Rachel Ford is a programmer, and since 8:00 to 5:00 doesn't provide enough opportunity to bask in screen glare, she writes in her spare time. She was raised a very fundamentalist Christian, but eventually "saw the light." Rachel's personal blog is Rachel's Hobbit Hole, where she discusses everything from Tolkien to state politics.
In Egyptian law, there is a concept of “seasonal marriage” — a temporary arrangement, during which time two persons are wed, that concludes on an agreed upon date, with money exchanging hands. In a religiously conservative country, it’s a means of legalizing what essentially amounts to prostitution. The practice has been dubbed “tourism marriage” by human rights worker Amr Abdel Rahman, as it draws wealthy older men from other countries seeking temporary Egyptian brides. Brides who are, often enough, from very poor families and desperate circumstances. Recent government moves to protect temporary brides by increasing the cost of these marriages have raised concerns that they will only bolster sex trafficking as the women involved may have little or no say in their marriages. Read more
When people learned that former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott would be addressing the right-wing American Christian group Alliance Defending Freedom, there was plenty of criticism to go around. This prompted author and rector at St Mark’s Anglican Church Michael Jensen to write that such pushback demonstrated a threat to religious liberty. Read more
The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against Colorado City in Arizona and Hildale in Utah, alleging that the towns’ leadership prioritized the clean water needs of Mormons while denying access to non-church members. And the ongoing trial is providing pretty solid evidence to substantiate the charges. The two towns had close ties to the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints church (convicted sexual abuser Warren Jeffs’ sect of Mormonism); in fact, the Colorado City board members involved in granting or denying water access were all FLDS members. Read more
It’s not a secret that many Christians are terrified of letting their kids make up their own minds about the question of God. It’s not a secret that many seem to feel, instinctively, that without constant, repetitive drilling of faith concepts into their kids’ heads from the earliest possible age, they will not believe. In effect, they’re saying that the argument for God is not persuasive enough on the basis of reason, evidence, and logic, but must instead be force-fed to children from infancy before they develop a way to ask questions or form a rebuttal. Or, as the Bible puts it, “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” And while this is, I’m happy to report, not strictly true (certainly not exclusively, as myself and many other former believers can attest), it’s a pretty deeply entrenched concept all the same. To do anything less than indoctrinate kids as soon you can is to risk their soul — because children left to examine the evidence and arguments for religion on their own are children who may reject it. By not passing along your faith, you’re avoiding your greatest duty as a parent: preserving your children’s souls. In short, reason, evidence, and freethought be damned when souls are on the line. It’s bad enough on its own, and it certainly reflects poorly on the perceived strength of religious arguments. But then you find parents justifying this bad idea with a full-on embrace, taking it to conclusions that are so much worse. Parents like Christian blogger James Uglum, who recently wrote a piece describing why letting children skip church is a monstrous thing. Worse, in fact, than letting them play in rush-hour traffic. Read more
