I would like to have attended this conference

The event, hosted by the New York Institute for the Humanities at New York University, bore the title "Us v. Them: the State of the Divide between Believers and Secularists in 2004 and Beyond." Its secularist-heavy lineup -- which included Michael Newdow, plaintiff in the case challenging the "Under God" phrase in the Pledge of Allegiance; arch-Darwinian biologist Richard Dawkins; and playwright Tony Kushner -- raised the question of just who "us" and "them" are. But running through the seven sessions was a paradoxical idea: In order to gain traction, does secularism need to present itself as more of a cohesive movement or belief system -- in other words, something more like a religion? The basic challenge seemed clear enough. "Huge swaths of this country can't talk to each other," lamented conference organizer and New Yorker writer Lawrence Weschler during a lunchtime conversation with Kushner and essayist Sarah Vowell. He suggested that the conference's marked tilt toward the secular could be a symptom of this problem. Vowell was raised as a "good little Christian" in the small town of Muskogee, Okla., which had five churches and one gas station, an environment she said she considers racist and backward but still finds herself defending in public. In the piercing monotone familiar to fans of her monologues on "This American Life," Vowell suggested that her own brand of coastal secularism ought to start to consider itself a civil religion and send "missionaries to go out to Kansas and spread the blue-state word."

Some talk about the need for an Islamic reformation; unfortunately, Saudi puritanism seems to be the reformation under way, and interesting heterodox forms like Sufism are threatened.

There is no doubt that throughout the Islamic world this anti-Sufi movement is growing in strength. Until the 20th century, ultra-orthodox strains of Islam tended to be regarded as heretical by most Muslims; but since the 1970s, Saudi oil wealth has been used to spread these intolerant beliefs across the globe. As a result many contemporary Muslims have been taught a story of Islamic religious tradition from which the tolerance of Sufism is excluded. What happens at Nizamuddin matters as it is an indication as to which of the two ways Islam will go: can it continue to follow the old, pluralistic path, or under the pressure of Saudi funding will it opt for the more puritanical, reformed Islam of the Wah habis and Tablighis with its innate suspicion - or even overt hostility - towards Hinduism, Christianity and especially Judaism.

Chloe Breyer complains about studies which, as part of their framing, imply that religious consevatives are "more religious" than religious moderates and liberals. I do not, for the most part, agree with her however, because in my view, many liberals have not gone far enough in examining their beliefs for coherence. In particular, I find many liberal Christians who are quick to rally for gay rights, yet entirely Orthodox theologically, to be having it both ways. I don't agree with the conservatives, but I find that they often live their faith more fully.

I found this essay by Rev. Elizabeth A. Lerner, responding to her former professor, a halakic Jew who criticizes Unitarian Universalism as a salad bowl religion, answering to no higher authority than personal choice. One could say something similar about science, which ultimately has no higher authority than the collective peer judgement of scientists. Freedom comes with uncertainty, obedience with false certainty.

Scott Wells announces there is now a UUWiki. I'm high on wikis. I have my own for my Open Source Novel project, though I must admit participation has not been as active as I had hoped.

The NY Times had a detailed article on studies of the effects of prayer, and reports

In 2001, two researchers and a Columbia University fertility expert published a startling finding in a respected medical journal: women undergoing fertility treatment who had been prayed for by Christian groups were twice as likely to have a successful pregnancy as those who had not. Three years later, after one of the researchers pleaded guilty to conspiracy in an unrelated business fraud, Columbia is investigating the study and the journal reportedly pulled the paper from its Web site. No evidence of manipulation has yet surfaced, and the study's authors stand behind their data.

The electorate conveniently divided in 12 by Beliefnet.