The Cowtown Humanist
The Official E-Mail Publication of the Humanists of Fort Worth; E-mail:
A chapter of the American Humanist Association,
and allied with the Council for Secular Humanism
June 2003 Volume 5, No. 3
E-mailed June 20, 2003


Fort Worth Humanists Elect NEW VICE CHAIR






 Fourteen members participated in the May 20th meeting at which a new vice chair was elected.  Jim Cheatham takes over the responsibilities of the vice chair albeit he voiced the expectation that someone else would subsequently be found to edit the newsletter in view of his inadequate computer skills.  Subsequently, Michael Rivera volunteered to help with those duties.  The newsletter, thus, will be a joint responsibility.

The new team wishes to congratulate Wallace on a job well done.  He will be sorely missed.  We wish him well in his new endeavors.  Your new editors do not aspire to replicate Wallace's inimitable style and intellectual heft.  We do, however, have ideas of our own concerning format and substance that will be implemented over the coming months.  In the meantime, we ask for our readership's indulgence for any and all failings.  We will improve as we go along.  We will welcome any feedback, voiced or written, on the virtues and shortcomings of our efforts.  We also urge members to contribute either with pieces of their own on some aspect of humanism that we may be missing or with comments that will alert us to how this publication can better serve the humanist community of the area.


The next HoFW meeting will be a picnic at Trinity Park June 22 at 2:00 p.m.  Bring your own food and drink.   Let's try for a good turnout to celebrate the summer solstice.


The next regular HoFW meeting will be July 15 at West Side Unitarian Church.  Our own Dick Trice is the featured speaker.  Mark the occasion down in big red letters on your calendar.


Following the business session, the members were treated to the first two video lectures on evolution.  Lectures three and four were attended on June 11 by 11 persons.  Following is a description:


Theory of Evolution:  A History of Controversy

Lecture Three:

Darwin's Inspiration


I.                   Charles Darwin entered the scientific debate over origins inconspicuously.

A.     Born in 1809, Darwin came from the British landed gentry. His maternal grandfather was the wealthy china manufacturer Josiah Wedgewood and his father, a prosperous physician.

1.      On both sides, members of his family were active capitalists at the dawn of the industrial age.

2.      After his mother died when he was nine, Darwin went to a dismal boarding school.

3.      Science became an early outlet and led, in 1825, to Darwin's attendance at medical school at Edinburgh, the traditional center of experimental science in Britain. He could not stomach dissection, surgery, or the sight of blood; he liked only natural history.

4.      Darwin transferred to Cambridge University to prepare for a career . in the ministry at a time when the Anglican clergy served mostly a social function. He continued to study natural history, which was then viewed as a prop to religion.

5.      He excelled in natural history, and his professors recommended him to serve as naturalist aboard the Beagle on a five-year British naval survey of the South American coast, with return voyage around the world.

B.     Darwin's experience on the BeagIe changed the course of intellectual history.

1.      Darwin took with him Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology and was converted to uniformitarianism after seeing a volcano on the Cape Verde Islands and experiencing an earthquake in Chile.

2.      Adopting Lyell's evolutionary view of geologic history did not shake his faith in the special creation of organic species. Lyell, too, accepted a form of creationism.

3.      Species on the Galapagos Islands changed Darwin's view of origins. He found only a few basic types of plants and animals there, but those few took a wide variety of forms.

4.      On his return voyage, Darwin began speculating that those various Galapagos forms must have evolved from a common ancestor. He adopted this view after ornithologists confirmed that various birds in his collection constituted distinct species.

5.      Darwin kept his views on evolution a secret. He knew that the idea had been ridiculed by scientists and that he lacked a satisfactory explanation of how it worked.

II.                Returning to England in 1836, Darwin assumed the life of a gentleman naturalist, living first in Cambridge and London, then at a country home with his growing family.

A.     Having married his wealthy first cousin, Emma Wedgewood, Darwin did not need to work. He devoted himself to natural history, secretly developing his theory of evolution.

B.     Darwin gradually gained stature and friends in the British scientific community.

1.      He oversaw the identification and study of specimens brought back on the Beagle.

2.       He published a highly popular narrative of his voyage and numerous scientific articles and books about his findings on it.

3.      He became an active member of leading British scientific associations.

C.     As his health deteriorated, he spent more time at home consumed by his biological studies. Although this research seemingly dealt with various topics, it all related to his obsession with understanding how evolution worked.

III.             Darwin's breakthrough came in 1838 while reading Thomas Malthus's well-known 1798 essay on population.

A.     Malthus was a gloomy Anglican cleric who maintained that because the human population far outstripped the food supply, only the fittest can or should survive. His social thinking was popular among rising Whig capitalists of Darwin's class.

B.     Applying Malthus's theory to all living things, Darwin struck on a purely materialistic mechanism that he believed capable of driving the evolutionary process: natural selection.

1.      Despite the obvious similarity of individuals in a species, all do vary slightly.

2.      Assuming overpopulation, only the fittest of these can survive to reproduce.

3.      Just as artificial selection propagates varieties in domestic breeding, so this natural selection process should create and maintain variety in the wild.

4.      Given enough time and a changing environment, as postulated by uniformitarian geology, selected varieties would gradually deviate into separate species.

C.     Darwin composed a first draft of his theory in 1842 and a second in 1844, yet he kept his idea secret from virtually everyone. He published seven books of basic science during the years from 1842 to 1857 but nothing about evolution.

1.      Knowing the scientific opposition to earlier theories of evolution, Darwin labored to anticipate and answer every conceivable objection to his theory.

2.      Although Darwin was never deeply religious himself, his beloved wife was a pious Christian and he valued the social role of religion. He feared the impact of his theory would undermine religious faith by making humans a product of nature and showing that a cruel process of survival of the fittest (rather than a loving God) formed species.

3.      Darwin gradually lost his own faith in God during this period through a combination of his focus on materialist causes in nature and his struggles with the problem of evil.

IV.              Darwin was shocked out his self-imposed intellectual exile by the receipt in 1858 of an essay from Alfred Russel Wallace outlining the theory of natural selection.

A.     From a poor family in rural England, Wallace had developed a passion for natural history, particularly the study of beetles. He became a paid collector of natural history specimens in the Amazon valley and East Indies.

1.      Radical in his political, social, and religious views, Wallace favored a theory of evolution over creation on philosophical grounds.

2.      He went to the tropics with the ulterior motive of seeking proof for evolution by looking for evidence that similar species inevitably live near one another.

3.      Obsessed with conceiving a sufficient mechanism to drive the evolution process, Wallace realized, during a malarial fever in 1858, that Malthus offered an answer.

4.      He immediately wrote up his theory of natural selection in a cogent essay and sent it to Darwin, whom he knew had thought favorably of his early writings on evolution.

5.      Darwin showed Wallace's work to Lyell, who was one of the three people who knew of Darwin's work on the same theory, and Lyell arranged that essays by both men on the theory of evolution by natural selection be published jointly in 1858.

B.     Driven to get his evidence for evolution by natural selection before scientists and other educated readers as soon as possible, Darwin worked furiously to complete his classic book, On the Origin of Species, in 1859. This book revolutionized biological thought.


Essential Reading:

Darwin, Voyage of the Beagle, ch.19.


Lecture Four:

An Intellectual Revolution


Scope:  On the Origin of Species spawned an ongoing revolution in human thought.  In it, Darwin does not "prove" his theory of evolution by natural selection. Rather, he argues that his theory offers a better explanation for the origin of organic species than creationism.  In his later book, The Descent of Man, Darwin carries this argument on to provide a materialistic explanation for the origin of the human species and such supposedly human traits as love and consciousness.


The implications of Darwin's theory provoked immediate controversy.  Although accepting his theory did not preclude belief in God, it did dispense with the need to believe in a supernatural creator of species.  Further, it undermined natural theology by suggesting that species evolve through random chance and a struggle for survival.  As extended in Descent of Man, Darwin's thinking dispensed with God as the creator of humans, love, and consciousness.  The study of man and nature became an investigation of natural (rather than Supernatural) causes.




I.                   Darwin wrote his 1859 masterpiece, On the Origin of Species, to persuade scientists and educated readers that evolution was a better explanation for the origin of species than creation and that natural selection was a plausible mechanism for driving the process.

A.     Darwin could not offer a traditional "Baconian" scientific proof that evolution had transformed one species into another because he had not observed it happen. Rather, he artfully marshaled overwhelming circumstantial evidence for evolution.

1.      Descent from a common ancestor accounts for the existence of natural groupings or families of similar species; creation does not.

2.      Descent from a common ancestor accounts for the geographic proximity of similar species (Wallace's argument); creation does not.

3.      Evolutionary descent accounts for the existence of rudimentary organs; creation does not.

4.      Evolutionary descent accounts for progression in the fossil record; creation does not.

5.      Descent from a common ancestor more logically accounts for the geographic distribution of species than does creation.

B.     Darwin also could not prove that natural selection of random, inborn variations caused evolution, but he argued that it could do so.

1.      Artificial selection in agriculture showed the power of selection to maintain a variety.

2.      The ability of introduced species to displace native ones both shows the power of selection and discredits the notion of special creation by a beneficent creator.

3.      Competition and cruelty in nature support selection over creation.

4.      Bright colors for male animals and for flowers support selection over creation.

C.     None of Darwin's arguments proved that evolution actually occurred, but together, they were persuasive for readers already inclined toward naturalism over supernaturalism.

II.                Darwin's theory dealt a body blow to traditional Western religious thought.

A.     Darwin's chronology of, and outline for, the origin of species differed on its face from that set forth in the Genesis account.

1.      Early nineteenth-century theories of geologic history had already forced many educated Christians to accept a metaphorical interpretation of the Genesis account.

2.      Cuvier and Lyell had offered new chronologies and outlines for creation without arousing significant religious opposition.

B.     Darwin exceeded Cuvier and Lyell in dispensing with the need for a creator to fashion individual species.

1.      Although some atheists had appealed to science in their rejection of God, most eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century scientists accepted either a theistic or deistic God and posited the need for a creator as prime evidence for God's existence.

2.      Although Darwin acknowledged some place for an initial creation, the creator's acts were pushed back in time and out of the realm of science.

C.     Darwin's theory undermined natural theology, which had become a mainstay of Protestant Christianity.

1.      Natural theology sought objective evidence of God's existence and indications of his character in his creation. This was a key prop to religion in Protestant cultures that had rejected Church authority and elevated individual interpretation of scripture.

2.      Without the special creation of species, there was less immediate evidence for God's ongoing interaction with the physical world and, thus, less evidence of His existence.

3.      Under Darwin's theory of natural selection, new species evolved through chance variations and a ruthless struggle for survival. If nature reflected its creator, then natural selection challenged His justice and love.

4.      In 1874, in a tightly reasoned book, the noted Princeton theologian Charles Hodge spoke for many when he concluded that Darwin's denial of design in nature denies God.

D.     Although Darwin consciously avoided the issue of human origins in Origin of Species, to the extent that his theory of evolution applied to man, it also threatened deeply entrenched religious and philosophical opinions on human uniqueness and dignity.

III.             Scientific, religious, and popular debate swirled over the applicability of evolution to the origin of humans.

A.     The central issue concerned the origin of man's mental and moral attributes, not whether his physical body had evolved.

1.      Traditional Christianity had ascribed these attributes to a divinely created soul, the existence of which divided humans from other animals.

2.      Scientists generally segregated humans from other animals on this basis, from Aristotle's theory of the rational soul found only in humans, through the Cartesian dualism between physical matter and the human and divine soul, to Cuvier's classification of humans and primates into separate orders.

3.      To the extent that the human mind, human behavior, and human morality had become topics of academic study, humans were studied on their own terms or through religion.

B.     Darwin equivocated on the matter in Origin of Species but announced for the materialistic origins of humans from simian ancestors in his 1871 book, Descent of Man.

1.      Darwin did not believe that humans descended from apes (because they coexist now) but argued that they had a common ancestor.

2.      He asserted that the difference between the mental powers of humans and animals was one of degree rather than of kind. To do so, he exaggerated the human-like qualities of animals, such as in intelligence, emotions, and communication.

3.      Darwin argued that moral feelings (including love and belief in God and immortality) would have survival value such that they could incrementally increase through natural selection.

4.      He appealed to Lamarckian mechanisms to suggest that the force of habit could augment the development of mental and moral attributes in humans.

5.      He invoked sexual selection to account for the development of traits in humans (such as monogamy) and in other animals (such as the male peacock's tail) that have no direct survival value.

6.      Although more speculative and less influential than Origin of Species, Descent of Man anticipated developments in the social sciences and evolutionary psychology.

C.     Even such loyal supporters as Charles Lyell and Alfred Russel Wallace broke with Darwin over the evolution of man. Both maintained that humans were simply too different from other animals for those differences to have evolved by chance variations.

D.     Applying materialistic Darwinism to the origins and nature of human beings carried profound significance for Western thought. It ended the perceived divide between humans and the rest of nature enshrined by biblical religion and Aristotelian science.


Essential Reading:

Darwin, On the Origin of Species, ch. 14

Darwin, The Descent of Man, ch. 21


The above outlines © 2002, The Teaching Company Limited Partnership


Editorial Note:  An excellent introduction for the general reader to Darwinism is Ernst Myer's What Evolution Is.  Myer was 96 years old (!) at the time of its publication in 200l.  In an appendix he gives short answers to frequently asked questions about evolution.  One answer that I had not heard before is:  How did human consciousness evolve?  ...The answer is actually quite simple:  from animal consciousness!  There is no justification in the widespread assumption that consciousness is a unique human property.  ...Every dog owner has had occasion to observe the 'guilt feeling" a dog displays when in the absence of its master; he has done something for which he expects to be punished.  (Mine did this morning!)  How far "down" in the animal kingdom one can trace such signs of consciousness is arguable.  It may well be involved even in the avoidance reaction of some invertebrates and even protozoans.  However, it is quite certain that human consciousness did not arise full-fledged with the human species, but is only the most highly evolved end point of a long evolutionary history.

Check it out. JHC/


Our very own Dick Trice will talk about the origins of Christianity at the Fort Worth Humanists' session on July 15:  “CHRISTIANITY; THE POWER OF RECYCLING AND REPRESSION.

The success of Christianity rests to a great extent on the repression of its origins.  If the faithful only knew that its very dogma was a complete recycling of the ancient superstitions and the terrifying punishments for dissent that had evolved over centuries of trial and elimination, there might be fewer Christians and many more Humanists.  We'll take a look at the remarkable sameness of Christianity  with pagan religions, of Mithraism,  Zoroastrianism, and the Gnostic Gospels discovered in a cave near Nag Hamaddi, Egypt, in 1945, and learn why Christianity's origins are so unknown."

Humanists, as well as the faithful, need to know more about this intellectual stew from which the world's largest religion was formed. Let's all try to give Dick a hearty welcome.



A unanimous Supreme Court decision makes it significantly easier for workers to win discrimination suits against their employers in cases where race, sex, religion or national origin is one factor among others in a dismissal or other adverse job action.  Such cases of "mixed motive"--a legitimate reason combined with an improper, discriminatory one--are so common as to be the norm in the world of employment discrimination litigation.  Congress addressed this category of cases, among others, in 199l when it amended the basic federal employment discrimination law, to counter a series of pro-employer Supreme Court decisions.  Lower federal courts, however, continued to require "direct evidence" of discrimination.  Disagreeing with that interpretation of the statute, Judge Thomas wrote:  "On its face the statute does not mention, much less require, that a plaintiff make a heightened showing through direct evidence."  The administration had urged the court to adhere to its direct-evidence requirement. (NYT, 6/6/03)


The House approved, by a vote of 282-139, legislation outlawing partial birth abortion.  The Senate approved a similar bill in March.  After differences are resolved, the bill goes to the White House for signature.  Kate Michelman, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, characterized the bill as sacrificing "women's" health and future fertility on the altar of extreme right-wing hostility."  (NYT 6/5/03)


The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) filed a federal lawsuit in April challenging the funding and merger of two Montana state offices with the "Montana Faith-Health Cooperative, a body managed jointly by the state and the Montana Association of Churches.  "The mission of the Montana Faith-Health Cooperative is to foster and promote 'holistic health care', including an emphasis on the spiritual aspect of human beings," the Foundation complaint charges, promoting "the importance and power of faith as part of public health care initiatives."  Using state and federal funds to operate a faith-based organization, "whose religious objective is indivisible from any secular objective," advances endorses and promotes the establishment of religion in violation of the U.S. Constitution.  "The defendants" actions convey a message that religion is favored, preferred and promoted, in contrast to nonbelief, and the mission of the Montana Faith-Health Cooperative is clothed in traditional indicia of government endorsement."  The Foundation is asking for an order enjoining the defendants from continuing to operate, manage or otherwise participate in the Montana Faith-Health Cooperative, or from engaging in any other activities creating the appearance of government endorsement of religion.  (Freethought Today, May 2003)


The Freedom From Religion Foundation has called for the resignation of U.S. Secretary of Education Ron Paige, over remarks in April to the Baptist Press, the news service of the Southern Baptist Convention.  "All things equal, I would prefer to have a child in a school that has a strong appreciation for the values of the Christian community, where a child is taught to have a strong faith." He denigrated diversity as well as secular public schools noting he favored religious education. Speaking of critics of Bush's public religiosity, Paige responded:  "I would offer them my prayers."  Paige begins his day with coffee, "Scripture lessons, readings, and my prayer."  (Freethought Today, May 2003) 


Because our enemies are for the most part more enthusiastic about horizontal prayer than we are, and see absolutely no difference between church and state--indeed, want to make them the same--it is alarming to reflect that they may be having more success bringing us around to their point of view than we are at sticking to our own traditional American beliefs about freedom of religion.  When Ashcroft and his enemies both begin their days with displays of their godliness, do we feel safer after they rise from their devotions?   Movie critic Roger Ebert, (Chicago Sun-Times, 3/5/03)


A federal appeals court is right:  The words "under God" should be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance recited by millions of schoolchildren.... Our one nation, indivisible with liberty and justice for all, was founded by people who fled the oppression of state religions in Europe.  The founders understood the distinctions, however galling that might be to the devout.  Seattle Times editorial, (3/9/03)


And what remains the best-kept secret from the Second World War, because it is so embarrassing, is that Hitler was a Christian, and that his swastika was a Christian cross made of axes, an apt symbol of a political party for Christians of the working class.  And there were simpler, unambiguous crosses on all Hitler’s tanks and planes.

                             Author Kurt Vonnegut  (In These Times)


The 26th annual convention of the Freedom from Religion Foundation will be held in downtown Washington, D.C., at the Washington Court Hotel, Capitol Hill, 525 New Jersey Ave., NW, Washington DC 200l, on the weekend of Oct. l0-l2, 2003.  Receiving "The Emperor Has No Clothes Award," honoring public figures for "plain speaking on religion," will be Natalie Angier, the Pulitzer Prize-winning science reporter for The New York Times.  Ms. Angier wrote a recent piece for the New York Times Sunday Magazine, "Confessions of a Lonely Atheist."  She says: "Of all the things I have written over the years, nothing generated as much response as did the atheism piece.  I received hundreds of letters, e-mails, phone calls, faxes--and 98% of them were supportive..."


For anyone interested in debating, in print or in formal oral debates, against religious spokespeople, theologians, Christian-nation mythologists, or others of similar mindset, come to the first ever Debater's Toolbox, to be held in Amherst NY on 31 July through 3 August 2003.  (Also for those who want to learn more about debating these opponents, even if you never expect to debate yourself.)  Thanks to a generous supporting grant from California attorney Edward Tabash, the cost of this workshop, including coffee breaks, lunches, and a dinner is only $69.  (Center for Inquiry, 1310 Sweet Home Rd., Amherst NH, 14228, Tel: l-800-458-1366.)

"1984" IS NIGH

Recent government "data mining" proposals have bought the prospect of a Big Brother "total surveillance society" near.  Most Americans may suspect that a Total Information Awareness (TIA)" program administered by Admiral John Poindexter of Iran-Contra fame is up to no good, but may not understand precisely what data mining is and why they should worry about it.  Although TIA's implementation has been limited by Congress, research into the tool itself is ongoing, and there is a danger that once perfected, the power to monitor Americans' lives on a mass scale will emerge in some other way.  A prime example is the CAPPS II program, which is based on the premise that the government can catch terrorists by looking  into the lives of millions of Americans for "suspicious" patterns.  This concept is faulty not only because terrorist "patterns" will prove impossible to detect, but because so much of the underlying data is faulty in the first place.

Americans have yet to feel the full potential of data-mining technology because of government and business inefficiency.  Most large businesses and government agencies have hundreds of data bases that can't talk to each other.  But inefficiency won't protect our privacy forever; government and businesses are getting better every day at sharing data, in fact, the government is perfectly positioned to impose standards for weaving together information from disparate sources--and that is why programs like TIA and CAPPS II must be shut down.  (National Newsletter, ACLU)



...should secular humanist organizations such as the Council for Secular Humanism take positions on the burning political issues of the day? ...I would submit that we have a responsibility to speak out on issues that we consider vital to our scientific humanist outlook.  Indeed, I would submit that doing so is an important part of our educational mission. ...Primarily, I submit, we have an obligation to make ourselves heard when vital moral issues are at stake. ...That there is an intrinsic continuity between ethics and politics is a classical idea. ...Accordingly, secular humanists should speak out and act when they believe that their cherished values and beliefs are at stake; they should seek to persuade their fellow citizens about the principles that they consider important to endorse and defend....Getting our theories straight is important; but it is praxis,  the practical consequences of our actions, that is the best test of our efficacy and influence.  Purely theoretical humanism is a mere abstract concept, without content, of no moment for the real life of humans as lived; thus, the relationship of humanism to praxis is central.  (from Paul Kurtz's editorial in Free Inquiry defending his decision to editorialize (the previous issue) about the immorality of preemptive war against Iraq.  FI, Summer 2003).                          


Mike Haney reports that six members participated in the rain-delayed tri-monthly trash pick-up on Granbury Road on May 31.  The pick-up had been scheduled for the previous Saturday; the elements determined otherwise.


To the 17th Century philosopher, John Locke, is attributed the description of the human mind as a tabula rasa ("blank slate").  Everything in it is furnished by experience, according to the Lockean creed.  To this, his great German contemporary, Gottfried Leibniz, famously retorted:  There is nothing in the intellect that was not first in the senses, except the intellect itself.  Thus began the debate:  nurture vs. nature.  Defenders of nurture were dominant in American social science in the mid-twentieth century.  Its founder, John B. Watson, wrote in 1924 perhaps the most exaggerated claim for the Blank Slate: 

Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select--doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief, and yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.

The publication of E.O. Wilson's Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, touched off a tempest in the social science.  Wilson not only implicitly dismissed the "blank slate"; in the last chapter of his very lengthy book he made what many regarded as heady claims for genetic influences in man's behavior.  Foremost among Wilson's attackers were his Harvard colleagues, palaeontologist Stephen Jay Gould and biologist Richard Lewontin.  Steven Pinker, Professor of Psychology at MIT, and author of two previously widely acclaimed books, How the Mind Works and The Language Instinct, has entered the fray again with a hard-hitting refutation of the behaviorists' tabula rasa in his recently published The Blank Slate:  The Modern Denial of Human Nature.  His main point is that the social science establishment has stressed environmental factors to the near total exclusion of our genetic legacy.  Pinker's efforts to set things right have not gone unchallenged.  His book, albeit written mostly for the general public, has drawn both strong praise and stinging criticism from his academic critics.  His thesis is strongly argued; his style is felicitous.  I recommend it highly. A better beginning on sociobiology would be hard to find.

Old-timers will recall that about 2˝ years ago Dr. Greg Francois, Chairman of the TCU Philosophy Department, spoke to us on the theme "sociobiology".  Pinker's earlier books were among those he recommended we read.

HoFW Events

HoFW Picnic

The next HoFW meeting will be a picnic at Trinity Park June 22 at 2:00 p.m.  Russell Eleven will reserve a table and signs will be placed in the park to guide members to the correct spot.  Bring your own food and drink.   Let's try for a good turnout to celebrate the summer solstice.


July Evolution Studies

The next installment of the Evolution series will be Wednesday, July 9, from 7-9:15pm  at Westside UU Church.


July Meeting

The next regular HoFW meeting will be July 15 at West Side Unitarian Church.  Our own Dick Trice is the featured speaker.  Mark the occasion down in big red letters on your calendar.

Board Meeting

The next quarterly meeting of the Board of Directors is set for July 14, 2003 at the home of Secretary Reed Bilz.

August Evolution Studies

The August installment of the Evolution series will be Wednesday, August 13, from 7-9:15pm  at Westside UU Church.

August HoFW Meeting

The regular HoFW meeting will be Tuesday, August 19 at West Side Unitarian Church.  Speaker TBA.



Chairman and Webmaster: Russell Elleven, 6120 Comfort Dr.,
Fort Worth TX 76132; 817-370-2171;
Vice Chair and Newsletter Editor: Jim Cheatham, 1582 CR 2730,

Glen Rose, TX  76043; (254) 797-0277;

Secretary: Reed Bilz, 6316 Walburn Ct., Fort Worth 76133;
Treasurer: Dolores Ruhs, 1036 Hilltop Pass, Benbrook 76126-3848;
Immediate Past Chair: Mike Haney, 924 Roaring Springs Rd.,
Fort Worth 76114; Ph. 817-737-7047;
Past Chairman and Programs Director: Jeff Rodriguez,
4901 Bryce Ave., #5, Fort Worth TX 76102; 817-732-4235;


Call to Members

Do you have an idea, event, or opinion that you’d like presented in the newsletter?  Did you find an error?  Has your address changed?  E-mail address changing?  Would you like to subscribe/unsubscribe to the e-mail newsletter?  Send your request to Michael Rivera.