- The sad state of American “debate” persists. In short:

It’s not a mosque, it’s not at Ground Zero, it’s not violating a zoning ordinance, and we live in a country that, like it or not, protects religious freedom. What passes for American “debate” and “issues” today is shameful and inexcusable.

- Yesterday, I received news that my last surviving grandparent, Mary Tropasso, has been diagnosed with terminal cancer. A tough old Italian broad about to be destroyed by the scourge of centuries. We piss away so many billions of dollars on such nonsense, and refuse to rise to the challenge that kills so many.

- I’m about to begin the unenviable business of trying to approach the ever-dwindling world of publishers and literary agents, now that I’ve finished my latest science-fiction novel. 110,000 words of characters and technologies, life-and-death struggles and a society on the verge of tearing itself to shreds. My novel is set in a gritty futuristic world divided by polarities — those who reside in cozy enclaves, and those who fight for survival in the Outlands. This social framework revolves around the subject of mind-uploading. It is the beginning of what I hope will be an exciting new science-fiction series… a look at humanity’s tenuous steps into an uncertain future.

- Life is choice, chance, and what you’re willing to fight for.

I have stated before how important it is for people to read things for themselves, rather than let others tell them about it. People flippantly refer to the Constitution without ever having perused its pages… and therefore they are willing to believe what others tell them about it. These same people are flippantly condemning Judge Walker’s ruling. And, not surprisingly, they are stooping to that lowest level of “debate” – the personal attack.

As I wrote in my recent cover piece for The Humanist, rationality and blind belief (in anything… not just religion) are going head-to-head in a cataclysmic culture war. And at least in this round, rationality has carried the day.

So here is Judge Walker’s actual ruling. It is a logical, cogent, and convincing document. It exposes the bigotry and irrationality motivating the rabid anti-gay crowd who are on the wrong side of history.

The entire piece is very much worth reading. I will highlight a few points, however:

A private moral view that same sex couples are inferior to opposite sex couples is not a proper basis for legislation.

Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its
constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the  Fourteenth Amendment.

Never has the state inquired into procreative capacity or intent before issuing a marriage license; indeed, a marriage license is more than a license to have procreative sexual intercourse.

Race restrictions on marital partners were once common in most states but are now seen as archaic, shameful or even bizarre. When the Supreme Court invalidated race restrictions… the definition of the right to marry did not change. Instead, the Court recognized that race restrictions, despite their historical prevalence, stood in stark contrast to the concepts of liberty and choice inherent in the right to marry. The right to marry has been historically and remains the right to choose a spouse and, with mutual consent, join together and form a household.

Plaintiffs do not seek recognition of a new right. To characterize plaintiffs’ objective as “the right to same-sex marriage” would suggest that plaintiffs seek something different from what opposite-sex couples across the state enjoy —— namely, marriage. Rather, plaintiffs ask California to recognize their relationships for what they are: marriages.

A lot of this chimes in with the prejudices of author Orson Scott Card, who I condemned two years ago for his astonishing position that gay marriage would be the end of civilization.

But I’ll take things a step further now:

There is an interesting argument to be made with the religious organizations who threw so much money and energy into opposing gay marriage in California: They should lose their tax-exempt status. It has nothing to do with them being on the wrong side of the issue, but because if they wish to participate so vocally in the political sphere (and affect the liberties of so many people) they should face the tax man like the rest of us.

From the Interview with the Vampire author herself:

“As I said below, I quit being a Christian. I’m out. In the name of Christ, I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life. In the name of …Christ, I quit Christianity and being Christian. Amen.”

Now many readers of mine know that I am a lifelong non-participant in religion. It is a position I came to comfortably, without hatred or tears.

My parents were lax Catholics. I had gone to a Catholic school as a child. There were no atheists or agnostics or religious fundamentalists in my family — certainly not in my mother’s boisterous and high-strung Italian side, nor in my conservative and placid father’s side of Polish, English, and Irish mongrelization.

My parents took me to church for a while, because that’s what people did. And like so much else in my life, I decided to investigate what this “church thing” was about. I promptly read the Bible — I never liked other people telling me what a book said — and  I was disturbed by the Bible’s stories of wickedness: the notion of a sadistic God who ordered pregnant women to be killed, kids to be put to death, rival tribes to be raped and slaughtered, and people of different ideologies to be exterminated. None of that sat well with me.

So after reading the Bible, I began reading history. I read about the things which had been done, again and again and ever-again, in the name of religion. Actions count for a lot in this world. And I didn’t like the way people acted when possessed by religious zeal.

And there was something else, too. Snakes can’t talk. The sun cannot stop in the sky. Planets do not form in six days. And the evidence I’ve seen for angels doesn’t convince me; I stopped believing in such things about the same time I concluded there couldn’t possibly be a Santa Claus (our house in Waterbury didn’t even have a chimney, and my mother’s creative explanation that Santa had keys for every house made me imagine the impossibility of hauling around a key-ring like that. Not to mention the speed necessary to visit every house is not possible. Oh, and reindeer can’t fly. I’ve seen reindeer up-close. They really can’t fly.

Finally, there was a fourth reason I never formally joined formalized Christianity or organized religion itself: I could never ideologically side with a philosophy that, as I wrote in my post yesterday, emphasizing blind servitude over free-thinking investigation of the cosmos.

Non serviam. Ipsa scientia potestas est

I certainly support religious freedom in America, while also supporting the strict separation of faith and government.

So here is my response to Anne Rice:

Ann, I never joined that gang for many of the very reasons you listed, but I can add one additional one: I actually read the Bible, as I did the other holy texts of the world, and found it to be a litany of cruelty, intolerance, violence, genocide, slavery, and murder orchestrated around the Bronze Age value of a mythical tyrant. Couldn’t go along with that. Not to mention… snakes cannot talk.

Anne, I agree that [an article which condemns your decision] is thoughtfully written. But I differ with its thesis: “The difficulty in dispensing with the Church and keeping Christ is that it is impossible and can’t be done.” Thomas Jefferson did it, and did it quite well; his ample writings on the subject, including his Jefferson’s Bible (which focuses on egalitarian philosophy and not claims of magic.) Such a philosophy is keen, a kind of post-Periclean democracy. But the Church? A history of oppression and murder, and an entity devoted to violent self-perpetuation.

Why can’t you be spiritual and not religious? I certainly am… I love existing, learning about the world in which I exist, and nourishing the bright engines of imagination and wonder. You have rejected an ugly institution, and you appear to have done so by an authentic and freethinking stance. Your critics are chained to that institution — as if they are caught in a supernatural game of Risk and have lost a playing piece. Freethinkers are not playing pieces; they freely wander, not in confusion, but like Thoreau, perhaps… enjoying the journey and the world.

I could not applaud you more. The conceit in that article you link to (about such distinctions being “impossible”) is really the line in the sand between freethinking and blind, mob-like subservience. I see every reason to reject the Church on philosophical, ethical, moral, and historical grounds. Formalized Christianity has devolved from its founder’s protestations of equality and humanism to a vengeful theocratic ambition.

Thank you Ann. I really enjoyed Servant of the Bones.

Why the controversy? Because Hypatia, the most brilliant and learned woman of her day, the last curator of the Great Library, was torn to pieces in a church by a Christian mob. And this wasn’t just any mob; these were the pairishioners of the man who would be Saint Cyril, who cracked the freethinking heart of Alexandria as his uncle Theophilus had years previously. He was a man who hated Hypatia as he hated anyone harboring different views than his own (Cyril is also the man who drove the Jews from Alexandria. Think a proto-Mel Gibson… only with the power of a violent mob and a state-endorsed theology behind him.)

I know Hypatia, which is to say she is the subject of my flagship book, Lady Philosopher: The Story of Hypatia. I studied her for years, the time period, the events and people surrounding her. Her murder on the eve of the Dark Ages represents one of the greatest “What Ifs” in history: What if the classical world didn’t fall to the torches of religious fanaticism? What if learning had remained the zeitgeist, as opposed to enslavement to an age of theocracy?

I have always felt a powerful connection to the free inquiry of the classical age, when people like Eratosthenes figured out the size of the world using sticks, shadows and the power of his own mind. When people like Galen pioneered medical advances and studies of the human body. When people like Hypatia taught people to think for themselves.

After Hypatia’s murder, a new age of history dawned. A dark age, when — as Mark Twain said — a “nation of men became a nation of worms.” When religion ruled unfettered in all areas of life, when pluralism (of which Alexandria had been famous for) evaporated under the hot lights of blind zeal and fundamentalism.

Today I learned that bestselling historical novelist Steven Saylor has listed Lady Philosopher on his own website as a recommended read. Thanks, Steven! I look forward to your next book, Empire.

Inception was breathless, mind-bending, and intelligent. By virtue of this alone, it proves to the charnel house that Hollywood has become that intelligent and thoughtful action films are possible once again.

Hats off to Nolan. Well done… once again.

The sun hits it like a golden spear and splinters into daggers. The humidity makes everything sweat. Above in the burnished sky, a hawk draws lazy circles to an airplane’s hum.

Just returned from a week in Canada and a few days in Nova Scotia. Part vacation, part field research. Met some interesting people, delved into old bookstores, hiked into the wilderness and talked with plenty of locals.The first day of arrival, the towns were cloaked in a white mist… like something out of a Stephen King story. Come to think of it, I wasn’t THAT far from Bangor, Maine.

*

I finished three science-fiction short stories before vacation, and am in the editing and polishing phase. Like scrubbing a new sculpture free of rough edges.  The majority of my speculative stories take place in the same universe… like different episodes of a common timeline… and these three are no exception. They form part of a mythos.

*

Shifting from science-fiction, I’m starting two new book projects I’m very excited about. 50,000 words into one of them already. And I’ve got a little film project I’m cooking up…    

*

Speaking of films… just rewatched Point Break, starring Keanu Reeves and the late Patrick Swayze. A guilty pleasure, riddled with poor acting and script problems… but one thing stands out: Kathryn Bigelow’s confident and natural directing ability. Every scene crackles with violent, sensual energy. I’ve been a fan of hers ever since the grossly underrated Strange Days.  Seeing her win the Oscar for The Hurt Locker this year was a real treat.

Ironically, just a few hours after watching this film, I learned that a real bank robber decided to apply the Point Break strategy. Only instead of a Ronald Reagan mask, he opted for something less political.

Now watching: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Shutter Island, and Inception.

Now reading: Timequake.

This particular execution is endorsed by Shariah law, and also by the Bible. The stones can’t be too small… because death would take far too long. Yet neither can they be too large… because some amount of suffering is important, apparently.

Ashtiani was convicted of adultery. The formal charge, however, is “enmity against God.”

I’m pleased that this case is getting a fair amount of media attention (almost enough to challenge Lindsey Lohan’s 90-day prison sentence.) I suspect the really important lesson will be lost on many, and brought up by precious few.

We have a separation of church and state in America precisely to prevent situations like this. Western civilization dealt with religious government for that 1,000 year stretch of history known as the Dark Ages. The Enlightenment broke that ugly tradition, and America was conceived as the post-child for that Enlightenment.

Now we need places like Iran to follow.

I usually hate sequels, prequels, reboots, and remakes. They cheapen the original, and they are (with only a handful of exceptions) a reduced product.

Every once in a while, a legit sequel emerges from the Hollywood swamp. Aliens, Terminator 2, The Godfather 2, X-Men 2.

But if good sequels are rare, then good threequels are near-mythical. X-Men was chugging along nicely until Bryan Singer left the franchise so that Brett Ratner could destroy it. The Godfather 3 can put you in a coma. Die Hard and Lethal Weapon should have stopped at their first followups. And let’s be nice and say that Alien 3 was not on par with its predecessaors.

Actually, I don’t feel like being nice. Alien 3 was inexcusable trash, and I’ve never forgiven David Fincher for it… though I came close when he made the excellent Fight Club.

So where are the good threequels?

The original Star Wars is one. It’s vogue lately to bash Return of the Jedi, but I’ll argue that the Ewoks could not ruin that excellent film. Fact is, they even worked in their own… er… small way.

The Lord of the Rings is next. While I think the last one was rather uneven, it’s still a fantastic movie in spite of its flaws. Not an easy thing to be.

Now, Toy Story 3 can comfortably land in that mix. No spoilers, and no review, other than to say it was phenomenal. I don’t know what they put in the water at Pixar, but I hope they keep drinking it.

I’m not an especially compromising guy, so “America’s Addiction to Belief” is not compromising. We live in a culture which prizes belief on par with fact. A lot of people are obsessed with “believing” things… and this obsession is marked by an emotional investment that makes them immune to critique, discussion, and good ole fashioned American dialogue. And if it isn’t addressed, fast, we will have no way of addressing the issues of tomorrow with a clear-thinking honesty.

From the article:

“It is a culture that thrives on the false principle that “all opinions are equal,” even those without a shred of factual data, documentation, or reasoned methodology. It is a culture where 20 percent of the American people believe NASA faked the Apollo moon landings, and where half the population believes the world was made in six days…

The reality is that the world we live in is irrelevant to belief. For example, I don’t believe that there are fish in the sea. Rather, I have seen the evidence for fish in the sea and accept that evidence. I have seen documentaries on fish and have visited aquariums, have gone fishing, caught fish, fried fish, and eaten fish. It’s not an issue of belief.”

Here we go.

Now reading: Down the Rabbit Hole by Peter Abrahams

Now watching: Jaws, naturally enough!