this is great. As UTAH ACCESS + would be partially funded by doctors, hospitals. etc. The responses and comments were (not surprisingly) negative in endorsing this plan.

So much of the time was taken up by the legislatures pressing questions upon these spokes persons.  Also they kept droning on and on about the millions and millions of dollars and percentages here and there and explaining charts, that my eyes glazed over and attention was almost nil.

After about an hour of this, I realized this was a “set up” by these legislators. A plan brought before us, in the open, which they knew would not “pass muster” with those they designated to pay for Utah’s share of any costs of the plan.

How could a legislative body representing the electorate in Utah so flagrantly flaunt a plan such as UTAH ACCESS + and manipulate this much needed health care in this way?????

—Sally Jo Fuller
—Robert Frahm

 

---

Founding Politics: Debating the Constitution in Philadelphia

Professor Jeremy Pope from the Political Science Department of BYU presented our Founders Day lecture. He started by discussing George Washington’s “first farewell” which was titled Circular to the States, the third sentence reads, “if their Citizens should not be completely free and happy, the fault will be entirely their own.” In the end the loose federation of the states proved to be too little to guarantee the safety and prosperity of group so a Constitutional Convention was convened. This was not an easy thing to do, why did they establish the government that they did? On February 21, 1787, the Continental Congress resolved that “…it is expedient that on the second Monday in May next a Convention of delegates who shall have been appointed by the several States be held at Philadelphia for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation.”

Some of the main players included William Paterson of New Jersey who was a successful advocate for the rights of the small states. James Wilson from Pennsylvania advocated a strong and independently elective executive. Roger Sherman from Connecticut who had helped with the drafting of the Declaration of Independence, proposed the Great Compromise. Gouverneur Morris from Pennsylvania did the actual drafting of the constitution. Alexander Hamilton was a powerful friend of stronger government. George Mason from Virginia, while a major player, did not sign the final document as it lacked a bill of rights. John Rutledge from South Carolina strongly defended slavery at the convention. Benjamin Franklin from Pennsylvania, while his age prevented as much participation as some, endorsed the constitution and backed it with his prestige. George Washington left retirement to risk his reputation on the enterprise. He only made two speeches, but he presided over the convention and consistently supported the document.

Socializing was an important aspect of getting the document completed. The delegates spent a lot of time at taverns and eating together. An actual surviving bill from City Tavern shows that they ordered about two and a quarter containers of alcohol per delegate for one evening; wines, claret, whiskey, porter, hard cider, beer, and alcoholic punch were all listed. These conversations were less formal than the ones in Constitution Hall but were the source of many significant compromises. Among the significant agreements were Proportional Representation, Federalism, and Executive Independence. There were roughly three groups of states: the (physically) Small States which wanted little if any reform but favored a stronger executive. The Deep South, who wanted to change federalism and representation to favor slave-holding states, but did not want to make a powerful executive. Finally the Core Reform States who wanted to change everything, but they didn’t all agree on exactly how and what.

They set an example that could help us today. Slavery was of paramount importance, much that is good in the Constitution came about because of the slave interest. The founders did NOT agree on everything but they were able to compromise and forge one of the greatest political documents in history. Two statements from participants illustrate this:

“On the whole sir, I cannot help expressing a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections to it, would with me on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility, and to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument.”

—Benjamin Franklin

“It has been frequently remarked, that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country to decide, by their conduct and example, the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not, of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend, for their political constitutions, on accident and force.”

—Alexander Hamilton

The most thought provoking and challenging concept of this lecture was that without slavery the Constitution likely would not have been written. It is ironic indeed that so much good could be spawned by something as heinous and revolting as slavery.

---

President’s Report

I’m still recuperating from attending the Third annual Comic Con at the convention center here in Salt Lake City. My sweetheart, Amy, surprised me a few weeks ago when she told me she had bought us three day golden passes to Comic Con. So I thought I would write about my experience. Like Amy said “we had a blast.” Indeed it was quite enjoyable in a number of ways.

But while I’m thinking about them, I have a few suggestions about attending Comic con. One obvious thing is to wear good shoes. You’re going to do a lot of walking. I think I must have walked at least 15 miles in three days going back and forth and around all the vendors on the main floor. Plus we walked an extra mile round trip to where we parked on the second day. Another suggestion is to go early the first day because that is when it is the least crowded and the vendors haven’t ran out of the popular items yet. Most of which are gone by the third day. And most important, if you can, take lots of money.

Don’t go if you hate crowds or if you’re not into Sci-Fi, Fantasy or Horror “stuff,” it’s what it’s all about. They had the entire convention center and it was full. It was full of vendors of all sorts of artists, authors and lots of crazy people, like me, there to buy all kinds of stuff. Plus there were photo ops with celebrities and of course lots of food. There were also dozens of workshops and presentations and retrospectives and tributes. And naturally, the big draw for many was having Chris Evans of Captain America addressing the audience in the grand ballroom on the third day.

But for me, the most fun of all was all the people watching you could do, without feeling guilty for staring. There were thousands of people dressed in all sorts of costumes. You name it, and someone was there in costume and they were all quite willing to pose for you or with you. Speaking of costumes, they had as many people in costume as they could get, to gather in one area so Guinness World Records could get a count. They did and it was announced they broke a record set in China in 2011 with a count of over 1700. But there were still hundreds and hundreds more in costume not being counted still wandering around with the rest of us.

I did say bring lots of money didn’t I, because there are a lot of things to buy when there are hundreds of booths to check out. Because it was a mini stay at home vacation for Amy and me, it was possible for us to spend a little more. And spend a little bit more we did. I for example I bought six shirts, (only two will be gifts) a couple of pictures, coasters, playing cards and other items of swag. Amy did the same plus she had originally bought us each photo ops. Mine was with Walter Koenig. Cool. Although they do run you through like cattle when there are a couple hundred waiting for their photo op.

There was one “touching” moment in a retrospective of Leonard Nimoy. After the presenters gave a nice pictorial of his life, they opened the mic to the audience. One young man talked emotionally about how as a youth the persona of Spock with his insistence on logic and reason helped him greatly to use reason and be skeptical. That was quite satisfying for this old humanist to hear. So I think I will leave this as is without bitching about any republicans or religious idiots this month and just say, as always, “Hope to see you Thursday at our general meeting. I’ll bring the goodies.

—Robert Lane
President, HoU

---

The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
                                  ~Book Review~

This book by Steven Pinker is an amazing work. Consider the sub-title, “Why Violence Has Declined”—are you kidding me? Violence has declined? This week saw another campus shooting where multiple students were killed by a gunman, what is happening in the Middle East? However, after reading this book it is apparent that violence has declined, and indeed precipitously declined. “The past encompasses a vast diversity of cultures and customs. What they have in common is the shock of the old: a backdrop of violence that was endured and often embraced, in ways that startle the sensibilities of a 21^st century Westerner.”

According to Pinker the decline in violence was precipitous: “The reason so many violent institutions succumbed within so short a span of time was that the arguments that slew them belong to a coherent philosophy that emerged during the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment. The ideas of thinkers like Hobbes, Spinoza, Descartes, Locke, David Hume, Mary Astell, Kant, Beccaria, Smith, Mary Wollstonecraft, Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, and John Stuart Mill coalesced into a worldview that we can call Enlightenment humanism.”

This lead to the acceptance of governments as arbitrators; “A government is a good thing to have, because in a state of anarchy people’s self-interest, self-deception, and fear of these shortcomings in others would lead to constant strife. People are better off abjuring violence, if everyone else agrees to do so, and vesting authority in a disinterested third party. But since that third party will consist of human beings, not angels, their power must be checked by the power of other people, to force them to govern with the consent of the governed. They may not use violence against their citizens beyond the minimum necessary to prevent greater violence. And they should foster arrangements that allow people to flourish from cooperation and voluntary exchange. This line of reasoning may be called humanism because the value that it recognizes is the flourishing of humans, the only value that cannot be denied. I experience pleasures and pains, and pursue goals in service of them, so I cannot reasonably deny the right of other sentient agents to do the same.” … “In many parts of this book I have credited the Leviathan—a government with a monopoly on the legitimate use of force—as a major reducer of violence. Feuding and anarchy go together. We can now appreciate the psychology behind the effectiveness of a Leviathan. The law may be an ass, but it is a disinterested ass, and it can weigh harms without the self-serving distortions of the perpetrator or the victim. Though it is guaranteed that one side will disagree with every decision, the government’s monopoly on force prevents the loser from doing anything about it, and it gives him less reason to want to do something about it, because he is not conceding weakness to his adversary and has less incentive to carry on the fight to restore his honor.”

The book is detailed and complex. The above quotes barely scratch the surface of this fascinating subject. I’ll conclude this review with a couple of points that are further developed in the book. First, “giving women more control over their reproductive capacity (always the contested territory in the biological battle of the sexes) may be the single most effective way of reducing violence in the dangerous parts of the world today.” And, “Carefully reasoned briefs against slavery, despotism, torture, religious persecution, cruelty to animals, harshness to children, violence against women, frivolous wars, and the persecution of homosexuals were not just hot air but entered into the decisions of the people and institutions who attended to the arguments and implemented reforms.” And finally, “The forces of modernity—reason, science, humanism, individual rights—have not, of course, pushed steadily in one direction; nor will they ever bring about a utopia or end the frictions and hurts that come with being human. But on top of all the benefits that modernity has brought us in health, experience, and knowledge, we can add its role in the reduction of violence. The forces of modernity—reason, science, humanism, individual rights—have not, of course, pushed steadily in one direction; nor will they ever bring about a utopia or end the frictions and hurts that come with being human. But on top of all the benefits that modernity has brought us in health, experience, and knowledge, we can add its role in the reduction of violence.

—Wayne Wilson

---