My ultimatum to myself: write, or face cardboard boxes

A coworker informed me that Massachusetts is just as religious as the Midwest. Clearly, that coworker has not spent a substantial amount of time in the Midwest. After living in Ohio for 24 years, the past six months of living just a few minutes walk from Harvard University has felt practically like a different world, one in which atheism… well… doesn’t actually matter so much.

Sure, sure—there is religion in Boston. However, it feels more like the free-form Western European variety of religion where some people are religious, some not, and only a relatively small percent of the population actually wants to shove their religion down your throat. Compare this to Ohio, where atheism was such an oddity that I was included in a newspaper article about local atheists, and where, on my last day as a tutor, the mother of one of my clients spent twenty minutes explaining to me that god had asked her to witness to me because he wants to be a part of my life. (Note to god: asking a friend to ask someone out for you is soooo middle school. In the future, I’d advise both god and middle school students to try direct communication for better results.)

The only bad part of the move? No inspiration. Since packing up myself and my books and transporting us to Boston, I’ve been horribly lax about writing in general and blogging specifically. I think the best solution would be for me to move back to Ohio, thus recreating the religious tension necessary for good atheist blogging. However, since I’m not actually interested in moving, my second-best solution is to just sit down at the darn computer and start typing. Regularly. We’ll see how that works. If I’m unsuccessful, please start sending new cardboard boxes for my books.

(Okay, so I have absolutely no intention of enforcing this threat to myself. I (heart) MA.)

Brazil to subsidize birth control pills

SAO PAULO, Brazil - Just weeks after Pope Benedict XVI denounced government-backed contraception in a visit to Brazil, the president unveiled a program Monday to provide cheap birth control pills at 10,000 drug stores across the country.

(applauds) If this is the effect the Pope has on the countries he visits, I encourage him to tour widely and often.

"The church favors responsible parenthood, with parents using natural (birth control) methods," said Tempesta, who oversees the church in the northeastern state of Para.

- Brazil to subsidize birth control pills

As the joke goes, the Catholic Church allows women to use mathematics to prevent pregnancy, but neither physics nor chemistry. "Natural Family Planning" has always struck me as a ridiculously contrived loophole. I once heard it explained that the method leaves open the opportunity for God to "give" you a child, if he so wishes. I suppose that if I were to believe in an omnipotent deity who reputably once managed to impregnate a virgin, I'd likely trust that neither a condom nor a pill full of hormones would be likely to thwart him. Perhaps I’m over-estimating omnipotence.

(cross posted at The Atheist Mama)

The Friendly Atheist... publishes a book!

I Sold My Soul on eBay, written by Hemant Mehta of Friendlyatheist.com, will be available April 17th, 2007. Hemant is fabulous; I had the chance to hear him speak briefly as well as talk to him in more depth at meals at the recent American Atheists convention in Seattle. I’ve preordered his book on Amazon.com and hope to provide more informed recommendation (of the book, rather than just of Hemant) once I’ve had a chance to read it.

The Watchmaker’s Apprentice part 2

Previously, we determined that you had been stranded on a beach, found a few watches, made a few religions on your own, and then found a tribe and religion that offered some comfort and assistance. The story was the backdrop for examining the Watchmaker argument: Given Design. Therefore Creator.

It might be interesting to take a native’s perspective as they investigate the outsider’s magical “watch.” You, now the native, see the magical moving watch of your new friend. You determine that this watch, being not alive, must have a creator like the creator of your boats and bows. Given Design. Therefore Creator.

You determine that to make such a small, yet powerful object, this creator must have amazing and magical powers. Given Design. Therefore Powerful Creator.

You ask your friend about the watch and he provides you with a book. He declares it to be the watchmakers manual and from it you can learn what you need to know. Given Writings. Therefore Divine Word.

You can not actually read the book, so your friend ‘helps’ you. He explains some of the desires of the watchmaker, such as daily winding and protection from the rain. He also explains the location of the watchmaker, a place called “China”, and that the watchmaker has the power to make this and many other items. You fiercely follow the ‘user instructions’, worried that you will miss out on gifts or suffer due to breaking the watchmakers rules. Given Paranoia. Therefore Dogma.

You tell some of your friends of the benefits and “other items” that the watchmaker can provide. You tell them of the inviolable “usage instructions” your friend has translated for you. That they may also get benefits of the watchmaker if they follow the “usage instructions.” Some of your native friends are impressed and come to see the watch. Given Promises. Therefore Followers.

After a short time, your native friends appreciate the knowledge that you are bringing. They are happy about the promise of new gifts and often come to you for advice and counsel about what the watchmaker would want. Given Followers. Therefore Clergy.

Your friend has noticed what you are doing and explains that you may have misunderstood. After some time, you think you understand. You are sorry about missing out and go to tell some of the natives that you misunderstood. The ‘user instructions’ and the watch are not really so great. They are angry and want some of what you promised. Although you try to explain, some of them refuse to believe you and hold onto the “old ways.” Given Hope. Therefore Delusion.

Some of your native friends never give up about the watchmaker. Your and your outside friend and many of the others wonder at how they could still be confused, but they seem happy and so you leave them alone. After a time, you and your outsider friend pass on, but the promises of the watchmaker do not. A future expedition finds the remote island. There are standard divine statues, but they seem to have watches carved into their arms. The natives perform a daily prayer ritual called “winding” and tell of a great messiah who will one day return to take them all to salvation in China. Given Time. Therefore Legend.

One of the members of the expedition explains that you can go to a place called heaven if you put water on your head and just believe really hard, but the natives weren’t nearly gullible enough to believe that.

[Although I wrote this from scratch, I was quickly shown a passage in Dawkins’ book The God Delusion. This passage talks about a phenomenon called “Cargo Cults” in which natives deify sailors and the possessions they bring on cargo ships. In case you thought this was implausible, well apparently it does happen.]

The Watchmaker's Apprentice part 1

Let us assume for a moment that you, the reader, are stranded on a desert island. You see design in the world and theorize that, yes, there must indeed be a higher power responsible for this design. You have determined in fact that there is a higher being, although you are still a little unclear about the details. Given Design. Therefore Creator. You have extrapolated this principle from watch to universe. Let us return to the details and theorize about what practical conclusions one might draw, and how curious these conclusions might seem.

You are stranded on a beach and see a watch, concluding that there must be other intelligent life. You come closer only to find that the watch is actually a shiny rock on some kelp that gave the appearance of a rock. Your expectations and prior knowledge led you to jump to a conclusion prior to verifying evidence. Given Nothing. Therefore Creator.

Later, you have been without food and are in dire straights. You find another watch, concluding again that there must be civilization. Later, after continuing your search, you find food, eat, and regain your wits. You find the ‘watch’ was actually just a rock. Given Dire Straits. Therefore Creator.

Later, your newly-found food supply dwindles and you again find yourself in dire straights. In your state, you determine that it must have been the fake watch that led you to your initial success in finding food. You return to the ‘watch’, pick it up, and carry it with you believing that this watch will assist you. Given Coincidence. Therefore Personal Creator.

You later find food and a native tribe. They are tentative, but you move closer to their leader. They see on your arm a real watch. They see its hands moving for no apparent reason and determine you to be a magical being. Given Unknown. Therefore Powerful Creator.

As they bow and show deference, you unfortunately trip and fall on your face, showing your lack of divinity. They immediately drag you to their Gods, one of which is a body with a large eye, and the other of which is a body with a head. With their spears, they indicate clearly that you should worship. Given Threats. Therefore Worship. And Given Outsiders. Therefore Assimilation.

You defer, and, given no other alternative, you live with the tribe rather happily for a period of time. You adopt their customs, including worship. The comfort provided by their society gives you ample incentive to allow them the superstitions you know are wrong. Given Habit. Therefore Religion And Given Comfort. Therefore Compliance.

How many times has this played out in the past? Combinations of assumed magic, the unknown, coincidence, and assimilation all leading towards a pattern of organized religion. Independents wandered through difficult surroundings with little understanding of the world and happy for any opportunity to band together with others for protection.

Next, we'll examine the Watchmaker argument from the native’s perspective.

Oh Zeus!

ATHENS, Greece - After all these centuries, Zeus may have a few thunderbolts left. A tiny group of worshippers plans a rare ceremony Sunday to honor the ancient Greek gods, at Athens' 1,800-year-old Temple of Olympian Zeus. Greece's Culture Ministry has declared the central Athens site off-limits, but worshippers say they will defy the decision.

"These are our temples and they should be used by followers of our religion," said Doreta Peppa, head of the Athens-based Ellinais, a group campaigning to revive the ancient religion.

(skip a few paragraphs)

Greece's archaic religion is believed to have several hundred official followers, mainly middle-aged and elderly academics, lawyers and other professionals. They typically share a keen interest in ancient history and a dislike for the Greek Orthodox Church.

(skip a few paragraphs)

Peppa's group, dedicated to reviving worship of the 12 ancient gods, was founded last year and won a court battle for official state recognition of the ancient Greek religion.

Those who seek to revive the ancient Greek religion are split into rival organizations which trade insults over the Internet. Peppa's group is at odds with ultra-nationalists who view a revival as a way to protect Greek identity from foreign influences.

They can't even agree on a name for the religion: One camp calls it Ancient-Religion, another Hellenic Religion.

- Zeus worshippers demand access to temple

Workplace expression

The growth of diversity in the workplace, along with the influence of religion in America, has brought faith -- once as taboo in the office as talk of sex and politics -- to the job, experts say.

"Work is invading people's personal lives, so people are bringing more of their personal lives to the workplace," said Paula Brantner, director of Workplace Fairness, a Washington, D.C.-based group that promotes employee rights.

Religious expression at work may take the form of affinity groups or faith networks, prayers at business meetings or the citation of Biblical verse in office memos.

If people are going to be permitted to pray religion during business meetings, I certainly think I should be permitted to have sex on the conference tables during business meetings. I’d only be bringing my personal life to the workplace because work is invading my personal life… my personal life just involves less praying and more ‘laying.’

"We have an increase in the number of employers and employees who are choosing not to hide their faith," said Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute in Sacramento, California, which provides legal defense for religious freedoms.

- Religion finds firm footing in some offices

There is a difference between praying during business meetings and not “hiding” your faith. There are many things that I don’t hide that I wouldn’t do at business meetings (having sex on conference tables apparently isn’t one of these things). Being openly Christian is one thing; posting your Christianity at the top of business memos is another. You’re Christian. You like to pray. You like the Bible. We got it.

I don’t think any of this is a direct violation of Title 7 unless it affects hiring and promotions. However, I’d be much less likely to work for a company that had say, Bible study on its premises. Being a non-Christian minority in setting where openly Christian practices are acceptable makes it more difficult to navigate networking and promotions—somewhat like being a woman navigating the “old boys club” of some larger corporations. It’s not that religion itself makes me uncomfortable. I live in the Midwest of the United States. Religion, frankly, is all around. However, it would be lovely to keep theism entirely unlinked to my wages.

Back-Room Bones

Famed paleoanthropologist Richard Leakey is giving no quarter to powerful evangelical church leaders who are pressing Kenya's national museum to relegate to a back room its world-famous collection of hominid fossils showing the evolution of humans' early ancestors.

(skip a few paragraphs)

The museum's collections include the most complete skeleton yet found of Homo erectus, the 1.7-million-year-old Turkana Boy unearthed by Leakey's team in 1984 near Lake Turkana in northern Kenya.

The museum also holds bones from several specimens of Australopithecus anamensis, believed to be the first hominid to walk upright, four million years ago. Together the artifacts amount to the clearest record yet discovered of the origins of Homo sapiens.

Leaders of Kenya's Pentecostal congregation, with six million adherents, want the human fossils de-emphasized.

"The Christian community here is very uncomfortable that Leakey and his group want their theories presented as fact," said Bishop Bonifes Adoyo, head of the largest Pentecostal church in Kenya, the Christ is the Answer Ministries.

- Scientist Fights Church Effort to Hide Museum's Pre-Human Fossils

Well, Martin Luther is on your side at least: "Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has: it never comes to the aid of spritual things, but--more frequently than not --struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God." Definitely... hiding the evidence in a back room is the way to go. (nods) Wouldn't want anyone to use that nasty reason stuff.

Mercy Me!

He said that it was his belief that God first intervened to spare his life in 1973, amid rioting in Belfast, when he found himself stranded with two of his men in a Loyalist paramilitary area.

A hail of gunfire cut down the other soldiers, fatally injuring one, while Sir Richard emerged unscathed.

The second incident took place during a mine-clearing operation in South Armagh in 1975, when an explosion killed his company commander, Major Peter Willis. Sir Richard had been walking alongside him moments before but had stopped to study an aerial photograph.

The general's third brush with death came a few months later in Germany when he fell asleep at the wheel of a car but was fortunate to veer off into a field rather than into a steep bank and wood which bordered the route 200 yards further on.

"On three occasions, God had shown me his love and his protection and had challenged me to make a complete commitment to him, but on each occasion I had failed to make the response that he wanted from me," said Sir Richard, who is vice-president of the Officers' Christian Union.

- God saved me from death three times, says Army chief

Goodness. Apparently, god wasn't so fond of the two who were killed in his presence.

The thing about near-death experiences is that the ones who live to tell about it... are... well... the ones who live to tell about it. It's much harder for the dead to lament god's lack of mercy.

Knock-knock!

An elderly lady was well-known for her faith and for her boldness in talking about it. She would stand on her front porch and shout "PRAISE THE LORD!"

Next door to her lived an atheist who would get so angry at her proclamations he would shout, "There ain`t no Lord!!"

Hard times set in on the elderly lady, and she prayed for GOD to send her some assistance. She stood on her porch and shouted "PRAISE THE LORD. GOD I NEED FOOD!! I AM HAVING A HARD TIME. PLEASE LORD, SEND ME SOME GROCERIES!!"

The next morning the lady went out on her porch and noted a large bag of groceries and shouted, "PRAISE THE LORD."

The neighbor jumped from behind a bush and said, "Aha! I told you there was no Lord. I bought those groceries, God didn`t."

The lady started jumping up and down and clapping her hands and said, "PRAISE THE LORD. He not only sent me groceries, but He made the devil pay for them. PRAISE THE LORD!"

In my last post, I promised to start this post with a knock-knock joke. As you have likely realized, the above joke is not of the knock-knock variety. There is a knock-knock joke in the post... but not until the very end. The above joke was included to tide you over and prevent unnecessary incidences of bad-joke withdrawal.

(clears throat)

Regardless, speaking of believing what we want to believe:

The Rev. Ron Carlson, a popular author and lecturer, sometimes presents his audience with two stories and asks them whether it matters which one is true.

In the secular account, "You are the descendant of a tiny cell of primordial protoplasm washed up on an empty beach 3 1/2 billion years ago. You are a mere grab bag of atomic particles, a conglomeration of genetic substance. You exist on a tiny planet in a minute solar system in an empty corner of a meaningless universe. You came from nothing and are going nowhere."

In the Christian view, by contrast, "You are the special creation of a good and all-powerful God. You are the climax of His creation. Not only is your kind unique, but you are unique among your kind. Your Creator loves you so much and so intensely desires your companionship and affection that He gave the life of His only son that you might spend eternity with him."

First of all… STRAW MAN and FALSE DICHOTOMY!

(blinks and readjusts self to former state of calm dignity)

Truth isn’t a popularity contest. Sure, it sounds pretty to live in a world where meaning and goodness are predefined by a wrinkled man with a beard. However, wanting to believe something (i.e. your pet bunny Foo Foo will never die) doesn’t make it an accurate representation of reality (rabbits have a life-span of approximately eight years and, to date, there has never been a recorded instance of an immortal rabbit).

I have no problem with the concept of making meaning. It’s like the life-review equivalent of good writing techniques; you sort through the mess of details of an event to identify, define, and present the essentials. However, when we decide try to randomly ascribe cause to our selected sentences, we’ve crossed the line from good technique to bad logic.

The article quoted above then moves to the ever-popular hobby of atheist bashing:

Across the globe, religious faith is thriving and religious people are having more children. By contrast, atheist conventions only draw a handful of embittered souls, and the atheist lifestyle seems to produce listless tribes that cannot even reproduce themselves.

Have you ever been to an atheist convention? I have, and between the engaging speakers, dinners with crowds of participants, and dancing at a three level club, there wasn’t time to be embittered. Sure, sure, atheists should continue to work to improve their general PR. However, the false idea of atheists being uniformly dour and boring is perpetuated mainly by articles and misrepresentations like this.

Lacking the strong Christian identity that produced its greatness, atheist Europe seems to be a civilization on its way out. We have met Nietzsche's "last man" and his name is Sven.

(blinks) Was the greatness you were referring to simple imperialism or to the tendency of the Christian Europeans of the past to murder and enslave the “heathen” natives they would encounter?

Based on my experiences, I’m pretty sure the more secular version of European civilization isn’t on its way out. We’ve already established that you’ve likely not attended an atheist convention. Have you been to Europe?

The real difference is that in the past, children were valued as gifts from God, and now they are viewed by many people as instruments of self-gratification. The old principle was, "Be fruitful and multiply." The new one is, "Have as many children as enhance your lifestyle."

Or, “we have access to birth control and careers and thus have other options to pursue if we wish.” Not to mention, “seeing as the world population continues to grow and we have limited resources, it doesn’t seem like such a tragedy if some people chose to have one or even (heaven forbid) no children.”

The prophets of the disappearance of religion seem to have proven themselves to be false prophets. Even though the world is becoming richer, religion seems to be getting stronger. The United States is the richest and most technologically advanced society in the world, and religion shows no signs of disappearing on these shores.

Richest?? Well, perhaps if you ignore Luxemborg and Norway. Then again, they are part of that silly, declining Europe, so we can just ignore them anyway.

My conclusion is that it is not religion but atheism that requires a Darwinian explanation. It seems perplexing why nature would breed a group of people who see no purpose to life or the universe, indeed whose only moral drive seems to be sneering at their fellow human beings who do have a sense of purpose.

No darling, I just sneer at people who write poorly researched articles accusing atheists of having no moral purpose.

Here is where the biological expertise of Dawkins and his friends could prove illuminating. Maybe they can turn their Darwinian lens on themselves and help us understand how atheism, like the human tailbone and the panda's thumb, somehow survived as an evolutionary leftover of our primitive past.

- God knows why faith is thriving by Dinesh D'Souza.

Yes, logic is clearly a vestigial trait.

***

Oh, and...

Knock, knock.

Who's there?

(silence)

(silence)

(silence)

(peers outside at the friendly darkness)

(shrugs)

Who's there? Well, nothing supernatural as far as I can see, but is that really so scary?

(shrugs)

I'm okay with getting my meaning from humanity and my groceries from my neighbor.

(cross posted at The Atheist Mama)

Dust in the Wind

(I realize this is a decidedly uncheerful topic. I promise to not only make the next post more cheerful, but also to start it with a knock-knock joke as a bit of compensation.)

During a terminally ill patient’s less lucid moments, he’d reach his arms up to the ceiling, ignoring everyone around him, the nurse at the head of the table explained. Eventually, when he was awake, he informed his family that he was reaching up to god and that they shouldn’t disturb him during these moments. Everyone around the table nodded approvingly. The nurse recounted another story, where a staff member’s grandfather, “a very bad man”, started yelling that his feet were burning as he lay dying in his hospital bed. Everyone around the table gasped and looked properly horrified. We all had ours stories to tell, of inspiring or scary end of life experiences, and everyone was able to happily file away the information as further evidence of the afterlife planned by a Christian god.

Well, everyone except me.

I’m five weeks into a seven week training program for a local non-profit Hospice and, as the only atheist (actually, as the only non-Christian), periodically find myself squirming in my seat in the unable-to-identify-yet-unwilling-to-dissent sort of uncomfortable that comes from being part of an often distrusted minority. My New Year’s resolution of this year was to be more outspoken, and one of the ways I’ve attempted to do so is by being more open about my lack-of-theism. However, sitting around that table, I was entirely uncomfortable with the idea of expressing my own interpretations of those stories and I instead just squirmed silently.

I can’t think of a moment where atheism is more of a challenge to a Christian belief system than when it comes to death and the concept of an afterlife. When considering heaven and hell, Christians can’t brush us off as just a misinterpretation, as they might other varieties of Christianity, Judaism, or even less related religions, such as Islam or Hinduism. Atheism isn’t just another version of theism, but instead a direct rejection of the biblical idea of the afterlife. This is a touchy subject when it comes to loved ones who people desperately want to believe “live on.”

I’m not scared of death. Certainly, I’m in favor of living. However, the thought of slipping into an unknown doesn’t terrify me; it just gives me incentive to live more deeply and savor the time I do have. I’m okay with not knowing what might come after death, even if, as I think is likely, it’s nothing at all. It’s a question that I’m willing to leave unanswered, for the moment at least. Deciding whether to be vocal when others come up with answers that I find implausible? Now, that’s more of an immediate challenge.

I think that after I move past the training and into the volunteering itself, it should be less complicated. My goal is to be a Hospice volunteer specifically for nonreligious families, because I think the end of life concerns and questions are a bit different. It would perhaps be a bit easier for a terminally-ill freethinker to talk about this with a fellow freethinker rather than even a well-intentioned believer.

My questions to you: as atheists, what are your views towards death and dying? Do you feel the end of life issues and inquiries are different for an atheist than for a believer? How can we provide support to terminally-ill atheists? Finally, have you had situations where you’ve discussed dying with theists? How have you handled these discussions? I’d appreciate any input.

(cross posted at The Atheist Mama)

Ahmadinejad and the Pope Agree. How Quaint.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said here on Friday that the big powers' atheism is the rootcause of man's problems today.

- Ahmadinejad: Atheism of big powers is rootcause of man's plight

Ahmadinejad, dear, you're being cliche. The pope said essentially the same thing a few weeks back.

(glances around self) Big powers? Where are these atheistic big powers? How is it that we are the scary demon of two major religions when we are an unorganized minority?

I personally feel I should strike fear only in the hearts of tricky standardized test questions and leafy green vegetables. I make it a practice to conquer and destroy both on a regular basis. Otherwise, I’m pretty un-scary. (shrugs)

Expanding Values (yeah right)

Determined to break the links binding partisan politics and faith, growing numbers of religious moderates are uniting and organizing in an unprecedented bid to challenge the Christian right and broaden the values agenda beyond the issues of abortion and gay marriage.

(skip a paragraph)

This new coalition of moderate and progressive Christians underscored its intentions with a flurry of activity last week, as prominent conservative Christian leaders and politicians converged on Washington for the Family Research Council's first annual Values Voter Summit, which ends today.
- Moderates finding a voice

So, if these lovely, moderate people expanded the conversation beyond abortion and gay marriage, what did they talk about? Well, apparently gay marriage and abortion (see how different it is if you switch the order?):

The gathering, which concludes today, featured Republican presidential candidates and members of Congress, and seeks to mobilize evangelical voters this fall by focusing on issues such as gay marriage and abortion. Focus on the Family has started voter registration drives in eight states, according to its Web site.
- Baylor study debunks the ‘religious conservative’ and ‘secular liberal’ stereotypes

Bipartisan, huh? This all sounds like an awfully red shade of purple to me. “Oh, we’re bipartisan… there must be at least one Democrat here! Democrat? Where are you? Oh well, he must have wandered off for a moment.”

Speaking of “bipartisan”, at this same summit:

"I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate," Falwell said, according to the recording. "She has $300 million so far. But I hope she's the candidate. Because nothing will energize my [constituency] like Hillary Clinton."
Cheers and laughter filled the room as Falwell continued: "If Lucifer ran, he wouldn't."

(skip a few paragraphs)

"He was calling Hillary Clinton a demonic figure and openly arguing that God is a Republican," said the Rev. Barry Lynn, director of the advocacy group Americans United for Separation of Church and State. "It's hard to know whether people thought he was joking or serious, but once you start using religious imagery and invoking a politician in this way, it's not funny."

An aide to Falwell said Saturday the Lucifer reference was an "off the cuff" comment and Falwell "had no intentions of demonizing her." In the past, Falwell has described Islam's prophet Muhammad as a terrorist and said abortionists, feminists, gays and lesbians were to blame for the Sept. 11 attacks.

Falwell's remarks about Clinton were part of a 40-minute address at a private breakfast that included assurances that God would preserve a Republican majority in Congress and that moderates such as former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani cannot be allowed to win the GOP presidential nomination.

- Hillary Clinton could outdraw the devil, Falwell says

I must concede that Falwell is almost as much fun as Robertson. Then again, until Falwell claims to bench-press 2000 pounds, he’s still a second-rate crazy in my book. If the Democrats do obtain a Congressional majority in the November elections (as I hope they do), then did Falwell’s oh-so-Republican god fail?


At another recent “values” rally, in Pittsburg:

All the speakers said they wouldn't tell people how to vote.

But if a politician shares his principles on issues from judges to marriage "and is committed to the God of the universe, and from my perspective, Jesus Christ his only begotten son ... it would be a sin not to go to the polls and vote for him or her," Dobson said.

A sin! But we are not, of course, telling you how to vote.

Attendees were encouraged to "pray, prepare and participate" by, among other things, taking bulk packages of voter guides prepared by the conservative Pennsylvania Family Institute to distribute at their churches and asking pastors to hold voter-registration drives.

(skip a few paragraphs)

Gay-marriage bans are on the ballot in eight states this year, including three with close Senate races: Arizona, Virginia and Tennessee.

"When you have a marriage amendment on the ballot, it makes it that much easier" to motivate conservative Christian voters, said John Green, a senior fellow at the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. "And on balance, they'll vote for the Republican candidates in those states."
-
"Disappointed" activists pushing values buttons

Aww… how sweet. Let’s lure ‘em in with the discriminatory legislation and keep ‘em around to vote for the Republicans. Erm, the bipartisan Republicans, of course.

Futher further "friendly" fire

**An addition to my post from this morning.... 'cause I just can't get enough of the pope.**


Or, from Pope stops short of apology to Muslims:

"We swear to God to send you people who adore death as much as you adore life," said the message posted in the name of the Mujahedeen Army on a Web site frequently used by militant groups. The message's authenticity could not be independently verified. The statement was addressed to "you dog of Rome" and threatens to "shake your thrones and break your crosses in your home."

(coughs) Once again, we’re not violent! We just adore death!

As I’m continually mocking, I shall point out I do get that these messages/firebombs/etc. are being sent out by select groups of Muslims. I find the garden-variety Muslim no more irrational than the garden-variety Christian. The Muslim extremists just tend to be a lot noisier in today’s world.

He noted that earlier during his German trip, Benedict warned "secularized Western culture" against holding contempt for any religion or believers.

(skip a few paragraphs)

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan insisted the pope apologize to the Muslim world, saying he had spoken "not like a man of religion but like a usual politician."

Exactly like a politician! We’ll pander to various religious groups, but why bother worrying about whether or not we step on secular toes? Oh, and I’m not contemptuous of believers. I’m just contemptuous of many of their beliefs.

"We have to show the determination and care not to hurt one another and avoid situations where we may hurt each others' beliefs," the Istanbul-based Patriarchate said.

(rolls eyes) As already suggested, the pope is perhaps not the most convincing figure when it comes to pointing fingers at violent religions. However, I’m all for pointing at fundamentalism/ridiculousness and calling it by name. You can’t expect me to smile sweetly and accept whatever you want to believe when laws and actions based on these beliefs restrict the rights of others. Believe whatever you like, just keep it out of the lives of others. If you don’t, expect to be pointed at.

Further "Friendly" Fire

Further clarification on the pope’s remarks about atheists and Islam in Pope said to be upset Muslims offended:

"Indeed it was he who, before the religious fervor of Muslim believers, warned secularized Western culture to guard against 'the contempt for God and the cynicism that considers mockery of the sacred to be an exercise of freedom,'" Bertone said, citing words from another speech that Benedict gave during the German trip.

Pfff! What would I do with my spare time if I had to guard against cynicism and mockery of the sacred? Secularism is more dangerous than religious fervor? Pffff! A note: I don’t have contempt for god (as I don't believe in him/her/it), but my contempt for the thoughts of the pope certainly continues to grow.

Two churches in the West Bank were hit by firebombs Saturday, and a group claiming responsibility said it was protesting Benedict's words.

Right. Secularism is a LOT more dangerous than religious fervor. Those were friendly firebombs!

Glass Houses & Charred Popes

Some updates on my thoughts about the pope’s recent speeches: apparently, I skipped right over the part that’s making the news. When quoting Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus, the pope referred to Islam as a violent religion.

First, as was pointed out to me in an email this morning (thanks J!), it’s rather hard to claim you aren’t violent when your response to being called violent is to burn the pope in effigy. (shrugs) Perhaps it was a non-violent form of burning-in-effigy. The burning of the Danish embassy a while back? Done in the least violent way possible!

However, the pope may also not wish to throw stones while standing in his own glass house. Islam certainly isn’t the only violent religion out there... come on now, he was quoting from the era of the crusades. You can find many, many violent, awful quotes in both holy books. The level of violence among the followers depends largely on who’s doing the interpreting and in what socio-political conditions.

As for the anti-atheist and anti-science remarks for which I originally grumbled at the pope, I see absolutely no atheists rioting. Perhaps this is because atheism is not a religion and we thus manage to skip much of this irrational mob action each time someone pokes a stick at us? Oh sure, atheism doesn’t prevent people from being silly, mean, bigoted, angry, or even violent. However, there is no banner, symbol, or holy book of atheism we feel compelled to protect. We grumble. We type. Sometimes, we even throw a minor fit. However, in the end, our fits tend to be significantly easier to clean up after than those of offended religious groups.

Money & Politics (but not together)

Time Magazine’s cover story this week is “Does God Want You to be Rich?” It seems to be a toss up, with various preachers and biblical passages supporting various views. As has been covered many a times before- you can find support for pretty much anything in the Bible, as long as you’re willing to ignore similar passages that contradict the one you chose.

Blah, blah, blah. The Bible is confusing. Got it.

***

On a more amusing note, the following multiple choice question appeared on page 88.

Which of the following did not happen last week?
A) President Bush revealed plans to appoint Clay Aiken to his Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities
B) Former House majority leader Tom DeLay asked supporters to vote for country singer Sara Evans on Dancing with the Stars
C) Three Senators nominated Jerry Lewis to receive the Congressional Gold Medal
D) Congress pass an immigration bill

The correct answer is D.

This unfortunately underlines the major reason I shall never be able to run for any political office: I just don’t know enough (really, anything) about pop culture.

Mr. FTP god and his blatant misuse of ropes

I was at my friend K’s apartment last night when she mentioned that she’d been left an exciting, fun-to-mock religious pamphlet on her car windshield at work on Monday. My car is never papered with such pamphlets, likely because I work in a small, well-to-do town where we shoot pamphleteers on site. Okay, perhaps not. But we’d probably at least give them a hefty ticket and force them to plant flowers on Main St as punishment. Regardless, K had accidentally thrown away the pamphlet. Possibly due to my having consumed alcohol on an empty stomach, or possibly simply an indication of my innate lunacy, I suggested we go dig it out of her dumpster. We did and found it was defiled only by the tiniest piece of (holy?) mold.

The tract is entitled

“What If You Had Been Here?
September 11, 2001
A Day That Began
Like Any Other Day”

and features a picture of the world trade center with various computer added (I’m guessing- it looks fairly unrealistic) mounds of smoke.

Do I even have to add that I think it’s total crap to exploit the fear of terrorist attack for religious (or, for that matter political) purposes?

Regardless, without further ado, I bring to you the words of the Fellowship Tract League (FTP):

WHAT IF YOU had been in the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001? What would have happened to YOU? YOU could have died, and YOU would have had to face God.

ME? Not only me, but in CAPITALS? Oh my… this FTP god is one serious critter.

And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment. Hebrews 9:27

That actually makes more sense this morning, sans vodka. However, I’m still not sure that I’d qualify it as good writing. Lots of people, even nonreligious ones, like to point to the Bible as “great literature”. I’ve read the Bible. Parts of it are quite lovely and might qualify as “great literature”. However, other parts just make the writing-tutor in me want to cringe and yell, “keep it short and to the point! Short and to the point!”

Sin is breaking God’s law. It is doing something God said not to do, or not doing something God said to do.

(blinks)

I suppose that makes sense. However, if I take this literally, I fear I shall have to take up arms against opposing tribes or something of that nature. It’s been a couple of years since I’ve used a sword. I’m not sure I’m up for it.

Sin is an offense against God.

Well then, perhaps Mr. FTP god just needs to get over it. I find people using adjectives as adverbs terribly offensive. However, I have yet to suggest that all people who do so be stoned to death. (the population of Ohio would dwindle to nothing, I fear)

Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He is as much God as if He had never become man and as much man as if He had never been God.

(blinks)

Well, it’s beyond my comprehension, so it must be true, right?

A gift is free. Eternal life is not anything we can earn, it is something we accept. Romans 6:23 gives us two choices. We can pay for our sin ourselves by dying and going to Hell, or we can accept God’s gift of eternal life and go to Heaven when we die.

Apparently the FTL god has bad management skills. Let’s say you have a group of workers making widgets. I’d imagine the best way to motivate them would be to say, well, you can work as hard as you’d like to make as many widgets as you'd like… however, the only factor used to determine if you’ll get paid is whether or not you ask for your check. I’m sure absolutely everyone will jump at the chance to make widgets, even though it as no effect whatsoever on whether or not they are paid.

Frankly, if there must be religion, I’d rather people feel compelled to do nice things in exchange for salvation.

For whosever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Does calling "upon the name of the Lord" in bed count? I might be saved and not even know it!

Anytime you start telling people, all you have to do is this one religious whatever, and you’ll go to heaven, you open the door to awful interpretations of what that one thing might be. Well, in my version, god wants me to run planes into buildings or well, in my version, god wants me to go kill infidels and take their land.

To be saved, a person must be saved from something. If you were drowning, and someone threw you a rope, you would say that he had saved you from drowning.

(tilts head to the side and stares at the strange analogy)

Sure. So, since there isn’t so much in the way of reasons to believe in hell, I’m not drowning and that rope could obviously be put to better uses.


Thanks K!

My Mixed Feelings about the Pope

I have mixed feelings about the pope. I disagree with so very much of what he says and does. His books make me cringe. His speeches leave me shaking my head. On the other hand, his religion has sent me many delightful varieties of disillusioned Catholics to date*. Somehow, Protestantism just doesn’t seem to promote disillusionment quite as effectively as Catholicism. What would my sex life have been like without the pope?

Regardless, Mr. Head-Disillusionment-Causing himself spoke recently on the topics of algebra, atheists, and humanitarian aid. Okay, so he switches the "responsibly" phrase to mean conversion rather than aid at the end of his paragraph-- but they're the same thing, right? Anyway, without further speculation (well, at least not for another 5 lines)... the pope and his concerns with secularism!

....something is missing from the equation! When God is subtracted, something doesn’t add up for man, the world, the whole vast universe.”

Math!

So, a + v + m + g = u?

One important note: if g equals 0, as I believe it does, then subtracting it from the left will have no effect on the equation.

The pope did not make direct reference to the age-old controversy between evolution and creation but noted that “we end up with two alternatives. What came first? Creative Reason, the Spirit who makes all things and gives them growth, or Unreason, which, lacking any meaning, yet somehow brings forth a mathematically ordered cosmos, as well as man and his reason. The latter, however, would then be nothing more than a chance result of evolution and thus, in the end, equally meaningless.

FALSE DICHOTOMY AND STRAW MAN!

(I’ve always wanted to just type fallacies in capital letters and leave it at that. It’s never seemed very nice in actual discussions. However, I highly doubt the pope is reading this, so I feel no guilt.)

Today, when we have learned to recognize the pathologies and the life-threatening diseases associated with religion and reason...

I wanted to make some statement about how, with scientific knowledge, we no longer need a “god of the gaps” in areas such as “where did this plague come from?”. However, the pope's entire statement baffles me and I’m not sure I would be answering what he is saying. Are these pathologies and life-threatening diseases infecting religion and reason? Or, since they are merely associated, do they just see each other periodically among mutual acquaintances?

Only this can free us from being afraid of God - which is ultimately at the root of modern atheism. Only this God saves us from being afraid of the world and from anxiety before the emptiness of life.”

(SIGH)

I’m not scared of god. I just don’t believe in god. Atheism isn’t a tree we hide behind to avoid a father-figure coming after us with a lightening bolt. It’s more like standing in the middle of a field and stating calmly, “there isn't a deity to be afraid of.” As of yet, no lightening bolts have hit me while I’m standing in my field. (Then again, I go inside when it’s storming. I’m atheist, not a-lighting-bolt-hit-able.)

We are not meant to waste our lives, misuse them, or spend them selfishly. In the face of injustice we must not remain indifferent and thus end up as silent collaborators or outright accomplices. We need to recognize our mission in history and to strive to carry it out. What is needed is not fear, but responsibility - responsibility and concern for our own salvation, and for the salvation of the whole world.

Oooooh... you were doing so well! If you’d just take off that last appositive phrase, “responsibility and concern for our own salvation, and for the salvation of the whole world”, you’d have such a dandy, quotable paragraph.

At least in part, science has vainly sought to make God unnecessary in the universe and hence to man himself.

So, science makes god unnecessary, huh? Even though the rest of the speech seems rather silly to me, based on that one statement I fear I’m going to have to reconsider my previously supportive view of science. If science manages to make god unnecessary, will I eventually run out of disillusioned Catholics to prey (not pray) upon? The horror!



All of the above quotes are cherry picked from the Pope’s recent address explaining how science seeks vainly to make God unnecessary in the universe and our lives. If you want to be fair, you could go read the entire thing. However, it’s not that exciting, I promise.


* though, I most note, of all the types of dissilusioned Catholics I've encountered, my current variety of atheist-disillusioned-Catholic is certainly the best

Four Witnesses

Under the current law, approved by a former military dictator in 1979, prosecuting a rape case requires testimony from four witnesses, making punishment almost impossible because such attacks are rarely public.

A woman who claims she was raped but fails to prove her case can be convicted of adultery, punishable by death.

Maulana Fazalur Rahman, a leader of the Islamic coalition, said Tuesday that lawmakers in his group would vacate their seats in the National Assembly if the government tries to get the assembly's approval to change the law.
"We will render every sacrifice for the protection of the Shariah (traditional Islamic) laws," he said at a news conference.

However, the ruling Pakistan Muslim Party — which has a majority in the assembly — has praised Musharraf for taking steps to amend the law and end the four-witness requirement.
- Rape law rankles some Pakistan lawmakers

Victim: Would you mind dragging me out in front of at least four witnesses before you rape me?
Rapist: Oh, certainly. After all, I wouldn’t want you to be stoned to death for adultery should you become impregnated due to my act of violence against you.

Yeah right. Four witnesses. (shakes head)

Kudos to President Musharraf's party for challenging this ridiculous law.

(hums to self about the importance of the separation of religious law and government... not to mention Amnesty International, an organization that has been working for years to prevent stoning-women-because-they-were-raped-without-witness situations)