Deities & Dump Trucks

God threw a dump truck at me on Wednesday. Luckily, God apparently has lousy aim and the dump truck landed in the ditch beside me, leaving my little civic-hybrid and all people involved entirely uncrumpled.

Some might suggest that instead of attacking me, God saved me by sending the dump truck into the ditch instead of into my bumper. However, it doesn’t seem quite fair to always be giving God the benefit of the doubt by attributing the miracles to him while denying his involvement in misfortune. As a dirty atheist, I certainly haven’t been racking up “divine intervention” points. This was most likely an act of divine spite gone bad due to inadequate warm-up time in the bullpen.

On the bright side, I think I might have found a new angle for marketing my car. Perhaps I’ll have more luck selling the Honda Civic Hybrid with Divinely-Thrown Dump Truck Dodging Powers. Anyone want to buy a “magic” car?

Is coffee dangerous after all?

After reading all of the studies about the potential health benefits and downfalls of coffee, I apparently subconsciously decided to conduct my own study this morning. My findings were this: espresso, when applied directly to the left hand, appears to have no health benefits. In fact, scalding one's skin could arguably have a negative effect on one's health. Based on this experiment, I’d suggest that espresso continue to be ingested through the mouth rather than applied to the skin. Others are welcome to repeat this experiment to assess the validity of my results, but I’d recommend that you use someone else (preferably someone you don’t like) as a test subject rather than applying the espresso to your own hand. Ouch.

Sacrificing for the Relationship

Many moons ago, I dated a vegetarian. Many moons ago, I was a bloodthirsty meat-eater. But, I was also a hormone-crazed young man, so whatever she wanted was fine with me. No meat? I'll deal. So I sacrificed.

These days, I'm a vegetarian. This actually makes things easier. I'm still in the minority on other things though. I'm an atheist. I have to steer clear of those catholic school girls. (also because I'm atheist). So I sacrifice. Actually, that has worked out with my wonderful current significant other. She's great. atheist, vegetarian, and sometimes, a Catholic school girl. Life is good...

I guess I wouldn't be blogging if everything was good. See, here's the deal. Sometimes, I need a pencil, detergent, some Wheaties, a bike chain, the new Economist magazine, two staples, tires for the truck, and a wireless router. Back in the old days, I would set out for the one-stop shopping paradise: Wal*Mart. I love me some Wal*Mart. Everything I ever wanted and didn't know it. Awesome.

However, apparently, my new girl is a NonWal*Martitarian. Just my luck. So now I sacrifice. Sometimes I have to go to two, three, or even four different stores to shop. It's tough, but these are the tradeoffs I have to make.

Abject Disappointment with my 24 Hours of Theism

Dear Bible ministry of prayer people,

A few days ago, I received an envelope from you containing the following objects: a paper prayer mat, a cheerfully underlined “God’s Holy Blessing” type letter, and a page of testimonies from those who followed your instructions and received either large amounts of money or other blessings (mostly large amounts of money).

This was not, however, the first time that I have been thus selected. I received my first prayer mat and associated papers in my mailbox approximately five years ago. I was quite surprised to learn God was planning on bestowing such wonders upon an atheist. However, the lure of financial gain and other holy treasures gave me pause, and I decided to give this “believing” stuff a try, at least for the 24 hour period specified in your letter. I followed your instructions and happily awaited my rewards.

I must say I was sorely disappointed for my effort, and feel that God must not, indeed, be as interested in bestowing his glory upon me as you led me to believe. I shall outline my disappointments for you, so you may fully understand the degree of God’s failure to meet my needs. First, I must call your attention to a section of page two of your letter. It reads:

Pray for my family and me for…

( ) My Soul
( ) A Closer Walk with Jesus

etc, etc… a bunch of other stuff that, as a nontheistic sort, didn’t interest me so much… but then….

( ) Confusion In My Home

!!!!!

I was terribly excited to see that I could ask the Lord for confusion in my home, something that I’m sure everyone covets (or maybe just prays for, seeing as coveting tends to be on the no no list). However, after dutifully checking the box and sending the letter back, I find that my household situation has only gotten less confusing! With the departure of a significant other (now an ex-significant other), his mistress, and his dog almost three years ago, I find myself in a significantly less confusing and generally more peaceful household. Why would God so ignore my pleas for chaos? WHY?

As for financial gain, with the said departure of ex, I find myself with $30,000 of student loan debt. Seeing as I did not have $30,000 of student loan debt three years ago, I must only conclude that either God hates me (this would really be rather harsh, as I did return the highly valuable paper prayer mat you enclosed with your last letter), or God has trouble telling the difference between positive and negative numbers. As a math tutor, I would be happy to help with the latter, but not if I would be smote for my efforts. Just how much pride cometh before fall? Does the joy that comes from possessing a more thorough knowledge of integers than God count as undue pride?

I digress. After my fruitless attempts at following your instructions, I think it’s time to resort to new methods of persuasion. Thus, I shall hold your prayer mat hostage until God does one of the following: (a) grants me my two (just two! I’m not greedy!) wishes of financial gain and household confusion (b) publicly admits that he doesn’t exist (c) signs up for math tutoring. Under the circumstances, I feel my requests are perfectly reasonable. I shall be eagerly awaiting God’s reply.

Yours truly,

Disappointed Ohio Atheist

Leading Evidence the Universe Wasn’t Intelligently Designed

1. Pi isn’t three. If the universe were intelligently designed, not only would certain bible verses imply that pi is three, but it actually WOULD be three, rather than a student-baffling irrational number.

2. Atheists exist. As one of those with less “god gene” than others, I often marvel at the fact that if there were an intelligent designer, he did a darn poor job of designing me (and many others) as good little believers. Want people to acknowledge your divine presence? Design them in a way that encourages such! If I had a marquee on my index finger that constantly explained to me the wonders of the divine world, I’d be far more convinced.

3. London, England is realllllly far away from Columbus, Ohio. Pfff. Why would this be? A god with sense would realize that those from the Midwest clearly need regular excursions to London, and thus would have placed them in closer proximately. Same with Antarctica and the Caribbean. Clearly, these are compliments to one another and should be within walking distance so when one gets sick of one climate, one can visit the other.

4. Women don’t come with a mute button. (blinks) Wait. Not only did I definitely NOT come up with that last one, but the creator of that last sentence will certainly be sleeping on the couch for at least a month. Let me replace it with: if there were an intelligent designer, men with a predilection towards making comments such as the one above would have mechanical devices in their heads that would allow their significant others to shock them when they said such. (nods) Much better.

5. Men have no vibrating genitals. None. How ridiculous and poorly designed is that? Clearly, if we were designed, the designer either wasn’t omnipotent or wasn’t benevolent. Either way--- a ridiculous oversight!

Okay, so, title not withstanding, these might not be the leading reasons why the universe couldn’t possibly be intelligently designed. Want to explore some other reasons? Check out Wikipedia’s Argument from poor design. It’s very remotely possible that their reasons are a bit more scientific than mine. Remotely.

Deer, Oh Dear

On my way from work to tango yesterday, I managed to hit a deer. For over four years, I lived in the middle of the woods where deer and other various critters abound, yet managed to never hit one. Really. I even dodged toads in rainy weather. Then, on the edge of the city I now live in, BOOM, a deer! On my car! Ek!

Okay, I’m done whining. However, I see this as a serious drain on my “getting what is coming to me” fund and thus require a Democratic sweep at tomorrow’s election to make up for the physical (well, to my car and the deer) and emotional (ahhh!) trauma of last night. (nods) All interested higher powers should take note and act accordingly. If Democrats do win both the House and the Senate, it shall be known throughout the land that sacrificing a deer (and an insurance record) is the proper way to metaphysically rig an election.

Update: Don’t Throw Away Your Holy Water Yet!

Below is Anton’s analysis of why Costas Efthimiou’s mathematical proof (a few posts down) of the impossibility of vampires is terribly flawed. It was just too amusing to waste away as a simple comment.

Fine, fine, let's play along.

What could be holding down vampiric reproduction? A lower percentage of victims becoming vampires, certainly--maybe most just die, or recover after looking pale and consumptive for a few days. But that would only decrease the natural reproductive rate, and the population would still increase exponentially...we need density-dependent effects.

Perhaps the per-vampire vampirization rate decreases as the number of vampires increases. For one thing, it makes it more likely that several vampires would happen to bite the same person each month (assuming the bites aren't individually fatal), thus only producing one new vampire instead of several. Also, any vampire-resistance alleles are going to be selected for in the local human population, so that over time more and more people are born with an uncontrollable love of garlic, cross-shaped stigmata, etc., making them unsuitable prey.

But an increased vampire mortality (er, re-mortality) rate is probably the biggest culprit. We all know that when you put two vampires in a room for long enough, they'll probably try to kill each other. This is observable in Anne Rice novels, American movies and comic books and Japanese ones, hence must be true. Beyond casualties of direct conflict, the necessary lightless areas for daytime snoozing (warehouses, catacombs and so forth) will become overcrowded, forcing the weaker vampires to cobble together back-alley sunshades from cardboard and newspapers, only to spontaneously combust when a gust of wind or plummeting pigeon corpse lets in a few sunbeams.

Finally, exceptional levels of bloodsuckery can't fail to alert the more observant humans, and in the end warrior priests, Belmont family members, renegade half-vampires, superpowered cheerleaders and so forth will converge on the area. They'll return vampire populations to their normal levels in an orgy of violence that just barely misses the NC-13 rating (because, although people's brains are pulled out of their eye sockets in slow motion, no one is shown in the shower.)

There! I disproved his silly claim the long and rigorous way. Needless to say, with a name like "Costas Efthimiou," he's obviously just trying to cover up the existence of his fellow stalkers of the night.

(nods) I knew I was right to buy the extra-large bottle of minced garlic.

Guest Blogging & Vincent Van Goat

I’m going to be one of fiver guest bloggers at www.theatheistmama.com while Cassandra is off vacationing and meeting with Richard Dawkins on his God Delusion tour. Seeing as the closest I will get to Richard Dawkins is his appearance on the Colbert Report I recorded last night, I had the urge to be terribly jealous. I believe I have quelled said urge.

Cassandra is a member of my local humanist group and THE Atheist Mama. She’s a stay at home mom with two boys and is quite active in the online atheist community. See, I said all nice things, so I must have quelled my jealousy. Or perhaps Cassandra is just too nifty to not write nifty things about and I’m still horribly jealous. One or the other.

Anyway, as an atheist who is entirely childless, I’ve decided my main qualification to contribute to a blog entitled “The Atheist Mama” is that I formerly owned two lovely pet goats, Vincent and Thyme. Parenting “kids” of the goat variety from an atheist standpoint is, indeed, a challenge. I’m proud to say I worked hard to ensure both knew of my feelings towards religious law, and I believe they took my explanations to heart. A heartening tale: one afternoon, as I was waving around a Gideon’s while lecturing Vincent on the dangers of mixing church and state, he reached over and took a bite straight out of Leviticus! Take that vultures- and- mildew- and- the- many- sorts- of- people- you- aren’t- supposed- to- have- sex- with- related passages!

(Okay, so, the story in the above paragraph is indeed fabricated. Well, except for the part about having goats. I did have pet goats who would frequently consume paper products.)

I am no longer a “goat parent”, as they began eating my house and I was forced to give them away. I believe that giving away your kids for such reasons is generally considered poor parenting, but we all have our limits, eh? I shall still draw from my extensive goat parenting knowledge when guest blogging. Or something like that.

Above silliness aside, I’ll be posting at www.theatheistmama.com periodically from October 20th to the 29th. Please stop by!

Book Musings

Alternative titles for this post include:
- Poor Aviaa, Forced to Write About Books
- I’m Trite!
- A Careful Analysis of the Danger Posed by English Majors
- Aviaa’s Grand Rebellion!


Mr. Apostate over at Bibliography tagged me for this post. So, I reluctantly wrote about books. Poor, poor me. All of those who feel just awful that I was so targeted for such a terrible task can send donations of food, blankets, checks, and quirc... wait, I already tried that a few posts back. Never mind.

So, books!

I’m ignoring the singular implications of “a” and “one” in some answers. Ha!


1. A book that changed your life
All books change my life in one small way or another. Wasn’t that cute and trite? I’m actually not sure quite what to add to that to make it un-trite, however. It’s true. I’m trite. How annoying.


2. A book you’ve read more than once
Many of ‘em, though I “reread” more when I was in school than I do now, likely because I had more time to read back then. I read The True Confessions of Charlette Doyle more than twenty times before I left middle school (this was potentially a bit ridiculous). I’ve also reread all of Austin’s books and several of Montgomery and Wharton’s. I’m currently rereading, Lies my Teacher Told Me… I read it in high school, lost my old copy, and bought a new copy when I went to hear Loewn speak a few months back. I was properly outraged the first time I read it, but I think I’m getting more out of it this time around.


3. One book you’d want on a desert island
The Art of Pastry Making? Wait, desert, not dessert.

(ponders)

Actually, I’m going to forgo the oh-so-popular “survival guide” and say that I’d want a longish, well-written book that I could read over and over without getting terribly sick of it too soon. Anna Karenina, perhaps? It’s the only Tolstoy I’ve read, and I loved the compilation of various overlapping stories and lives. Not to mention that it certainly qualifies as longish.

When one has good literature, one doesn’t need food or shelter or any of that crap! (she types as she eats a burrito in her climate controlled office)


4. One book that made you giddy

Most recently, On Beauty by Zadie Smith. The book was layers of well-crafted metaphor combined with exquisite detail. I found myself wanting to swoon with readerly lust at several points during the book. Good political writing also frequently leaves me giddy. Actually, almost anything well-written makes me giddy. What can I say? I’m just that easy.

This is one of the reasons I can never date an English major... he or she could walk away with my money (not much), books (loads), and other random items (lots of those too) and I’d be left dazed and dazzled with only memories of onomatopoeic witty quips.


5. One book you wish that had been written

I don’t think I’ve ever come across a topic for a book that wasn’t written that I desperately wanted to read. There are so many books out there already! Or, perhaps I’m just being unoriginal again. (sighs despondently)


6. One book that made you sob

I don’t think a book has ever made me cry, though many have left me quite sad.

7. One book you wish had never been written

(shrugs) Whatever I put down here, I’d likely feel bad about writing it later. I'm not sure that the books are the problem. Don’t misuse ‘em, and I won’t feel the urge to wish them out of existence.


8. One book you’re currently reading

Lies My Teacher Told Me (for the second time), Global Ethics 101 (a compilation of interviews from guest lecturers at the Harvard class of that name– I’d highly recommend it!), and Apartment Therapy (bad non-fiction is my bad-TV substitute). I seem to be reading no fiction books currently, which is odd, as I’m usually in the middle of one.


9. One book you’ve been meaning to read

(coughs) Soooo many. I haven’t read about half of my collection (It’s not an insignificant collection, either. My books are lined in book-case fashion around my office where the floor meets the wall- they cover about 3/5 of the total perimeter. As you can tell by my highly creative method of describing my book quantity, I’m feeling a bit too lazy to count them), yet I continue to acquire more. Snoow and a tango-friend also both gave me lists of recommended books I still want to work though. Ah! So many books! Such awful pressure!

My next read is How We Believe by Michael Shermer.

****

I’m tagging snoow and Jess, two people with whom I love to discuss books. On the downside, snoow’s blog is written in French, so I can’t actually read it. On the bright side, his English writing skills are better than many native speakers’, so perhaps he’ll tell me what it all means. I’m tagging Ben and mesoforte as part of grand scheme to encourage/force them to update their blogs. I’m also going to tag... hey, where does it say we have to tag five? Everyone is tagging five! I’m going to be terribly unconventional and only tag four. So ha! (sticks out her tongue in a grand, highly-significant act of rebellion)

Lakes & and Temporary Lack of Me

I’m in Minnesota for the weekend, so my replies to emails, posts, etc. might be somewhat slow until Tuesday. My journey began somewhat forebodingly, as I managed to spend the first planned hour of driving lost in my home town while searching for a Chipotle. However, after this I did succeed in driving with relatively little trouble and look forward to viewing many, many lakes this weekend. Obviously, some higher power must have moved the Chipotle yesterday. I’m quite grateful he/she/it didn’t decide to move Minnesota as well, or I truly would have been in trouble. If he/she/it had moved Minnesota, would the lakes have still been here?

So.. what IS atheism?

After Zeiger’s article describing atheism as a religion (as noted, it’s not), I was thrilled to find an excellent article just a few days later refuting many of the common (incorrect) claims about atheism.

Common Misconceptions About Atheists and Atheism

David Gleeson
August 10, 2006

(skip a few paragraphs)

Atheists, therefore, do not positively assert that gods do not exist. Atheists simply withhold belief in said gods because the evidence is not sufficient to warrant the belief. This is not to say that there isn't sufficient reason to believe that certain gods do not exist. There is. But to categorically deny the existence of all gods would require a leap of faith that is anathema to a true atheist. Atheism requires no such leap.

(skip a few paragraphs)

Atheism, as noted above, is nothing but withheld belief. It does not take faith to have a non-belief. If I don't believe that Elvis is still alive, I am not practicing an anti-Elvis faith. If I withhold belief in Santa Claus, I am not a member of a Santa-less church. When an atheist says, "I don't believe in the Christian God", she is merely saying that the evidence for belief is insufficient. It is the same type of withheld belief that a Christian practices with regard to the beliefs of Muslims, Jews and other non-Christians.

This article isn’t really new stuff to most atheists; we have experience arguing that atheism is not a religion and explaining how a-theism isn’t equivalent to a-morality*. However, I was impressed by the well-worded, non-combative nature of Gleeson’s article and enjoyed reading it for its style and logic.

Gleeson also writes:

Some atheists may have had such [bad childhood] experiences, but I can assure you this is not the case in most situations. For me and for most atheists, the journey from belief to non-belief is simply a gradual process of discovery that eventually leads to God/gods becoming unnecessary.

This is very true. My “journey from belief to non-belief” was as simple as realizing atheism is an option. I was raised a Methodist and rarely saw or heard about people who didn’t believe in a god until high school. Believing in god wasn't a question; it was the standard. Years later, I find it far less “traumatizing” to be atheistic than theistic; I seem to have been born “aweless” (possibly without ”the god gene"**), and a world without a god feels comfortable and realistic.

Gleeson also has a blog that I haven’t had a chance to read yet. However, he appears to mock Ann Coulter in one of his recent posts, so I’d imagine it has to be decent.




* I really want a button that says, “A-Theism (not equal to sign) A-Morality”

** The paragraph at the bottom of the Wikipedia page I linked to reads:

Hamer responded that the existence of such a gene would not be incompatible with the existence of a personal God: "Religious believers can point to the existence of god genes as one more sign of the creator's ingenuity—a clever way to help humans acknowledge and embrace a divine presence."

I can’t resist pointing out that this means god must not want me as a believer, as he/she/it apparently decided to not include “the god gene” in my DNA. Another button I really, really want is, “I can’t help being an atheist… that’s just how god made me!” I apparently need a button maker.

Mexico... Maybe

I’m visiting LA and was planning to stay in Mexico this weekend. However, I seem to have left all proofs of citizenship (my passport, birth certificate, etc.) at home in Ohio. Apparently, my driver’s license, social security card, mono-lingualism, and pale, extremely sunburn prone skin don't cut it as “proof” (the second to last should certainly prove that I must be a US citizen... the last just proves that, had I been born in Mexico, I would have died of severe sun poisoning long, long ago).

I will likely still go to Mexico, if the border-guard-type people think there is a good chance of my being let back in. If I disappear, I was detained at the border. ;)

One of my atheist email correspondents and I once determined there must be a god of road trips, as there seems to be a god of pretty much everything else. This seems like an ideal time to ask others to make offerings to him/her/it... so, if you wouldn’t mind, burn gasoline, tires, or even entire cars (OSU fans and French rioters take note- you don’t have to wait for the next football game or country-wide riot!) to appease this deity enough that I’ll be allowed back into the US.


(A quick note: really, please don't actually burn anything other than mixed cds for your signficant other and possibly the love letters of your former significant other. Burning the car of your former significant other is not advised, albeit quite tempting at times.)

If life were like The Sims…

... I’d sell you these exciting, new, traditional-religious expansion packs:

(A quick note and semi-apology: yes, I was feeling particularly naughty and, yes, I agree that some of these are possibly outdated and certainly stereotypical things to write. Oh well. I do apologize. But I'm still going to post it.)


Catholic Version:
- New character: the Pope! (outfit options include a Nazi uniform)
- Birth control disabled
- A guilt meter! Keep your character’s guilt meter high enough or he’ll die!
- Historical feature: torture devices and large fires. Recreate your own Spanish Inquisition or declare your neighbors witches, burn them at the stake, and take their houses!
- Install this expansion pack with some Protestant expansion packs and your computer will crash

Protestant-Fundamentalist Version
- New character: Pat Robertson (specializes in wandering around the game, monitoring other characters’ sex lives and bragging about how many pounds he can bench press)
- Comes with a liquor store and a strip club, but characters have to ignore one another when they meet in either one
- Historical feature: gallows, used in a similar fashion as bonfires in Catholic version

Shaker Version:
- Sex disabled
- No one wants to play with you, due to feature one
- Only one character in the entire game, also due to feature one

Mormon Version:
- New character: Joseph Smith!
- Multiple wives feature, but only if you marry ‘em when they are 14 and don’t let them out of the house
- Historical feature: your characters will be regularly forced to flee whichever neighborhood they chose to inhabit

Zen Buddhist Version:
- Ships as an empty box. Don’t be alarmed or ask for your money back. Nothingness is the path to nirvana!

Jewish Version:
- Sports capabilities disabled
- All male characters must live with their mothers. Forever.
- Install this expansion with the Muslim expansion pack, and your computer will crash (Oy vey!)

Hindu Version:
- More gods than characters
- New object: a cow for every house
- Install this expansion with the Muslim expansion pack, and your computer will crash

Muslim Version:
- New Character: Mohamed (however, to avoid riots among other characters, this character is just a censored blob)
- Only one outfit/career option for women
- Install this expansion with the Hindu or Jewish expansion packs, and your computer will crash

Unitarian Universalist Version:
- Can’t decide which expansion pack to purchase? Buy all of the other expansion packs and be automatically upgraded to the UU version! We aim to please (everyone)!


Did I miss any?

It's in the Cards

I greatly dislike buying romantic greeting cards. I spent an hour this morning browsing through a sea of love, love, FOREVER, love, FOREVER, SOUL MATE, love, love, NEVERENDING LOVE, love, DESTINY, love, love, FATE, love, FOREVER. I became so sick of looking for the correct card for a significant other’s birthday that I deliberately bought a card that was all wrong and plan to cross out the parts I don’t like and replace them with new messages. I’ve also decided my skills are apparently needed in the card making business. So, here it goes... my first line of romantic greeting cards:

****
****
(front of card just has a picture of sexy lingerie)

(inside of card)
I'm just using you for sex.

****
****

(front of card)
I almost (heart) you more than I (heart) my job.

(inside of card)
Almost.

****
****

(If you’re reading this J, the above card was not intended to poke fun at you.)

****
****

(front of card)
I’ve been thinking about our relationship a lot lately...

(inside of card)
... and I’ve decided that you’re especially particularly nice.

****
****

(But yes, J, the above card was especially particularly intended to poke fun at you.)

****
****

(front of card)
I'll love you forever...

(inside of card)
... or at least until I run off with someone better.

****
****

(Road) Signs

Pennsylvania is the longest freaking state in the country. After consulting THE LONGEST LIST OF THE LONGEST STUFF AT THE LONGEST DOMAIN NAME AT LONG LAST*, I concede that I am indeed grossly exaggerating. However, after spending the majority of last Sunday merrily making my way across route 80, I make no apologies for doing so.

It wasn’t all grumbles, though. Pennsylvania has lovely mountains and reasonably frequent Taco Bells.** However, my favorite part of Pennsylvania was, by far, the excess of construction signs. Below is a reconstruction of my hastily scribbled notes describing the signs found leading up to and during just one bout of construction:

Road Work: 5 miles

Prepare to Stop!

Take a Break now at Exit 12B.

Construction: Slow Traffic

Road Work: 4 miles

Expect Delays!

Road Work: 3 miles

Right Lane Closed Ahead

Expect Delays!

Road Work: 2 miles

Construction: Slow Traffic

Rubble Strips Ahead

Road Work: 1 mile

Right Lane Closed: ½ Mile

Lane Shift: 500 ft

((Big Arrow Pointing Left))

Single Lane: 3 Miles

Emergency Pull Off: ¼ mile

Emergency Pull Off

Emergency Pull Off: ¼ mile

Emergency Pull Off

End Construction

A sign that likely should have been included for my benefit: Warning, you may crash and DIE due to attempts at writing while driving through construction.

Even with my unwise scribbling, I made it out alive and even had an epiphany***. The state of Pennsylvania should run FEMA! About three months before a major natural disaster, they’d send around postcards to all potential victims: Earthquake: 3 Months! A few weeks later: Danger, this House May End and Area will be Reduced to Rubble. A few more weeks: Earthquake: 1 Month! followed by, You should Exit This Area. Pennsylvania. FEMA. How brilliant is that?


* In case you were wondering, the longest state is Alaska. Additionally, the longest marriage was 85 years, the longest life was 128 Years, 273 Days, the longest banana split was 4.55 miles, and the longest spider 28 cm.

** An essential for the vegetarian road-tripper.

*** Okay, perhaps not an epiphany. The discovery of a somewhat clever idea, maybe. Maybe.

Bush Approves Funding for New “Walking-Only” Drivers' Education Program

Our ever-enthusiastic president has once again shown his concern for legislating the safety of the American* people with the adoption of a new “walking only” drivers' education program to replace the more traditional, tell-all programs that are already offered.

“For years now, those liberals in Congress have been radical enough to support programs educating people about so called 'safe-driving' techniques and seat-belt use. But I said, no sir, not in my god-fearing country. This is not an administration of half measures and careful thought. The only way to prevent car accidents 100% of the time is by preventing driving altogether,” Bush stated at a press conference announcing the new policy.

Supporters tout the new program as the only way to really protect the nation's teenagers. The program will not mention seat-belt use, the previous staple for keeping drivers safe, except to cite its failure rates. The creators of the new program maintain that any further discussion of that and other 'safe-driving' techniques would “only provide our teenagers with unnecessary temptation.” While it is unclear to some as to how these new programs will affect the driving skills of students should they ever end up behind the wheel, proponents of the program have assured the public that these programs will indeed make the world a better place, citing numerous articles published in renowned journals such as, “Bush's Vision of a New Nation,” and, “The Right is always Right.”

Under the new law, states will only continue to receive federal funds for roadway maintenance if they implement these new programs within the next twelve months. While there have been limited protests by lawmakers in several ill-reputed blue states, Bush dismissed these concerns as “just another attempt by those Liberals to twist my policies to fit their leftist agenda.” One such liberal lawmaker even suggested that this new policy might amount to coercion by the federal government. “That is the same leftist garbage that they gave us about similar laws encouraging states to set a nationally approved state drinking age and offer only religio… I mean, federally approved sex-ed programs. After this excellent legislation, do we still have problems with underage drinking and promiscuity? I'll let the facts speak for themselves,” responded the president.

A source in the White House, who spoke only on the condition of anonymity, revealed that the president had prayed carefully about the policy. “He told me that this policy would help bring us a bit closer to the way that God** intended us to be. After all, you don't hear about Adam and Eve using cars, now do you? If God had intended us to move around like that, he would have given us wheels instead of feet,” the source said. While Bush mentioned none of this in his speech, and in fact denied that this new program was based on any specific religion, rumors of the policy and it's positive religious** implications have been circulating among his excited followers for weeks.

“Well, I'm just so tickled pink that we have such a darling, God-fearing president in office,” gushed one fervent Bush supporter, “my darling little daughter, Peggy-Sue, wouldn't even think of doing anything as immoral as driving, but you never know what other teenagers might do if they are given too much information.”

* American referring, of course, to the country the United States of America, since we are, in fact, the only country in the entire continent worth mentioning

** God and religion referring exclusively, of course, to Protestant Christian denominations that are pro-life and anti-gay, in addition to having donated a significant sum of money to the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2004

Serendipity

1. the faculty of making fortunate discoveries by accident
2. my new favorite word

I once had a significant other who attributed our meeting* to the benevolent hands of fate. He not only told this to me, but also to my grandparents, his mother, and several friends upon recounting the circumstances of our meeting. I occasionally get the urge to call him up to ask if he still believes our meeting was fate, or if he has downgraded it to something less mystical after two successive break-ups. The urge to raise my cynical eyebrows is just barely tempered by my desire to not be a complete bitch.

Actually, the circumstances of my current relationship would weave much better into the story of a meeting destined by fate. How many vegetarian-atheist-humanist-business-oriented-not-mushy-yet-still-affectionate-ambitious-but-not-entirely-serious people can there really be in central Ohio? We met! We’ve been dating for six months! The perfect story of two people destined to be together meeting and beginning a relationship! Sounds pretty, eh?

As you might have guessed, I don’t buy it. (Could you feel the eyebrows going up?) Let’s see... fate or a divine being (or whatever) is going to go to all that trouble to bring together two people who don’t believe in fate or a divine being (or whatever)... so they can further reinforce one another’s lack of belief? Really, this seems like a pretty lousy marketing strategy to me.

Fate is creepy, as far as I’m concerned. Some omnipotent power controlling my life? No thank you! I also cheerfully reject destiny, karma, divine will, and metaphysical predestination. This isn’t to say I believe I entirely control all aspects of my life. When things work out, as they often do, I certainly don’t think it’s because I orchestrated everything perfectly- I’ve had too many moments where everything has come crashing down despite my best intentions to believe this. However, I’ve found that a blend of human action, environmental factors, and random butterfly flapping (see below), can be used to explain whatever happens in my life. Fate, while it sounds prettier, just isn’t necessary.

The world can be entirely logical and yet still seem quite random. The chaos theory is a mathematical concept that explains how it is possible to get seemingly random results from normal equations. A multitude of small occurrences can significantly affect the outcome of seemingly unrelated events. The most commonly used example is of butterflies** flapping their wings causing hurricanes in other continents, but this is fairly misleading (it wasn’t JUST the butterflies) and somewhat misses the point (no, we shouldn’t exterminate butterflies to end hurricanes). The point is, in any one event, there are many difficult-to-sort factors affecting the outcome. So, while whatever nifty or awful event COULD theoretically be entirely explained by logical forces, it's quite likely we may not have the tools/time/energy to trace all of the many causes.*** This doesn’t make the event metaphysical; it just makes it complex.

The only remaining problem: I like pretty words. While I’ve crossed fate off my list, it would be lovely to have something more elegant than “chaos” in my repertoire. Enter serendipity, “the faculty of making fortunate discoveries by accident”. Serendipity gives me an artistic sounding yet non-metaphysical way of describing what others might call fate. I can pull serendipity out when others instead throw up their hands and call in fate or a divine being (or whatever) to explain their good fortune. In fact, identifying serendipitous events is a even a faculty, meaning each time I discover something new to be excited about, I can attribute it to skill– I do love having skills. The discovery of the word serendipity was serendipitous indeed.****


* On the Internet, no less. I think that there should be a rule specifically prohibiting the attribution of anything that happens online to fate. Computers are all 1s and 0s. Contrary to what some of my more computer-obsessed friends might believe, there is little room for the divine in 1s and 0s.

** ‘cause they’re pretty

*** I apologize to any scientists who feel that I have utterly bastardized the concept of chaos theory. This is certainly a possibility. If this IS the case, I’m still going to apply whatever theory I described to my argument. Should it not already exist, I officially name this new, exciting theory Aviaa’s Theory.

**** Meta-serendipity?

Invisible Horses

I lost a horse yesterday. Yes, a horse. I realize horses are large and therefore seem as if they should be rather hard to lose. To make matters worse, this particular horse was lost in a fenced-in field. Theoretically, said horse could have been hiding behind a barn, also in the field. However, I choose to believe this horse was not hiding, but was instead rendered invisible for the time I spent pacing the field looking for it (trailed by another, visible horse, who was trying to nibble on my hair). In the end, after concluding the horse was gone, putting away the saddle, bridle, brushes, etc., and starting to drive away, whatever force had chosen to hide the horse from me (“tee hee hee,” I'm sure it said) decided to reveal it again. I ended up going to back and riding, grateful all the while that the people I regularly borrow the horse from weren't home to watch me look oh-so-very silly.

Fairy Tales and Catcalls

“That fairy tale about gay marriage has sparked a civil rights debate in Massachusetts, the only U.S. state where gays and lesbians can legally wed, after a teacher read the story to a classroom of seven year olds without warning parents first.”

“A parents' rights group said on Monday it may sue the public school in the affluent suburb of Lexington, about 12 miles west of Boston, where a teacher used the book "King & King" in a lesson about different types of weddings.”

“"It's just so heinous and objectionable that they would do this," said Brian Camenker, president of the Parents Rights Coalition, a conservative Massachusetts-based advocacy group.”

- Original Article

The words heinous and objectionable shouldn’t be used in that particular order. Heinous is a word with much stronger connotations than objectionable and should therefore either be used on its own or after a weaker word, in manner of a dramatic build-up. For example: I found the reading of that book objectionable.... heinous, even! Objectionable following heinous is anticlimactic.

Grammatical objections aside, I still have trouble understanding the label of “heinous” (from what I can gather, the princes didn’t even have graphic sex at the end of the fairy tale). Perhaps I missed out on the “having-problems-with-homosexuality” gene along with the religious gene. Oh well.

****

I have a new proposition: instead of banning fairy tales with homosexual themes, we should ban college students from revising fairy tales to fit catcalls.

I have a somewhat misguided sense of distance and thus ended up parking about seven blocks from the milonga (social tango dance) I attended Saturday night. Generally, I’m not terribly concerned about walking around cities late at night. I’ve been lost in Amsterdam’s red light district in the early am hours and actually felt quite safe. This could have been due to the fact that everyone was ogling the half naked women through red-lit windows, rather than the fully-clothed (and not for sale) me. Then again, other cities from Paris to London to Boston have left me similarly undaunted, so perhaps I just lean towards recklessly carefree when it comes to wandering cities at night.

Saturday night, I realized that Columbus feels at least three times as scary as any of those other cities. This is possibly due to a lack of cute foreign or Bostonian accents. More likely, it’s because Columbus actually is scarier than the other cities. Regardless, walking down poorly lit streets in a somewhat saucy skirt and heels late at night likely wasn’t the wisest course of action, but I really hate turning around (it feels defeatist) so I kept going.

In the end, nothing really scary happened, and I now have a reason to bitch about the modification of fairy tales (just like the Parents Rights Coalition guy! I shall be a conservative in no time!). On my way to the milonga, I was whistled at by a car full of college-age boys, one of whom yelled, “hey, I love that Cinderella thing you’ve got going on. Come over here!” I’m going to assume the “Cinderella” comment was in regard to the extra pair of shoes (dance shoes) I was carrying. However, were I attempting to mimic Cinderella, I would have had in my possession only ONE shoe, rather than a total of four shoes. I suppose I could have walked up to their car to explain to them the inherent silliness of their comment, but I decided an explanation probably wasn’t what they were looking for and continued on to the milonga instead.

It seems the quality of pick-up lines is going down the drain. Whatever happened to “if I told you that you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me?”, “I like your shirt, but it would look better on my bedroom floor”, or even just a well-timed, drawn-out whistle? Come now, surely you guys can do better than inaccurate fairy-tale references. I find your practices heinous... and objectionable!

Atheism is good enough for me…

Atheist: One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God, one who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

I’m not advocating fanatical disbelief. Certainly, were I magically summoned in front of a god, I wouldn’t close my eyes, cover my ears, and yell, “I can’t see you!” in manner of a two year old. In fact, were he/she/it to do something conclusive like cure world hunger or turn my house into a pillar of salt, I might actually believe I wasn’t experiencing a caffeine-withdrawal induced hallucination* and was instead viewing the powers of a divine being. See? I’ve left open a door for any god interested in developing in a personal relationship with me (interested gods: please see ad below). However, I’m sure enough that this won’t happen to label myself as an atheist rather than just an agnostic. I’m agnostic about god in the same way as I’m agnostic about unicorns, flying pigs, and faithful men**.

* If you doubt the plausibility of this, then you haven’t experienced the true powers of caffeine, and it would be utterly impossible for me to put the glory of such into words.

**Yes, yes- I was just kidding with that last one.