As part of the Center for Inquiry’s ongoing Campaign for Free Expression, we’re pleased to announce the launching of our:

Public Service Announcement Video Contest

Participation is easy: create a short public service announcement-style video about the importance of free expression, upload the video to YouTube, and tag it with “Campaign for Free Expression Video Contest”. Videos must be submitted by September 20th, 2010, then on International Blasphemy Rights Day, September 30th, 2010, we will announce the top three winners.

Third place will get $500,
second place gets $1,000, and
first place walks away with $2,000.

• Please see the full instructions and rules before creating your entry.
• Example videos can be found on our CFI Youtube page.
• Help spread the word! Find the Campaign for Free Expression on Facebook .

For more information, or if you have any questions, please visit the Campaign website  or email videocontest@centerforinquiry.net .

The Council, along with co-plaintiffs Richard and Elaine Hull,   initially filed suit in Leon County Circuit Court in May 2007 challenging the legality of state laws authorizing government payments to faith-based organizations for social services. The specific payments in question are being made to two faith-based organizations, Prisoners of Christ, Inc. and Lamb of God Ministries, Inc., which are under contract with the Florida Department of Corrections to provide faith-based services to individuals with substance abuse problems. Richard and Elaine Hull, two associate members of the Council, are Tallahassee residents and Florida taxpayers.

The Council based its challenge on the Florida Constitution, which includes a “No-Aid” provision mandating that no revenue of the state be provided “directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.”

In December 2009, a three-judge panel of the Florida First District Court of Appeal unanimously reversed a lower court ruling that dismissed the Council’s lawsuit. The defendants in the case immediately appealed the appellate court panel’s decision, asking the Florida Supreme Court to decide the issues in the case. This latest decision from the state Supreme Court denying that appeal has finally cleared the way for the case to proceed to trial.

“The Council intends to litigate the case to completion,” said   Derek C. Araujo , director of the Council’s legal programs.  “The Council’s case will be an important test of state courts’ willingness to enforce ‘No-Aid’ provisions in state constitutions.  More than half the states have ‘no-aid’ provisions similar to Florida’s in their constitutions.”

Ronald A. Lindsay, president & CEO of the Council and CFI, added, “We are confident the evidence at trial will establish that state funds are being used to support the efforts of Prisoners of Christ and Lamb of God Ministries to advance and promote their religious views.”

“We really aim to equip the kids with the tools to think through life’s questions—big and small—for themselves,’ said camp director Dr. Angie McQuaig.  Camp goers this year will tackle some pretty big existential questions, like Who am I? Why am I here? What can I know? and What ought I to do? 

“These themes, once the exclusive domain of speculative religious thought, are now increasingly being addressed by the sciences—and by kids,” said McQuaig. Campers will take part in discussions about the value of science as a method for understanding the universe and improving the human condition. Continued McQuaig, “We plan to introduce these young, curious minds to cosmology, evolutionary science, and neurobiology so they can explore how and where they fit in the wider cosmos.” Carl Sagan would be delighted. 

  Camp Inquiry is a project of the Center for Inquiry (CFI), an organization committed to fostering a secular society based on science, reason, and humanist values. “Camp Inquiry is a critical part of our educational mission,” said CFI’s president and CEO Ronald A. Lindsay  “It is one of only a few summer camps that focuses on critical reasoning and  encouraging children to think for themselves.” 

McQuaig, who holds a doctorate in educational leadership, said that kids will enjoy a “hands-on philosophy,” learning the moral and cultural implications of the scientific outlook through games, team activities, and engagement in the arts.

Parents can also join in the fun, including an opening dinner with Dale McGowan, author of “Parenting Beyond Belief”, and a special closing evening presentation with popular magician and skeptic “The Amazing” James Randi.

Camp Seven Hills boasts 620 acres of woodland paths, meadows, streams, and hills perfect for outdoor exploration.  It is fully insured and accredited with the American Camp Association.  With its impressive 5-to-1 camper-to-counselor ratio, Camp Inquiry is run by a staff of fully screened and trained teacher-counselors, including a trained medical professional.

Enrollment remains open until July 12. More information is available at   www.campinquiry.org .

The Center for Inquiry/Transnational, a nonprofit, educational, advocacy, and scientific-research think tank based in Amherst, New York, is also home to the Council for Secular Humanism, founded in 1980; and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (formerly CSICOP), founded in 1976. The Center for Inquiry’s research and educational projects focus on three broad areas: religion, ethics, and society; paranormal and fringe-science claims; and sound public policy. The Center’s Web site is   www.centerforinquiry.net .

The case concerns a student chapter of the Christian Legal Society (CLS), which sued the school after being denied official recognition and funding because the student group violated the school’s non-discrimination policy. That policy requires that student groups must be open to all students in order to receive funding and official recognition. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled unanimously in 2009 against CLS because the school’s policy prohibited every student group, whether religious or secular, from excluding students that disagree with the group’s mission. For example, if the school’s Democratic club cannot access school funding while excluding Republicans from its membership, a conservative Christian group cannot demand funds while excluding gay, non-Christian, or non-conservative Christian students. CLS appealed, claiming that it had a constitutional right - not enjoyed by any secular organizations - to receive state funding while discriminating against students on the basis of religion and sexual orientation.

  Derek C. Araujo , director of CFI’s legal programs, called today’s decision “a victory for fairness and for equal treatment under the law.” He continued, “Religious student organizations should not be granted a special right to ignore non-discrimination policies that all other organizations must comply with.”

In March the Center for Inquiry   submitted an amicus brief to the High Court arguing that religious organizations do not have a constitutional right to special exemptions from generally applicable regulations, and that student groups in violation of the school’s policy therefore cannot demand public money and official recognition.

Ronald A. Lindsay, CFI’s president & CEO, said he was very pleased with the outcome, adding that “the Center for Inquiry has made a commitment to advocate vigorously for the constitutionally mandated separation of Church and State. This is the third Supreme Court case in which CFI has participated in the last year-and-a-half.”

Justices Ginsburg, Stevens, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kennedy agreed with CFI that the Christian Legal Society has no special right to access funds while violating UC-Hastings’ non-discrimination policy.  Four Justices—Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Scalia and Thomas—dissented.

CFI has raised concerns stemming from Ms. Kagan’s record on religious liberty, as detailed in documents released to the Senate Judiciary Committee during her current nomination and her nomination to serve as U.S. Solicitor General.  For example, during her time serving in the Clinton White House, Ms. Kagan declined to press for changes to the “charitable choice” provisions in the Welfare Reform bill that would have prohibited taxpayer funding of “pervasively sectarian institutions” performing government-funded social services.  Ms. Kagan also acknowledged the concerns of civil rights organizations that federal statutes designed to shield exercises of religious freedom, such as the Religious Liberty Protection Act (RLPA), could be used to circumvent civil rights protections for minorities, including critical state and local laws protecting the LGBT community.  In an e-mail to Vice President Al Gore’s office, however, she stated that she was “the biggest fan of [RLPA] in this building,” and went on to urge the Vice President not to reference the statute in a speech because of potential objections by the LGBT community.

  CFI’s letter urged the Committee to question Ms. Kagan about her views on the Establishment Clause in general, as well as her particular views regarding government funding of religious activities and the relationship between civil rights laws and claims of religious freedom.  CFI recommended that the Committee pose the following five questions to ascertain Ms. Kagan’s views on religious liberty and church-state separation:

  1. Does the Establishment Clause require neutrality with respect to religion and non-religion, meaning that government may not act in any way that would favor religion in general over non-religion? Does the Establishment Clause instead merely require that government may not favor any one religion over others?

  2. What test or tests should the Court apply in Establishment Clause cases: the three-part test in     Lemon v. Kurtzman     , 403 U.S. 602 (1971), Justice O’Connor’s “endorsement test,” Justice Kennedy’s “coercion test,” or some other test? In what way does the answer depend on the nature of the case before the Court?

  3. To what extent does Ms. Kagan agree with the holding in     Bowen v. Kendrick     , 487 U.S. 589 (1988), that “pervasively sectarian” organizations that cannot or will not separate their religious activity from their secular activity are constitutionally barred from receiving government funding? In what circumstances, if any, is it permissible for the government to fund pervasively sectarian organizations?

  4. Does the Free Exercise clause ever make it necessary for the government to carve out exceptions to generally applicable laws that burden an individual’s ability to exercise his or her religious belief? If it does, what test should be applied, or what factors should be considered, in determining whether an exemption should be granted?

  5. There are some instances in which civil rights protections may conflict with claims of religious liberty. For example, Ms. Kagan has acknowledged the concerns of civil rights organizations that the Religious Liberty Protection Act (RLPA) could be used to avoid compliance with civil rights laws, including state and local laws protecting the civil rights of the LGBT community. (Email from Eli Attie to Elena Kagan, “FYI - Bill Galston asked me to share this with you as an FYI,” May 20, 1999 at 1:28 pm.) How do the RLPA, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and other protections of religious liberty interact with civil rights protections? Does government have a compelling interest in enforcing its civil rights protections, or do incidental burdens on religious freedoms sometimes defeat that interest?

CFI’s letter concluded that “If she is confirmed, Ms. Kagan will have enormous and longstanding influence on the development of church-state jurisprudence and the interplay between religious and civil rights. It is therefore critical that the Committee ascertain Ms. Kagan’s views on these matters during next week’s hearing.” 

CFI intends to follow closely Kagan’s nomination hearings, which are scheduled to begin on June 28th. 

Meanwhile, our work continues. In a few days, our headquarters building in Amherst, New York, will be abuzz with dozens of leaders and representatives from our branches and student groups convening at our   Leadership Conference . CFI’s continuing vitality is amply demonstrated by the commitment and dedication of the many supporters the organization has at the grassroots level.

In another few weeks,   Camp Inquiry will get underway in upstate New York under the direction of Dr. Angie McQuaig. This annual summer camp has been receiving increasing attention as a unique program for fostering critical thinking in children.

CSI will, once again, be holding its   Skeptics Toolbox in August in Eugene, Oregon . This annual event continues to attract the best and brightest skeptical scholars and investigators.

And, of course, in a few months, the Council for Secular Humanism will be holding its   30th anniversary conference in Los Angeles . The program for this event is nothing short of stellar, with speakers including Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, Jennifer Michael Hecht, and Ibn Warraq. Continuing in our tradition of tackling tough issues through open discussion and dialogue, the conference will also feature a discussion between Sam Harris and Robert Wright on the approach that seculars should take regarding religion and religious belief and a panel discussion on science and religion featuring Chris Mooney, Eugenie Scott, P. Z. Myers, and Victor Stenger. This will be a lively, intellectually enthralling conference.

We are looking forward; however, there are some whose gaze is fixed on the past and continue to snipe at CFI, hoping to undo some of the reforms we have undertaken. So permit me for a few moments to address some of these critics, which include, of course, CFI’s former Chair, Paul Kurtz.

  Click here to view the entire letter.

In recent decades, public interest in acupuncture has grown dramatically. Proponents of acupuncture repeatedly make the unjustified claim that acupuncture is an efficacious and cost effective complement to conventional medicine. These claims rely on dubious and discredited research data. During the past ten years, however, an increasingly robust body of research has accumulated showing that acupuncture has no intrinsic clinical value. Despite mounting empirical evidence against it, however, acupuncture has become increasingly embedded within the American healthcare system, in part through government funding of integrative medical clinics.

CFI's paper was authored by Robert Slack, Jr. a writer living and working in Maryland. Mr. Slack was assisted by biophysicist Eugenie V. Mielczarek, emeritus professor of physics at George Mason University.

Click here to access a copy of CFI's paper in PDF format.

It appears this donor will not be providing any gift this year.  No information has been forthcoming from the donor concerning the donor’s intent, and repeated efforts to contact the donor have elicited no response.  

In recent years, this major donation has been received within the first few months of the year.  Through the first four months of this year, the deficit for our combined operations has been over $300,000, so the absence of the donation is already being felt.  Moreover, without the donation, we are on pace to have a deficit in excess of $900,000.  We cannot possibly maintain operations with a deficit of this magnitude.

Given the significance of this donation, and the silence of the donor, CFI and its affiliates have had no choice but to undertake immediate drastic reductions in expenditures.  It has been extremely difficult to do so because last year we made a concerted, successful effort to streamline our operations and make them more efficient.  In fact, we reduced costs by over $600,000, without materially affecting our work, with the exception of the suspension of The Jesus Project.

Now we are forced to cut down to the bone.  We are making very painful decisions — we are laying off several employees, and, although programs will continue, we are moving out of our offices in Tampa and Washington, D.C.  We are reluctant to take these measures, but as indicated, we have no choice.

We are trying to take as conservative an approach to this crisis as possible.  Our cost-saving measures will save us only about $120,000 in 2010 and about $330,000 in 2011.  We are reluctant to slash more because of the adverse impact further reductions would have both on our programs and our staff.

But this means that if we are to sustain our operations and avoid further reductions, we need our supporters to rally behind us.  Given the extraordinary situation, we need an extraordinary outpouring of support.

Religious dogma and pseudoscience are not going away.  Today, more than ever, there is a need to defend science, secularism, and humanist values.  Together, CFI, CSI, and the Council do more to advance humanism and science than any other organization.

And together, the supporters of CFI, CSI, and the Council can ensure that this important work continues.

We ask you to stand with us so we can meet this daunting financial challenge. Please donate as generously as you can—today.

Thank you for your commitment and support.

If you prefer to donate by telephone, please call 1-800-818-7071 during business hours Eastern time.

If you wish to make your contribution as a multi-year pledge, please download our pledge form .

To learn more about our current budget gap, view the fact sheet.

Sincerely,

Ronald A. Lindsay
President & CEO of CFI and its affiliates

Barry Karr
Chief Financial Officer, CFI and Executive Director, the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry

Tom Flynn
Corporate Secretary, CFI and Executive Director, the Council for Secular Humanism

We have received the unwelcome news that our longtime friend and colleague Martin Gardner died on May 22. He was ninety-five.            

Gardner, a brilliant polymath, was (and always will be) a hero to skeptics and science-minded people worldwide.            

“Martin would not have wanted to know how devastated I am at the news,” said James Randi, in a perhaps typical expression of grief. “I can’t quite picture my world without him. That man was one of my giants, a very longtime friend of some 50 years or more. He was a delight.”

Gardner’s 1950 book Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science is still the classic examination of pseudoscience and pseudoscientists. It remains in print, still relevant today. In 1976 he became a founding fellow of CSICOP, now the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, and an original member of SI’s Editorial Board. He followed Fads and Fallacies with Science: Good, Bad, and Bogus and many subsequent compilations of essays and reviews.

He published scores of memorable books in mathematics, philosophy, science, literary criticism, and critiques of fringe science. He was probably most famous for his long-running “Mathematical Games” column in Scientific American , where his curious, whimsical, original mind delighted readers everywhere.

After he retired his SA column, we invited him to do a regular column for the Skeptical Inquirer, and he did so from 1983 to 2002 (“Notes of a Psi-Watcher,” later titled “Notes of a Fringe-Watcher”). He also published a series of books based in part on it. He recently resumed his SI column on an irregular basis. Martin mailed his last column to me May 12, only ten days before he died. His cover letter gave no indication of failing health. I answered immediately to tell him how much I enjoyed it. We will publish it in the upcoming September/October issue, along with tributes from his colleagues.            

The Center for Inquiry (CFI) has announced that Angie McQuaig, Ph.D. has joined the nonprofit organization’s Board of Directors.

Dr. McQuaig is a distinguished educator who has served for nineteen years in public education as a teacher and administrator both in the US and abroad. She also teaches university courses in leadership theory, business ethics, research methodology, and statistics. She is currently the Chief Academic Officer of a professional development company in New York City that trains educators on exemplary pedagogy. Dr. McQuaig is the director of CFI’s Camp Inquiry , an educational program for youth emphasizing humanistic, scientific, and critical thinking. Angie holds a B.S. in Elementary Education, an M.A. in Educational Administration and Supervision, and a Ph.D. in Educational Leadership.

“The Board is delighted that Dr. McQuaig has agreed to become a director,” said Board Chair Richard Schroeder. “The Board was very impressed with her credentials, ideas, and, most of all, her enthusiasm. She is dedicated to educating the next generation of skeptics, who will be critical to the future of our movement.”

“It was thanks in large part to the pioneering work of the Center for Inquiry and its visionary founder, Dr. Paul Kurtz, that I came to be an ardent supporter and lifelong student of secular humanism and skepticism,” said McQuaig. “So, it is a tremendous thrill and honor to join in carrying it forward.”

The Center for Inquiry, a nonprofit, educational, advocacy, and scientific-research think tank based in Amherst, New York, is also home to the Council for Secular Humanism, founded in 1980; and the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (formerly CSICOP), founded in 1976. The Center for Inquiry’s research and educational projects focus on three broad areas: religion, ethics, and society; paranormal and fringe-science claims; and sound public policy. The Center’s Web site is www.centerforinquiry.net .