06/12/09
I need a new bumper sticker. My Thomas Jefferson one is faded and fuzzy; no one could possibly read it. I think the car is old enough now, and I'm comfortable enough, that I might put the "Atheism is myth-understood" sticker on. I might even put my "Reality Bites" fish back on. I took it off a while ago, because I felt like it was mean. I'm not really a mean person. But I like it. Maybe it's not mean, so much as it's snarky. And I'm definitely snarky. I'm sure I have one of those evolve-fish-humping-the-Jesus-fish emblems around here somewhere. That would be going too far, though.

05/14/09
See "The Other L Word: Why I am a Libertarian" in the news. This is an article by Michael Shermer; he felt compelled to write it after the comments on a previous blog lambasted him.

Reading the comments left for Mr. Shermer, especially relating to his original post, took me back to a time I tried to communicate my ideas of freedom to other atheists. You'd have thought I was slapping them across the face. The bitchiness my ideas invoked was puzzling to me and eventually led to extreme disappointment with atheists.

I'm learning, clearly, to live with feelings of extreme disappointment in the human race.

But it was refreshing to see Michael Shermer express the same kinds of ideas that I tried to, without his eloquence. I should note that I'm not a card-carrying Libertarian. I don't mind being labeled as one, but I can't say I agree with everything they, as a political party, espouse.

It's not that I have anything against labels, mind you. If the label fits, slap it on. I recall, during my heated 'discussions' with fellow atheists labeling someone's ideas as fascist. Well, now, the guy said, if you're going to start name-calling, I'm out of here. After which he proceeded to email me and call me a name.

I can laugh about it now, because, well, it was funny. And that reminds me of how people don't listen. They hear only certain parts of what you're saying and make assumptions based on that. I have little doubt I'm as guilty as the rest.

Case in point: I tried to discuss such ideas as Shermer's recently with family (bad idea, right?) and was, again, disappointed. Maybe it's me. Maybe I can't articulate properly. Anyway, the looks from one member of the family told me, during the conversation, that she was saddened by what I was saying (which was, basically, that it was not right for the government to take money from everyone to pay for her healthcare). I said that if the government stopped taxing us to death, we'd all have more money to GIVE to charities and causes we want to give to. To which the other family member offered the tired liberal response, "But people won't give."

I realized only after this discussion that what they were hearing was that I was selfish and didn't believe in charity. They believe that Libertarian ideas would result in a selfish, uncaring populace that watches its elderly and poor die in the streets.

I know I didn't say that. But I can see it now in their faces after the fact. They think I'm a cold-hearted, selfish bitch.

It's the same with Objectivism. All people can hear in the ideas of Ayn Rand is the word 'selfish'. They can't get past it. But I wrote a blog a long time ago pointing out that it wasn't the Libertarians or the Objectivists who were selfish and greedy. I don't think I want to go into that now. I have no doubt something will occur to launch me into it another time. But to give you a hint: economic liberals are selfish and greedy.

In a way, though, I guess that my family is right. Now, anyway. I mean, when I was younger, I wanted to do so much for my fellow man. Now...now I think I'd give it all to cats.

05/09/09
Check out the article under religion titled, "Defectors to faith mark a growing trend." My husband and I will have to have a talk with the boys today about which religion they will join.

Our oldest seems unlikely to embrace any type of religion, so he'll have to be a Buddhist. He's inherited his fathers cold, calculating, and pessimistic view of the world, and his mother's rabid pitbull debating techniques. So young to be in the fray. I've given him my history with debate and the disappointments it brings. We'll see how he does with it.

The middle child is tall, lean, and dreamy. He'd make a great Wiccan, except that he might think of it as a girls' religion. His distaste for people, following in his parents' footsteps, means he might be better off as a quaker. He might embrace Jedi, except I think it's a social religion, too.

And the youngest has already created his own religion. It has a god, Fes, but there are times when I'm certain that J is his own god.

I wish them all well in their faiths. And I will take up the arms of debate again if I must, if they should try to convert me. Except for J, as worshiping Fes entails eating chocolate. J may have a convert already.

04/21/09
My apologies for the previous post. I don't know what got into me. He he. Look, there is a lot to make fun of in religion. I can appreciate that for many people, their religious fervor is devout and genuine; and I can understand why it would hurt them to see it laughed at. But this is why I prefer to stick to science. It's hard to laugh at science.

People do it, of course. Religious people do it. They think it's funny. They're usually laughing at some type of straw man they've created out of their small understanding of something scientific. It's unfortunate that that only gives the intelligent more things to laugh at regarding them.

But think about it. They think we're stupid for laughing at their nonsense. And we think they're stupid for trying to laugh at something they don't understand.

Who is right?

I took a long drive with my brother the other day and he posed just this sort of dilemma. Many of his friends are very conservative people. Conservative, not in the idea of fiscal conservatism or original Republicanism; but conservative in the idea of religious whackos. He thinks they're being stupid when it comes to Bush, Obama, gay marriage, etc. But they think he's stupid. So, how does he know, he wondered, if they're right and not him?

Simple, I said.

Just look at the basis of a person's beliefs and attitudes. His friends ideas are fear-based. Most of them are based on the fear that their world is under grave threat by some outside force, namely Middle Eastern terrorists (but sometimes also Mexicans and gay people).

My brother's ideas are based on reason, evidence, and compassion.

So, which ideas are more trustworthy?

Naturally, his friends won't agree. But fear-based thinking never allows for dissent. And there's another clue to who's thinking clearly and who isn't.

And so it is with the religious--who is right? The person who believes in a book written by several men at several points in ancient history and who looks inward at their 'feelings'? Or the person who looks outward at the world and uses the scientific method to determine reality and truth?

Anyone who trusts the former and laughs at the latter has serious issues to deal with. And I can understand that. But that doesn't mean I have to stop getting a laugh out of them now and then.

04/12/09

Watch the whole video by clicking on it.

04/11/09
The Holy Gospel of the Easter Bunny
<snort>

04/10/09
It is officially Easter for me! There's a large Reese's Peanut Butter Bunny with my name on it in the closet and I'm starting in on it today.

The boys are so much older now. They don't want an egg hunt on Sunday. But they want turkey and stuffing and a basket full of chocolate (and jelly beans for the older kid). When I told them I always buy too much candy for them, they said to leave out that fake grass. All it does is take up room that could be used for more candy.

My dh thinks it's ridiculous to fill a basket full of candy for 19 and 17 yos. He may even think it's ridiculous to do it for the 12 yo. But since when have I ever cared what dh thinks? Well, okay, I'm being defiant. But it's Easter! It's when we celebrate the rebirth of the earth! Weave baskets out of grass (or buy them at Walmart), worship bunnies, and gather colorful eggs (forgot...they don't even want to dye eggs this year).

Okay, maybe, I suppose, you could say...that if they're too old to dye eggs and hunt them, they shouldn't get the basket. I have little doubt that if I told them as much, we'd be in the kitchen this afternoon dying eggs and I'd have to go to Walmart for those plastic ones to hide.

Well, this Easter bunny has no problem filling a few baskets and forgetting those other things. I  mean, one day, they'll be gone, off on their own. And then who will I have to fill a basket for? Just me? Hmm. Yes, I suppose I will have to fill a basket for myself.

There's good in almost all things.

04/07/09
Well, I still haven't received an answer about prayer at my high school reunion. The organizer of the event said she is not ignoring me; she just doesn't know what to say yet. And she also said that she is "just against intolerance of any kind."

What that says to me is that she thinks that, maybe, I'm being intolerant by asking that we refrain from having a Christian prayer spoken during the proceedings, as a blessing before we eat.

This is the problem we have with Christians in this country. You can't really talk about religious freedom with them because, to them, what we call freedom is intolerance.

Too many Christians in this country feel that inclusion means they are left out. If they have to include everyone, and accept that not everyone is Christian and doesn't want their religion in every facet of our lives, they feel that they are being imposed upon.

It is not, in any way, intolerant of Christianity to ask them to pray on their own and not expect the whole room to join them. But they feel otherwise.

They just don't get it. And I'm, personally, tired of trying to educate them.

04/02/09
Why do people feel the need to lead other people in prayer?

It's been ten years since my last high school reunion. I think I was more sociable in high school than I am now. I think maybe that's because I was crazy in high school. I had no clue...about so many things, most notably, who I was. But this blog isn't about all that.

This blog is all about the praying. I don't remember much praying in high school. I went to a public school, after all. I think there was praying at football games back then, but I bet they put a stop to that. I definitely remember going to the baccalaureate ceremony, thinking it was part of graduation, you know, with speeches and awards and stuff. It turned out to be a religious ceremony. I was so bored...and even back then, some fifteen years before I would realize atheism, I was annoyed.

So, I'm not sure if my reaction to the scene at my last reunion was warranted or not. You see, at my twenty-year high school reunion, we were all gathered in a room where we had a sit-down meal. And before we got up to fill our plates at the buffet, someone had us all bow our heads for the blessing.

I can't believe it's been ten years since I wrote about that, right here at Atheist View. Sorry the archives aren't around anymore; but the gist of it all was that I was so shocked and befuddled, I pushed myself out of my seat and walked over to the bar and ordered a glass of wine. (Okay, I admit it, I drank too much at my twenty-year high school reunion. I had such a headache...)

I was so put off by the ordeal that the first thing I blurted out of my mouth later, upon meeting up with an old acquaintance was, "I'm an atheist." Granted, I was new at it; but it was highly inappropriate even so. I said it because I felt put upon. I felt as if I'd been coerced into a religious ritual I wanted no part of and I needed to shout out that I'd been duped. I needed to cleanse it from my skin and my psyche.

I didn't feel that my rights had been violated; that I leave to government-sponsored prayer. No, I felt I'd been taken advantage of by arrogant, self-serving Christians who took it upon themselves to assume not only that we were all Christians, but that any that weren't could just sit quiet and deal with it, because by god they were the righteous! They were the holier than thou! They were going to beseech their deity whether anyone else liked it or not.

It was akin to being spit on.

Why do people think there is nothing wrong with inviting a religiously diverse group of people to PAY for dinner and then insist they wait while they lead them in prayer? What purpose does it serve? Why can't they get their food, sit down, and pray quietly to themselves? Why the show?

That's really the crux of the matter, isn't it? Why do they need everyone to hear them? Why do they need everyone to pretend to join them? Is it that they're insecure in their beliefs? Or is it, that they're just rude, arrogant people who don't give a damn about anybody who isn't like them?

So, there's talk of a thirty-year reunion to which I may or may not go. I emailed the organizer and asked about the prayer issue.

You might say, why do you want to make a big deal out of it? I guess my answer is that things that are important to me, are big deals to me. And to me, rude people, arrogant people, should not be given carte blanche to snoot their noses at this religiously diverse population just so everyone can see how pious (dumb?) they are. If I don't say anything, if I just go, and sit there, and let them pray without letting them know how I feel, I'm just going along to get along. Not only does that threaten my self-esteem and my intellectual honesty, but it allows the dominant religion in this country to continue in their thwarting of the rights of the minority.

No, suffering through prayer at your high school reunion isn't a trampling of your rights. But your silence about it only leads the rude and arrogant religionists to continue their assault on your rights.

The response from the organizer has thus far been silence. Better to ignore the 16% (and growing) of the population who do not subscribe to your archaic beliefs than to accept that maybe you ought to pray on your own time.

03/29/09
I created a fan page on facebook after I learned that one of my "friends" did it.

This guy, John Shore, invited me to be his friend and I wondered why. In investigating his website to see what we might have in common (no friends), I found that he was a Christian. Hmph. I read some of his writings and was further disturbed. One thing he said was that atheists have a belief too and should just admit it.

What is wrong with people? Why can't they understand a simple little thing like non-belief?

No. I do not have any beliefs. I shun belief. I do NOT believe that the Christian god does not exist. I just don't believe it does.

I guess that's too subtle. Believers must need black and white, all or nothing kinds of input. They can't fathom the more difficult stuff.

Anyway, so I accepted the guy as my friend, thinking that if he starts in with the proselytizing, he's getting the boot. Turns out he's not a bad guy. He calls himself a heretic because he doesn't believe in evangelism and instead believes that he should love everyone.

It seems to me that judging atheists, in general, as people who hold a belief about his god, is just a tad unloving. But he's still okay in my book. So far. Hehehehe.

03/20/09
It's 'coming out' day for atheists on Facebook! Sponsored by Richard Dawkins' Outcampaign.org. Change your profile photo to the scarlet letter!

03/16/09
Thinking about the awful state of atheists in filmdom ended with me trolling the Internet for good atheist films. I wasn't looking for films in which religion is simply absent, but in which the focus of the film is on an atheist character who is good and moral and remains staunchly atheist in the end.

Atheist Empire has a list of atheistic movies, including Contact, Saved, and Dogma. I'm thinking, nah, not so much. Didn't the Jodi Foster character waffle in the end of Contact? And Saved is not atheistic at all. Sure, it makes fun of an extreme form of Christianity, and thankfully, if I recall, the atheists don't become saved; but I'm pretty sure it's just a movie against nut cases, not against religion or for atheism. A milder, kinder form of Christianity is promoted. In fact, one might say that the two extremes are the nut cases and the atheists. Not good.

Same with Dogma--promoting liberal Christianity, not atheism.

I agree with Chocolat, however. So...there's one.

Somebody over at the Rational Response Squad recommends a film called Bad Boy Bubby. I've never heard of it, but I'll check Netflix. It sounds very disturbing, though. Rape, incest? And atheism? Not boding well.

Also recommended are The Life of Brian and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I've never seen The Life of Brian, so I'll give that a try. The newer Hitchhiker film wasn't good. What a disappointment. The old version, from the BBC miniseries, was truer to the books.

There was a little discussion of The Golden Compass in my search, but I wouldn't call that one atheistic either. I mean, doesn't the guy kill god in the end?

So that's it. Chocolat, Bad Boy Bubby (maybe), The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and Life of Brian (maybe).

That's just sad.

03/15/09
Most of the news I get is of the stupid variety, so that box will be updated more often. I have to admit, sometimes I don't know where to put some items. Look at the 'Atheists call for debaptism,' for instance. I almost put that one in the stupid box. But I figured it relates more to atheism than it does to atheists being stupid. And then there's the one about witchdoctors mutilating the remains of albinos in Tanzania. I almost put that one in the religion box. But is witchdoctorism religion? I think it's just stupidity, so it's stupid on both counts. (Not to say murder is stupid. Murder is awful. But that's one of the things that is stupid about humanity, so, okay, I guess I'm saying murder is stupid.)

update:
I watched Brideshead Revisited last night. I had no idea it was another one of those 'atheist has to deal with religious nut and loses love because of it' movies. The other one was The End of the Affair. Anyway, it was a really long movie, but I didn't realize how long until it was over, so I'll say it was a good movie, if not a tad melodramatic. In the end, Charles goes into the chapel at Brideshead and dips his fingers into the holy water, and I'm like, great, he's going to make the sign of the cross and become religious. But instead, he almost puts out the candle with his wet fingers. Almost. I don't know what it means. But I'm going to say it means he loved and respected Sebastian and Julia, so he left them their light. But, let's go online and see what the experts say.
Oh, well. The experts say the book is a bit different from the movie and dear Charles the atheist becomes a Catholic in the end. Figures. The atheist always either converts, or wallows in some form of insanity by the end of most books and movies. (That's probably not true, but it feels like it right now.)

I added my mailbox and guestbook links in the left column today.

THE NEWS
(Archive)