American Atheist Magazine Nov 1986

8/9/2019 American Atheist Magazine Nov 1986

1/48

November 1986 A Journal of Atheist News and Thought

$2.95

.~

.

,;; ( I

. ~/t

, I

1 / ; . . . ~

J

/,

..

,

I

• J

.

,~.

.

,

.

. . '.

.. .

; .

,

.

• M ~

....


2/48

A M ER IC AN A TH E IS TS

isa non-profit, non-political, educational organization dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of state

and church. We accept the explanation ofThomas Jefferson that the First Amendment to the Constitution of the

United States was meant to create a wall of separation between state and church.

American Atheists is organized to stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry concerning religious

beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals, and practices;

to collect and disseminate information, data, and literature on all religions and promote a more thorough

understanding of them, their origins, and their histories;

to advocate, labor for, and promote in alllawfulways the complete and absolute separation of state and church;

to advocate, labor for, and promote inalllawfulways the establishment and maintenance ofa thoroughly secular

system of education available to all;

to encourage the development and public acceptance ofa human ethical system stressing the mutual sympathy,

understanding, and interdependence of all people and the corresponding responsibility of each individual in

relation to society;

to develop and propagate a social philosophy in which man is the central figure, who alone must be the source of

strength, progress, and ideals for the well-being and happiness of humanity;

to promote the study of the arts and sciences and of all problems affecting the maintenance, perpetuation, and

enrichment of human (and other) life;

to engage in such social, educational, legal, and cultural activity as willbe useful and beneficial to members of

American Atheists and to society as a whole. .

Atheism may be defined as the mental attitude which unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at

establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all

arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own

inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life;that man -

findinghis resources within himself - can and must create his own destiny. Materialism restores to man his dignity

and his intellectual integrity. It teaches that we must prize our lifeon earth and strive always to improve it. It holds

that man is capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism's faith is in man and

man's ability to transform the world culture by his own efforts. This is a commitment which is in its very essence

life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation and impossible without noble ideas that

inspire man to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that humankind's potential for good and for an outreach to

more fulfillingcultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited.

American Atheists Membership Categories

Life $500

Couple Life* $750

Sustaining $100/year

Couple*/Family $50/year

Individual $40/year

Senior Citizen**/Unemployed $20/year

Student** $12/year

*Include partner's name **Photocopy of ID required

Allmembership categories receive our monthly Insider's Newsletter, membership card(s), a subscription to

American Atheist

magazine for the duration ofthe membership period, plus additional organizational mailings,

i.e.,

new products for sale, convention and meeting announcements, etc.

American Atheists - P.O. Box 2117 - Austin, TX 78768-2117


3/48

November

1986

Vol 28, No.

11

m e r i c n t h e i s t

Journal of Atheist News and Thought

Editor's Desk

R. Murray-O'Hair

Director's Briefcase

Jon G. Murray

Mr. Murray writes of the ramifications

of Biting the Final Biscuit.

Ask A .A .

A discussion of tax-deductible dona-

tions may give you cause to write a few

checks before the end of the year.

A Special Section on Funerals

Have you sometimes wondered how

to avoid religion at the very end of

life? Atheists of all kinds give their

perspectives on Atheist burials and

funerals. '

Plotting Atheist Funerals - The

grande dame of Atheism, Madalyn

O'Hair, lends her thoughts on how funer-

als should be conducted. - 8

An Atheist Cemetery - An account

of the only Atheist cemetery in the U.S.

and the philosophy behind it. - 16

When Atheists Die - Frank Zindler

gives some moving examples of how

wellmemorials can be held without reli-

gion. -18

Grave Robbery - The banditry of

the funeral industry is unmasked by

Brian Lynch. - 22 .

The Final Page - How do Atheists

react to death? Gerald Tholen provides

a few examples. - 25

2

A Course in Claptrap

Nevin Hawkins

A short critique of some very, very silly

metaphysics.

26

27

33

34

36

37

40

41

42

44

ARE YOU MOVING?

Please notify us six weeks in advance to ensure uninterrupted delivery. Send us both your old and new addresses.

NEW ADDRESS: (Please print) . OLD ADDRESS: (Please print)

Name

Address

City _

State

Effective Date: _

3

7

Blasphemy (part II)

Law and order were not the order of

the day a hundred years ago when an

Atheist and freedom of speech were

tried.

Poetry

8

Report from India

Margaret Bhatty

The Indian government is trying. to

clean up the sacred Ganges. But is it

brave enough to stop the real source of

pollution - dead bodies?

Historical Notes

American Atheist Radio Series

Madalyn O'Hair

E. Haldeman-Julius was one of our

nation's earliest and most prolific Athe-

ist publishers.

Book Review

There's trouble in Baptist-land.

Me Too

Letters to the Editor

Classified Advertisements

Cover Art by Christopher Dunne

Name

Mail to: American Atheists

Austin, Texas

Address

City ~ _

State

P.O. Box 2117

Zip _

Zip _

Austin TX 78768-2117

November 1986 Page 1


4/48

m e r i c n t h e i s t

Editor/R. Murray-O'Hair

Editor Emeritus/Dr. Madalyn O'Hair

Managing Editor/don G_Murray

Assistant Editor/Gerald Tholen

Poetry/Angeline Bennett, Gerald Tholen

Non-Resident Staff/John M_Allegro, Burnham

P_Beckwith, Margaret Bhatty, Nawal ElSaadawi,

Merrill Holste, Lowell Newby, Fred Woodworth,

Frank R. Zindler

Production Staff/Laura Lee Cole, Christina Dit-

ter, Shantha Elluru, Keith Hailey, Brian J. Lynch,

Jim Mills, John Ragland, Virginia Schlesinger,

George Thomas

Officers of the Society of Separationists, Inc.

President/Jon G. Murray

President Emeritus/Dr. Madalyn O'Hair

Vice-President/Gerald Tholen

Secretary/R. Murray-O'Hair

Treasurer/Brian J. Lynch

Chairman of the Board/Dr. Madalyn O'Hair

Members of the Board/Jon G. Murray (Vice

Chairman), August Berkshire, Herman Harris,

Ellen Johnson, Scott Kerns, Minerva Massen,

Robin Murray-O'Hair, Shirley Nelson, Richard C.

O'Hair, Henry Schmuck, Noel Scott, Gerald

Tholen, Lloyd Thoren, Frank Zindler.

Officers and Directors may be reached at P.O.

Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768.

Honorary Members of the Board/Merrill

Holste, John Marthaler

The American Atheist is published monthly by

American Atheist Press, an affiliate of Society of

Separationists, Inc., d/b/a American Atheists,

2210Hancock Dr., Austin, TX 78756-25%, a non-

profit, non-political, educational organization ded-

icated to the complete and absolute separation of

state and church. (Non-profit under IRS Code

501(c)(3).)

Copyright 1986by Society of Separationists, Inc.

All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in

part without written permission is prohibited.

ISSN: 0332-4310.Mailingaddress: P.O. Box 2117,

Austin, TX 78768-2117.

The Americ an A th ei st is indexed in IBt{1nterna-

t ional Bibliography o f Per iod ica l L i te rature, Os-

nabrock, Germany).

Manuscripts submitted must be typed, double-

spaced, and accompanied by a stamped, self-

addressed envelope. A copy of American Atheist

Writers' Guidelines is available upon request. The

editors assume no responsibility for unsolicited

manuscripts.

The American Atheist Press publishes a variety of

Atheist, agnostic, and freethought material. A

catalog is available free upon request.

The American Atheist is given free ofcost

to members of American Atheists as an

incident of their membership. For a sched-

ule of membership rates, please see the

inside front cover. Subscriptions for the

American Atheist alone are $25 a year for

one-year terms only. The library and

institutional discount is 50%_Sustain-

ing subscriptions ($50 a year) are tax-

deductible.

Page 2

EDITOR S DESK / R. Murray-O'Hair

M IX ED R EP L IES

W

e at The American Atheist Center

have often toyed with the idea of a

book titled Questions From Atheists

which would answer typical questions Athe-

ists have asked which have never been ade-

quately answered. Atheists from around the

country and the world inquire with the same

questions. And we answer each individually

as often from our hearts as from our heads, if

at all.But some of the questions, poignantiy

full of necessity, so often asked, are nearly

impossible to answer patiy.

One such question, very often heard at

The Center, is What do we, Atheists, do for

funerals? Our culture's means of dealing

with death are so saturated with religion that

the Atheist, having opted out of theism

completely, is most often entirely excluded

from traditional expressions of mourning.

So we thought to face that problem -

perhaps not once and for all, but certainly

once. We thought to giveAtheists a range of

options for composing funerals.

But as our authors considered the matter,

it became clear that our very Atheism pre-

vented us from giving our readers a stylized

response to the trying circumstances of fac-

ing death. For inAtheism is a recognition of

the individual, an emphasis on his or her

importance that is in opposition to the reli-

gious emphasis on a god. Each unique per-

son, our authors felt, needed a final fare-

well reflecting his or her life.It became clear

as we worked that we could only offer

examples, not guidelines.

We recognize that for grieving persons

such an approach is not entirely helpfuL

Individuals in pain may prefer to retreat to

the formulaic. But we did not feel that we

could offer the formulaic to alL

Perhaps this issue of our magazine will

open up a discussion of the facing of death

which will lead to better solutions, for the

individuals and the group, than have been

found in the past. We hope for this as we

present this multitude ofapproaches to you.

To begin is an article by the woman often

called The Atheist, Madalyn O'Hair. In

Plotting Atheist Funerals, she deals with

legal and individual aspects ofdisposal ofthe

dead. Concluding there is no single Atheist

response to death, she discusses how she

would have her own funeral handled.

We could not overlook a description of

the United States' only Atheist cemetery.

An Atheist Cemetery describes its ap-

proach and reproduces its application form.

November 1986

Frank Zindler gives a taste of funeral

ceremonies he has conducted. His poetic

examples are in When Atheists Die.

Atheists have never been persons to

ignore reality - including the financial reali-

ties of death. Brian Lynch critiques the fu-

neral industry in Grave Robbery.

In The Director's Briefcase, Jon Murray

presents Biting the Final Biscuit, an

attempt to cover a number of aspects of

death, dying, funerals, and burials.

Finally Gerald Tholen provides The Final

Page, a moving account of an Atheist's

reaction to death.

Interspersed are various delicate poems

reflecting an Atheistic attitude to death.

Pray forgive us for trying to lighten the

subject with a cartoon or two. Death is such

an emotionally-laden topic that any handling

of it is likely to upset, offend. Keeping in

mind that some may cry out against our

treatment as tasteless, we felt a need to

encourage a more matter-of-fact handling of

death through a bit of humor.

We often try to schedule the publication

of special features with an appropriate sea-

sonal event. For example, our feature on the

rearing of Atheist youth appeared in the

year's most youthful month, January; our

articles on weddings appeared during the

traditional month to wed, June. But we had

difficulty in choosing the appropriate

month for a funeral issue. Surely, we

thought, the feature should not appear in

December, the month for celebrations; nor

February, the month for lovers; nor March,

April, or May, months for birth and renewal;

nor July, a month for Americans to celebrate.

October, the month of Halloween, seemed

gauche. In the end, by default, we settled on

November for our feature on Atheist funeral

procedures (we shy from the word services

with its religious connotations).

Perhaps we accidentally made the correct

decision. For in the various essays in this

issue you will see Atheists insist on the

recognition of death as a natural event, not

to be avoided, not to be feared, not to be

anticipated, but to be accepted - just as we

accept the small deaths of the fall season.

We watch lush greenery fallto provide room

and humus for a new generation - and

understand the necessity of the process.

Just so, the authors felt, we must not deny

the reality of and need for the end of individ-

ual lives, no matter how we express our

sorrow and respect for dead companions.

American Atheist


5/48

D IR E C T O R S B R IE F C A SE Jon G. Murray

BITING THE FINAL BISCUIT

A

frequently asked question ofThe Amer-

ican Atheist Center is, What should

anAtheist do with respect to the many ques-

tions surrounding death? Ifone isan Athe-

ist and has a family member or person

known to one die, how should one comport

oneself?Ifan Atheist dies, what should those

who survive do with respect to disposal of

the body? Should there be a service, and if

so, of what should it consist? These are all

complex questions because they involve a

highly personal and emotional issue. Indi-

viduals react differently when faced with a

death, whether their own potential one or

someone else's actual one. Generally, reac-

tion to death as a subject is dependent on

one's total background and lifeperceptions

and on an individual fact situation. The

American Atheist faces, in dealing with the

topic of death, somewhat the same problem

as it faced in dealing with the subject of

marriage. Marriage is a highly personalized

matter of opinion and taste which differs

widelyfrom individual to individual.

Even when itcomes to taking statistics or

asking questions about death, the nature of

the subject matter, as a subjective consider-

ation, interferes with the statistical process

and casts doubt on the validity of the con-

clusions reached. This same problem exists

when doing surveys about god beliefs or

concepts. Each person surveyed willdefine

god in his own unique way. A question

like, What is death? willlikely net one as

many different answers as persons asked.

Varied Responses

In 1974Warren Shibles, then an instruc-

tor at the University of Wisconsin - White-

water, published a book entitled Death, An

Interdisciplinary Analysis. In that book,

Shibles starts out by attempting to analyze

fifty-fivequestions which were answered by

forty-nine of his students at the beginning of

an undergraduate philosophy seminar on

death in the spring of 1972 at University of

Wisconsin - Whitewater. Shibles's look at

the questions and their answers takes up the

first thirty-five pages of his book, and I can-

not present that entire analysis in this

column. I can try to give the highlights of

what Shibles found from just one class of

students. Mr. Shibles has ten books on var-

ious philosophical and sociological topics in

print from The Language Press, but this par-

Austin, Texas

ticular title,

Death,

is now out of print.

Each student had his or her own concept

of the definition of the term death, from 3

cessation of bodily functions to like being

bored. To the question Can you imagine

your own death? halfof the class answered

no. Is death necessary, or is it a disease

which man may be able to conquer? drew

an equally divided response from it can be

eliminated completely to it is neither

necessary nor conquerable - itjust exists.

The majority had immediate personal

experiences with death, but when asked

Have you discussed death (a) with your

family? (b) with others? one-sixth had not

discussed death at all. Most had discussed

it in terms of heaven, hell, reincarnation,

afterlife, and the religious context.

Have you ever wanted to die? drew a

yes answer from twenty-eight students. Most

of the reasons given centered around bore-

dom or the futility of life.This was followed

by the question Have you ever or do you

contemplate suicide? to which twenty-two

students answered yes. The related ques-

tion Should one have a right to take his own

life? drew thirty-two yes responses.

On fear of death, twenty-one out of the

class answered yes to the direct question

Do you fear death? Fifteen ofthe students

believed in immortality and that they have

a soul. Seventeen believed in reincarna-

tion and nineteen did not, while sixteen said

that they did hope for life after death, with

eight saying no. Twenty-six said that they

did not want to know when they would die,

and eight said they would like to know.

Forty-two said they would want the doctor

to tell them if they had a terminal illness,

while five said they would prefer not to

know.

With regard to the question Do you

pray? twenty said no, while nineteen said

yes. Then, curiously, to the question Do

you think you can be punished for your sins

after death? twenty-nine said no, four yes,

and three were not sure.

Next to last, question number fifty-four,

Do you think most people are honest in

their statements about death? was an-

swered no by twenty students and yes by

only seven.

What can we conclude from all of these

questions to a single class ofundergraduates

in Wisconsin? Little or nothing that can be

applied to the majority of the population.

November 1986

Attitudes on death and dying are personal,

fact situation determined, and even chang-

ing from time to time throughout a given

individual's lifetime.

As you can see from the samples given,

the reaction of the class to the topic of death

was a mixed one. Each student had a sepa-

rate opinion on each question - an opinion

not necessarily related to any other ques-

tion. Many of them have probably changed

their minds since 1972ifthey could be found

and asked the same set of questions again.

This isan area, from my point ofview, that is

not amenable to statistical analysis. It iseasy

to ask questions of groups or persons large

and small that lend themselves to definite

yes and no answers without qualification or

personal experiences, outlooks, and inter-

pretations being a valuable part of a com-

plete answer to the question. One can ask,

for example, Do you own a motor vehicle?

and get a reliable count from the total sur-

vey, but ifyou ask, Why own a motor vehi-

cle? that requires a qualitative rather than a

quantitative response. The answers willbe

divergent and difficult to correlate and to

draw any substantive conclusions from.

Iwould say, however, that a safe assump-

tion is that everyone has thought about the

subject of death at one time or the other -

whether or not they will admit to having

done so in a survey. It is a natural subject of

curiosity regardless ofwhether derived from

spontaneous curiosity or brought on by a

personal experience with death. The re-

sponse to that curiosity is a subjective con-

sideration and is not necessarily related to

an understanding of what death is from

any kind of scientific perspective.

Death's Definition

Death can be defined medically as the

permanent cessation ofthe vital functions in

the bodies of animals and plants, or slight

variations thereof. That is a pretty straight-

forward definition. Even more simply, death

isthe end oflife.That isalland nothing more.

Archaeologists and anthropologists for the

most part agree that death from natural

causes was inexplicable to primitive man in

the savage state, that in all times in all

lands, ifhe reflects on death at all, man fails

to understand that it is a natural phenom-

enon, that in its presence he is awed or

curious. This indifference is not dictated by

Page 3


6/48

Il

t

•• iI v

1\0.

••, dread returning to that lonelq, silent house with no bitching, belching,

snoring, or farting.

any realization that death means annihila-

tion of the personality. The savage concep-

tion of a future state is one that involves no

real break inthe continuity oflife as he leads

it. There isuniversal refusal ofsavage man to

accept death as the natural end of li,fe.If a

man dies without being wounded he is con-

sidered to be the victim of spirits of some

sort. This animistic tendency was a marked

characteristic ofprimitive man inevery land.

The savage explains the processes of inani-

mate nature by assuming that livingbeings

or spirits, possessed of capacities similar to

his own, are within the inanimate object. He

explains to himself the phenomena ofhuman

lifein a likemanner, believing that each man

has within him a kind of mannikin or

animal which dictates his actions inlife.This

miniature internal man is the savage's

conception ofa soul. Sleep or trances are

then regarded as the temporary absence of

this soul and death as the permanent

absence thereof. Each person isperceived in

the primitive mind as having a dual exis-

tence, with the soul of dual man having

many names and forms. One common belief

isthat the body's shadow or reflection isthe

soul. When a man issick inmany primitive

cultures he issaid to have lost his shadow or

at least a part ofit. This reflection or shadow

soul is thought, in many cultures, to be

subject to enemies or attacks givingrise to a

Page 4

host of associated superstitions. Most com-

monly in a cross-cultural analysis the soul

is perceived as being man's breath (or

anima, the root word for animal). The term

last breath and the use ofthe word breath as

a synonym for

life

expresses the savage

beliefthat there departs from the body ofthe

dying something tangible, capable of sepa-

rate existence.

As a direct result of the inability of the

savage mind inallages and inalllocations to

comprehend death as a natural phenome-

non, there results a universal tendency to

personify death, and myths are thus in-

vented to account for itsorigin. The point of

this littleanthropology lesson isthat the atti-

tude of even so-called civilized man

towards death has been in a great part dic-

tated by the savage belief that to die is

unnatural. This is the crux of the differen-

tiation between the Atheist position with

respect to death and that of the theist. The

theist continues to build on a mythological

structure based on the false premise that

death isan unnatural act. The Atheist rec-

ognizes death as a natural process that is

simply the termination oflife.Once that real-

ization is attained, there is no need for the

fabrication ofstories as to the cause or effect

of death. It is simply accepted as an inevita-

ble natural phenomenon.

I see no need, as an Atheist, to become

November 1986

emotionally distraught over a natural phe-

nomenon, no matter how closely it occurs to

me in terms of personal relationships. It is

simply not rational to allow the death of

another to significantly interfere with one's

own life. No one will deny that there is a

period of adjustment and remorse and a

sense of something being missing when

someone with whom one has a close per-

sonal relationship dies. It is the inability of

the vast majority to be able to cope with that

adjustment period without turning outside

ofreality to some type ofmysticism or chem-

ical stimulation that fosters the continuance

ofreligion. I do not viewbeing able to handle

death emotionally something for only the

tough John Wayne image individual. Cop-

ingwith death isbased on a realization of the

fact that it is a natural phenomenon and

nothing more. Once one fallsinto the trap of

thinking otherwise then all of the excess

emotional baggage of guilt, sin, souls, after-

life,reincarnation, and grief can pileup quite

easily. Ifthe natural premise is relinquished,

one can build an incredible nightmare on the

ruins.

One of my fellow columnists in this very

issue of this journal seems to feel that a

gathering of those concerned upon an indi-

vidual's death and some type ofceremony is

necessary to help them reorder their lives in

the absence ofthe deceased. This columnist

feels that one must restructure one's lifeto

compensate for the deceased individual. I

disagree. Idon't think that any kind of gath-

ering or ceremony isnecessary at the time of

a death whatsoever other than the persons

who are required to dispose of the body in a

particular manner. Many kinds ofgatherings

are possible, but they should not be thought

of interms ofa psychological crutch. Itis an

emotionally unstable person indeed whose

life structure is so dependent on the exis-

tence of another that it would need to be

radically restructured upon the dependee's

death.

Disposal Concerns

Once an individual has died, the most

immediate consideration is disposal of the

body. The three simplest ways ofdoing that

are (1) burial inthe ground, (2)cremation, or

(3)throwing the corpse into a body ofwater.

Inactuality itwould not make any difference

to the rest of the animals on the earth, other

than the human ones, ifthe body was simply

allowed to decay where it fell or simply

dragged offinto the countryside and allowed

to decay and fall subject to scavengers. In

fact every other animal other than man falls

prey to scavengers and/or natural decay

upon death. Only man embalms or other-

wise attempts to preserve or protect the

dead body. The disposition ofthe body after

death isin both a legal and practical tradition

the providence of the next of kin -

American Atheist


7/48

regardless of the wishes expressed by the

deceased prior to death either orally or in a

written willor testament. The surviving fam-

ilymembers can do with the body what they

willwithin the scope of current

law,

That is

not to say that the wishes of the deceased

should not be taken into account. When my

grandfather died mymother saw to itthat he

had a traditional funeral with a Presbyterian

minister officiating despite the fact that we

were Atheists because that is what he

would have wanted. The disposal of his

body was carried out in accordance with his

lifephilosophy - not his daughter's, which I

think was correct. Her father did not know

what she had done, but it gave her peace of

mind at the immediate time of her father's

death to carry out services in accordance

with what she knew he would have desired,

As an Atheist, it makes the most sense to

me to dispose of a dead body in the most

simple way possible. Digginga hole and plac-

ing the nude body therein and fillingin the

hole with dirt is the best method to mymind.

Clothing the body or putting it into some

kind of protective receptacle or trying to

chemically preserve it is ludicrous. All of

those things are superfluous. Cremation or

burial at sea (as itis called) are also practi-

cal, depending on the location and imme-

diate circumstances of the death. I see no

need for any kind ofgrave marker either; it

is just a waste of stone or other natural

resource. What is the sense of knowing

where to return to stand over or near

the dead person? Speaking of wasting

resources, I must drive past a very large

, municipal cemetery on the way from my

home to The American Atheist Center each

day. Today Isaw the sprinklers watering the

grass around the tombstones, despite the

fact that Austin, Texas, is in the midst of a

severe drought and our city council has

imposed mandatory water rationing. Why

waste much needed water on the grass in a

cemetery? Cemeteries usually also occupy

prime, should-be-commercial real estate.

I am occasionally accused, needless to

say, ofbeing a hard, cruel, heartless, unfeel-

ing, unloving person who lacks emotion. I '

am none of the foregoing, but Isee no need

to become hysterical or show wildemotion

at a death. When people cry, moan, engage

in the biblical-type wailing and gnashing of

teeth, and carryon at funerals, for whose

benefit is the display - the deceased? The

deceased is no longer capable of caring

about what is said or done in his or her

immediate vicinity. All funerals, from an

Atheist analysis, are for the benefit of the

living, not the dead. The religionists, on the

other hand, hold funerals for the benefit of

the deceased to ensure the proper disposal

ofthe soul, sending iton its journey to the

hoped-for location. The practical purpose of

a gathering when a death occurs is for those

who knew the deceased personally to have

Austin, Texas

physical proof that the individual is indeed

dead. This isan archaic hang-over from the

days of lesser communication ability. Prior

to cameras, telegraphs, and telephones,

etc., relatives and those concerned, particu-

larly in a legal sense as beneficiaries of an

estate, had to actually travel to see the body

to confirm death had occurred. In modern

terms it makes more sense for persons,

especially families, to get together for other

social reasons with each other while they are

stillalivethan to wait for a death inthe family

to be used as an excuse to get together.

Ithas also disturbed me that many people

can only express their true sentiments about

another after the person isdead. It seems to

me that personal relationships should be

such that one could tell another what one

truly thinks about them to their face and not

wait until after death. It does no good to tell

someone that you love them or hate

them in terms of the ongoing nature of a

personal relationship after they are dead.

One woman I knew' was a case in point.

Upon her husband's death she refused to

attend the burial services because she had

hated him for the entire duration of their

marriage - or so she said. It would have

made a great deal more sense for her to have

expressed those feelings to him while he was

alive.

If anything is to be done in terms of a

ceremony or gathering for a death, the

occasion should not be a time for mourning

or tears or sadness. Itshould be ifanything a

time to reflect upon the accomplishments

and character ofthe deceased during hislife.

A ceremony, if there need be one for what-

soever reason, should only consist of the

giving of a biographical synopsis of the

accomplishments and failures of the de-

ceased's life from the point of view of the

deceased or as near as possible to avoid a

judgmental rendition of that biographical

sketch. Some members of the groups

attending such a ceremony may enjoy music

or find itemotionally soothing. Inthat case, I

feel that it is most appropriate to play the

favorite music of the deceased, which may

add to the understanding ofthe biographical

sketch for those in attendance.

I am often asked by religionists what will

happen to me when I die. My reply is that I

willrot, simply that and nothing more. Ioften

add two concepts to that. First, I usually

draw an analogy to death as the destruction

of an ordinary audiocassette on which a

, voice has been recorded. Ifthat cassette is

set afire and consumed thereby, where did

the soul or personality that was on that

tape gowhen the physical receptacle was no

longer? It did not go anywhere. In a like

manner, when a physical body permanently

. ceases to have vital functions, the individual

personality that was associated with that

body ceases to be, except in the memories

of those who knew the deceased. In this

November 1986

technological age, one can also be immor-

talized, as the saying goes, on video- or

, audiotape. Second, Itell them that my death

will be of no greater or lesser significance

than a dead leaf falling from a tree in the

autumn and that it should not be granted

any more significance by those who survive

me. In addition, I like to taunt their little

religious minds by asking them how they

intend to enjoy a heaven or suffer in a hell

with no bodies, the soul being conceived

of as ephemeral. With what eyes will they

see their god? With what ears willthey hear

angels sing? With what sex organs, in the

case of the Mormons, will they procreate?

Their reply is usually stunned silence.

Funeral Costs

One ofthe most enlightening books Ihave

ever read regarding ceremonies associated

with death, that was a large part of the

development of my convictions concerning

funerals, was The American Way of Death

by Jessica Mitford (Simon and Schuster,

1963). One of the things that shocked me

most in this book was the extraordinary

amount of time, effort, and money that

Americans put into ceremonies for the dead.

A few examples from the book will suffice.

These figures are all from the 1960s, so that

they will need to be updated in terms of

inflation or current cost-of-living indexes.

According to the 1986Statistical Abstracts

ofthe United States, taking the 1%7 buying

power of the dollar as the constant, a 1984

dollar only has 32.1 cents worth ofpurchas-

ing power today. That means that what one

could buy in 1967 for $1.00, in terms of con-

sumer goods', costs an average consumer in

1984 $3.12. With that adjustment in mind,

according to 1961 funeral industry figures

from Mitford's book, the average undertak-

er's billin that year was $1,450.00. In terms

of 1984 dollars that would be $4,524.00.

According to the U.S. Department of

Commerce census of business under the

heading of personal expenditure for death

expense, in 1960Americans spent $1.6 bil-

lion ($4.99billionin 1984dollars) on funerals,

as revealed in Mitford's book. The author

goes on to add that that figure, averaged out

among the number of deaths in 1960,

amounted to $942.00 for the funeral of

every man, woman, child, and stillborn babe

who died inthe United States. Mitford also

points out that the figure of $1.6 billion

averages out to $1,160_00for each regular

adult funeral. Mitford says that the De-

, partment ofCommerce figure isactually low

because it fails to take into account such

extras as funds for the burial ofindigents,

shipping ofthe dead bytrain or plane, funer-

• al flowers, and the purchase of graves and

mausoleum crypts for future occupancy.

She concludes that: It would be a conserva-

tive guess that these extras, if added to the

Pag~5


8/48

Commerce Department's base figure of$1.6

billion,would bring the nation's burial billto

wellover $2 billion. In terms of 1984dollars

that comes out to about $6.24 billion. The

most startling figure then drops likea bomb-

shell out of the pages of Mitford's book on

the reader:

Personal expenditures for allhigher

education - tuition, books, and living

expenses for 3.6 million students

enrolled in colleges and graduate

schools in 1960- came to $1.9 billion,

which is a little less than Americans

spent to bury 1.7 million dead in the

same year. ... The cost of providing

medical care for the aged, the 17 mil-

lion Americans who are 65 or older,

under a medical-hospital insurance

program, would be less than the

annual cost of dying in the United

States.

I am sure that the same situation exists

today - only exacerbated by population

and inflation figures and the fact that we

have a statistically older population now

which means more per capita deaths each

year in the 1980s than in the 1960s.

I was stunned when I read Mitford's book

incollege, and Iam stillstunned to think that

the sick religious rituals surrounding death

mean more to Americans than education or

health for the living.

A Time To Change

In conclusion, I feel that we, as Atheists,

need to do what we can to lead the nation

out of its mania over death. We must dem-

onstrate that no one passes away (where

to?), is dearly departed, gives up the

ghost, is gone, is missing, has passed

over, has gone to his/her reward, rests

in peace, or any other religious term, but

has simply died. It is up to each of us

through our personal actions at the time of

death of a fellow Atheist to make a point of

letting the survivors know that death is a

natural phenomenon and that we, as ani-

mals, are all simply part of a continuing life

cycle and nothing more. Death isa reality as

is birth, and it need not be coped with or

adjusted to ; it simply is.

I can remember the showing of a home

movie of the burial of an Atheist inmate by

Arnold Via ofVirginia, founder ofthe Prison

Atheist League of America, at a past Ameri-

can Atheist convention. (See Recycling of

an Atheist,

American Atheist,

October

1983.) Mr. Via picked up the inmate's body,

wrapped in plastic, at the prison. He hauled

itto his acreage inthe bed ofan open pickup

truck, dug a hole in the woods, tied a rope

around the neck of the body and dragged it

to that hole, unwrapped it, kicked it in, and

then filledinthe dirt. Many ofthe Atheists in

the audience were horrified and complained

later to both Mr. Via and officials at the

convention. I saw absolutely nothing wrong

with the way in which Mr. Via handled that

burial. He was simply disposing of the

remains of a dead animal and nothing more.

Many of you will say, But he could have

done so with more dignity I reply, Dignity

for whom? Did the corpse care?

Personally, I couldn't care less what is

done with my body upon death. The only

request that Icould imagine havingis that no

religious ceremonies of any kind be con-

ducted. Many Atheists express concerns

about having unwanted services of a reli-

gious nature performed over their remains.

It may be of interest here that even if you

make arrangements to leave your body to a

university, medical school, or organ bank,

that many of those institutions will hold

prayer services over the body prior to dis-

section, then cremate and/or bury the

remains with religious ceremonies. But what

if there were religious mumbling said over

my remains? Would I know the difference?

No, and neither would any other deceased

Atheist, and there is nothing that one can

really do legally to prevent such an oc-

currence.

As an Atheist, I plan to live my life to the

fullest, being cognizant all the while that if is

finite. The fact that I must die eventually

makes each day that I do live and enjoy life

without the mental reservations that inhibit

the religionist from doing likewise precious

tome. ~

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

A second generation Atheist,

Mr. Murray has been the director

of The American Atheist Center

for ten years and is also the managing

editor of the American Atheist. He

advocates Aggressive Atheism.

Hang up your spurs at the 17th

Annual National Convention of

American Atheists

Held April 17, 18, and 19

(Friday, Saturday, and Sun-

day of Easter Weekend), the

1987 American Atheist Con-

vention will take place at

the Radisson Hotel Denver.

As it is every year, the con-

vention will be three days of

excitement, comradery, and

education.

But Denver - ski capital

that it is - can be a busy place

in April. So to make sure you

don't miss this experience, it's

best to make your arrangements

early.

The Radisson Hotel Denver is offer-

ing conventioneers the very special

rates of $44.12 per night - tax included

- for a single or double. A triple room will

cost just $55.29 per night - again, tax

Page 6

included. Please make your accommodation arrange-

ments directly with the Radisson Denver, 1550 Court

Place, Denver, CO 80202; (303) 893-3333.

Suggested carriers to the Denver Stapleton

Airport are United and Continental airlines.

And, of course, you need to make arrange-

ments with American Atheists to attend.

Early registration will be just $50 per

person, or $25 for students and

elderly on a fixed income (I.D.

required). But after March 27,

1987, registration will be $60

per person ($30 for students

and elderly on a fixed income).

Send your registration to:

1987

~m eric an Ath eists

Convent ion

D env er, C O

November 1986

Convention Coordinator

American Atheist Center

P.O. Box 2117

Austin, TX 78768-2117

(Make checksor money orders for

the registration fee payable to

American Atheist Convention.

Visa and Mastercardaccepted.)

American Atheist


9/48

ASK A A

In Letters to the Editor, readers

give their opinions, ideas, and informa-

tion. But in Ask A.A.,

American

Athe-

ists answers questions regarding its

policies, positions, and

customs, as

well

as queries

of factual and historical

situations.

The end of the tax year iscoming up, and I

am thinking about ways to pay less tax.

Could you please clarify what payments,

etc., to American Atheists are tax-deduct-

ible?

Shannon Gumps

Texas

(1 ) All levels of membership inAmerican

Atheists are tax-deductible. Membership

fees are structured

so

that almost anyone

can afford them. (Those who are absolutely

unable to meet a membership fee are finan-

cially assisted.) Fees range from $12 a year

for Student to $750 for Couple Life. These

can be utilized by members to help them-

selves on the tax problem: Better to pay

$100 Sustaining membership fee each year

than to give it to the tax collector. Ifyou are

retired and have money, better to take the

regular membership of $40 a year and

deduct that on your 1040 than to take the

$20 Senior Citizen/Unemployed (65+/re-

stricted income) membership.

(2) All monetary donations to American

Atheists are tax-deductible. ,

(3 )A Sustaining subscription to the Amer-

ican Atheist

($50

a

year) is tax-deductible.

(4 ) A regular subscription to the Ameri-

can Atheist magazine isnot tax-deductible.

(5) Purchases of books and other

prod-

ucts from American Atheists are not tax-

deductible.

Religionoften sells books using a gimmick

that allows the buyer to take the cost of the

books off their taxes as a donation to a

charity. The television viewer is told that a

certain religious book, magazine, or other

article is free, but at the same time is

invited to send in a donation (tax-deduct-

ible) for the book, magazine, or whatever.

This is a very clever way of getting books

tax-exempted. Why can't American Athe-

ists use a similar gimmick? Iwould rather use

the money I save on taxes to buy more

books from American Atheists or give it

back to American Atheists as a donation.

American Atheists has stated several times

that books are not tax-deductible, and only

Austin, Texas

membership fees are. Why doesn't Ameri-

can Atheists use the same gimmick religion

uses to give its members a tax break? Ifyou

think there will be problems with the reli-

gious ordering books and not paying, why

not restrict the tax exemption for books to

members only?

Dan Chilinski

Ohio

You hit the nail

on

the head. The above

method of book sale issimply dishonest and

is used almost exclusively by the most dis-

honest groups in the nation - the religious.

We do not care to emulate them, simply

because itis

a

measure of deceit. The intent

is not to sell a book; the intent is to get the

donation by advertising deceit. The books

are printed by mass methods so that the per

unit cost is insignificant

to

the church which

is offering it as bait. The sucker is then on

the church mailing list for further hits

which do not include giveaways. The banks

did this at one time, if you remember; the

green stamp method of sale inmany gro-

cery stores was of the same nature.

American

Atheists does not desire to fig-

ure out dishonest schemes of tax evasion.

Currently, we are givingaway books (and it

hurts) for

a prompt

return of magazine

resubscription and renewal of membership.

This isnot at all widely advertised. We need

the money so damn bad that we are willing

to stand on our heads to get it. Now, if we

could only sellyou heaven, we would never

need to deliver, and my gawd how the

money would roll in.

You state that dues are tax-deductible

and that single subscriptions to the maga-

zine are not. This is understandable. How-

ever, IRS regulations state that anything of

value received with a donation must be

deducted from the claimed tax deduction

(booklet, theater admission, etc.).

Is the magazine coming with the dues

considered to be a thing of value to be

deducted before claiming the tax deduction?

Or, on the other hand, isthe fullamount paid

considered dues and tax deductible even

though the magazine is received as a result

of paying this amount?

I should appreciate your prompt reply as

tax deadline is fast approaching.

Ifthe magazine must be deducted, please

let me know how much.

Elmont Tunison

New Jersey

November 1986

What we are talking about here is not

even applicable to most people. The IRS

permits you to automatically take a deduc-

tion of

2

percent, regardless of your income,

assuming that is how much people give to

charitable and nonprofit organizations. You

do not need to itemize this 2 percent, but

you must keep proof of donation. Assuming

that a family of four is living at the poverty

level, which isabout $23,000 these days, the

IRS assumes that you have given 460 to

organizations like

American

Atheists, which

is 2 percent ifyou are at this $23,000 level.

Most cause organizations inthe United

States receive $100or more annually from 1

percent of their constituency. The other 99

percent contribute less.

If you are a senior citizen with a limited

income, your annual membership dues are

$20;for students, annual dues are only $12.

So

the IRS permits you to deduct it all

on

a

1040-A (short form) ifyour annual income is

over $1,000 a year. Full-time students don't

have any income tax deducted up to a cer-

tain amount, but can deduct the $12 if their

taxable income exceeds 640a year. Before

you can begin to itemize deductions, you

have to have deductions of over $2,000 a

year, excluding your own personal exemp-

tion. Most taxpayers do not make enough,

or have enough allowable deductions, to

worry.

The magazine

is an

incident of member-

ship, and we place no dollar value on itfor

fillingthat function. Actually, we lose money

on

every magazine that goes out of The

Center. The cost of printing is about 3per

magazine if one does not figure any of the

general overhead costs of The American

Atheist Center into production.

The magazine subscription alone is $25

per year, which does NOT cover the cost of

production and mailing, as indicated above.

American Atheists is a nonprofit, nonpoliti-

cal, educational organization, and itsimply

absorbs the cost of educating and informing

Atheists. Those who actually assist us get a

tax break as - for example - a Sustaining

subscription for $50 a year, which may be

deducted as a donation also.

The revisions in the IRS regulations for

1986 now allow you to deduct

up

to

50 per-

cent of your income for cause and charita-

ble organizations, prorated for your tax

bracket. This is general advice which

ap-

plies to most people. Ifyour income and tax

situation is unusual, or if you have excep-

tionally complex tax preparation, consult

your CPA or attorney.

Page 7


10/48

MADALYN O'HAIR

PLOTTING ATHEIST .FUNERALS

IIWhat do we - Atheists - do with the

body? Bury it, burn it, or sink it, of course.

But is there any single answer to

t

problem of what or what not to say over it?

Page 8

November 1986

American Atheist


11/48


12/48

THE BELL'S FINAL TOLL

Barbara Marion Sinclair

So fleeting is a lifetime

And so full of sunshine -

When it chooses not to rain;

Scarcely are we born

Only to shed this mortal coil.

What precious moments we are not suffering

We spend in frenzied quest for pleasure;

As though lifewere a gag:

Tempting us ... abandoning us ...

Like a fleeting furlough.

Hardly is the fog of youth lifted

Before becoming the burden of maturity

That suppresses yet defines us:

Grains of sand upon the beach of humanity.

This case was brought to a hearing in the

United States Supreme Court in April 1856

and was confirmed. The Ruggles report thus

came then to form the basis for funeral and

burial law in the United States. quite apart

from English precedence.

Legal interest in the corpse came to be

accepted as inhering in the next ofkin, being

the duty and right of prescribing ceremony

and disposing of the body. The rights have

developed to be those of (1) holding and

protecting the body until it is processed for

disposal, (2) selecting the place and manner

------------------------------- ••.•• of the disposition, (3) prescribing the last rite

ceremonies, and (4) carrying out the disposi-

tion by placing the body in a grave, crypt,

niche, or urn, or in a crematorium. These

rights are protected by law, and the courts

may intervene by injunctions, or award

monetary damages for interference with

them.

Legal writings attempting to enlarge on

these rights for the benefit of better under-

standing have stated that the burial should

comport with the prevailing sense ofdecency

inthe community and that itwould be nice to

permit the wishes of the dead person to be

taken into account. There are long strings of

priorities of who does what when kith and

kin are at one another's throats over what to

do, and a number of cases developed into

legal brawls over what religious services

should rule, primarily when a next of kin was

ofa different brand than the deceased. Ifno

next of kin is found, the duty for disposal of

the body falls on community officials.

In any event, what is done must be done

with all deliberate speed, and many states

have written into their Health Codes that

one can be charged with a misdemeanor if

there is not a disposition of the body in a

reasonable time. The fact of decomposi-

tion of the dead body is and has always been

everywhere present.

4

Also, ifdeath is caused

by infectious, communicable, or loathsome

disease, the states often impose special pre-

cautions on body preparation as well as

We carry with us little more

Than the savage scars

Of a drunk and arrogant yesterday;

And the fretful futile scandals of last night.

And now, like a vacant gallows,

An idle wind punctuates

The lifethat was my eternity.

is no longer even a person, with a singular

personality which sets him or her apart.

There is simply a body, and all dead bodies

present identical problems: What do we do

with them? At the moment of death, all

responsibility for the rights of the dead per-

son are dictated by the laws of whatever

nation inwhich he or she dies. Most st~tes in

our union have or are making more clearly

defined legal definitions of death. The dec-

laration ofSydney, Australia, by the Twenty-

Second World Medical Assembly inAugust

1968, stated: Death is a gradual process at

the cellular levelwith tissues varying in their

ability to withstand deprivation of oxygen

supply. But medicine is one discipline and

law is another. Death has been set forth

legally as occurring when the heart stops

beating, ,the respiration ends, and there is a

cessation of the animal and vital functions

consequent thereon. This is a very precise

time, not the continuing event that medical

science now defines. The dichotomy shows

up in our time when the law says the heart

has not died, but medical science says the

brain is dead. Heroic survival techniques to

keep the popularly named vegetable

existence, as with Karen Quinlan, or Baby

Doe, are vigorously debated.

Even here, the question is What do we do

with the body? Shall we keep it alive? Shall

we stop heroic efforts and dispose ofit?That

concern is not relevant here, for ultimately

Page 10

one way or another, at one time or another,

the same situation will appertain: There

must be a disposition of the body.

In the United States, with no state reli-

gion, and with an abandonment of the

Church of England during the time of our

Revolutionary War, there were few ecclesi-

astical courts to pontificate concerned with

funerals or burial rites. In England, the habit

had been to place the bodies of the dead in

consecrated grounds, usually in church-

yards or churches themselves. In the colo-

nies and later the United States, the burials

were relatively casual, with family grave-

yards or municipally controlled cemeteries.

A court fight inNew York over the remov-

al of a body from one place of interment to

another (when a street in Lower Manhattan

needed to be widened) resulted ina study of

dead bodies and burials. This was written by

the court referee, the Hon. Samuel B. Rug-

gles, and was printed in Bradford's Surro-

gate Reports (vql. 4).2 The conclusions

reached in this report were later set forth in

the case of Bogert v. City of lndi anapolis i

1.That neither a corpse, nor its bur-

ial, is legally subject, in any way, to

2Appendix, p. 503 (1856)

313Ind. 134 (1859)

November 1986

ecclesiastical cognizance, nor to sac-

erdotal power of any kind.

2. That the right to bury a corpse

and to preserve its remains, is a legal

right, which the courts of law willrec-

ognize and protect.

3. Thatsuch right, in the absence of

any testamentary disposition, belongs

exclusively to the next of kin.

4. That the right to protect the

remains includes the right to preserve

them by separate burial, to select the

place of sepulture, and to change it at

pleasure.

5.That ifthe place ofburial be taken

for public use, the next of kin may

claim to be indemnified for the ex-

pense of removing and suitably rein-

terring the remains.

American Atheist


13/48

hermetical sealing of any body encasement.

The opening of the West and the Civil

War have both been factors which have

changed the mode ofbody preparation. The

smaller nations of Europe did not have the

difficulty of transportation of a dead body

over long stretches of land as remains

were shipped back to the place of origin.

This led to the widespread use of embalm-

ing

5

in our country. Whereas the undertak-

ing business had been a small sideline to

cabinetmaking and carpentry enterprises, it

quickly developed into an independent, and

lucrative, business. These were all quickly

brought under some state supervision

through the process of licensing for this

work. Later, a National Funeral Directors

Association was formed and, after much

criticism of the industry inthe 1960s, both a

Code ofEthics and a Code ofGood Prac-

tice were developed. However, much scan-

dal still attaches to prearranged planning,

since unscrupulous practices have devel-

oped, most notably with the

diversion

of

money. collected to other ambitions of the

promoters.

As medical science becomes more and

more adept at using the still intact and

healthy spare parts of those who have died

to assist those in need of such organs, laws ----------------------------------

become necessary to facilitate this, lest the

culture return to the ancient practice of

grave robbing. The practice, designated as

an ante marten tissue gift,was already much

in use in July 1968 when the Uniform Ana-

tomical Gift Act (UAG.A.) was approved

by the National Conference on Uniform

Laws and by the American Bar Association.

Allfifty states and the District of Columbia

adopted the UAGA by the end of 1971.

This brought a partial end to the question

What do we do with the body? for at least

some of it could be recycled for use by oth-

ers still living.

6

But what if one decides that the entire

body should be given to a university for

study by students of medicine? The human

body

provides

excellent raw material for the

empirical teaching methods used. Actually,

each student needs about three bodies on

which to practice during his year-and-a-half

courses insurgery and anatomy. Parts, ifnot

all, of the body as dissected simply are

trashed. But the residual that is left, unfor-

4InArizona, a body may not be kept more

than forty-eight hours after death unless itis

embalmed or stored at below thirty-two

degrees Fahrenheit.

5The veins are drained of blood, and chemi-

cals designed to disinfect and preserve the

body are injected. Orthodox Jews forbid

embalming.

6A sample Uniform Donor Card is given

on page 15.

Austin, Texas

tunately, American Atheists has recently

discovered can be subject to a funeral in

which nondenominational religious mum-

bo jumbo is carried out by the chaplain

associated with the medical school. Most

frequently unclaimed bodies, those who die

at charitable institutions or in hospitals, are

used for this work.

At the beginning of our nation, Justice

Joseph Storey, together with Simon Green-

leaf, published a report on the principles of

the common law inwhich they reviewed the

offense of concealing, indecently exposing,

throwing away, or abandoning a human

body:

The proper method for disposal of

the dead has been regulated by law

from earliest times, on the continent

of Europe by the canon law, and in

England by the ecclesiastical law ...

I n

Reg. v. Stewart, the rule is

broadly laid down in the followinglan-

guage: We have no doubt, therefore,

that the common law casts on some

one the duty of carrying to the

grave,

decently covered, the dead body of

any person dying in such a state of

indigence as to leave no funds for that

purpose. The feelings and the interest

of the living require this, and create

the duty:

. . . any disposal of a dead body

which iscontrary to common decency

is an offense at common law.

What do we do with the body? Appar-

ently, we must take into account the sensi-

tivities

of the

survivors

and the general

mores of the community in which the

deceased

lived.

By 1938, in State v. Bradbury,7 a court

gave approval to cremation, distinguishing

between decent and indecent cremation. I n

the case, in the smalleastern cityof Saco, an

aged brother had, when he found his sister

dead, tied a rope around her legs, dragged

her body down the cellar stairs, shoved it

into the furnace, and burned it. It was

impossible to get it all into the firebox at

once, but once the head and shoulders were

consumed by the fire, he forced the body

79A2d A. 657 (1938).

•. , know where I'm going to spend

etemitq;

in t he

qroundl

November 1986

Page 11


14/48

farther in, and as more burned, he forced it

infarther until he was able to close the door.

He was charged with indecently disposing

ofthe body ofhis sister by burning the same

in said furnace, to the great indecency of

Christian burial, inevilexample to allothers

in like case offending .... The judge used

the criterion, The first requirement of a

sound body of law is, that it would corre-

spond with the actual feelings and demands

ofthe community, whether right or wrong.

What do we do with the body? Make damn

certain that whatever it is, the neighbors

approve.

And that isexactly what an internationally

famous Atheist couple did not do in the late

part of the nineteenth century. Elizabeth

Ney, originally ofWestphalia, Germany, and

her husband, Edmund Montgomery, M.D.,

an Atheist philosopher, were livingon their

plantation, Liendo, near Hempstead, Tex-

as, when their infant son Arti died of diph-

theria in 1873. They simply placed a stack of

logs in the center of the grove of oak trees

near their home, wrapped the small body

with cloth, saturated it with oil, placed it on

the firewood, and set it all afire. There was

no funeral service, no ceremony ofany kind.

When the fireburned out, they collected the

ashes into a leather pouch. No one knows

anything further.

Individual Opinions

As the founder of American Atheists,

members and other Atheists look to me to

develop a policy, a custom, or a rite which

can be used as a standardization for Atheist

funerals. But I don't know any more than

anyone else knows. I've never been dead. I

have, however, survived the deaths ofother

persons. And, in the course of sixty-seven

years oflivingI have attended about a dozen

and a half funerals. The most recent one was

during the writing of this article when it

became necessary to interrupt it in order to

attend a Roman Catholic funeral and a burial

ina military cemetery inSan Antonio, Texas.

The funeral mass was so generic that itcould

have been recited over the dead body of a

dog, as well as a human. There was nothing

to personalize it at all.

It should be apparent that if a decision is

made to have a ceremony, rite, wake, or

memorial concerned with the body ofsome-

one between the time of death and the dis-

A DEATH SONG

The following is reprinted from the

August

14,1886,

Truth

Seeker.

Dr. W. A. Barry died May 24th, at Jones-

town, Pa. He served as surgeon in the late

war, and was with General Sheridan in his

famous ride to the front. A delegation of

twelve physicians and insurance men ac-

companied the remains to Reading, Pa.,

where the interment took place May 27th.

The only service was the reading of the fol-

lowing poem, written by John L. Stoddard,

and by Dr. Barry's request read at the grave:

When o'er my cold and lifelessclay

The parting words of love are said,

And friends and kindred meet to pay

Their last fond tribute to the dead,

Let no stern priest, with solemn

drone,

A funeral liturgy intone,

Whose creed is foreign to my

own.

Let not a word be whispered there

In pity for my unbelief,

Or sorrow that I could not share

The viewthat gave their souls relief.

My faith to me is no less dear -

No less convincing and sincere

Than theirs, so rigid and austere.

Let no stale words of church-born

Page 12

song

Float out upon the silent air,

To prove by implication wrong

The soul of him then lying there.

Why should such words be glibly

sung

O'er one when from his living

tongue

Such empty phrases never rung?

But, rather, let the faithful few

Whose hearts are knit so close to

mine,

That they with time the dearer grew,

Assemble at the day's decline;

And while the golden sunbeams

fall

In floods of light upon my pall,

Let them in softened tones recall

Some tender memory of the dead -

Some virtuous act, some words of

power,

Which I, perchance, have done or

said,

By loved ones treasured to that

hour;

Recount the deeds which I ad-

mired,

The motive which my soul in-

spired,

The hope by which my heart was

fired.

November 1986

posal of the body that itshould be recogniz-

able as related to the person and his or her

life. For this reason, why should the same

babbling be recited over everyone? If we

have half a dozen poems from which to

choose, that won't help, for certainly there

are more than halfa dozen life-styles among

Atheists who are usually wildlyindependent

and individualistic. What mournful dirges

should we designate as music? Iwillnot stip-

ulate any. I refuse to put words into your

mouths, rhythms into your ears. Suppose he

who died, in his life, was an insufferable,

chauvinistic, selfish, brutal, sadistic man -

albeit an Atheist. Should we feign what we

feel not? Suppose another had been warm,

supportive, kind, understanding? Ifwe truly

loved him, need we flaunt this openly for all

to come into our private circle of intimacy?

At the Roman Catholic funeral which I

attended in late September, there was so

little reference to the man who had died that

no one would have recognized him. It simply

appears to me that we should at least say

something of this genre, ifwe say anything at

all:

We, relatives and friends of Ignatius

T. Wigglesby, gathered here, have

come together to commiserate one

with the other, that he has died and

that the bonds we knew exist no

more.

Ignatius T. Wigglesby - we all

called him Wiggie - with a name like

Ignatius, you know no one was going

to call him that. Well, he was born in

McComb, Mississippi, in 1932, and he

has died now, here inHouston, Texas,

this week. That means he was fifty-

four years old when he was killed in

this motor collision. We all knew him

only since he lived in our town -

about twenty years now. Marcie, here,

is hissecond wifeand Jim and Bob are

his two kids. Wiggie used to hammer

on Marcie and the kids pretty regu-

larly, and we all know about that.

(Pause) One or the other of us has

always had to come to the rescue or

put the kids up for the night - some-

times even Marcie.

He was a decent man, though,

when you add it all up. He worked as

best he could, and he was a good elec-

tronics engineer. He put himself

through the University of Texas, and

he always supported Marcie and the

kids. Marcie always was going back to

him, even with those lumps she took

- so he had something to offer.

He sure loved football, didn't he?

He had a bet with me on the Oilers for

next week.

None of us really knows if Wiggie

got out of lifewhat he wanted to get.

He took some awful pride inhaving his

American Atheist


15/48

house and fixingit up all the time, like

he did. Everybody liked him on the job

- he was a twenty-year man at

General Electrics here. He did his

work well. He was skilled and com-

petent.

(A small chuckle) He sure told

some good jokes, too. He was pretty

easy to get along with - unless you

were Marcie or the kids.

But, he's dead now. Itwillbe kind of

rocky here to get used to the idea that

he's dead. But that's it. He could have

used a few more years.

The coffinis closed because he was

pretty banged up. The kid in the

pickup who hit him was sniffing glue.

He's still in jail yet. Somehow, it

doesn't allseem right, but then a lotof

lifedoesn't.

Now if you'll all just get together,

we're planning to take him out to

Wake Forest Memorial since Marcie

wanted him buried there. The two of

them have a lot there. That's about all

I can say. Thank you all for coming.

Some small recitation such as this would

be a lot more honest than anything any ofus

has ever heard at any funeral. Talking about

death, ingeneral, isnot going to help anyone

handle the grief one has, ifone has any. Or,

help one over one's feelings ofguiltifone did

not really like the deceased because he was

a mean son-of-a-bitch. Atheists should han-

dle reality even in death. We all survive

someone else's death; it's our own which

finishes the story for each of us.

What do we do with the body?

What music is to be used? Is the question

ever asked, Why music at all? W,hat if

there should be, instead, a recording played

of a football game being described by How-

ard Cosell? Why not have a primal scream

as the coffin lid closes?

How do you plan to clothe the carcass?

Where is it going? Do bodies need. to be

covered at all?Should the Judeo-Christian

obsession with the sin ofnudeness followan

Atheist also to his/her grave? Undercloth-

ing? stockings? shoes? Why not an over-

coat, earmuffs, and galoshes? One makes as

much sense as the other.

Why the dressing of the hair, and

makeup, especially with the closed coffin

idea currrently in vogue? Why not shave

under the arms then and spray on an under-

arm deodorant? Let us be as absurd as pos-

sible. Female corpses can have hair removed

from their legs with their favorite depilatory.

Should you let the tattoos show? After all,

they were put on by the former owner who

probably was quite proud of them.

What do we do with the body? Shave it,

powder it, perfume it, groom it, dress it inits

best clothes - and then put it some place,

away from our sight and our smell, to rot.

Austin, Texas

•

Hello ... Mister FriCK? I'm calling to let 40u Know that Herbert Allison

won't be at work todoq he's dead as a doornai l: '

Take it to a crematorium, dump it into a

body ofwater, bury it ina hole inthe ground.

You really don't have any other options at

this point in history.

No matter what you do, it is dumb to

spend a lot of money. Dead bodies can't see

anything, feel anything, or know anything. A

quick, inexpensive disposal is all that is

necessary. Every living person knows how

others feel toward them. There need not be

an excessive display, at the monetary

expense ofthose who remain alive, upon the

occasion of a death.

More and more members advise the

National Office of American Atheists that

they have made anatomical gifts of their

tissues, willed their bodies to medical

schools, or requested cremation. These

solutions to the problem of What do we do

with the body? would appear to be the most

rational, scientific - and Atheist. The Amer-

ican Atheist Center highlyrecommends any

of the three to you - as you plot your future

demise.

P ar t II

Actually, all any of us knows about funer-

als consists of our own personal experience

with the same. One and all, they are awash

with emotion, hardly events to be analyzed

objectively. No person can look death in the

face and come away from the experience

November 1986

without it having an effect, momentary or

permanent, slight or profound, but always

emotional.

Allof our burials today hark back to these

older practices of thousands ofyears ago -

inhumation, cremation, embalming, various

types of graves, cemeteries, preparation of

the body for burial, expressions of grief,

floral contributions, funeral processions,

funeral orations, gravestones and epitaphs,

consolatory and adulatory feasting, funeral

music. Recently I have been informed that

children are now excluded from many fu-

nerals so that they need not ,endure the

trauma. It appears to me that to exclude

children from anything puts them in a posi-

tion ofimagining what might happen; escorts

them into a world of unreality and make-

believe. Children should be privy to all

aspects of sickness, death, funeral arrange-

ments, and body disposal. This isthe stuff of

life, the duty of the living, and of death, the

lesson that there is a final end.

As I reviewed this month, my short ac-

quaintance with death and funerals, What

have I to do, I thought, with a statement

concerned with Atheists and funerals? I

know no more than anyone else. Who has a

right to pontificate, or to set down rules?

Certainly, we want to be rid of all the super-

stition, the religious trappings which have

accompanied the idea of death, but how to

do that? Ah, that's the rub.

Page 13


16/48

What do I mean by all these random thoughts?

Should there be a ceremony in my behalf? I have

thought long and hard about this. Iwould not need

one. I don't think those persons who knew me,

worked with me, or loved me would need one.

What should one do when an Atheist

dies? With alacrity, the answer comes, Bury

him. But, Idon't think that isthe immediate

answer. Paul Tirmenstein stipulated in his

will that his body should be picked up and

transported to the Anatomy Department,

University of Tennessee Medical Unit in

Memphis. Lloyd Thoren has an arrange-

ment with the University of Indiana. Ernest

Kerpen willed his to the University of

California.

A problem is that one's body belongs to

one's relative(s) when one dies. Like a piece

offurniture, an old book, a well-worn coat, it

becomes to all extents and purposes the

property of the next of kin. Most usually

Atheist bodies are buried with extravagant

religious rituals as (especially) spouses act

out long-suppressed hostilities with crosses,

Bibles, priests, hymns, ministers, churches,

holy water, communion wafers, prayers,

printed religious announcements, and rosa-

ries. The notices and descriptions received

at The American Atheist Center are some-

times nauseating. We had all thought for

forty years that Lou Alt's wifewas an Atheist

- and so did he. The affidavit inour filestells

with what delight Ida burned his Atheist

library and how religiously she buried him.

After the Anatomy' Departments in the

medical schools are done, what is leftof the

body isfrequently taken to the school chapel

where a religious service is given over the

remnants before they are buried or burned.

How can one win?

You can stipulate until your pen runs out

of ink as to what you want done with your

body when you die. Your next of kin can

ignore anything you say, can tear up any

stipulations you leave. If they do not like

your will,allthey need do issimply destroy it

and innocently tell everyone you left no will.

When you are dead, you cannot alter the

events that your death sets into motion. You

may say cremate, your next of kin can

ignore you. You may make prearrangements

with a mortuary, and your next of kin can

change them inany way.You may designate

your money is to go to your paramour, and

your wifeneeds only to tear up your will.

You can't win. When you are dead,

anyone can, really, do almost any damn

Page

14

thing he cares to do, not alone with your

property, but also with your body.

My Own Body

And then, I thought, what about me? I

represent Atheism to the world. Wouldn't

the religionists love to get their filthypaws on

my corpse? And, so I have told Jon and

Robin - no funeral parlors or mortuaries. I

don't want some religious nut to shove a

rosary up the ass of my body, or a commu-

nion wafer down its throat. My physical

body is the host of Madalyn O'Hair. Well,

that's not right. There is nothing indwelling,

no soul, no spirit, no essence, nothing. I am

simplyallofthe parts acting inconcert under

the direction ofa depository brain which has

stored both the record and the education I

received from the events of my lifeand the

genetically inherited factors, upon which I

have acted. The dead carcass is the carcass.

It should not matter ifthey shove a cross up

its ass, or spray holy water in its nose, or

screw it in the ear; when life is gone, it

doesn't matter what happens to the body.

What I don't want, as I t hink of it now, is for

the religious to get the satisfaction of corpse

mutilation or activities which would encour-

age them to assume that they have wrought

revenge for their god.

As I review what has been done with

corpses: What is the sense of draining out

blood? That isbarbaric and useless. So what

if the face of the body is up or down or

sideways, east or west? What does itmatter

if the body is flat on its back, curled on its

side, or ina fetal position? The idea ofdress-

ing up a body isbizarre. What isthe need, for

example, of pockets in a shroud? Why a

metal or plastic casket which is not biode-

gradable? Why a concrete vault? This is an

extraordinary expenditure of money for no

reason. The body should be permitted to

decompose in the earth, at minimum. The

hundreds ofthousands ofsquare miles which

have been removed from farming, building,

and park areas inorder to accommodate the

bodies ofthe dead isa scandal inour nation.

Fields of wheat should be planted there, or

- in town areas - market gardens should

be growing tomatoes, potatoes, lettuce,

November 1986

squash, cucumbers, and other vegetables. If

not food for the hungry, at least flowers and

shrubs for livingbeauty could be produced

from these fallow, neglected acres.

Everything done in funerals in our nation

today is for the preservation of the body, its

dressing, to prepare itfor that moment when

the (Christian) rapture will carry the body

heavenward to a new life. Hairstyles and

cosmetics for the dead? Manicures and

cologne? We are carrying on insane tradi-

tions. A new suit, or a new dress - often

something the person could not have af-

forded when alive? Where willthey walk in

shoes? This is a shameful waste. And why

should there be a different mourning mode

of dress for the relatives? Let us allay the

armbands, the wretched blacks of suit and

dress, the covered heads. None of this is

important. Ifone truly mourns the death of a

relative or comrade, the feeling within one

need not be posted without for the world to

see. It is too private to display.

I am appalled at the worries over who all

signs the guest book at the mortuary, count-

ing the noses of those who show up and

those who don't. The arguments as to which

automobile follows the hearse and how

many are in the funeral procession, who

rides with whom, whether to hire the mortu-

ary limousines, are indiscreet shocks to my

sensibilities. And did you see, my dear, that

skinny littlespray of flowers? Does itmatter

to the body laying there?

I have told Jon and Robin that when I die,

they should gather me up in a sheet,

unwashed, drag or carry me out and put me

on a pyre in the backyard and burn my car-

cass. Now, they can't do that; I know that.

When we visited in India, we were taken to

the outdoor crematoria of the poor. A large

number of bundles of wood are needed to

burn up a human body. The process takes

hours, the fire must be hot and constant,

and itsmells like a barbecue. There are more

ashes and cinders from the wood than from

the body, ofcourse. IfThe American Atheist

Center ever gets acreage and this can prop-

erly be done, itis stillmy preferred desire for

the disposal of my body. I know it will take

six to eight hours and someone has to tend

to the damn thing so that the fire doesn't go

out. If they can't do it themselves, then I

want them to throw the carcass in the back

of The Center's van and tote it down to San

Antonio where there isa crematorium. But I

want Jon to handle the process of loading

the carcass into the oven, himself. I don't

want any damn Christer praying over the

body or even putting his hands on it. It

served mewellfor decades and, as one takes

care of an old car that has been of service, I

want the same for my body. Again, I realize

that it real

Documents

American Atheist Magazine Nov 1986