Turns Out I’m Not the Only Black Atheist in America

The symbol of secular humanism.

I am on an e-mail list for an organization called the Center for Inquiry. I also get e-mails from various affiliates of this organization. One such affiliate is the Council for Secular Humanism, from which I receive a monthly e-newsletter. Through that newsletter I discovered a group called African Americans for Humanism (AAH) that is having a conference in Washington, D.C. on May 16, 2010. The topic of this  conference will be “New Directions for African American Humanism.” (I wonder what the old direction was.) They plan to discuss African-American women and humanism, how to attract more African Americans to the movement, and the role of the clergy, among other topics. Humanism, for those of you who don’t know, is “a philosophy that usually rejects supernaturalism and stresses an individual’s dignity and worth and capacity for self-realization through reason” (this is from Webster’s).

I was pleasantly surprised that there is such a movement. I began to wonder how big it is, so I did a quick and dirty online search. There is a blog called The Black Atheist. There is a black atheist group on Facebook as well. Apparently the number of nonbelievers is larger among Europeans of African descent, but Western Europe tends to have more secularists/atheists/agnostics/freethinkers than the United States generally. Also, the black church in America is closely linked to the civil rights movement, therefore it has stronger roots in the community. Humanism among black people in the United States seems to be rare, but black humanists are not non-existent. I don’t know why I assumed I was the only one, but in my experience–having earned my law degree at an historically black college and having family with very southern Christian origins–I felt like a pariah for being a non-believer. Just one among the many things that puts me at odds with the black community.

I am struggling to find an adequate definition for my state of non-belief. For now I refer to myself as an agnostic heretic. Webster’s Dictionary defines “agnostic” as “a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable” or “one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god.” This accurately describes me. I think the question of whether there is something bigger than ourselves is unknowable, so I feel that stating definitively that there is no God is just as arrogant as stating that there is one.  The same dictionary defines a “heretic” as “a dissenter from established religious dogma; especially : a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church who disavows a revealed truth.” I am a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church, so this definitely describes me. This is why I combine the two words – it results in a more specific description.

Although I was once officially a “member” of a church, I have never been religious. Even when I went to church, I didn’t attend because I thought it was important to keep the Sabbath Day holy or take communion in remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice. I always went for some more practical purpose. When I was a kid, I went just to get my mother off my back. I quickly learned that if I just shut my mouth and acquiesced to her wishes on the church issue, it was one less thing she would lecture me about later (this is key to getting along with a religious parent when you are an eleven year old skeptic). When I was in college I went to church because I was a cantor (singer) for the Mass. I was studying classical singing at the time and volunteering to sing at Mass allowed me to practice before an audience on a weekly basis. As I recalled these events from my past, I finally began to understand why I was never religious: I don’t care that much about truth.

A key aspect of religion is that it claims to be “truth”. It states that anything that contradicts the dogma is a lie, a heresy. This is why I don’t “get” religion; why talking to religious people makes me feel like I am listening to some obscure foreign language that I need someone to translate for me. Truth is not my concern in life. I like facts. Facts I can use. Facts matter. Truth is irrelevant…and highly subjective. The difference? I refer you to the dictionary once again. A fact is “something that has actual existence”; “a piece of information presented as having objective reality.” Facts can be proven. Truth can be related to a particular fact, and in some cases may be proven, but this is not required. Truth can also be “a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true.” When religion speaks of truth, this is the kind of truth they are talking about.

I don’t care whether any of my beliefs about the world are true. It’s irrelevant. What I care about is whether my beliefs work for me. If they do, I keep them. But if they begin to cause a problem for me or others, I scrap them. It’s as simple as that.

By the way, for those interested in the AAH conference, it costs $45 to attend ($15 for students) and you can e-mail Melody Hensley at mhensley@centerforinquiry.net or call her at (202) 546-2332 to register.

President Obama, Black History and The Rude Pundit

To the right of the President is Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Senate Minority Leader Mitch "McChin-less" McConnell of Kentucky.

As you all know, yesterday the President conducted his “Healthcare Summit”, a last attempt to compromise with Republicans and move forward on some much-needed healthcare reform. Why Democrats are trying to compromise with Republicans when they clearly have no interest in compromising with anyone is beyond me. My guess is that the purpose was to distinguish the President as the adult in the room and the Republicans as the greedy, petulant children. I make no effort to conceal my political leanings on this or any of my blogs. February is Black History Month. I suppose I could just write some sort of feel-good post linking you to a You Tube video of Martin Luther King Jr. or Malcolm X, but that seems to be what everybody does. I’d like to do something more constructive today. And so, in honor of Black History Month, I wish to provide you with some scary health statistics. (This information is brought to you courtesy of the Centers for Disease Control. I will compare the numbers for African Americans to the numbers for White people only. Remember: Blacks are approximately 12.4% of the U.S. population, whites are about 75%.)

Let’s start with the scariest disease and work our way down:

HIV/AIDS

• In 2007, the estimated number of white AIDS cases was 12,556, the number of black cases was 21,549. (This is the number of infections, not deaths.)
  

CANCER

• The death rates for all cancers for African American men are 36% higher than they are for white men.
• The death rates for all cancers for African American women are 17% higher than they are for white women.
• Although breast cancer is diagnosed 10% less frequently in African American women than White women, African American women are 34% more likely to die from the disease.

HEART DISEASE

• In 2006, African American men were 30% more likely to die from heart disease, as compared to non-Hispanic white men.
• In 2006, African Americans were 1.5 times as likely as non-Hispanic whites to have high blood pressure.

DIABETES

• On average, African Americans are twice as likely to have diabetes as Whites.
• When adjusted for age, African American women are more likely to be diagnosed with diabetes than men or women in any ethnic group.

OBESITY

• African American obesity rates are 51% higher than whites.

ORAL CARE/HEALTH

• African Americans generally have among the poorest oral health in the United States. But we have company in this group: Hispanics,  American Indians and Alaska Natives also have poor oral health.
• The 5–year survival rate is lower for oral pharyngeal (throat) cancers among black men than whites (36% versus 61%).

You get the idea. In every disease category, African Americans are significantly worse off than anyone else. Disease begets more disease. The more you have been treated for various diseases, the less likely you are to be able to get affordable health insurance and/or care, the more you will spend on co-payments and deductibles, and the more likely you are to have claims denied for pre-existing conditions. So the stakes in this healthcare debate are high for all Americans – but they are even higher for us. These statistics are our past and our present – let’s not make them our future.

The Rude Pundit live Tweeted and extensively blogged about the Healthcare Summit. The Rude Pundit is not an African American, but he has a keen political eye and a direct, and often profane (hence the “Rude”), way of assessing a political situation. I think he sums it up well:

What Obama did yesterday will either go down as the naive last gasps of hope and change on health care reform or as a stroke of genius, providing cover for Democrats and resuscitating an effort that will progress from the degraded baseline of the current bill. With what seems to be honest-to-Christ momentum towards reconciliation, the Rude Pundit believes the latter. He thinks that Barack Obama calmly, gently, even, fucked the Republicans in the ass yesterday, his well-lubed thrusts just enough to make them comfortable until the very end.

Roll over and have a cigarette, Mr. President. You’ve earned it.

More on Race and Abortion…

Sigh.

I’d particularly draw your attention to the comments made by Spellman College women’s history Professor Beverly Guy-Sheftall:

“To use racist arguments to try to bait black people to get them to be anti-abortion is just disgusting…These one-issue approaches that are not about saving the black family or black children, it’s just a big distraction…Many black people don’t know who Margaret Sanger is and could care less.”

At least somebody has some sense.

Feministing also covered this. A writer on the community board noted that this billboard is especially insulting to black women and children because it “animalizes them” and “assert[s] that black women have no control over our own bodies and that we’re somehow intellectually weak enough to be controlled by the so-called eugenics-crazed poor-black-baby-eaters, aka Planned Parenthood.”

And here is another interesting piece on the Abortion/Eugenics thing.

Black Anti-Choicers, the Bane of My Existence

Dr. Alveda King

This past Friday, January 22, 2010 was the 37th Anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, which ruled that women have a fundamental right to an abortion. The so-called “pro-life” movement plans several events and protests all over the country on this day and since the anniversary was on a Friday this year, it was an anti-choice extravaganza all weekend from coast to coast! I am staunchly pro-choice, as you may have guessed. In fact I do not even like to refer to the opposing side as “Pro-Life” – they are “Anti-Choice.” If they cared about life, they would care about the life of the woman who actually has to carry and care for the potential life that they have such a boner for…but I digress. There is a particular portion of the “Anti-Choice Movement” that I find all at once peculiar, hilarious and dangerous: Black Anti-Choicers.

The ideology at the heart of this movement is Evangelical Christianity. So, I suppose it should not be surprising that black Christians are particularly vulnerable to anti-choice rhetoric. Like their white counterparts, religious African-Americans will often take anything their pastor says as – pardon the phrase – “gospel”. If Reverend Smith says “abortion will send you to hell”, then as far as they are concerned it will. And likewise on the issue of gay marriage. The black Christian vote that helped elect President Obama is the same black Christian vote that killed gay marriage in California in 2008.

These anti-choicers have a particular race argument that drives me bonkers. They believe that Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health organizations are part of a conspiracy to kill black people. They see abortion as black genocide perpetuated by the white liberal elite in order to reduce our numbers. They often use the following rallying cry: “Abortion is the leading cause of death in the black community!” They also employ incendiary phrases like “womb lynched.” The poster child of this movement is Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and Pastoral Associate at an organization called Priests for Life. This organization is headed by a particularly sinister character named Father Frank Pavone (a guy who is on my personal anti-choice shit list). Sigh. Let’s deconstruct this shall we?

Planned Parenthood founder, Margaret Sanger, is accused of being an advocate for eugenics, the practice of selective breeding. Therefore, anti-abortion blacks believe that the modern day Planned Parenthood organization is akin to the Nazis and is trying to implement selective breeding by making abortion and other forms of birth control available to black women. Historically, eugenicists have a bad reputation because those who were deemed good enough to breed according to them often did not include the poor, the immigrant classes and people of color. Was Ms. Sanger a eugenicist? Yes, she was…but that is not the end of the story.

There are two types of eugenics: positive eugenics and negative eugenics. Positive eugenics encourages those who are deemed genetically advantaged to have more children, while negative eugenics encourages limiting the children of those who are not. Methods used to limit births included abortion, sterilization and other forms of birth control (i.e. contraceptive devices, douches, natural family planning, etc…). But there is an important distinction to be made here. Sanger believed in limiting the children of those whom she thought unfit to be sure (she was a negative eugenicist), but the next logical question to ask is exactly how would those children be limited. In her own words:

“The campaign for birth control is not merely of eugenic value, but is practically identical with the final aims of eugenics…. We are convinced that racial regeneration, like individual regeneration, must come ‘from within.’ That is, it must be autonomous, self-directive, and not imposed from without.” Margaret Sanger. The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda. Birth Control Review, October 1921, page 5. (Emphasis mine)

“We maintain that a woman possessing an adequate knowledge of her reproductive functions is the best judge of the time and conditions under which her child should be brought into the world. We further maintain that it is her right, regardless of all other considerations, to determine whether she shall bear children or not, and how many children she shall bear if she chooses to become a mother… Only upon a free, self-determining motherhood can rest any unshakable structure of racial betterment.” Sanger, Birth Control and Racial Betterment. The Birth Control Review, 3(2), 11-12. (Emphasis mine)

Furthermore, unlike many of her eugenicist contemporaries, she vehemently opposed euthanasia as a method of limiting the populations of the “unfit.” Her mission was that women, of all races, nationalities and classes should have the power to determine their reproductive destinies – not men and definitely not the state. If women had this power, the problem of too many sick or unwanted children would solve itself. So what was the driving force behind Sanger? What led her to a life of fighting for the availability of family planning services? Well, maybe it had something to do with  watching her Catholic mother’s health deteriorate after having given birth to 18 children. She died at the age of 40 from tuberculosis and cervical cancer. Sanger was a nurse and cared for her mother in the final years of her life. Or maybe it was because of what she witness while working in a hospital on the Lower East Side of Manhattan in 1912. The Lower East Side was primarily composed of slums at that time. Sanger witnessed first hand the sickness and death experienced by women as a result of dangerous pregnancies and illegal abortions.

So you see folks…it’s complicated. And because they know that most people won’t dig that far beneath the surface of this bull shit argument put forth by black anti-choicers, many are frightened by it and actually believe Planned Parenthood is trying to slaughter people in their communities. It’s just not true, folks. As George Carlin said: “It’s all bullshit and it’s bad for ‘ya.”

FYI: Martin Luther King Jr. was presented with the Margaret Sanger Award in 1966. This award is presented annually and intended to recognize “leadership, excellence, and outstanding contributions to the reproductive health and rights movement.” He was unable to attend the ceremony to accept the award, but sent his wife, Mrs. Coretta Scott King, in his place. He later wrote a letter to the president of Planned Parenthood where he expressed how honored and humbled he was to receive this prestigious award: “This award will remain among my most cherished possessions. While I cannot claim to be worthy of such a signal honor, I can assure you that I accept it with deep humility and sincere gratitude.”

Do you think Dr. King would have accepted this award if he thought there was even the slightest chance that the person the award was named for was in favor of black genocide? I don’t think so.

Negro, Please

A few days ago, the buzz about a book called Game Change began to surface. This book, written by Time Magazine’s Mark Halperin and New York Magazine’s John Heilemann, mentions some comments that Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said about then-Presidential candidate Barack Obama. Apparently the Senator said something like this: Barack Obama is a great candidate because he is “light skinned” and has “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”

I was shocked. Absolutely shocked…that Harry Reid correctly assessed a political situation. We democrats weren’t sure that he was capable of such an achievement. It might be the first time this has happened. Reid just might be one of the worst Senate leaders ever. He’s petrified of the conservative Democrats and Traitor Joe Lieberman, he can’t give a press conference to save his life (I have seen reporters struggle to maintain consciousness while hearing his answer to their own question), and he has had a majority since 2006 and hasn’t been able to do dick with it. And we are criticizing him for using the word “negro”?

Basically what he said was that Obama is black enough for the black people, but no so black that he scares the white people. He said what every black person already knows. You have to be fairer that average and speak the Queen’s English, but you have to be able to shift into what Dave Chapelle calls “street vernacular” on cue. I myself have mastered the former, but never could accomplish the latter.

As for his use of the word “negro”, I am less concerned about him sounding like a racist and more concerned about him sounding like a hick running for the town council in Texarkana in 1904.

I have one thing to say to any black person who spends more than 90 seconds thinking or talking about this incident:

Negro, please.

Embarrassing Black Celebrities: Jackson Family Edition

Sigh. I apologize for being a slow on writing this one, but here is goes.

I was at the movies over Thanksgiving weekend. The advertisements that they show before the film are annoying enough, but in addition, I had to sit through a promo for the Jackson Family’s new reality show on A & E, which premiered earlier this month. I must say, I have rarely seen a family that is more content on siphoning as much money and career reinventions as they can off of the one son that has some talent.  Mind you, I do not include Janet Jackson when I talk about this family. She is very talented in her own right and went out of her way in the 80s to distinguish herself and build a career entirely on her own. She relocated to Minneapolis and built an act from the ground up with the help of music producers Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis. No, pals and gals, I am talking about the other Jacksons. That marginally talented, alarmingly parasitic, and financially irresponsible bunch from Gary.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Jacksons, here is a quick summary. Parents Joe and Katherine Jackson had 10 children – Rebbie, Jackie, Tito, Jermaine, LaToya, Marlon, Brandon (he died at birth), Michael, Randy, and Janet. They settled in Gary, Indiana and Joe formed the singing group, The Jackson Five – which included Jackie, Marlon, Tito, Jermaine, and Michael – around 1966. The group made their national debut in 1969 and racked up an impressive four #1 singles in 1970. They had a “boy band” following that would have made N’Sync and New Kids on the Block jealous. They even had their own (short lived) variety show. Popularity of the group waned in the mid 70s. In the late 70s Michael Jackson’s solo career started to take off. It was very obvious from the beginning that Michael was the most talented of the five brothers. He had done a few solo albums in the 70s, but it was his solo album, Off the Wall that was his real breakthrough. And the rest is history….He went onto to iconic status, while the rest of his brothers faded into obscurity becoming pathetic has-beens. As you know, Michael Jackson died on June 25, 2009. And all of a sudden, there were the Jackson brothers again….and there was his father, Joe, from whom he had been estranged for years.

Papa Jackson did a lot of press in the days following Michael’s death, particularly on June 29, 2009. At a press conference with Al Sharpton (huh?) he referred to Micheal’s success as follows: “We were famous…we were famous all over the world…” What do you mean we, douchebag? I don’t recall ever seeing Joe Jackson do the Moonwalk. I get that he formed the group and apparently drilled the boys in their dance steps relentlessly, but as a parent, taking credit for your child’s accomplishments when that child is in his 50s – it’s just tacky. But the most unbelievable, disgusting, and unconscionable thing of all was the press that Joe Jackson did before that press conference. Earlier that day – to the horror of the public – Joe Jackson had done an interview to promote his latest entertainment project!!! Yes, my friends. Four days after his son’s death he was out plugging his own crap! What. The. Fuck.

As for Jackie, Marlon, Tito and Jermaine, the description on the website of the reality show is as follows:

Behind the headlines lies a captivating family, whose lives have been unwillingly played out before cameras for decades. After 40 years in the business together, Jackie, Jermaine, Tito and Marlon have sold more than 250 million albums worldwide (I’d like to see this number broken down into how many sold when Michael left the group). Now, the brothers allow unprecedented access into their world as they record new material and rehearse for a concert celebrating the 40th anniversary of The Jackson Five. The Jacksons: A Family Dynasty will chronicle the brothers’ relationships with each other, their parents and their children, while also balancing the demands of their professional commitments and celebrity. (emphasis mine)

First Question: What celebrity? Can you tell me who gave a rat’s ass about the Jackson brothers before Micheal’s death this past summer? OK, fuck that – answer my second question: Who give’s a rat’s ass about them now? All of a sudden, they are “professional entertainers” again – rehearsing and records for their “tour.” Give me a break! Memo to the Jackson brother: You are not famous anymore. Enjoy the memories you have of being famous and get on with your lives – start a charity, invest in real estate or a restaurant, but stay off the damn television for fuck’s sake. This is the worst case of capitalizing off of a dead man that we have seen in a while.  These people are riding the media storm of their brother’s (and son’s) death like a mechanical bull, desperately trying to hang on as long as they can while people are still looking so they can make a buck.

Disgusting, pathetic, and oh so embarrassing.

Embarrassing Black Celebrities: Michael Steele Edition

Michael Steele is the former Lt. Governor of Maryland and the current Chairman of the Republican National Committee. There is so much about this man that is wrong that I barely have time.

Let’s start with this little gem: In an article in the Washington Times from February 19, 2009, Steele stated that he planned for an “off the hook” public relations plan to attract young black voters by applying the party’s principles to “urban-suburban hip-hop settings.” I don’t think he ever explained exactly what he meant by that. He also offered Louisiana Governor, Bobby Jindal (who is of India descent) some “slum love.” This was a reference to the fact that, according to the ABC News radio host, Governor Jindal is considered the “Slumdog Millionaire” Governor. Sigh.

In addition, he criticized the White House when they asked Govern David Patterson of New York not to run for re-election. He was basically accusing the White House of being racist because there are only 2 black governors and they asked one of them not to run. Hey, Douchebag Steele – Patterson’s numbers are in the crapper. That is why he was asked not to run. A 19 year old Congressional intern could figure that one out.

I am not sure exactly what Steele hopes to accomplish by doing this stuff. Does he really think that black voters will respond favorably to the Republican Party if he presents it in an “urban hip-hop” manner? Since when are racism, condescension and stupidity “urban”? See, here’s the thing about black people: while some may criticize other blacks for acting “too white” they really hate it when people talk to them differently than they talk to white people. It makes them think that you think they are less than. It’s condescending. Mike, you might as well just give a speech in Ebonics at your next fundraiser. That is how offensive you are.

This type of behavior only illustrates the fact that Steele was chosen to head the Republican Party because he is black. He has no leadership capabilities, nor has he raised any serious money to speak of. He is not a good RNC chairman. White Republicans aren’t afraid of you because you’re black, Mike – they just think you suck. And they’re right. Democrats have a black guy (President Obama) so Republicans wanted one too! And he is just as good right? Sure he is! Because black people are all the same. Just like Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton are the same – black skin is interchangeable, just like vaginas.

By pretending to be hip in a pathetic attempt to appeal to black voters, Steele is exposing the fact that he is anything but. There is nothing sadder than a poser.

He’s embarrassing.

Just Because You’re Black, Doesn’t Mean You Can’t Be a Bigot

We’ve reached the Promised Land, people! Black church leaders are now just as bigoted and bat shit crazy as white church leaders! Ahhhh, equality at last.

Let me tell you a little something about me. From time to time, I read conservative columnists or listen to Christian radio – just to keep tabs on the enemy. My favorite bit of Christian Crazy comes from a woman named Maggie Gallagher. She is the President of the National Organization for Marriage and co-authored the book “The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier Healthier and Better Off Financially”. By the way, this book has been ripped apart by Dr. Bella DePaulo, author of “Singled Out.” Dr. DePaulo basically debunks all the “research” quoted by Ms. Gallagher and makes the hilarious and quite adept analogy that if marriage was a drug, the FDA would not approve it.

Anyway, in Ms. Gallagher’s latest column, she discusses the gay marriage issue in the District of Columbia. There was an anti-gay marriage rally in DC last Sunday. In a speech given at the event, a minister recalled a visit that he and other clergy representing black churches paid to D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray, who is black. Mr. Gray is in favor of expanding marriage rights to gay couples. One minister asked about the fate of the councilman’s soul. The clergymen were all shocked when he responded that the fate of his soul was irrelevant to the issue of whether gays should have the right to marry.

Apparently, the black churches have their panties in a collective wad because a black politician is doing the unthinkable: granting homosexuals equal rights.

Black church leaders and the Democratic Party both have a political problem. You see, black clergy support the Democratic Party overwhelmingly in national, statewide, and local elections, but the party has a progressive wing that is very energized now and wants Democrats to get off their collective asses and grant gays the right to marry, or at the very least refrain from open hostility towards the idea. Black Christians in the U.S. are primarily of the Protestant variety -  many sit firmly in the Pentecostal or Evangelical camp. These are biblical literalists, folks – people who see the King James Bible as the absolute, infallible and unequivocal word of God and they are staring down black socially liberal Democrats and pointing to that passage in Leviticus.

Now don’t get me wrong, I don’t think that this will be a big problem in the congressional elections in the near future. Historically, as my husband’s Aunt Glenda always says, black people are the smartest voters in the nation. We vote in our own economic best interests most of the time…that’s more that I can say for white Christian voters. However, it doesn’t take much to change the game. If the Republicans can peel  about 15% of the black vote away from the Democrats, there could be trouble – and these “Values” wedge issues, like gay marriage, have shown to be a very effective way to do that. What put Proposition 8 over the top in California was the black Christian vote. According to a Los Angeles Times poll, 70% of black voters supported Prop 8. Imagine that you live in an area where there are enough black Christian voters whose pastors have told them that gay marriage is wrong. There is a close election. If you get enough black Christians to the polls, that could lead to that state’s electoral votes going for the Republican candidate in a presidential election. That is exactly what happened in Ohio in 2004.

The Promised Land. The place where we have the right to be just as stupid as white people.

Embarrassing Black Celebrities: Sherri Shephard Edition

Sigh. What can I say about her. As some of you may know, Sherri is a co-host of ABC’s The View, a daytime talk show where 5 women dressed in designer clothes sit at a table with coffee mugs and discuss what’s going on in the world. Most of the stories are ridiculous tabloid trash (yesterday for example, they discussed Ivanka Trump’s wedding), but occasionally they discuss serious news items. Anyone who has watched this program in the last year is well aware that Sherri Shephard is quite possibly the dumbest co-host in the history of television. Let me count the ways.

The woman had never voted until 2008 and didn’t even “know the dates” of the elections. She was totally unaware that civilization, religion, philosophy and culture existed prior to the birth of Jesus Christ. Sherri was uncertain as to the shape of planet earth. She also has really fucked up views about clothing and gender and is apparently one of the many bigoted anti-gay black Christians who do not want to “redefine marriage.”

If you watch “The View” you are well aware of the Sherri Shephard situation. Once when the gang was interviewing Bill Maher while he was promoting his film Religulous, she asked him why he had not turned his questions about faith to God to see what He had to say. Um, Sherri…honey: People who are atheists and agnostics don’t speak to God. Why? Because they believe he is a figment of your imagination and don’t care to go through life with an imaginary friend. Unfortunately, there was no time for Bill to respond to this insanity because the segment ended abruptly.

Let me say this: she seems like a nice person and she is a very funny comedienne when you give her some good writing. But I find it difficult to respect a person who has uttered that many bigoted, or just down right dumb, statements on national television. I just can’t do it.

She’s embarrassing.

Barely Black Series: Embarrassing Black Celebrities

In the coming days I will begin a very special series: Embarrassing Black Celebrities. In this series I will highlight one person in politics or entertainment that makes you want to hide your face behind your glass of chardonnay and change the subject every time their name is mentioned at parties.

Stay tuned.