Defiance_01's Xanga

Monday, August 25, 2008

Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:27:40 GMT

The Last Entry for This Blog.

Like I've said, all of my future political/religious writings will go on my Main Blog from now on, but I am NOT deleting this one. Too many memories, too much work, too much fun, too many brilliant insights ().

Link Dump, POLITICS!

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2007-08/2007-08-21-voa14.cfm?CFID=29923419&CFTOKEN=77500056
"Polls show decline in conservative values."

http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/06/news/economy/oil_profits_tax/index.htm?postversion=2008050612
"Analysts split over windfall oil profits tax."
(Yeah, split between the douchebags in Big Oil's pocket, and the ones that actually have common sense.)

http://www.gigglesugar.com/1075639
Ann Coulter wants to snort Nicorette. I couldn't even make this up.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/03/richard-engels-book-war-j_n_104969.html
"Bush on Iraq War: 'I don't care if it created more enemies.' "

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/8/144617/5311/186/452389
"McCain-Huckabee: You got your Christian Crusader rhetoric in my crazy-ass foreign policy!"
....you got your crazy-ass foreign policy in my Christian Crusader rhetoric!

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/7/17/63235/7095
Bill O'Reilly's fans are hatemongers.
.....and the sky is blue.....?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/11/105023/784/387/533532
Details on Obama's 50-state strategy, deploying campaign staff in every single state.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid353515028?bctid=416343938
A speech given by Obama about religion in America. I didn't agree with all of it, but not bad overall.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06092008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/eat_crow__iraq_war_skeptics_114671.htm
The New York Post: Still bat-shit insane. "ZOMG, we dun won Iraq!"
.....yeah, eat crow!"

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_obama.html
Factcheck.org bitch-slaps the Republican Propaganda Machine

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/aug/12/usa.iraq
"Fatigue cripples US Army in Iraq"

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/03/beck.oilexecs/index.html
How, how, HOW, I ask you, does Glenn Beck get his own head THAT far up his own ass?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/29/gop-frets-over-democratic_n_89299.html
"GOP Frets Over Democratic Fundraising"
""

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/09/gop-obstruction-has-shatt_n_105671.html
"GOP Obstructionism Has Shattered Previous Record"

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/22/video-maxine-waters-threatens-to-nationalize-americas-oil-industry/
From an extremist right-wing website: "Maxine Waters Threatens to Nationalize America's Oil Industry"
GOOD. This is just more proof that the right-wing is allergic to common sense and rational thought.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htm?postversion=2008061115
"How McCain and Obama Will Change Your Tax Bill"
If you guessed that McCain will shovel money to people who already have enough and don't deserve any more, while Obama will give money to people who need it and force the super rich to pay their fair share, you'd be 100% right.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/01/poll-bush-most-unpopular-in-modern-history/
"A new poll suggests that George W. Bush is the most unpopular president in modern American history."
That's okay, America. We liberals forgive you, but you'll have to permit us a colossal I TOLD YOU SO.

http://www.amazon.com/Good-Fight-CD-Liberals-Liberals-Can/dp/B000VYXB7Y/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204520691&sr=8-1
"The Good Fight: Why Liberals - and Only Liberals - Can Win the War On Terror and Make America Great Again."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/25/sunday/main4125912.shtml
Proof that Ben Stein is not only out of his fucking mind when it comes to religion, but also with regards to politics.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/01/aaron-brown-olbermann-is_n_99567.html
"Aaron Brown: Olbermann Is 'Smarter, Funnier, Better Read, And Eminently More Talented' Than O'Reilly"
No shit, really?

http://www.juancole.com/2007/12/top-ten-myths-about-iraq-2007.html
"Top Ten Myths About Iraq 2007"

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1706650,00.html
"Is Dobson's Political Clout Fading?"
Yes. And not only Dobson, but the entire Religious Right.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/feb2008/db20080212_645487.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_top+story
"Is Obama Good for Business?"
Well I sure as fuck hope not. That's how we know he'd be good for America.
In the words of one consultant: "Business would have a seat at the table, but business wouldn't be able to buy all the chairs"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-smiley/its-the-economists-stup_b_92006.html
Economists don't know jack squat about the economy. But those of us with experience in poverty already knew that.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/04/news/economy/mccain_obama_econplans/index.htm?cnn=yes
Clarifying Obama and McCain's positions on the economy.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/21/celebrate-earth-day-destroy-capitalism/
"Celebrate Earth Day, Destroy Capitalism."
Hey, wow! Two birds with one stone!

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/04/planned-parenthoods-obscene-profits/
The ONLY time Michelle Malkin goes batshit over a company's profits are when it's a company involved with helping women. Big Oil rakes in billions of dollars in record profits, and she doesn't bat an eye. Planned Parenthood helps a few women maintain control over their bodies, and it's the fucking end of the world. Give me a break.

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/09/plucky-90-year-old-klansman-d-wva-clings-to-committee-chairmanship/
"Plucky 90-year-old Klansman (D-W.Va) clings to Committee Chairmanship"
Of course, little Miss Journalistic Integrity doesn't mention anything about Robert Byrd's reform and denouncement of the Klan 70 years ago, or the fact that he and Obama became great friends after he won his Senate race. No no no, to Michelle Malkin, once a Klansman, always a Klansman. Which makes you wonder what she thinks of about half the Republicans in Congress....

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/03/25/the-obamas-tax-returns-show-how-capitalism-helped-make-them-rich/
"The Obamas’ tax returns show how capitalism helped make them rich."
THEY SOLD A FUCKING BOOK, YOU DITZY AIRHEADED TWIT!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/28/new-york-beginning-to-alt_n_104008.html
"New York to Recognize Same-Sex Marriages From Other States"
The Christian walls of bigotry are beginning to crumble....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/14/olbermann-to-bush-this-wa_n_101831.html
Keith Olbermann's best Special Comment to date.

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/change-hope-cds-1957828-government-stop
"Mark Steyn: Capitalism is the real 'agent of change' "
Yes, yes, economists are completely ignorant of how the real world works, we get it already....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/11/smackdown-the-emdaily-sho_n_96185.html
The Daily Show points out how Fox News if full of shit.....but everyone with a brain has already caught on.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/ailing_capitalism.html
"Capitalism's Reality Check"
Damn good article.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/05/windfallprofit_nonsense.html
John Stossel shouts from the rooftops: "I AM A MOUTHPIECE FOR BIG OIL'S BULLSHIT!"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/10/republicans-block-extra-t_n_106282.html
"Republicans Block Extra Taxes On Oil Companies"
Conservatives and Greedy Oil Barons: BFFs for lyfe!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/23/sean-hannity-confronted-o_n_92961.html
Sean Hannity is friends with a Neo-Nazi.
No no, they mean someone other than himself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/10/sex-hormones-mood-stabil_n_90714.html
"Sex Hormones, Mood Stabilizers Found In Drinking Water Of 41 M Americans."
I'm no conspiracy theorist, but in the words of Captain Kirk, this is damn peculiar....

http://soldiersangelsgermany.blogspot.com/2008/06/trust.html
So, the Iraq War has been a disaster of epic proportions that has made the world less safe and was waged for the sole purpose of shoveling money toward war-based businesses, but look at these warm and fuzzy pictures! That's enough to make you forget about the 4,145 dead American soldiers, right? Right? Now shut up and vote Republican.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/01/stephen-baldwin-on-fox-ne_n_110169.html
"Stephen Baldwin On Fox News: 'If Obama Wins, I'll Leave The Country' "
Oh god, ANOTHER reason to hope Obama beats McCain!

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1811992,00.html
Interesting Time Magazine article about marijuana in America.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/921kauae.asp?pg=1
This will make you vomit faster than downing a full bottle of ipecac.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/05/26/080526fa_fact_packer
"The Fall of Conservatism"
Four of the most beautiful words in the English language....

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/15/conyers-someones-got-to-kick-roves-ass/
"SOMEONE'S GOT TO KICK ROVE'S ASS"
I like the way John Conyers thinks....

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/14/half-hour-newshour-fails/
Remeber when Fox News tried to start a right-wing equivalent to The Daily Show?
Didn't think so. No one else does, either .

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/10/bill-sali-bigotry/
"Rep. Bill Sali: Religious Diversity In Congress ‘Was Not Envisioned By The Founding Fathers’ "
Right, right....so they decided to establish a firmly secular government as opposed to a theocracy by.....coin toss?

Link Dump, RELIGION!

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=15-answers-to-creationist
"15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense"
"Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don't hold up."

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/03/09/oklahoma-one-step-from-doom/
More proof that my fucking state is stuck in the 1800s. Someone's got to start trying to change this shit.

http://www.bigcynic.com/2006/11/atheists_fight_.html
"Atheists fight back."
And it's about damn time, too.

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2007/11/15/burnout-on-the-god-beat-second-top-religion-writer-calls-it-quits/
"Burnout on the God Beat: Second Top Religion Writer Calls It Quits."
“It was time to go. What faith I had, I’ve lost, I am afraid – I’ve seen too much, too close. A young Methodist press officer once asked me earnestly whether I saw it as my job to spread the Good News of Jesus. No, I said, that’s the last thing I am here to do.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2037882/Car-dealership-advert-tells-atheists-to-'shut-up'.html
1) Fuck
2) you.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/dec/09/tracymcveigh.theobserver
"Children are targets of Nigerian witch hunt."
"Evangelical pastors are helping to create a terrible new campaign of violence against young Nigerians. Children and babies branded as evil are being abused, abandoned and even murdered while the preachers make money out of the fear of their parents and their communities."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
The Wikipedia article about Christian Terrorism. It's quite long.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/silverman.htm
South Carolina's Superme Court just declared it illegal to bar atheists from holding public office!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article3087486.ece
"Richard Dawkins, the British scientist who has become the high priest of atheism, is launching a crusade in America to win new recruits to the church of nonbelievers. He is to embark on a lecture tour of 2,000-seater halls in the Bible Belt and the Midwest in the wake of the presidential primary season, which reaches its climax in early February. Dawkins, whose book The God Delusion has sold 1.5m copies in the English language, has teamed up with Robin Wight, the man behind some of Britain’s most memorable advertising campaigns, to make it respectable to admit to being an atheist."

http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/10/09/discussion-christian-proselytization-horror-stories.htm
"Christian Proselytization Horror Stories"

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2006/09/holy-war-and-holy-father-bible-vs.html
The Bible vs. The Koran: Which is more violent?

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/
HUGE collection of essays and stories related to Atheism.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080122101929.htm
"Equal Level Of Commitment And Relationship Satisfaction Found Among Gay And Heterosexual Couples"
......suck it, Dobson!

http://www.exminister.org/
A website for ex-ministers and ex-Christians.

http://www.expelledexposed.com/
A website that debunks all of the bullshit in Ben Stein's Expelled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society
Wikipedia article about the Flat Earth Society. These people are no different than the imbeciles at the Creation museum.

http://www.lovegodsway.org/C.H.O.P.S.
"God hates fags" is quite a popular phrase among Christians these days, isn't it?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=66323
An atheist billboard: I love it!

http://elroy.net/ehr/fighttheright.html
"How to fight the Religious Right: A guide to defending yourself against Fundamentalist Christians."

http://atheism.about.com/od/adolfhitlernazigermany/tp/HitlerNazisAtheismSecularism.htm
"Quotes from Hitler Opposing Secularism & Atheism"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/14/AR2007091402199.html
"In America, Nonbelievers Find Strength in Numbers"
One of my all-time favorite articles!

http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2006/03/atheism_is_the.html
"Athiesm is the fastest-growing religious identity in America."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-dorchen/emexpelledem-ben-steins-f_b_99368.html
"Expelled: Ben Stein's Fall from Disgrace... to... Something Even Lower"
A HuffPo writer rips Ben Stein a new one. I thoroughly enjoyed it .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_Behind:_Eternal_Forces
A Christian video game that rewards players for killing people like me (just as Jesus would have).

http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/061203_richard_leakey.html
"Scientist Fights Church Effort to Hide Museum's Pre-Human Fossils "
.....yeah, sounds like something a church would do.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/25/national/main3873100.shtml
"Many in U.S. Drop Their Childhood Religion"
I'd bet money that this trend not only continues, but that it also increases.

http://www.maaf.info/
The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers
("No atheists in foxholes" my ass....)

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
"Our Founding Fathers were NOT Christians."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/30/world.aids.day/index.html
"President Bush: Faith key to international AIDS fight."
Yeah....PRAY the virus away, THAT'LL fucking work....

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/310592/
"Get Religion For Your Brain Today! You'll Be Believing Stuff In No Time!"

http://home.earthlink.net/~owl233/biblequotes.htm
"Scary Bible Quotes"

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/science/30profile.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&ei=5070&en=e3760aa7d1b5022a&ex=1183780800&oref=slogin
"Scientific Savvy? In U.S., Not Much"
Of course not. We're too busy thinking the planet is only 6000 years old, and that prayer can actually stop AIDS.

http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/09/28/secular-americans-more-moral-than-christian-americans.htm
Freethinkers are much less likely to think torture is okay.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/12/04/sherri-shepherd-doesnt-g_n_75292.html
"Sherri Shepherd Doesn't Get That Whole BC Thing, Insists 'Jesus Came First' "
Sherri Shepherd.....is a fucking dimwit.

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/julia_sweeney_on_letting_go_of_god.html
An excerpt from Julia Sweeney's "Letting Go of God".

http://www.fixedearth.com/
A group of Christians who believe the Earth doesn't spin.
Uh......what.....?

http://outcampaign.org/
Richard Dawkins' OUT Campaign

http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/
Oh now HERE'S a good one: Young Earth Creationists who think 9/11 was an inside job.
I didn't even know that much Koolaid has ever even existed.....

http://www.secularcovenant.com/TSE/2008/01/11/who-killed-slavery-response-to-dinesh-dsouza/
Another good one: Dinesh D'Souza claims that Christianity is what brought about the end to slavery in America. Of course, being completely ignorant of reality and simultaneously full of shit, this laughably absurd argument is ripped to shreds.
It's like breaking 1,496 priceless vases, then duct-taping one of them back together and patting yourself on the back for it. Nevermind the Church quoted as describing the abolition movement as "undeniably atheistic".

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/26/anti-gay-summit/
" ‘Values Voter Summit’ Features Attack on ‘Faggots,’ Claim That Gay Rights Movement Inspired ‘From The Pit Of Hell Itself’ "
Hating people who are different: it's what Jesus would have done.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2008/03/27/grace.girl.pray.cnn
"The case of an 11-year-old girl who died after her parents opted for prayer over medical care."
These parents should be charged with manslaughter, and placed in a psychiatric ward for the rest of their lives.

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/god5.htm
Why WON'T god heal amputees?

PA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAH AHHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you don't get why I'm laughing at this video, click here.

Ben Stein gets ripped a new asshole.
It'll go well with the rest of his personality:

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Saturday, December 15, 2007

Sat, 15 Dec 2007 01:12:31 GMT

BILL O'REILLY DEFEATS SECULARISTS IN THE WAR ON CHRISTMAS!!!!!!1111

but also,

I DEFEAT BILL O'REILLY IN THE WAR ON THE BLUE SKY THEORY!!!!!!1111

Well, it's happened. Billo's relentless stream of mighty Christian logic has finally defeated us. I had to say, I was hoping we anti-American, Christmas hating secular-progressives stood a chance in our War on Christmas, but deep down, I knew....I looked at Bill O'Reilly and said to my atheist comrades, "well, there's just no way we could ever compete with a fat, balding white guy whose audience consists mainly of people in their 60's". Come on, it's Bill O'Reilly! Defeat for us was inevitable.

What was our defeat, exactly? Well, I'm not exactly sure, but Billo said it on his show, so it must be true. He has single-handedly defeated all of us atheists. And he beat us bad. In fact, Bill O'Reilly's steady stream of American Righteousness and Invincible Conservative Rationality has defeated us so soundly, I'm going to get baptized and convert to Christianity this Sunday.

Keep in mind, O'Reilly's declaration of victory over Christmas-hating secular-progressives like me is completely different from the declaration of victory he made last week. Or last year. Completely different. This time, Billo has REALLY beaten us in our War on Christmas. I don't think we'll be able to pull our forces together and regroup, this time. I think we're done for. We should have known better than try to take on Bill O'Reilly, the Cultural Warrior. This isn't just some arbitrary declaration of victory from O'Reilly, either.....no no no, this is and arbitrary declaration of victory that he announced on his show! To declare victory in a war, you usually have to have a victory in at least one battle, but this is different. This is the O'Reilly Factor we're talking about! Imagine if O'Reilly had been around in World War II! Billo would go on the Factor, declare a victory two days after Pearl Harbor, and the Nazis and Japanese would have laid down their arms and given up in droves.

So Bill O'Reilly has defeated us secular-progressives yet again. Boy, he sure is racking up those wins against us! Score one for Jeeeeeeeesuuuuuuus!! Billo even declared on his show that the secular-progressives are "furious, furious about losing the War on Christmas." Well, I'm not furious. I saw it coming, I knew there was no way we could ever defeat the Great Bill O'Reilly. He declared on his show that the S-P's "Taliban-like oppression of Christmas", his words, is at an end. Because, you know how oppressed Christmas has been. We sure had been successful at oppressing the holiday that is celebrated at the end of December, but who's shopping season now starts before Halloween. But alas! Our days of Christmas-oppressing have ended. In fact, I'd even go so far as to say that secularism is in its last throes.

But wait, my heathen, godless comrades!

I've just declared a victory over Bill O'Reilly as well. I'm sure you'll be hearing about it on all the major news networks next week. You see, Bill O'Reilly believes the sky is green with purple polka dots.

Yes, he has relentlessly been fighting a war on the blue-sky theory. You may not have heard about this war, but it's there....it's there, just believe me. Bill O'Reilly has been leading a group of people around the country fighting this war. They're the Purple-polka-dot Sky-ists. We'll call them P-S's for short.

You see, the P-S's are furious, furious that we have defeated them in the War on the Blue Sky Theory. What specific defeat did we hand them, you ask? Well, that's not important. The important think is that we have finally defeated Bill O'Reilly in his War on the Blue Sky Theory. Making this declaration of victory IS how we've beaten them in this war. It's perfect logic! We simply declare victory in the P-S's War on the Blue Sky Theory, and that's that! What are they going to do, say that we haven't defeated them? Phht! Once victory has been declared, you can't go back and un-declare it. You can only declare victory again on top of it. Like now: I officially declare that we have defeated Bill O'Reilly and the Purple-polka-dot Sky-ists in the War on the Blue Sky Theory. BAM! Did you see that? In the space of the time it took me do declare victory the first time to declaring victory in the sentence preceding this one, we have defeated Bill O'Reilly TWICE! I bet the P-S's are furious.

Just give it up, Billo. We've beaten you and your America hating P-S's twice already in your evil, America-hating War on the Blue Sky Theory. There's no use in standing up to our infallible, American, anti-terrorist logic. Might as well just give up and pack it in, pal, because I'm a ~~GOD~~ CULTURE WARRIOR, and I will fight you and all the other P-S's until we achieve yet another victory in the War on the Blue Sky Theory. Your days of Taliban-like oppression of the Blue Sky Theory are OVER!

FSM Bless America.

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:10:41 GMT

As of last Wednesday, I've had this blog for 3 years. Which means I've been blogging since before "blog" was a household term . Readers come and go, readership goes up and down....here's the thing. Xanga is primarily a social networking site, and not a serious blogging site. But Xanga has been losing out to Myspace and Facebook over the past several months. For a lot of people, Xanga was just a fad. A year ago, two or three dozen of my friends in real life had Xangas; now, only a couple do. But to be blunt, I really don't care; I would keep writing on this blog and my other one even if no one at all read them. It's what I do. But in retrospect, I wish I had chosen a host that was geared more toward serious blogging (Blogspot) than toward social networking (Xanga). C'est la vie - I'm not about to dump three years worth of posts just to switch over now. I'll be writing on Defiance_01 for a very, very, very long time.

A few weeks ago, a friend of mine interviewed me for a report paper at her Christian college.

The Full Paper (names have been removed):

Introduction
I have provided my interview responses below and feel that adequate explanation of the people answering these questions is required. The first requirement is an active Christian not associated with Ozark Christian College. I turned to a close friend of mine named [TC]. He is a student at the University of Central Oklahoma studying to one day become a politician and have a positive influence in our government. I have known [TC] for about two years, and have come to see him as a very blunt man with set opinions.

The other requirement for this report is a person who is not an active Christian. Honestly, I knew exactly who to contact. I turned to a very good friend of mine, [Kryss]. I have known him since elementary school, and we have always had different opinions when it came to religion and views of God. He is a very active atheist/agnostic with also very bold opinions to share with everyone who will listen. He claims to be atheist/agnostic meaning that it is indeed possible for a deity or a group of deities to exist but no evidence to support either has ever been made known. [Kryss] is a student at Oklahoma State University studying [Computer Engineering].

Interview with [TC], a Christian

1) Do you believe that a personal God really exists? Why or why not?
Yes, because you are able to have a personal relationship with God the Son (Jesus Christ).

2) Do you believe that Jesus Christ was God incarnate? Why or why not?
Yes. Jesus either had to be Lord, liar, or a lunatic. If a liar then he could not have been a "good man" or "prophet" as other religions claim. If a lunatic the same follows. He claimed to be Lord and was indeed who he claimed to be.

3) What is the purpose of human existence?
To worship God.

4) How do you know what is right and wrong?
Through prompting of the Holy Spirit. God gives us a knowledge of right and wrong. The bible says that we are not to expect non-believers to act like believers do. Therefore becoming a Christian (believer) gives us a clearer definition of right and wrong.

5) What happens to a person at death?
You die. If you’re a Christian, you either stay here on earth until the 2nd coming, or you pass go and collect $200. Or Christians go straight to heaven upon death. Non-Christians go to hell... eventually to be thrown into the lake of fire where they will cease to exist.

Interview with [Kryss], an Atheist/Agnostic

1) Do you believe that a personal God really exists? Why or why not?
If by "personal god" you mean a deity whose personality and actions can be explicitly known though works such as the Bible and the Koran, absolutely not. Those works are not only clearly man-made and intended to control and pacify vulnerable and/or gullible minds by appealing to the basest of human desires, such as to be comforted from our fears (e.g. death), to be given a sense of personal cosmic significance, and to believe in some sort of control behind the chaotic nature of the universe, but are so riddled with scientific and historical (let alone ethical) flaws that to think of them as anything other than at best historical fiction and at worst simply manipulative fairy tales is, to the unbiased mind, asinine.

But if by "personal god", you mean some sort of guiding hand or universally cohesive entity, essentially synonymous with nature, then the existence of such an entity is possible; but only as equally possible as the existence of multiple deities, or no deity at all. And while there is certainly a possibility that a deity or group of deities exists, there has been no evidence or proof to definitively confirm so.

2) Do you believe that Jesus Christ was God incarnate? Why or why not?
Certainly not. Aside from the aforementioned overwhelming unreliability of the Bible, the Christian concept of Jesus is nearly identical to hundreds of other stories of demigods that had been around for centuries (such as Dionysus, from Greek mythology). Jesus Christ was either a very nice and compassionate leader whose story was distorted and exaggerated to suit the political purposes of the early Christian church, or an out-and-out con artist who was able to manipulate the people of that era into believing he was directly connected to an all-powerful deity to suit his own ambitions and further his own agenda.

3) What is the purpose of human existence?
Who says human existence requires a predetermined purpose? Once a person realizes that, as Christopher Hitchens puts it, "The cosmos is not designed with us in mind," it's a profound liberation to see that we are free to create our own purpose rather than to presuppose that the universe put us here for a reason and that it's our job to find it.

4) How do you know what is right and wrong?
Our understanding of morality is constantly evolving, just as we are. Two thousand years ago, people thought of the cold-blooded murder that took place in the Roman Colosseum was merely a sport. Civilized modern society, as a whole, has long understood it to be barbaric and, to say the least, immoral. Two hundred years ago, people thought it was all right to enslave an entire group of people simply because they had darker-colored skin. We now understand that slavery of any kind is abhorrent. Twenty years ago, people thought homosexuality was nothing more than sexual deviancy and unnatural perversion. We are now beginning to understand that sexual orientation is a matter of physiology and biology, stemming from brain chemistry and essentially the same as a person's race, though less directly connected to genetics. Our understanding of "right and wrong" is evolving just as humanity as a species is.

5) What happens to a person at death?
No one will ever know before they actually die. Although some modern scientists like Aubrey de Grey are working on ways to eliminate death completely, and I say more power to them. Some people accuse them of playing god, but if there really is a god who doesn't want us to play god, I'm sure he'd just twitch his nose and smite them, or something.

Response and Evaluation
After conducting these interviews, I was slightly discouraged, because too many times within the church have I seen this happen. People who have no faith are more bold and ready to give an answer than those are commanded to be ready. Not to say that [TC] did not give a proper answer, but to me, they seem concise and maybe without much thought behind them. I found myself thinking, “Well, duh, anyone who actually listens in church could say that,” wondering maybe he should put some more thought into his answers. Then again I do not know how much research he has done for his own personal apologetic. [TC]’s response seemed based on experience only and that there was not much more. [Kryss] gave a very thorough, well-thought response. I asked him to help me because I knew he would give such an answer and take an interest in why I wanted his opinions.

So what then? Who is out there challenging the church to teach their faith? Are we afraid to think about the “Why?” and “How?” because we worry it might lead to doubt, which might lead to unbelief? Why should the church be afraid to examine that which they claim is irrefutable truth? Has the church simply become content with saying that we do not know all the answers and that is acceptable? Granted, we will never know all the answers; yet that should not be an excuse to sit back and not take an active attempt.

My Comments:
Heaven help us, no pun intended, if [TC] gets into public office. But then again, since Oklahoma has people like Jim Inhofe in office, it would pretty much be a lateral move.

"Are we afraid to think about the “Why?” and “How?” because we worry it might lead to doubt, which might lead to unbelief? Why should the church be afraid to examine that which they claim is irrefutable truth?"

In a word: Yes. For two thousand years, the Christian church has been horrified at the thought of opening their beliefs up to scrutiny and examination from scientific, historical, and philosophical perspectives. That's how all religion survives: the minute an objection is made to that particular belief system, all the members of that belief system bury their heads in the sand. After all, if we can prevent ourselves from hearing what people like Richard Dawkins have to say, we protect ourselves from having to accept the possibility that what they're saying might actually make sense, right?

But the fundamental problem with all of this is that the Christians who attend colleges like this and like "Liberty" University is that they're not seeking "truth". They're beginning with the assumption that the Bible is innerrant, accurate, and the "word of god". Why? Because that's what they've been ordered to believe their whole lives by their parents and preachers. The problem is that in taking this approach, right off the bat you're rejecting the possibility that the Bible is completely and utterly wrong - and in doing so, rejecting an immeasurably large amount of information and knowledge that may very well point to the "truth". The classic examples of this Christian rejection of reality are the Creationism, and the Young Earth Theory, but now is not the time for debates about such nonsense.

"People who have no faith are more bold and ready to give an answer than those are commanded to be ready."

More than anything, this is because of the recent move toward Atheism and secularism in American over the past 5-10 years. Atheists in America are finally beginning to realize that we don't have to simply sit back and be bullied by moronic cretins who think our beliefs and our way of life are "immoral" or "evil". There's a chapter in Christohper Hitchens' new book called "The Resistance of the Rational", and while I haven't read the chapter in its entirety, most synopses describe the chapter as explaining this in full. There has been an underground movement in America for some time to take the country back from hyperreligious dogmatists who have come to rule it with what can only be described as one click south of an iron fist. Spurred on by intellectuals such as Dawkins, this secularist resistance is beginning to grow more vocal and more bold. If current trends continue, by the middle of the 21st century there will be more secularists in America than Christians.

But back to my previous point about Christians rejecting anything dealing with religion that conflicts with what has already been cemented into their psyche, there is proof of that in [TC]'s response to question #5. It's not just his response, it's the response Christianity has been using for two thousand years:

"Non-Christians go to hell... eventually to be thrown into the lake of fire where they will cease to exist."

"Join us or burn in hell." That sentiment is really the only thing Christianity is about, isn't it? It's certainly not "feed the hungry and clothe the poor", because a) statistics show nonbelievers are almost always more compassionate and caring about the less fortunate in society and b) as shown in any Christian activist group, who has time to be empathetic to those damned welfare cheats while we have abortions and gay marriages to stop? So now we see the heart of Christianity (and Islam, and Judaism, and any other religion throughout history): "Conform to us, or else!"

....which is much easier than trying to fight facts with facts (come to think it, Christians kind of have an empty quiver in that regard). But when someone (like myself) comes to understand that the concept of hell (a place of fiery torture that juuuuust so happens to be reserved for anyone who doesn't agree with their dogma) is little more than one in a long series of fairy tales meant to intimidate and control weak-minded and gullible people, that argument of "Join us or burn in hell", which is the core of Christianity and countless other religions throughout history, loses its sway entirely.

One of the many things that can be learned from all of the recent books by atheist authors who show religion for what it really is is that while the task of gathering enough evidence to conclude that a religion is based on lies, ignorance, antiquated ideas, and little else is straightforward and relatively simple, what's much more difficult is to prove to the believers in that religion that the evidence you've collected is both accurate and adequate. The main reason for this is that the believers in these religions have had their beliefs so entrenched into them since birth that they don't want to believe this disillusionment because that would shatter their perception of the world around them. And the idea of having that perception shattered, of having that bubble of fantasy (in which there is a god who loves them and that they will one day live in a perfect utopia) burst is too frightening for most of them to even consider.

[EDIT]: One quote of [TC]'s that I forgot to mention:

"Yes. Jesus either had to be Lord, liar, or a lunatic. If a liar then he could not have been a "good man" or "prophet" as other religions claim. If a lunatic the same follows. He claimed to be Lord and was indeed who he claimed to be."

First off, just how many religions other than Christianity and Islam claim that Jesus is both a good man and a prophet? Second, if a liar, then they could still make the claim that he is a good man and a prophet if he has successfully decieved them into believing so. Third, the word "lunatic" has different meaning two thousand years ago and today: two thousand years ago, almost everyone thought the earth was flat, and today, people who believe such a thing are called lunatics. Given the aforementioned fact that the story of Jesus is one of hundreds of stories of people who were thought to be prophetic and to posess divine power, it's not hard to see how a common man either skilled in propaganda or completely delusional could make these claims and avoid the label "lunatic". The question is not whether Jesus was Lord, liar, or lunatic, the question is whether Jesus was liar, lunatic, or both.

Youtube Videos
(and lots of them!)

Let's start with a video of a mother who has just discovered that her son is an Atheist:

Penn and Teller: "The Bible is Bullshit" (GREAT VIDEO)

Richard Dawkin's response to an audience member's question: "But what if you're wrong?"
This is why I love Dawkins: his answer could not have been any more perfect:

Part 1 of Dawkins speaking at a college in Virginia. The above clip is from this lecture.

Part 2 of the above lecture. As a bonus, he often slaps down the imbecility that spews forth whenever an audience member from "Liberty" University opens their mouth:

Christians often whine about being "persecuted" in modern times. What a load of utter garbage.
Try this instead - this is the price atheists often pay for living in America:

And now, for some comic relief:

An EXCELLENT video of Julia Sweeney, Christopher Hitchens, and Ellen Johnson.
Especially Sweeney's mother's reaction to learning about her atheism:

Bill Maher, doing what he does best:

And finally, a classic. She's a SPIRITUAL WARRIOR!:

--Kryss864 (My personal blog)
--Why I Am the Way I Am (An essay about why I am an agnostic atheist.)
--Little-known statistics about religion (A reason to hope)
--The Day the Democrats took back Congress
--Save Roe v. Wade!
--Atheists in Foxholes
--Beautiful stories of deconversion from Christianity

Saturday, October 06, 2007

Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:00:17 GMT

The End of the Republican Party?
(We can only hope.)

What MoveOn.org said: General Petraeus, or General Betray Us?

What MoveOn.org meant: "General Petraeus has allowed himself to become a puppet of the Bush administration, and in doing so, has turned his back on both his country and the troops under his command."

The Right: "OMFG, THIS 1S LYKE T0TALY OUTR4G3US!!!!!!11 I C4NT B3LIEVE THEY WUD DO SUCH A THNG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111 L1BRALS R EV1L AND HAT3 TEH TROOPS AND HAT3 AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111"

Congressional Democrats: "You criticized him? But he's wearing a uniform! That mean's you can't criticize him, doesn't it? But you did it anyway. And that's mean."

(Later that month....)

Rush Limbaugh: "Troops who don't support this war are phony soldiers!"

The Right: .....

The Left: "Hey! You just bashed troops for opposing your opinion, and did so without constructing any logical arguments! And then you bashed the people who criticized Petraeus, even though there actually is a legitimate reason for why they did it! That's not only asinine, it's hypocritical!"

The Right: "STFU!!!!!!!!1111 RUSH LUVS TEH TROOPS!!!!!!!!111 TH3R3 WUZ N0 HYP0CR1SY AT ALL!!!!!!!!!!111111"

Congressional Democrats: .....

I would almost think that Limbaugh said what he said just because he wanted to subtly prove the point that the right can get away with doing anything to and saying anything about the troops. Anyone with any semblance of common sense can see that Rush, who was one of the right-wingers who went ape-shit over the MoveOn.org ad, was being as hypocritical as anything in the history of hypocrisy after then going on to blatantly attack any and all soldiers who opposed his position on the war. This whole MoveOn/Limbaugh debacle is downright laughable in the level of obtuseness displayed by Rush.

You'd think he'd learn. After all, Rush's bashing of Michael J. Fox over the issue of stem cells is essentially what handed Claire McCaskill her victory over her Republican rival for the Missouri Senate seat in 2006. We all know that story; you could easily make the case that Limbaugh's sick and twisted on-air rants handed Democrats the 51st Senate seat.

And yet he's at it again. "Damn MoveOn for their criticism of an American military man! Oh, and by the way, any American military man who disagrees with my opinion on the war is a phony soldier!"

The American people may not be quick to pick up on things.....but Christ, You'd have to be fucking brain dead to not catch (and/or care about) Limbaugh's 180.

It's just the latest in a series of right-wing fuckups so obvious and severe that they couldn't do a better job of handing 2008 to the Democrats if they tried.

And 2008 is the conservative assessment (pardon the pun). One Republican lawmaker remarked, "There's talk about us going the way of the Whigs."

Three articles I've read recently highlight this:

Leading Indicators Point Down for GOP - This one expands on how the left is crushing the right in terms of fundraising. And most of the left's contributions come from grassroots - the people - as opposed to the right, whose contributions come primarily from the rich and from big business.

The Religious Right's Power Ebbs - Fundamentalist Christianity is (finally) losing it's chokehold on American political power (presumably because Atheism, Secularism, and Freethought are rising exponentially each year). I'll expand on this more in my next post, which will be devoted to religion and Atheism.

And my personal favorite:

Is the GOP Committing Suicide?

In a word: Yes. One EXTREMELY noteworthy example is Bush's recent veto of S-CHIP (State's Children's Health Insurance Program). It would give free health insurance to millions of poor children in America (a small step toward Universal Health Care). What's more, it would do so by raising taxes on cigarettes - health insurance for children would be paid for by the people who already have enough money to take up that god awful habit. It's a win-win, right? Right. And the overwhelming majority of Americans support the bill.

So what does Bush do? He vetoes it.

Talk about things that make no fucking sense:
a) It's going to drive his 29% approval rating even lower.
b) It puts the right in the position of defending someone who's taking away health care from children.
c) It's fucking cruel and downright sadistic.

As Jon Stewart remarks, Bush's actions are actually starting to resemble someone else:

.....which is hilarious, until you realize just how true it is, and until you realize the fact that taking away so much from people who have so little is anything but a laughing matter.

Because as we all know, denying poor children the right to medical care simply because equality despite wealth is a Socialist principle instead of a Capitalist one is EXACTLY what Jesus would have done.

But this S-CHIP veto is just the latest in a ridiculously long line of right-wing fuckups so severe that the country is not only turning left now, it may be turning left long term.

Allowing 9/11 to happen, taking away our freedoms and privacy with the Patriot Act, focusing on banning gay marriage and abortion when they should be focusing on real issues, lying about WMDs, entering a war of choice Iraq, saying we'll only be there 6 months and that it will only cost us $10 billion, failing to plan for the post-war, denying troops body armor and vacation time, extending troop deployments, failing to react to Hurricane Katrina, embracing crony Capitalism, putting us into a debt that will take us at least half a century to get out of, authorizing torture, ignoring global warming, failing to capture bin Laden, failing to secure the borders because of squabbling over how to best punish the people trying to provide a better life for their families, letting Walter Reed go to shit, pushing America ever close to a theocracy......

And that's not even including the sex scandals. Mark Foley, Jeff Gannon, Ted Haggard, Bob Allen, David Vitter, Larry Craig.....party of "family values", indeed......

Right-wing sleazebag commentators are only hastening the separation between conservatism and the future of America. Rush calls troops who disagree with him "phony soldiers". Bill O'Reilly is shocked to find out that African-Americans actually have table manners. Neil Boortz, aside from his asinine idea of the "Fair" Tax, has said this about immigrants: "When we yank out the welcome mat, and they all start going back to Mexico, as a going away gift let's all give them a box of nuclear waste....Tell 'em it'll heat tortillas". It's hard for any rational person not to cringe in the face of such blatant racism.

And to top it all of, the king (pun intended) of all the right-wing nutjob screwballs is coming out with another book. Ann Coulter's latest book is called "Democrats Would Be Republicans If They Had Any Brains". Now, for a commentator who wants herself to be taken seriously, she's a hair off of sounding like Lil the Toddler on the old Rugrats cartoons: "If Brains Were Gasoline, Democrats Wouldn't Have Enough To Power An Ant's Car Around The Outside Of A Penny". Well I hate to break it to you Ann, but most of us have graduated elementary school. We have real jobs now, so we won't have any time to meet you on the playground after school to play a game of Throw Rocks At Poor Kids.

But even Ann Coulter knows that the right-wing could very well be facing the end of it's days. Here's something I noticed while watching Faux News a couple days ago, so I decided to track down a couple pictures for comparison to make sure I wasn't imagining things:

"I AM SMILING, SEE? THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS GOING TO LAST FOREVER! AND JESUS WILL RETURN BEFORE ANYONE PUTS ANOTHER DEMOCRAT BACK INTO THE PRESIDENCY! SEE MY SMILE? HOW COULD ANYONE BE NERVOUS WHEN THEY'RE SMILING AS WIDE AS I AM!"

That's what I noticed when I saw her on TV. Looking much more ragged, and obviously faking a smile that's trying to mask the fact that she knows 2008 and a good chunk of America's political future lies with the left. The exact same kind of forced optimism that Karl Rove showed while he was proclaiming that Republicans would win even more seats in the Congress just days before the 2006 election.

But she was part of what contributed to that. Sane, rational people are repulsed by the things that Coulter, Limbaugh, and Hannity proclaim on a regular basis. The best thing that could ever happen to America would be if political discussions shifted from "right vs. left" (or "right vs. middle", given the wimpy Dems currently controlling Congress) to "middle vs. left". This is Coulter/Limbaugh/Hannity's worst nightmare, but by steadily spewing blatant hatespeech through TV, books, and radio, people have begun to see just how asinine the radical right's "principles" and "values" really are.

It's the combination of that hatespeech with the maliciousness and incompetence of the Bush Regime that has essentially cemented the left's influence over American politics in the near future (and quite possibly for a very long time to come).

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:26:28 GMT

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Sat, 11 Aug 2007 09:29:46 GMT

In a word: Yes.

(New post after I move into my new apartment.)

Monday, July 02, 2007

Mon, 02 Jul 2007 10:57:35 GMT

Absolutely BRILLIANT Article.

(From The Nation)

The New Atheists

What began with publisher W.W. Norton taking a chance on a gutsy, hyperbolic and idiosyncratic attack on religion by a graduate student in neuroscience has grown into a remarkable intellectual wave. No fewer than five books by the New Atheists have appeared on bestseller lists in the past two years--Sam Harris's The End of Faith and Letter to a Christian Nation, Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell, Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion and now Christopher Hitchens's God Is Not Great. The scandalized media have both attacked and inflated the phenomenon. After the New York Times Book Review, for example, ran a thoughtful review of Harris and then a negative front-page review of Dawkins, the daily paper published two weak op-ed attacks on the writers and a vapid article on how atheists celebrate Christmas, followed by tongue-in-cheek admiration in the Book Review for Hitchens's ability to promote his career by saying the unexpected.

Despite such dubious blessings, the four have become must-read writers. The most remarkable fact is not their books themselves--blunt, no-holds-barred attacks on religion in different registers--but that they have succeeded in reaching mainstream readers and in becoming bestsellers. Is this because Americans are beginning to get fed up with the religiosity of the past several years? It would be comforting if we could explain this as a cultural signal of the end of the right-wing/evangelical ascendancy. Such speculations are probably wishful thinking--book buyers are such a small slice of the population that few sociologists would stake their careers on claiming that book buyers' preferences reflect anything like a national mood.

The success of the New Atheists may, however, reflect something significant among their audience. In the past generation in the United States, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists have been a timid minority--almost voiceless, often on the defensive, routinely derided, both warned against and ignored. As Susan Jacoby pointed out in her book Freethinkers, it is symptomatic of the situation that the most dramatic presidential address in generations took place in the National Cathedral three days after September 11, 2001, so filled with religious language that it sounded like a sermon. It was delivered by a President flanked by Jewish, Muslim and Christian representatives, a model of religious inclusiveness, without anyone standing alongside them representing the tens of millions of nonreligious Americans. At this most important collective moment in our recent history, it was as if they did not exist. This is what the polls are telling us: Virtually everyone in America believes in God.

We know how zealously the conservative Christian denominations have politicized themselves in the past generation, how the GOP has harnessed this energy by embracing their demands--opposing stem-cell research, gay marriage and abortion rights, championing government aid to religious schools and faith-based social programs--and by appointing sympathetic judges. So effectively have they framed the issues that, according to the Pew Research Center's 2006 report on religion and public life, fully 69 percent of Americans believe that liberals have "gone too far in trying to keep religion out of schools and government."

We commonly hear that only a tiny percentage of Americans don't believe in God and that, as a Newsweek poll claimed this spring, 91 percent do. In fact, this is not true. How many unbelievers are there? The question is difficult to assess accurately because of the challenges of constructing survey questions that do not tap into the prevailing biases about religion. According to the American Religious Identification Survey, which interviewed more than 50,000 people, more than 29 million adults--one in seven Americans--declare themselves to be without religion. The more recent Baylor Religion Survey ("American Piety in the 21st Century") of more than 1,700 people, which bills itself as "the most extensive and sensitive study of religion ever conducted," calls for adjusting this number downward to exclude those who believe in a God but do not belong to a religion. Fair enough. But Baylor's own Gallup survey is a bit shaky for at least two reasons. It counts anyone who believes in a "higher power" but not God as believing in God--casting a vast net over adherents of everything from spirit to history to love. Yet the study allows unbelievers only one option: to not believe in "anything beyond the physical world," leaving no space for those who regard themselves as agnostics or skeptics, secularists or humanists. Contrast this with a more recent and more nuanced Financial Times/Harris poll of Europeans and Americans that allowed respondents to declare agnosticism as well as atheism: 18 percent of the more than 2,000 American respondents chose one or the other, while 73 percent affirmed belief in God or a supreme being.

A more general issue affects American surveys on religious beliefs, namely, the "social desirability effect," in which respondents are reluctant to give an unpopular answer in a society in which being religious is the norm. What happens when questions are framed to overcome this distortion? The FT/H poll tried to counteract it by allowing space not only for the customary "Not sure" but also for "Would prefer not to say"--and 6 percent of Americans chose this as their answer to the question of whether they believed in God or a supreme being. Add to this those who declared themselves as atheists or agnostics and, lo and behold, the possible sum of unbelievers is nearly one in four Americans.

All this helps explain the popularity of the New Atheists--Americans as a whole may not be getting too much religion, but a significant constituency must be getting fed up with being routinely marginalized, ignored and insulted. After all, unbelievers are concentrated at the higher end of the educational scale--a recent Harris American poll shows that 31 percent of those with postgraduate education do not avow belief in God (compared with only 14 percent of those with a high school education or less). The percentage rises among professors and then again among professors at research universities, reaching 93 percent among members of the National Academy of Sciences. Unbelievers are to be found concentrated among those whose professional lives emphasize science or rationality and who also have developed a relatively high level of confidence in their own intellectual faculties. And they are frequently teachers or opinion-makers.

But over the past generation they have come to feel beleaguered and, except for rare individuals like comedian and talk-show host Bill Maher, voiceless in the public arena. The great success of the New Atheists is to have reached them, both speaking to and for them. These writers are devoted, with sledgehammer force and angry urgency, to "breaking the spell" cast by the religious ascendancy, to overcoming a situation in which every other area of life can be critically analyzed while admittedly irrational religious faith is made central to American life but exempted from serious discussion.

This does not make for restraint. Harris displays brash self-confidence, Hitchens and Dawkins angry intellectual bite and Dennett an inexhaustible theoretical energy and range of inquiry. Harris excoriates religious moderates, accusing them of providing cover for fundamentalists at home and abroad by refusing to contest the extremists' premises--because they share them. More upbeat, Dennett is devoted to creating the intellectual conditions for future discussions, in which religion will be treated as just another "natural" phenomenon and accordingly subjected to critical scrutiny. Dawkins bulldozes his way through every major argument for religious belief, and a great many minor ones. And Hitchens endlessly catalogues religion's crimes and absurdities. Each man is at war, writing as if no others had preceded him, and with a passion that can only be described as political.

Above all, each sees himself as breaking a taboo. This explains not only the vigor and urgency of these books, their mainstream character and their publishing success but also the common refrain in reviews that they have "gone too far." Of course they have, because their many faults are often inseparable from their strengths. Self-indulgence is their common flaw: Dennett and Dawkins might have considered their readers more and disciplined their own need to follow out every line of thought, while Harris is so full of his point of view that he, like Hitchens, is unable to consider faith as anything but stupid. They show little understanding of religion or interest in it [see Daniel Lazare, "Among the Disbelievers," May 28]. Still, I am surprised by the hostility and bemusement expressed toward them by their fellow travelers in The New York Review of Books, The New Yorker and The London Review of Books. In attacking religion the four have been breaking the taboo against talking about it seriously, and they may be forgiven for not being calmer, more expert or more measured. Doing battle with what they see as the most pervasive and bothersome phenomenon in American life during the past generation, Harris, Dennett, Dawkins and Hitchens deserve praise for their courage and tenacity in shattering its spell.

Where does the work of the New Atheists leave us? I hope they have roused a significant portion of America from its timidity. But to what end? Living without God means turning toward something. To flourish we need coherent secular popular philosophies that effectively answer life's vital questions. Enlightenment optimism once supplied unbelievers with hope for a better world, whether this was based on Marxism, science, education or democracy. After Progress, after Marxism, is it any wonder atheism fell on hard times? Restoring secular confidence will take much positive work as well as the fierce attacks on religion by our atheist champions. On a societal level, as Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris point out in Sacred and Secular, living without God requires creating conditions in which people are free from the kinds of existential vulnerability that have marked all human societies until the advent of Europe's postindustrial welfare states. Markedly more religious than any of them, the United States provides a life that is far more unequal and far more insecure.

The surprising response to the New Atheist offensive should thus inspire us to think politically as well as philosophically. As a first step this demands creating a coalition between unbelievers and their natural allies, secular-minded believers. I am speaking first about many millions of Americans who nominally belong to a religion but effectively live without any active relationship either to it or to God, or belong to a church and attend services but are "tacit atheists," living day in and day out with only token reference to God. And I also include the many believers who accept the principle of America as a secular society. These include members of the liberal Jewish and Christian denominations, who have long practice in accommodating themselves to science and the modern world and who, as the National Council of Churches website tells us, may remain inspired by Genesis while not needing to take it in "literal, factual terms." Many of these turned up in the most significant finding of the Baylor survey, namely that more than one in four American "believers" does not mean by this a personal God at all but a distant God who has little or nothing to do with the world or themselves. This sounds very much like the deist God of "unbelievers" Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine.

These believers, along with those who think of themselves as "spiritual," as well as professed unbelievers, help to explain why according to the Pew study so many Americans--32 percent--want less religious influence on government. Twenty-four percent say that President Bush talks too much about his religious faith and prayer, and 28 percent deny that the United States is a Christian nation. Most dramatically, a whopping 49 percent believe that Christian conservatives have gone too far "in trying to impose their religious values on the country." This, then, is an unreported secret of American life: Considerable numbers of Americans, religious and secular, are becoming fed up with the in-your-face religion that has come to mark our society.

Until now the most vocal left-of-center response to the Christian right, for example by Sojourners, has been to call for more religion in politics, not less. In early June the group organized a nationally televised forum at which John Edwards, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton testified to their faith, talking about the "hand of God" (Edwards), forgiveness (Obama) and prayer (Clinton). Few loud-and-clear voices have been agitating in the mainstream on behalf of the separation of church and state, for secular and public education, or demanding less rather than more political discussion of religion. Yet tens of millions of Americans worry about such things.

Whether most of them continue to believe in God matters much less than that they are comfortable with secular knowledge and America's secular Constitution. Barry Lynn, for example, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, is a Protestant minister. Although Harris and Dawkins castigate all believers for sharing the premises of conservative Christians, the fact is that many believers could easily be working with out-and-out atheists and agnostics on key issues.

Such a coalition should take the offensive on behalf of American constitutional promises of a secular society, increasingly under threat from Bush's Supreme Court appointments. It will gain support in unexpected places: Judge John Jones III, a Bush appointee, delivered a devastating blow to the forces behind "intelligent design" in his December 2005 decision in the Dover School Board case. The first half of his impressive decision contains a crystal-clear reflection on what science is and why intelligent design, a refurbished form of creationism, is religion, not science. The second half reads like a whodunit, revealing how a minority on the school board conspired to impose intelligent design on the district. It should be a rallying point for the nearly half of all Americans who are disturbed by right-wing religious attempts to impose their faith on the rest of us. An immediate goal should be a call for the publication and widest possible distribution of the Dover decision. It could become another bestseller--by a conservative judge no less!--and a text for civics, current events, history, law and basic science classes.

A second goal of such a coalition might be a campaign to reorient American thinking about atheists and atheism. In recent polls, far more respondents have declared themselves willing to vote for a woman or African-American for President than for an atheist--atheists are more unpopular than gays. Television news viewers are encouraged to nod in agreement with such ageless gibes as "There are no atheists in foxholes" without seeing just how nasty they are. This obnoxious remark, by Katie Couric on NBC's Today show, drew a few complaints and letters, but no wider protests or apology. A coalition determined to widen the range of socially acceptable belief could make a significant difference on such issues.

A broad secular coalition could also demand more nuanced discussion of the range of belief and unbelief in America today. Rather than consciously or unconsciously promoting religious belief, public opinion research should try to register a full range of beliefs, including the interesting and perplexing ways in which people live secular as well as religious lives and their sometimes contradictory combinations. These are rejected by Harris, Dawkins, Dennett and Hitchens, and ignored by the media and mainstream politicians.

Finally, such an alliance could become one place where Dennett's goal of discussing religion openly and critically--as well as atheism and agnosticism--could begin to be realized. A number of questions might be explored: What, for example, is the common ground and what are the differences between believers and unbelievers? And--I save for last the touchiest question of all--shouldn't all Americans be instructed in the great religious and secular traditions, as well as their greatest books? After all, achieving literacy in both religion and secularism might allow us to discuss them more intelligently.

And a great video along similar lines, featuring Penn and Teller:

The Blasphemy Challenge!

The Rational Response Squad has had this going on for a while, trying to get as many people as possible to post on Youtube a video of them saying something along the lines of "I don't believe in god".

Yes, there are other interpretations of the verse they're talking about; "that type of blasphemy means a lifelong denial of the Holy Spirit". Blah blah blah. Interpretation of the verse notwithstanding, this idea is absolutely brilliant. I'm thinking of making a video myself.

The more people we can get to say "I don't believe in god, and I'm not afraid", the better. Religion relies on people's willingness to live in fear. Speaking from experience, throwing away that fear is extraordinarily liberating.

And sticking with subject of religion....

This ignorant douchebag wrote in to the Enid newspaper last Tuesday. I just had to bring it up, so that I could have the joy of refuting it:
Our country was founded on Christianity, its principles. America has lost her identity.

The highest glory of the American Revolution was this it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity. — John Quincy Adams.

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists but by Christians; not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. — Patrick Henry.

We are a Christian nation based on Christian principles by Christian founders. However, the forces of Anti-Christ claim we are not a Christian nation. It is these same forces of anti-Christianity who desecrate, defame and discriminate against Christians and Christ, who take God out of schools, who remove the Nativity Scene, who quote laws of non Christians Countries by the non-Christians on the Supreme Court. To de-Christianize America is to kill the goose so to speak, that has laid the golden egg of individual freedom and prosperity.

America has lost her identity because American Christians are afraid of making an open and public defense of Christianity for fear of having a label put upon them — America is now bowing to anti-Christian religions which runs contrary to Christianity and her American principles. Remember, America has become what she is today, a nation of freedom and prosperity, as a result of recognizing and honoring the Lord Jesus Christ which, in turn, results in the Lord blessing America. However, as we turn our back on Him, His protective blessing is removed.

Arlo Becker

There's so much here to refute, I feel like Lucy in the chocolate factory. For starters, how about these quotes:

"…the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion…" – Thomas Jefferson (He wrote the Declaration of Independence, in case you forgot.)

"Question with boldness the existence of a god." – Thomas Jefferson

"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible." – Benjamin Franklin

"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." – Benjamin Franklin

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." – Benjamin Franklin

"Priests and conjurors are of the same trade." – Thomas Paine

"The Christian system of religion is an outrage on common sense." – Thomas Paine

"All the tales of miracles, with which the Old and New Testament are filled, are fit only for imposters to preach and fools to believe." – Thomas Paine

....I'll see your founding fathers, and raise you one!

The idea that America was founded by Christianity and based on Christian principles is one of the biggest lies purpotrated by Christianity. We are not a Christian nation; only about half of the founding fathers were Christian, the other half were freethinkers (Deists, to be specific.)

To continue, in bulletpoint:

1) "However, the forces of Anti-Christ claim we are not a Christian nation."
Oh, so I'm a "force of the Anti-Christ", now? That's cute. "OOOOOooooooOOOooooo! I'm a scaaaaaarrrryyy atheist! BOO!!"

2) "It is these same forces of anti-Christianity who desecrate, defame and discriminate against Christians and Christ."
....A Christian in America complaining about discrimination, huh? Wow.......just.......wow. Nevermind the fact that Christians are not only promoting discrimination against atheists and homosexuals in America today, Christianity has supported discrimination for centuries. Southern Christians supported slavery; Christians supported the Salem Witch Trials; Christians opposed equality for women; Southern Christians opposed segregation; and that's only in America.

And now Arlo is bitching about what is at worst a taste of their own medicine, and at best a fight for what are simply the exact same rights he holds. Interesting.

3) "To de-Christianize America is to kill the goose...that has laid the golden egg of individual freedom and prosperity."
Well that's amusing. Christianity has been hacking away at individual freedoms, liberty, and prosperity for the past 200 years. Of couse, if Arlo 's knowledge of history led him to believe the founding fathers were all Christian, I'm not surprised that he also got that little fact wrong.

4) "America has lost her identity because American Christians are afraid of making an open and public defense of Christianity for fear of having a label put upon them."
Oh good night. Do I even need to debunk this when his head is that far up his own ass? Yeah, those 10,000+ member mega-churches are really terrified to speak out, aren't they? Give me a break.

5) "America is now bowing to anti-Christian religions which runs contrary to Christianity and her American principles."
America is waking up and realizing the irrational and illogical nature of religion. Arlo's principles of Christian über-fundamentalism are NOT American principles.

6) "Remember, America has become what she is today, a nation of freedom and prosperity, as a result of recognizing and honoring the Lord Jesus Christ which, in turn, results in the Lord blessing America."
America has become a nation of freedom in spite of Christianity, not because of it. Rewriting history does not change reality, Arlo.

VS.
Let's compare them side by side, shall we?

Michael Moore: Loves America.
Ann Coulter: Loves the 26% of America that agrees with her. (True fact: the same 26% believes Jesus will return before 2008. NOT an exaggeration.)

Michael Moore: Overweight, but has begun taking daily walks and eating healthier foods. Recently lost 20 lbs.
Ann Coulter: Bone-thin. Looks like an anorexic skeleton. Recently lost 20 lbs.

Michael Moore: Targets greedy big corporations and their enablers.
Ann Coulter: Targets 9/11 widows, John Edwards the poverty-fighter, and anyone with a (D) next to their name.

Michael Moore: Defends his positions with facts and statistics.
Ann Coulter: "FACTS are for FAGS!"

Michael Moore: Believes the War in Iraq was begun under false pretenses, that it was immoral and asinine.
Ann Coulter: Declared last week on Hardball with Chris Matthews that "We DID find Weapons of Mass Distruction!" and that "Saddam DID have ties to al Qaeda!"

Michael Moore: Believes Universal Health Care is important and necessary, to ensure the health of the poor.
Ann Coulter: Believes Universal Health Care is for EEEEEEVIL LIBERAL COMMIE BASTARDS!!!!!!!111

Michael Moore: Fights to help the poor and feed the hungry, like Jesus.
Ann Coulter: Believes Jesus hated liberals (an actual statement by her on Hannity and Colmes).

Michael Moore: Attacks opponents by exposing their corruption, greed, incompetence, and immorality.
Ann Coulter: Attacks opponents by calling them FAGS, HARPIES, COMMIES, TERRORISTS, and FATTIES.

Michael Moore: Believes in evolution and global warming.
Ann Coulter: Does not believe in evolution or global warming. Also, global warming is caused by liberals.

Michael Moore: Attacks both the left and the right in his books and documentaries.
Ann Coulter: Bill Clinton having consensual sex with another adult? "BURN HIM AT THE STAKE! RAPIST! RAPIST!!" Mark Foley sexually molesting children of both genders? "We should forgive him. It's the Christian thing to do." (The latter quote was also real.)

Kind of puts things into perspective, doesn't it?

I'll admit it, I have a litmus test for the intelligence of people I meet and hear about. Two questions: Do you believe in Global Warming?, and Do you believe in Evolution?

People can still be intelligent and believe in one but not the other. However, not one truly intellectual person alive denies the validity of both evolution and global warming. I'll admit that this may not be the best way to do it, but I think it's a fair tool in judging a person's intellect. The answers usually break down like this:

1) "I believe in evolution and global warming." - You're either a liberal or a centrist, and either a secularist or a moderate Christian. You're very in tune with reality.

2) "I believe in evolution, but not global warming." - You lean way to the right politically, to the point of being out of touch with reality to a moderate extent, but you are not a religious fundamentalist.

3) "I do not believe in evolution, but I believe in global warming." - You're a fundamentalist Christian, also moderately out of touch with reality, but you are not a radically right-wing screwball in terms of politics.

4) "I do not believe in evolution or global warming." - You're a pigeon for the Bush Administration and the radical right. You're ignorant, out of touch with reality, and a pawn in the war against rational thought. You probably believe the earth is only 6,000 years old, that we were magic'ed into existence by god, and that global warming is made up by the "commies" in the "liberal media". You'll believe literally anything that Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity want you to. You're so ignorant about the world around you, you should have your voting rights revoked. (Joke. Maybe.)

No, it's not politically correct. But it is accurate.

From Facebook:

Hypocrisy, anyone?

Also, in a related sidenote,
I SURE HOPE REPUBLICANS ARE HAPPY WITH STATUS QUO AMNESTY. IT'S HERE TO STAY, THANKS TO THEM.

Have a nice day, right-wingers!

Bad Attorney General! BAD!

Quick Comments:
We're goin' old school, baby!

Speaking of Ann Coulter, she helped John Edwards raise $300 grand

When all is said and done, she may be one of the best things to ever happen to liberalism.

I wish I had time to debunk all of her bullshit, but hacking down Ann Coulter is like the chocolates-on-the-conveyor-belt episode of I Love Lucy.

Tucker Carlson actually said once, "I may not like Ann Coulter, but I love how angry she makes liberals."
Which is essentially like saying "I may not like this 10-pound tumor growing out of my chest, but I love how hard it is for my doctors to get rid of.
The "Fair" Tax proposal is utter bullshit, but we already knew that, didn't we?
The 06 Midterms led to: the first female Speaker of the House, a record number of women (16) in the Senate, the first Muslim Congressman (Keith Ellison), the second African American elected govenor, AND....
THE FIRST ATHEIST CONGRESSMAN!!!
According to a recent study, Bill O'Reilly uses derogatory names once every seven seconds on his show.
The Rolling Stone's list of the 10 Worst Congressmen (pre-2006 midterm election):
10. Marilyn Musgrave (R - Colorado) - A Christians with an endorsement from the KKK (literally).
9. Hal Rogers (R - Kentucky)
8. Curt Weldon (R - Pennsylvania)
7. Dick Pombo (R - California)
6. Tom Tancredo (R - Colorado) - "Mr. Bigotry"
5. Jerry Lewis (R - California)
4. William Jefferson (D - Louisiana)
3. Don Young (R - Alaska) - "Bridge to Nowhere"
2. James Sensenbrenner (R - Wisconsin)
1. Dennis Hastert (R - Illinois)

One person who didn't make that list who almost always does: Jim Inhofe, from my state.
Usually for utterly retarded shit like this.

In fact, we now have "The Inhofe Scale", a scale from 1-100 based on how delusional or detached from reality someone is.
Tom DeLay was furious at the nomination of Robert Gates to replace Rumsfeld. Which probably means he's the right man for the job.
Yes, that's a military General saying "Conservatives are the worst thing that's happened to the United States Army and the United States Marine Corps."
ROVE IS RETIRING AFTER THE END OF BUSH'S PRESIDENCY IN '09!
(Hopefully he'll have been thrown in jail where he belongs long before then.)
Fox News 2075: "See, that's what I hate about you liberals, you never took the threats from terrorism or global warming seriously enough. I mean, if Al Gore knew about at the turn of the century, why didn't he try to warn us about it?"
"The war against drugs is a war against poor people on street drugs waged by rich people on prescription drugs." - Roseanne
From The Daily Show:
--"Bush insists on exhausting violent means first, and only using diplomacy as a last resort....."
--"Trent Lott was happy to accept the position of GOP minority whip, until he found out it had nothing to do with whipping minorities."
Speaking of whipping minorities, true fact: the plane Dick Cheney flies in is called "The Spirit of Strom Thurmond." Why not just cut to the chase and put on a white hood, Dick ?

It's sad that this is the perfect analogy:

Monday, June 04, 2007

Mon, 04 Jun 2007 15:54:55 GMT

I thought I would post some of the comments that people in my Critical Analysis and Writing class left on the paper, and then respond to some of them to explain what I meant. I’ll make sure to keep the comments completely anonymous, so if you’re someone from that class reading this now, you don’t have to worry about your comments being pointed out if you don’t want to. Although, I’ll point out the comments Jules (the professor) made, because I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t mind. Also, I tweaked a couple comments for clarity.

I’ll start by reposting the original paper in its entirety for anyone who hasn't seen it yet. If you've already read it, skip to the red and blue section.

Why I am the way I am.
My pseudonym would
Be pointless by the end of
The first paragraph

My mother is a liberal Christian; my father is a Deist. That is, he believes in a God, but that’s as far as his religious views go (ironically the same opinion held by not only many of the country’s founding fathers, but also Adolf Hitler…not that Hitler, Jefferson, and my dad have anything in common). My dad’s parents, on the other hand, were extremely religious. They sent my dad and his three sisters to church camp almost every summer when they were little. Church every Sunday. Although he’s only mentioned those experiences a handful of times, I always got a very strong impression that he really got sick of the indoctrination of it all. “Go here and believe in this. Rinse and repeat.” I’ve never asked him about it, so I can’t be sure, but I think that his subtle resentment toward being told what to believe and how to believe it is one of the main reasons he and mom never made my sister and I go to church.

Of course, we got little doses of religion anyway. It’s impossible not to in today’s society. Half of the songs we sang in my public elementary school’s musicals were about God and Jesus. Anytime someone used the phrase “…but no one knows everything…” someone else would inevitably chime in with “GOD DOES!” Even though I didn’t know much about “God” or “Jesus” up until 5^th grade, I was too busy worrying about whether I’d be having pizza or peanut butter sandwiches for lunch to care. But around 5^th or 6^th grade, the different pieces of that particular enigmatic puzzle started falling into place. I learned, essentially through osmosis, that everyone around me believed that “God” was an invisible being who created and knows about everyone and everything, and that “Jesus” died horribly so that I could go to a utopia called “Heaven” when I died. To my 11-year-old mind that was all well and good, but the “what” wasn’t as big of a problem as the “how”. As in, how do we know that all of this is true?“The Bible!” my fellow 11-year-olds told me when I asked them. To which I queried, “then how do we know the Bible is true?”

I never got much of a response to the second question (other than “…don’t you go to church?”) until one day in the very same music class where I had to sing the religious songs for the school musicals. Another student asked a question to the music teacher about God, and the teacher replied, and then the same student asked “Well the how do we know God and the Bible are real?” Hearing another student ask the same question I’d been asking myself made my ears perk up to the conversation, just in time to hear a second student answer his question with “It’s called FAITH, Kyle.” To this day, I can still hear in my head as clear as a bell the tone of condescension (e.g. “What idiot doesn’t know that?”) in her voice. But at the time, her tone of voice didn’t bother me nearly as much as what she had said. “It’s called FAITH” left a bad taste in my mouth for several days. Faith? That’s it? That’s all? “God is real because the Bible says he’s real, the Bible is real because we have faith that it’s real”?

But the longer I wore the cross necklace, the worse I felt. I felt like I wasn’t being true to myself. Worse, I didn’t even really know why I felt that way. All I had to go on was my discomfort with the notion that all God and the Bible had to go on was faith.

One day in my 8^th grade science class, the teacher began the chapter on evolution. Of course, he felt obligated to preface that day’s discussion with a disclaimer. I’m going on memory alone, but I’m 90% certain this was exactly what he said:

If only I knew then when I know now, I would have simply raised my hand and pointed out that he was missing about 9.8x10^5 “greats” in his little faith-based biology lesson. But even without knowing that at the time, Mr. Karns’ preamble was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I was only in 8^th grade, but even then I was extremely irritated that his personal beliefs would be affecting the quality of my education. His belief system affected what I learned in the class. Between that frustration and the frustration of not knowing exactly where I stood on these subjects, I decided what I would do next.

When I got home that night, I spent several hours on the internet looking up anything and everything about religion, Christianity, the Bible, and atheism. I drank in everything I could find about the subject. Of course at the time, I thought I was doing something I wasn’t supposed to be doing, and I didn’t know about my dad’s experiences with church camp at the time, so every time one of my parents walked by and I had my browser on www.atheists.org or something similar I would minimize the window. I didn’t want them to know I was studying the subject, because I had just assumed that my parents were the same way everyone at my school was. I learned that 95% of all scientists, not just all biologists, believed in evolution. I learned that the Bible had things like talking snakes and unicorns in it. I learned about the concept of hell and concluded it was little more than a scare tactic (“Join us or burn forever!”). I learned about Christian bigotry and prejudice throughout history toward everyone from gays and blacks to atheists and Muslims. I learned that reanimating dead neural tissue was impossible, therefore resurrection was impossible, therefore Christ’s resurrection was impossible. Of course, as an 8^th grader I was still working on my logic and critical thinking skills, so the depth to which I understood all these things left a lot to be desired. Regardless, after about a month of studying these things, and even though I only knew a fraction then of what I know about these subjects now, I felt comfortable enough to admit to myself that I was an atheist. It all just seemed to make so much more sense. There was no faith involved, only facts. There were no threats, only inquisitiveness. There was no intolerance, only acceptance. There was no condescension, only equality. From that point on, I never wore the silver cross again.

I still have the silver cross hanging in my dorm room with the rest of my necklaces as a reminder to always be true to who I am.

Well, almost always.

This is where I stand. Agnostic in theory, atheist in practice. I don’t pray to anything, I don’t worship anything, and I don’t consider myself submissive to anything. A typical response when I tell people that is “oh, how sad” or “you must be lonely.” Lonely? At times, yes, but that comes from living in a society where so many people think of me as nothing more than a hell-bound heathen heretic, not from living without a God or Gods. But sad? Certainly not. Which brings me to another of my major problems with Christianity and religion in general: proselytizing and evangelism.

Off the top of my head, I came up with the three main reasons I don’t pray.First, statistically speaking, prayer does nothing. A ten-year study involving 1,800 patients at various hospitals in America showed that patients who were being prayed for in the study actually suffered a higher rate of post-operative complications than patients who weren’t being prayed for. And in smaller studies conducted involving the power, or lack thereof, of prayer, the results have always shown that any positive effects that prayer has on recovery are comparable to yoga or meditation. The second reason is that in many situations, there’s no way to tell if it worked at all. On the local news, you often see that when someone survives a horrible car wreck, family members of the survivor are interviewed, and 9 times out of 10 the interviewed family member will say something along the lines of “…s/he survived because God answered our prayers!” Egad, a miracle! Except for the fact that there is no way to account for all the times someone was prayed for and still died, or all the times an atheist was not prayed for and still survived. And what does the family say if the person they prayed for die? “Well, it was God’s will.” As my spiritual advisor Bill Maher points out, if it’s all based on God’s will and he’s going to do whatever he wants to anyway, why do people bother praying in the first place? Couldn’t you skip over the praying and go straight to “God’s will”? The final reason I don’t pray is that for many people I know, prayer is more like a crutch than anything else. People who ask God for guidance before they decide to order a Big Mac or a Quarter Pounder. Obviously, I hyperbolize, but the point is I cringe when I hear people say “I couldn’t make it through the day without God.” I’ve been doing it for twenty and one-half years, and I haven’t had any problems with it. It’s a matter of reaching inside yourself and finding the strength to go on in the face of adversity. That is extraordinarily liberating in and of itself. I know that if I have a problem in life, I don’t have to turn to a deity who may or may not be there and hope that what I want just happens to be part of his “master plan.” I can turn to myself, create a solution myself, and survive the problem myself. I’ve seen countless lives ruined because people faced adversity and said “I leave it all in God’s hands!”...and then nothing happens. No solutions, no miracles, nothing. Only more suffering. Oh well. Must have been God’s will.

“We are right, and everyone else is wrong.”

“Believe in this, no matter what anyone says.”

“The Bible is God’s unquestionable truth.”

I realize that with a lot of the examples of Christians I’ve brought up (bigotry over the ages, creationism instead of evolution, etc), moderate Christians will read this and think to themselves, “that’s not what REAL Christianity is about…” A handful of people have read things I’ve written, such as this paper, and told me they “apologize on behalf of Christianity”, for the way Christianity is toward people like me. At this point, things like that fall on deaf ears. Actions speak louder than words. It’s as if someone were to say “my family’s not rude!”…but then you eat at their house and they pass gas the whole meal. You can say that Christianity has nothing to do with intolerance and bigotry, and that it’s all about helping the poor and feeding the hungry. But saying something doesn’t make it true. Another response I get fairly often is, “okay, Christians are sinners, but try to be like Christ and not Christians.” Be like Christ, because he was a kind, loving, compassionate, and peaceful man, right? Fair enough, but couldn’t you just as easily say “be kind, loving, compassionate, and peaceful”? Is there really a need for Jesus the middleman? Isn’t saying “be like Christ, Christ was a good person” essentially the same as saying “be a good person”?

My experience with Christianity is hardly unique. My girlfriend Cris grew up in Texas. Her parents made my grandfather look like Richard Dawkins. Indoctrination to the millionth power; burning CDs because rock and roll is Satanic music; God created blacks and whites as separate races and did not intend for them to marry, let alone gays; etc. On top of all that, her hyperreligious parents abused and beat her for the first half of her life. Did Christianity cause that? Of course not, but her parents did so with the explicit permission of the church they attended. They were given permission by the church to viciously beat her because of verses such as Proverbs 13:24 ("He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes") and Proverbs 23:13-14 (“Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell.”) Christie renounced her faith around age 12 or 13, and her experiences were nearly parallel to mine. She bought all sorts of atheist pride pins (“Born OK the first time”, “I’ve found Jesus! He was behind the sofa the whole time”, etc.) and attached them to her backpack. When a Christian student vandalized her stuff by taking a black marker and marking out all the writing on her pins, she showed the school principal, who then proceeded to shrug her off. After all, she’s a godless heathen. She deserved to have those pins marked out. From time to time, Cris still keeps in contact with her grandparents, who are at best only a notch or two better than her parents. I can’t say I blame her for keeping them in the dark about the fact that she’s a bisexual atheist. A couple months ago, she ordered two necklaces online with the atomic symbol for Atheist Pride in gold. She wears one of the necklaces, and she gave the other to me. It’s hanging on my wall, right next to the silver cross I bought when I was young.

Here’s a line I’ve heard on numerous occasions: “It’s so hard to be a Christian in today’s society.” Hard? Hard?! What crack are they smoking? Throughout history, almost no religion has been less oppressed than modern Christianity. I’ll give an example: in the past week, a story has been on the news about an artist creating a sculpture of Jesus out of 200 lbs of chocolate for Easter. Any time the story airs, it always involves Christian groups who are absolutely outraged at the sculpture. “It’s twisting the knife in the back of Christians”, “It’s hatespeech”, and “It’s like displaying a swastika” are all actual examples of Christian reactions to the sculpture. Their biggest complaint is a chocolate statue of Jesus? That’s how Christians are being “oppressed” in America? Chocolate Jesus in a museum and evolution in school textbooks, and all of a sudden it’s like they’re being fed to lions. Oh, the humanity!

That last statistic is of particular importance to me. It represents hope. I would attribute the majority of that to the internet, because all this wealth of information about the factual errors and flaws in the Bible are starting to be shown to the public. Religion does have its positive aspects, such as charity, but I certainly believe those positive aspects would not be lost without the religion. A lot of the ugliness in society, intolerance, closed-mindedness, unwillingness to change….many, if not most of these barriers to progress can be traced back to the prevalence of religion in society. That societal ugliness stemming from religion is kind of like a Hydra from Greek mythology. If you cut away one aspect of the ugliness, more heads will appear; the only way to permanently remove these barrier to progress is to break the stranglehold that Christianity has on the world. I believe that last statistic shows that that stranglehold is beginning to weaken. During the Renaissance, the world society rejected religion in favor of the beauty of art, the truth of philosophy, and the wisdom of science. I believe the world could very well be on the verge of a second Renaissance if secularism continues to increase and acceptance of religious dogma continues to decrease. I believe that second Renaissance is something worth fighting for. That’s why I hold the opinions I do about religion. That’s why I write things like “The Truth About Jesus”.

No doubt that if a pastor or church leader got a hold of this paper, they would pick it apart and analyze the pieces to try to decide on the best way to evangelize and minister to people like me, missing the point entirely.

“To give pleasure to a single heart by a single act is better than a thousand heads bowing in prayer.” - Mahatma Gandhi

Here are the class's comments.

Lines highlighted in RED are the comments someone left about the previous line or picture. I’ll separate different comments by brackets.

Lines in BLUE are my responses to the comments and other things (such as noting the religion of the person commenting).

Why I am the way I am.

My pseudonym would

Be pointless by the end of

The first paragraph

(No one noticed it was a Haiku )

In one sense, I’ve been writing this paper since I put the last period on the paper before it. In another sense, I’ve been writing it for the past 20 years. I’ve been living in Oklahoma for all but the first year or so of my life. In the past three years or so, I’ve written a lot about religion. My rule of thumb is, don’t intend to offend people, but don’t be afraid to offend people.
(Jules): [Good rule.]
(Christian commenting): [That’s what Preacher Bob does.] No, Preacher Bob intentionally offends people, and when he ticks someone off to the point where they slug him, he sues them for assault – that’s why he usually has his wife there filming him. There are documented cases of him pulling that stuff a handful of different times.
(Christian commenting): [Freedom of speech is a beautiful thing.]
If pushing someone’s buttons is what it takes to get them to think about a particular subject, so be it. That said, I have to reiterate that I’m certainly not writing this to intentionally offend anyone. I wrote this to explain my positions more clearly. Specifically, to explain how I got here, where I am, and where I’m going. It’s something I don’t take the time to explain as often as I should. I know the paper seems long, and it probably covers more topics than it should, but I felt it was more important to be thorough than to cut corners for the sake of conciseness.

My mother is a liberal Christian;
(Christian commenting): [I wish you would have explained this.] No problem – my mom believes in God, Jesus, and the Bible, but she also believes in gay rights, abortion, and evolution. Much like most of the Christians in the class.
...my father is a Deist. That is, he believes in a God, but that’s as far as his religious views go (ironically the same opinion held by not only many of the country’s founding fathers, but also Adolf Hitler…not that Hitler, Jefferson, and my dad have anything in common). My dad’s parents, on the other hand, were extremely religious. They sent my dad and his three sisters to church camp almost every summer when they were little. Church every Sunday.
(Freethinker commenting): [Both my parents were the same way. If the doors were open, they were there.]
Although he’s only mentioned those experiences a handful of times, I always got a very strong impression that he really got sick of the indoctrination of it all. “Go here and believe in this. Rinse and repeat.” I’ve never asked him about it, so I can’t be sure, but I think that his subtle resentment toward being told what to believe and how to believe it is one of the main reasons he and mom never made my sister and me go to church.
(Jules): [Why not ask him?] I got a TON of people asking me this question. I wrote about it in my ending comments at the very bottom.
(Liberal Christian commenting): [I just want to add that I agree with you. I hate cook-book religions: “Do this, receive this.” However, not all churches are like that. I grew up in a “Disciples of Christ” church in Ft. Smith, AR, and we are very liberal and open.]
Of course, we got little doses of religion anyway. It’s impossible not to in today’s society. Half of the songs we sang in my public elementary school’s musicals were about God and Jesus. Anytime someone used the phrase “…but no one knows everything…” someone else would inevitably chime in with “GOD DOES!” Even though I didn’t know much about “God” or “Jesus” up until 5^th grade, I was too busy worrying about whether I’d be having pizza or peanut butter sandwiches for lunch to care. But around 5^th or 6^th grade, the different pieces of that particular enigmatic puzzle started falling into place. I learned, essentially through osmosis, that everyone around me believed that “God” was an invisible being who created and knows about everyone and everything, and that “Jesus” died horribly so that I could go to a utopia called “Heaven” when I died. To my 11-year-old mind that was all well and good, but the “what” wasn’t as big of a problem as the “how”. As in, how do we know that all of this is true?“The Bible!” my fellow 11-year-olds told me when I asked them. To which I queried, “then how do we know the Bible is true?”
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Umm….because it says it is. Duh! <--- (Sarcasm, by the way)]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Good question. The answer IS faith, but that doesn’t help much. It’s like saying the Bible is the truth because the Bible says so. That leaves you in a loop, a loop I’ve run a lot.]
(Christian commenting): [Unfortunately, Christianity is illogical. It can’t be fully understood with a 5-step process – that’s where faith comes into play.] As I mention throughout the paper, faith is the Christian trump card that makes all the other nonsense easier to swallow.

That short conversation gnawed at me for days on end. Especially considering that that week at my school, two men dressed in nice suits came into my Social Studies class and passed out Bibles. They had gotten permission from the school principal beforehand, and told my class to line up and walk by their box of Bibles. That way, wink wink nudge nudge, anyone who didn’t want one didn’t have to pick one up.
(Christian commenting): [First Amendment, anyone? Anyone?] Ahh, but the First Amendment doesn’t matter in Oklahoma, because EVERYONE here is a god-fearing Christian anyway, right? All the heathens live safely tucked away in the blue states. </sarcasm>
I picked one up. I didn’t want to be known as that weirdo who didn’t pick up a Bible.

Not much changed until my 7^th grade Social Studies class. In a chapter on world religions, one of the vocabulary words was “atheist”. In the class discussion, the teacher explained that an atheist was someone who didn’t believe in God, and then asked if there were any atheists in the room. (Liberal Christian commenting): [That’s a bold question for a teacher but I guess not a shock in the “Bible Belt”.] Not really sure how to respond to the question, I half-heartedly raised my hand. The teacher saw me and pointedly asked why I didn’t believe in God. Forty pairs of eyes turned toward me, and all I could do was sweat and stammer. I didn’t have an answer. (Christian commenting): [Wow, quite an experience.] Later that day in the hallway, some girl told me she had heard that someone in our class was an atheist and asked if it was me. Before I could answer, she finished with “…because that is one seriously messed up kid…”
(Christian commenting): [I don’t understand, if she wasn’t your friend, why did you care what she thought?] That’s the way 7^th graders are – they haven’t learned that it’s okay that some people are going to just have different views on things. 7^th graders still think that being different makes you an outcast (and at the time, that’s exactly what happened).
Because of that comment, I decided to nip the rumors in the bud. I asked my parents to take me to the mall, and I bought a small silver cross necklace for $7. I wore it to school every day as a statement of “See? I’m one of you!” (Liberal Christian commenting): [That’s a really touching detail. It made my heart sink.] And for the most part, it worked. People stopped pointing me out in the lunchroom and whispering to the person next to them. (Freethinker commenting): [Peer pressure and conformity hold entirely too much power over us.] All too true. Especially when we're young.

“Alright, this chapter’s about evolution. Now, I’m required to teach it to you, but I don’t believe in any of this crap. I find it hard to believe that my great great great grandfather was a monkey. In my personal opinion, it was all God.”

(Jules): [What a sad story, but it’s repeated all over the state.]
(Liberal Christian commenting):[All my 8^th grade science teacher did was show us “Inherit the Wind” (about the Scopes trial) with a similar disdain. Then, she mocked the scientist anytime he mentioned evolution. I HATED every day of it!]
(Christian commenting): [Terrible science teacher. Evolution does not equal monkeys.] For anyone reading this who doesn’t understand the concept of evolution and doesn’t understand the “evolution does not equal monkeys” comment, evolution states that humans and apes descended from a common ancestor, not that humans evolved from apes.
(Liberal Christian commenting): [I hate it when people say this statement. It shows ignorance, [and tries to] take away credibility from the science community. It’s like God decided to take a piss so the Earth flooded. A complete disrespect for thought.] Not sure I understand the piss statement, but c’est la vie.

(Liberal Christian commenting): [Really?]
(Christian commenting): [I see that the talking snake might be the serpent in Genesis, but where is the unicorn?]
(Christian commenting): [?]

Yep:
"God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of a unicorn” (Numbers 23:22)
"Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? Or will he harrow the valleys after thee?” (Job 39:9)
"But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil” (Psalm 92:10)
"His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns[…]” (Deuteronomy 33:17)

I learned about the concept of hell and concluded it was little more than a scare tactic (“Join us or burn forever!”).
(Liberal Christian commenting): [I agree! I don’t think I believe in hell.] You know, what’s interesting is that in the Gnostic Gospels, Jesus actually tells one of his disciples (Peter, maybe? I’m not sure….) that hell actually was only a scare tactic, and that all people end up in heaven anyway. He also tells the disciple not to tell anyone, because if people knew that then there would be less incentive to follow Christianity.
I learned about Christian bigotry and prejudice throughout history toward everyone from gays and blacks to atheists and Muslims. (Christian commenting): [Can I offer a defense? I know that history doesn’t help Christians out a whole lot, but not every Christian is like this.] I’m well aware – I point that out later in the paper. I learned that reanimating dead neural tissue was impossible, therefore resurrection was impossible, therefore Christ’s resurrection was impossible. (Christian commenting): [That’s a big statement because that’s what a lot of Christians’ whole faith or hope is based off of.] Maybe so, but that doesn’t change the impossibility of it. Just because I didn’t understand it as completely when I was in 8^th grade doesn’t mean my overall understanding of the myth of Christ’s resurrection was flawed – I can see now that it wasn’t.
Of course, as an 8^th grader I was still working on my logic and critical thinking skills, so the depth to which I understood all these things left a lot to be desired. Regardless, after about a month of studying these things, and even though I only knew a fraction then of what I know about these subjects now, I felt comfortable enough to admit to myself that I was an atheist. It all just seemed to make so much more sense. There was no faith involved, only facts. There were no threats, only inquisitiveness. There was no intolerance, only acceptance. There was no condescension, only equality. (Christian commenting): [Are you talking about your life or atheism?] Atheism, in general. From that point on, I never wore the silver cross again. (Liberal Christian commenting): [I really like this detail of the cross. It is really touching. I am glad you took it off though, I hate when people wear crosses. If anything it is a symbol of death anyway.]

I continued to study different aspects of Christianity and atheism all throughout high school. It certainly had an affect on my social life. When I would talk to my closest friends about the subject, I found out that they felt the same way I did, and that they had the same questions I had. I would tell them about all the different things I had learned, and vice versa. There were literally hundreds of late-night bull sessions during my 11^th and 12^th grades. By the time we graduated, all my closest friends and I had become completely secular. Of course, then there’s the other side of the coin. Other friends of mine who were very religious and not as close to me absolutely hated talking to me about religion. Many of them told me flat out that the questions I posed had made them doubt their faith because even when they had the Bible with them and would flip through the pages to look up answers, there were none. (Christian commenting): [I think it’s good that you challenged them, but what they should’ve done is to keep looking themselves like you did. If they asked the right people they probably could’ve found some of those answers.] My guess would be that they could find someone who would give them an answer that is acceptable in their minds, but that’s not the same as giving them an answer that is accountable to reality.For many of them, this was the first time anyone had seriously questioned their faith from a secular perspective. It made many of them very uncomfortable, some even to the point of cutting off their friendship with me because they didn’t want to be confronted with these questions about their religion anymore. As much as that hurt, there was even an uglier side to it all. Around 10^th grade, the subject of homosexuality came up in my health class. Of course, all the Christians in the class jumped on the “gays are sinners, and God didn’t make them that way” bandwagon. The minute I stood up to defend homosexuals, I was slapped with the labels “faggot” and “fag-lover” that lasted for about a month afterward.
(Jules): [Another sad tale that plays out too often.]
(Christian commenting): [High school sucks!]
(Christian commenting): [The same thing happened to me in high school. I gave a talk about how homosexuality isn’t wrong and I was an outcast for a while because of it. I hope the future is different.]
Around that time, my resentment toward Christianity skyrocketed. (Christian commenting): [No kidding.] Haha Even today, I have to consciously remind myself that not all Christians are like that. But with people like John Hagee and Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson as the face of modern Christianity in America, it’s not always the easiest thing to do.
(Liberal Christian commenting): [I absolutely agree. I have a hard time not discriminating against Christians myself and I actually claim to be one. It’s sad ]
(Christian commenting): [The religious right make Christianity look very bad and distort it – please don’t see it as every Christian.] I don’t, but statistics show that the overwhelming majority of Christianity is of the religious right mentality. “Abortion is evil, gays are evil, evolution is evil, and we’re none too sure about gravity…” The irony is that several people who commented on the paper and weren't in Jules class were of that mentality, and yet still thanked me for mentioning that not all Christians were the same - they missed the point.

I still have the silver cross hanging in my dorm room with the rest of my necklaces as a reminder to always be true to who I am. (Christian commenting): [Nice!]

Well, almost always.

As far as my grandfather knows, I believe in God, Jesus, creationism, and the idea that the world was created in 6 days and is only 6000 years old. The past four times I’ve gone to Indianapolis to visit him, I’ve gotten dressed up on Sunday and went to church with the rest of my extended family. As many times as I’ve put my neck on the line for what I believe in, that is one situation I haven’t decided how to handle yet. There’s a very real possibility that if my grandfather (who hated the first X-men movie simply because it deals with evolution) knew I was an atheist, he would cut me out of his life. With my aunts and uncles, the possibility is still there, but not nearly as assured. But for the moment, I’d like to just maintain harmony with all of them, so every time I go to Indianapolis I put on my Christian mask and parade myself around the church, all the while itching to take over the preacher’s podium and tell everyone in there that it’s all a lie. Of course, I’d never actually do it, because that would negate the entire point of pretending to be a Christian around my extended family in the first place. So I just shut up, sit quietly, and mouth the words to “In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida” when the preacher tells everyone to bow our heads in prayer.
(Freethinking deist commenting): [I’m doing that the next time my parents drag me to church!]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Interesting song choice! I say this because I once heard that the original line was supposed to be ‘In the Garden of Eden’, But he was so stoned on stage that this was what came out! ] You know, I had heard that too, but I thought I read somewhere that it was just an urban legend. Either way, that’s why I sing that song in church: if anyone overhears me, it sounds like I’m talking about the Garden of Eden ) It feels like I’m still wearing the silver cross. There’s a reason they call atheism “the other closet.”
(Freethinker commenting): [I went to church all through junior and senior year because most of my friend would beat me with a Bible if I didn’t.]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [This sounds tough. It’s hard to lie about who you are to protect the people in your life. I think you are doing the right thing because you are obviously not very close to these people…so it doesn’t really matter anyway…why upset them? If y’all were closer, then I am sure they would accept it.] But here’s the thing: we’re actually very close, but I only see them once every year or two – the problem is not that we’re not close, the problem is that they’re fundamentalist Christian beliefs tell them that atheists like me are evil and should never be trusted. So it’s a question of whether they would believe what they see in me, or believe what their religion tells them to see in me – I think we all know which way Christians usually go in that situation.

(Jules): [Yikes!!]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [I <3 Chris!] Aww, shucks – I <3 you too
(Christian commenting): [So sad…]

(Christian commenting): [Well, we do know Bush is crazy.]

(Liberal Christian commenting): [So the woman either goes to prison or an asylum – what about Bush? The White House?!]

(Liberal Christian commenting): [That is funny! ZOMG!! The parallel is perfect!]

By the time I started OSU, I had flushed out exactly what my opinions were a little more thoroughly. To be exact, I am not an “atheist”. An atheist is someone who does not explicitly believe in any God. I can’t, in good faith (no pun intended), say that. I can’t stand on the opinion that there is no God, because I believe that there is certainly a possibility that a single God or higher power exists. By the same token, there is also the possibility that two gods exist, or that two hundred gods exist, or that no god exists.
(Christian commenting): [I like how you explain this.]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [I like the openness.]
The existence of God cannot be disproved, which is exactly why when I’m debating someone about religion, I never debate about God specifically. (Christian commenting): [OK, I just got really confused…so what do you debate about? Isn’t religion supposed to be all about God? So how can you debate about religion without debating about God?] Because there’s much more to religion than the existence of a deity. Context, history, world view, scientific accuracy…just because the religions that all say “I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT GOD IS LIKE!” (read: Christianity, Islam, so on and so forth) are wrong doesn’t necessarily mean that the theory of the existence of a supreme being is wrong. Unlikely, maybe, but still possible.Although it’s interesting when the person I’m debating with assumes that that’s what I mean. I’ve often heard the argument, “if you find a painting in the woods, you don’t have to see the creator to know that the painting HAD a creator.” Fair enough, but let’s say the painting was a mile long. Did the painting have a single painter, two painters, or two dozen painters? Was a computer attached to various paint brushes and programmed to paint something by itself? If it’s a splatter painting, what if a plane carrying paint as it’s cargo was shot down and the paint splashed onto the canvas at random? There’s no way to know who created the painting, so it’s completely pointless to attach yourself to one theory and never let go of it.
(Freethinking deist commenting): [I like this paragraph. I can finally put some of my beliefs into words.] This person told me that the word “deist” as described in the beginning paragraphs fit her perfectly
(Freethinker commenting): [That’s a good analogy.]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Did you come up with this whole analogy? It is rather good…well thought out.] Yep – I’ve heard arguments like ‘but we know *blank* had a creator!’ several times, and I came up with this analogy while I was watching a “What a Christian should say to an atheist” video where that argument was brought up. The rebuttal just sort of popped up into my mind, it explains my position fairly well.

(Liberal Christian commenting): [Good analogies. Pretty much covers most alternatives.]

This is where I stand. Agnostic in theory, atheist in practice. (Jules): [It’s a good place to stand.] I don’t pray to anything, I don’t worship anything, and I don’t consider myself submissive to anything. A typical response when I tell people that is “oh, how sad” or “you must be lonely.” Lonely? At times, yes, but that comes from living in a society where so many people think of me as nothing more than a hell-bound heathen heretic, not from living without a God or Gods. (Liberal Christian commenting): [Good point.] But sad? Certainly not. Which brings me to another of my major problems with Christianity and religion in general: proselytizing and evangelism.

Evangelism is a completely different story than things like anti-gay prejudice and pushing creationism over evolution. While those ugly aspects usually apply to the most fundamentalist Christians, as far as I can tell evangelism is universal throughout the entire Christian faith. Few things in this world bother me more than when someone declares that their religion is the one and only correct one, and that all other belief systems are inferior. When someone gives me the “oh, how sad” response, they mean it in terms of “it’s sad to see that you’re so lost and confused.” Although to be fair, there is a wide range of types of evangelism, from “Would you like to join us at church and hear the good news of the Gospel?” to “Join us or burn in hell. Those are your only two options.” (Freethinker commenting): [There are some times I would rather burn than have to conform.] But to an extent, the difference doesn’t matter. It’s all “we are right, and you are wrong.” I am neither lost nor confused, and anytime someone tries to condescendingly pigeonhole me into the stereotype of a sad, lost, confused, lonely little heathen, I have to fight the urge to tell them to take their Gospel and shove it.
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Yeah…I pretty much hate Evangelism too. The only problem is that liberal churches like mine are disappearing. How do you keep these ideas alive if you can’t scare people into the pews?] The bigger question is, and I don't mean this to be as offensive as it sounds, do we actually need these ideas to stay alive? It sounds to me like if you hadn’t been raised in a forced Christian setting, your beliefs would be fairly similar to mine.
(Christian commenting): [They’re just trying to share the greatest thing that has happened to them with everyone they meet.] I’m sure heroine and cocaine addicts think the high they get from drugs is pretty great too, but I don’t want that crap ‘shared’ with me either.
Off the top of my head, I came up with the three main reasons I don’t pray.First, statistically speaking, prayer does nothing. A ten-year study involving 1,800 patients at various hospitals in America showed that patients who were being prayed for in the study actually suffered a higher rate of post-operative complications than patients who weren’t being prayed for. And in smaller studies conducted involving the power, or lack thereof, of prayer, the results have always shown that any positive effects that prayer has on recovery are comparable to yoga or meditation.
(Christian commenting): [I don’t know how accurate a study on prayer could actually be.]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Using science to study religion is no better than using religion to explain scientific happenings.] I disagree – if religion makes a claim, the scientific community has every right to scrutinize it, because when science examines something it uses evidence, logic, and hard facts. None of that comes into play when religion examines science: only more of that poisonous abstract concept of faith. Also, it’s not science judging that prayer doesn’t work – science simply studies it and says ‘here are the statistics’. I’M the one who made the judgment that prayer did nothing, based on those statistics.The second reason is that in many situations, there’s no way to tell if it worked at all. On the local news, you often see that when someone survives a horrible car wreck, family members of the survivor are interviewed, and 9 times out of 10 the interviewed family member will say something along the lines of “…s/he survived because God answered our prayers!” Egad, a miracle! Except for the fact that there is no way to account for all the times someone was prayed for and still died, or all the times an atheist was not prayed for and still survived. And what does the family say if the person they prayed for died? “Well, it was God’s will.” As my spiritual advisor Bill Maher points out, if it’s all based on God’s will and he’s going to do whatever he wants to anyway, why do people bother praying in the first place?Couldn’t you skip over the praying and go straight to “God’s will”?
(Jules): [This has always befuddled me, too.]
(Freethinker commenting): [Good point.]
(Christian commenting): [God’s mind can be changed through prayer – look up Abraham and Sodom and Gomorrah.] “God’s mind can be changed”? That’s a new one.…I seem to recall a Bible verse that essentially said God’s mind could never be changed, but I could be wrong about that.The final reason I don’t pray is that for many people I know, prayer is more like a crutch than anything else. People who ask God for guidance before they decide to order a Big Mac or a Quarter Pounder. Obviously, I hyperbolize, but the point is I cringe when I hear people say “I couldn’t make it through the day without God.” (Christian commenting): [What is it to be “without God”, I guess I really don’t understand this idea.] It means I live my life without praying, worshiping, or being told what to believe and how to believe it. I have no need for some mystical ‘supreme being’ in my life.I’ve been doing it for twenty and one-half years, and I haven’t had any problems with it. It’s a matter of reaching inside yourself and finding the strength to go on in the face of adversity. That is extraordinarily liberating in and of itself. I know that if I have a problem in life, I don’t have to turn to a deity who may or may not be there and hope that what I want just happens to be part of his “master plan.” I can turn to myself, create a solution myself, and survive the problem myself. I’ve seen countless lives ruined because people faced adversity and said “I leave it all in God’s hands!”...and then nothing happens.
(Christian commenting): [It takes faith AND action; lol, I wish it was that easy that God would just do things for us. That’s like saying “God please let me get my homework done tonight,” and then not working on it at all.] The classic example of this comeback is “A man prays to God to let him win the lottery, but he dies without winning it; the problem is, he never bought a ticket.” A situation where there is no extra action that can be taken. The question is, if he had bought a dozen lottery tickets, would he have won a million dollars? Statistically, no. Prayer would have no effect on the outcome; it never does. Then the classic rebuttal is, “but he wasn’t praying for the right things!” Ah, so the thing that he wanted and that just happened to not come to him also just happened to be one of the things he wasn’t "supposed" to pray for. Convenient, isn’t it?
No solutions, no miracles, nothing. Only more suffering. Oh well. Must have been God’s will.
(Freethinking deist commenting): [I hate this phrase!! People fall back on it too much!]

(Jules): [Very funny!]
(Christian commenting): [Love it!]

Why do people do that? What causes such blind devotion regardless of outcome? The answer to those questions is no different than the conversation in my fifth grade music class. “It’s called FAITH.” Faith is the ultimate trump card, no? I’ve had dozens upon dozens of discussions about religion that ultimately end with the Christian declaring “it’s a matter of faith…without faith in your heart, you’ll never understand the truth.” Ignoring how little sense that makes, the bigger question is where does that blind faith come from? The answer is not pretty: indoctrination. Think about it – 99% of all the Christians you know are Christian because that’s what their parents told them to be when they grew up.
(Christian commenting): [Whoa! Don’t cut down your hope with false percentages.] I didn’t mean literally 99% - I meant it figuratively: “The vast majority of all the Christians you know…”
(Freethinker commenting): [Yep.]
(Christian commenting): [You were indoctrinated to believe in nothing – same game.] No no no no no, part of the reason I wrote this paper was to explicitly explain why I was not indoctrinated into my beliefs – I came to them out of my own research and observations. My parents never spoon-fed me an obligation to believe in nothing, they simply didn’t talk about it, and let me grow up first and make up my own mind about it. Looking back, that’s one of the greatest things they could have done for me. That’s not the same for Christian children, who ARE spoon-fed their belief in Jesus, and we all know it’s true. Their parents brought them to church every Sunday, and every day from birth they’re told to believe in God and Jesus no matter what. All other beliefs are wrong (and/or creations of Satan). Never doubt this, no matter what anyone says. These children were never exposed to other points of view, nor were they allowed to grow up and develop critical thinking skills before this stuff is pushed onto them. Of course not. The Christian parents and pastors drill into their heads and tattoo FAITH onto their brains. (Jules): [Yes, pure indoctrination.] When I bring this up, a common response (other than “You’re not a Christian, how would you know about the grace of God?!”) is “but Christians can leave their faith at any time, no one is forcing them to stay!” (Christian commenting): [Sadly, you have met some very unfriendly Christians.] You would be surprised how unfriendly the average Christian can become when confronted with an unbeliever.Really? These children have been told about the threat of hell their entire lives. “If you leave our faith, you’re going to hell.” Is that really giving them a fair chance to think for themselves and decide what they believe? It’s also interesting when these Christians are outraged at the stories of children in the Middle East, where Muslim radicals hold an AK-47 to the kid’s head and give them the choice of converting to Islam or being shot. What’s the difference? Is there really that big of a leap between “Join Islam or I’ll shoot you” and “Sure you can leave Christianity, but you’ll burn in hell for all of eternity”? (Christian commenting): [I think it is different though, because in one you are threatening the life now, in the other you are threatening the life later, but if you don’t believe in a life later, it’s not really a threat.] There are a few problems with this…first off, the only difference between the Christian and the Muslim in this case is time? Whether you’re threatening a life now or later, it’s still a threat made with the intention of converting someone whether they want to or not. Second, we’re talking about little kids – they’re going to believe whatever they’re told to believe, whether it’s fire and brimstone or Santa Claus. Third, I’ve recently read an article about Christians in Africa doing the same thing as Muslims do in the Middle East; in Africa, Christian terrorist groups actually do convert children to Jesus at the point of a gun.It’s just different forms of religious indoctrination.

“We are right, and everyone else is wrong.”

“Believe in this, no matter what anyone says.”

“The Bible is God’s unquestionable truth.”
(Christian commenting): [I think every church is unique. Mine is very open. We believe in the rights of homosexuals and hell is never mentioned. I feel as though you’re throwing everyone into the “Christian” group.] Here’s my opinion on making generalizations – it’s okay to do it as long as you throw in an asterisk letting everyone know that you know not all Christians are like this. 9 times out of 10 when I use the word “Christian” in this paper, I’m referring to the conservative evangelicals who make up the vast majority of the religion, not every single Christian in America.

It breaks my heart to see this indoctrination process happening to Zachary and Michael, two of my young cousins living with my extended family in Indianapolis. On a boating trip, when asked “Do you know where that lake came from?” Zachary replied “Jesus”, to the cheers and applauds of (almost) everyone around him. Does Zachary know about melting glaciers, or erosion of land over time, or anything else about geology? (Christian commenting): [The interesting thing about it is, you can know this info and still believe, and maybe appreciate God even more.] That wasn’t the point I was making, the point I was making was that they want him to believe God magic’ed it all into existence 6000 years ago – total bullshit, from a scientific perspective.He’s 4 years old! All he knows is “believe in Christianity, no matter what.” (Liberal Christian commenting): [This is so sad, but true. And again, I frequently find myself stereotyping Christians as idiots ] If some people had their way, by the time he got into high school, his science textbook would be a sheet of paper that said “GOD DID IT. CLASS DISMISSED.” Anyone who doesn’t believe indoctrination has anything to do with belief in Christianity should see the movie Jesus Camp. (Jules): [I’ve heard…] (Liberal Christian commenting): [I want to see this! Well…sort of…it sounds awful.] I added a little something about this movie in my ending comments at the very bottom. I would go into more detail about that movie, but then the paper would end up twice as long. Worse still, scientists have discovered that when people have religious experiences, including everything from raising their hands during the singing of gospel music to speaking in tongues and convulsing on the floor, the same areas of the brain are stimulated as when a drug addict takes a hit. From the standpoint of brain chemistry, after someone is indoctrinated into a faith and grows up with it, they can literally become addicted to the religion and psychologically dependent on it.
(Christian commenting): [Interesting…I never thought about it like that.]
(Freethinking deist commenting): [“I used to be messed up on drugs, now I’m messed up on God!”] LMFAO!

I realize that with a lot of the examples of Christians I’ve brought up (bigotry over the ages, creationism instead of evolution, etc), moderate Christians will read this and think to themselves, “that’s not what REAL Christianity is about…”
I should have put this paragraph after the one about Cris. I intended for this paragraph to address the Christians who read the paper and think “but not all Christians are like that!”, and I don’t think I made that clear enough. A handful of people have read things I’ve written, such as this paper, and told me they “apologize on behalf of Christianity”, for the way Christianity is toward people like me. (Christian commenting): [Grouping – This is like saying how atheism is towards me. There are different forms and different people. Just because a person is Christian doesn’t mean they’re going to treat you differently because of your beliefs.] The problem is that the vast majority of the time, that’s exactly what it means. Not ALL the time – obviously most of the people in the class are liberal Christians – but from my experience, the majority of evangelicals will treat a person differently (read: condescendingly) if they know he or she is a secularist. Also, "the way atheism toward me"? Atheists want the Pledge of Allegiance to read "One nation, indivisible", not "One nation, believing in no God whatsoever..."
At this point, things like that fall on deaf ears. Actions speak louder than words. It’s as if someone were to say “my family’s not rude!”…but then you eat at their house and they pass gas the whole meal. (Christian commenting): [If you didn’t consider passing gas at a meal rude…?] Actually, that’s a very good point. Most Christians don’t consider their own anti-gay prejudice to be bigotry. Neither did the Christians during the 1960’s who claimed God didn’t want whites and blacks to marry each other. You can say that Christianity has nothing to do with intolerance and bigotry, and that it’s all about helping the poor and feeding the hungry. But saying something doesn’t make it true. Another response I get fairly often is, “okay, Christians are sinners, but try to be like Christ and not Christians.” Be like Christ, because he was a kind, loving, compassionate, and peaceful man, right? Fair enough, but couldn’t you just as easily say “be kind, loving, compassionate, and peaceful”? (Jules): [Amen!]Is there really a need for Jesus the middleman? (Christian commenting): [Some people didn’t see Christ as a middleman but THE man. Paul believed he essentially was Christ. He said Christ was living in him and he was dead.] Again, not the point. From a secular perspective, Jesus is little more than a moral middleman. When you break down the flimsy arguments that rely only on faith, the only thing left is to say “Jesus was a really great guy” – fair enough, but so were hundreds of people across history. Making a religion out of him becomes unnecessary.Isn’t saying “be like Christ, Christ was a good person” essentially the same as saying “be a good person”?
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Well yes, but it is great to have role models. I probably think of Ghandi even more frequently. I know I can do ‘xyz’ because he did it.]
(Christian commenting): [The Judeo-Christian morals are what we consider to “be a good person”, i.e. don’t lie, steal, cheat, murder, etc.] That’s so far from accurate I don’t even know where to begin…what about Buddhists who have been around about as long as Judaism and still hold the same morals? What about societies that predated Judaism and still held the same values? It’s amazing that throughout history people have held to the “religion = morality” belief, while history has shown over and over and over that almost the exact opposite is true.

(Freethinking deist commenting): [I hate that they do this!]

My experience with Christianity is hardly unique. My girlfriend Cris grew up in Texas. (Jules): [Say hello for me.] HEY CRIS! JULES SAYS HI!! Her parents made my grandfather look like Richard Dawkins. Indoctrination to the millionth power; burning CDs because rock and roll is Satanic music; God created blacks and whites as separate races and did not intend for them to marry, let alone gays; etc. On top of all that, her hyperreligious parents abused and beat her for the first half of her life. Did Christianity cause that? Of course not, but her parents did so with the explicit permission of the church they attended. They were given permission by the church to viciously beat her because of verses such as Proverbs 13:24 ("He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes") and Proverbs 23:13-14 (“Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell.”) Christie renounced her faith around age 12 or 13, and her experiences were nearly parallel to mine. She bought all sorts of atheist pride pins (“Born OK the first time”, “I’ve found Jesus! He was behind the sofa the whole time”, etc.) and attached them to her backpack. When a Christian student vandalized her stuff by taking a black marker and marking out all the writing on her pins, she showed the school principal, who then proceeded to shrug her off. After all, she’s a godless heathen. She deserved to have those pins marked out. From time to time, Cris still keeps in contact with her grandparents, who are at best only a notch or two better than her parents. I can’t say I blame her for keeping them in the dark about the fact that she’s a bisexual atheist. A couple months ago, she ordered two necklaces online with the atomic symbol for Atheist Pride in gold. She wears one of the necklaces, and she gave the other to me. It’s hanging on my wall, right next to the silver cross I bought when I was young.
(Jules): [Very nice...]
(Liberal Christian commenting): [Well, I guess I can’t be a fan of atheist symbols any more than Christian ones, but again, I LOVE this detail. It really pulls things together.] [The girl sounds like a lucky find for both of you. I think it’s great that you can support each other. But beware of creating a common enemy. In my experiences, sharing hate with anyone, for any reason, is destructive.] True, but here’s how I look at it: you often hear Christians use the phrase ‘hate the sin, not the sinner’ – I certainly do not hate Christians, I hate oppressive religions (such as Christianity).

(Liberal Christian commenting): [This is ridiculous. But really, some people are just uneducated robots. What can you expect?]

(Liberal Christian commenting): [It’s like Fox News on paper…]
(Christian commenting): [That is a lil harsh!] “LIL”?!

(Christian commenting): [That’s terrible.]

(Christian commenting): [Organized prayer doesn’t belong in public schools…it’s to protect the atheists and Christians alike.]

Here’s a line I’ve heard on numerous occasions: “It’s so hard to be a Christian in today’s society.” Hard? Hard?! What crack are they smoking? (Christian commenting): [You would be surprised…it is hard sometimes…mostly on an individual level, not so much being “oppressed” by a chocolate statue. Good current events tie-in by the way.] Throughout history, almost no religion has been less oppressed than modern Christianity. (Christian commenting): [What is modern Christianity?] Christians living in modern times. People who attend a 10,000+ mega-church to hear some multi-millionaire preach to them how "terrible" Christians have it in today’s world, and then stop off at youth group to plan next week's anti-abortion rally. I’ll give an example: in the past week, a story has been on the news about an artist creating a sculpture of Jesus out of 200 lbs of chocolate for Easter. Any time the story airs, it always involves Christian groups who are absolutely outraged at the sculpture. (Christian commenting): [I LOVE the chocolate Jesus!] “It’s twisting the knife in the back of Christians”, “It’s hatespeech”, and “It’s like displaying a swastika” are all actual examples of Christian reactions to the sculpture. Their biggest complaint is a chocolate statue of Jesus? That’s how Christians are being “oppressed” in America? Chocolate Jesus in a museum and evolution in school textbooks, and all of a sudden it’s like they’re being fed to lions. Oh, the humanity! (Freethinker commenting): [Too true.]

Currently, one-third of all people on the planet are Christian. Second is Islam, at 21% of the planet. 77% of Americans consider themselves Christian. Oppression my eye. Try this instead: in seven states (Arkansas, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas), state constitutions have specific clauses that prohibit atheists from holding public office. 55% of Americans say they would not vote an atheist into office, no matter how intelligent or qualified he or she is. When asked what type of person American parents least want their children to marry, atheists topped the list. But here are a few more statistics: as a percentage, atheists hold both the lowest crime rate and the lowest divorce rate in America. (Liberal Christian commenting): [Most who claim to be atheists are normally more educated people, so I would say cause and effect might be education level.] True, but what does it say when the highest rate of secularism is with college graduates, and the highest rate of belief in Creationism and fundamentalist Christianity is with people who failed to even graduate high school?13% of the military consists of secularists (kind of kills that “no atheists in foxholes” myth); (For anyone who doesn’t know, the saying “there are no atheists in foxholes” is meant to imply that anyone in the middle of a battle where they may die is going to believe in God to help them through. In reality, quite the opposite is true – there is a higher percentage of secularists in the military (cough cough Pat Tillman cough) than in civilian life.) ….and finally, between 1990 and 2000, Christianity saw a 10% decline, while secularism (by that, I mean atheism, agnosticism, deism, humanism, universalism, and all other kinds of secular freethought) saw a 110% increase. (Freethinker commenting): [Impressive.]
(Christian commenting): [Maybe, but unfortunately there is no good way to band together and do anything like the HUGE churches do.] Actually, what’s interesting is that a number of “Churches of Freethought” have popped up across the country. They’re basically places where atheists, agnostics, and other secular freethinkers gather to discuss things like philosophy and politics. I would bet that as secularism continues to rise, so will the number of these Churches of Freethought.

That last statistic is of particular importance to me. It represents hope. I would attribute the majority of that to the internet, because all this wealth of information about the factual errors and flaws in the Bible are starting to be shown to the public.
(Christian commenting): [Could you elaborate on [the factual errors and flaws] a little?] GOOD NIGHT! Do you have any idea how long that would take?! For starters, try visiting www.skepticsannotatedbible.com - but be warned that the site is VERY BIASED. While the vast majority of the Biblical flaws the website points out are 100% accurate, some of them are biased nonsense. Wikipedia is also a great source for finding facts about errors in the Bible, but since it’s Wiki, be sure to double check the facts against another unbiased source. But here’s an example: often Christians brag about “600 fulfilled prophecies” in the Bible. What they don’t mention are the 400 failed, fake, and dead wrong ones. Not the greatest ratio for a book that is allegedly the word of God.Religion does have its positive aspects, such as charity, but I certainly believe those positive aspects would not be lost without the religion. (Liberal Christian commenting): [I do…all of those hateful people you have talked about only do good things because they believe they are going to get into heaven. Without heaven, they would be total dicks.] True, but I’d rather live in a world where people accepted reality than a world where people went around with their heads in the clouds 24/7. If we’re only keeping religion around to keep people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson from actually murdering people, we could do the same with high doses of Vicodin and Oxycontin. And keeping them drugged up on pills instead of God would get rid of that “gays are evil, abortion is evil, evolution is evil” side effect. (Then again, Rush Limbaugh is both a Christian and someone who sucks down Oxycontin like candy, and neither of which has kept him from being a dick.) A lot of the ugliness in society, intolerance, closed-mindedness, unwillingness to change….many, if not most of these barriers to progress can be traced back to the prevalence of religion in society. That societal ugliness stemming from religion is kind of like a Hydra from Greek mythology. If you cut away one aspect of the ugliness, more heads will appear; the only way to permanently remove these barrier to progress is to break the stranglehold that religion has on the world. I believe that last statistic shows that that stranglehold is beginning to weaken. During the Renaissance, the world society rejected religion in favor of the beauty of art, the truth of philosophy, and the wisdom of science. I believe the world could very well be on the verge of a second Renaissance if secularism continues to increase and acceptance of religious dogma continues to decrease. I believe that second Renaissance is something worth fighting for. (Jules): [Maude would agree. Right on!] For anyone who doesn’t get this reference, it’s from the movie “Harold and Maude” – go rent the movie, you’ll know what he’s talking about. That’s why I hold the opinions I do about religion. That’s why I write things like “The Truth About Jesus”. (Liberal Christian commenting): [I don’t know…there is still WAY too much fundamentalism, and those big churches are growing while liberal churches like mine are dying ]

“To give pleasure to a single heart by a single act is better than a thousand heads bowing in prayer.”- Mahatma Gandhi

This section is for the comments everyone in my class left at the end of the paper.

1) (Agnostic commenting – I didn’t know she was an agnostic until the end of the semester when I read these comments. She even kept her copy of the paper.)

Chris,
I wanted to keep your paper because I thought it was very interesting. I figured that you would get 14 other copies back and that this wouldn’t be a problem. These are some of my comments:

1) I think you are very brave to stand up for yourself and what you believe in.
2) I like how you included the cartoons/news stories because it keeps the paper interesting.

3) The part about gays really pisses me off. I’m so glad you defended them! I don’t understand why Christians are so worried about other people’s behavior. If they don’t want to see gay people, then they should turn their heads…not condemn them. The homosexuals aren’t doing anything wrong to others, so what’s the big deal? It’s their choice!
4) Your paper really makes me think about myself. I refer to myself as an agnostic, and I think you and I share many of the same beliefs. It’s all one big mystery. Every time I try to talk about it, people think I’m being a sinner. Oh well. In my eyes, I don’t understand why so many people are against evolution!

5) Some people can be such hypocrites. Many religious people spend so much time bashing other people’s behavior, that they don’t take the time to think about their own actions. I’m not trying to talk down on religious people, I just think it’s sad how they can be so cruel sometimes. However, some of them are great! Basically, I think people should only worry about themselves. Who cares what other people believe, it’s not their problem.

Sorry for going on like this…I have a lot to say on this subject, but I feel like I’m starting to ramble. Good job, I’m glad you were brave and wrote this, and thanks for letting me keep your paper!

2) (Christian commenting.)

As much as I disagree with your views on religion, I found your paper captivating. It was impossible to put down. You explain your views very well and how you have arrived at them. I always try to be open-minded, which is why I thank you for writing this paper because it has helped me to understand atheism/agnosticism, etc. While my views did not change because of your paper, my understanding has.

3) (Christian commenting.)

Chris,

Your paper was very well written and thought out. I feel like I understand you a little better and I can tell this is something you really care about and feel strongly about. I do still have a lot of questions, but I’m really glad that you seek information and explanation. Keep challenging others, and telling others. I think a lot of good can come of it.

4) (Christian commenting.)

A very bold paper. Thanks for sharing how you feel. I know you don’t wish to hear this, but please don’t be as intolerant as the Christians you describe by “Christian hating”!

[As a sidenote, I’m a big fan of Bill Maher’s quote “Don’t be so tolerant that you tolerate intolerance.” I don’t have any problem with Christians, I have a problem with Christianity.]

5) (Liberal Christian commenting.)

GREAT PAPER. I feel bad for you…not because you’re an atheist, but because you went to the trouble to write this really good paper and half our class won’t care because you said atheist on the second page so that’s where they stopped reading. The apathy is overwhelming.

I have struggled with this problem of religion as well. My roommate is a Creationist (i.e. the 6000 year kind) and so that was weird. I did a lot of research on my own and also had a science class concerning it, and the science course almost made it harder to believe the Big Bang etc. than Creation. A lot has to go just right, but I’m still deciding what I think. You would love the class (“Humans: Accident or Necessity”, taught by physics professor and former atheist now polytheist.)

I like that you research and think on your own and are open to the idea of a god. I can tell your beef is with organized religion. Mine too. I believe in God, dislike religion, and try to be a good person.

You may have done it already, but I would suggest studying evolution in depth, from both sides. It helped me out a lot. You don’t seem as “searching” as I was, but still good stuff to think about. Once again, I enjoyed reading this paper. I might have you e-mail it to me.

[Actually, judging from the comments, pretty much everyone in the class took the time to read and understand the paper. But he’s right, most Christians would see the word “atheist” and throw it in the trash at that point.]

6) (Liberal Christian commenting.)
One thing that has always intrigued me about atheism is the justification of miracles. I was atheist for about a year and a half, but just because it was “fashionable” in my middle school, and I had no other reason to believe otherwise. But basically I loved that atheists know that the human body was capable of curing itself of “incurable” diseases. Like when cancer disappears, and whatnot. Even with my belief in God, the power that comes from within the human body astounds me. It doesn’t take Christianity to get miracles J

I can understand why you feel the way you feel too. I’ve always rebelled against authority, and around here authority proclaims that “you must be Christian”. I think though, that your words are falling on deaf ears. Once you get to our age, it will take a life altering event to change our opinions. The stubbornness of general human nature is the ultimate drawback to our civilization.

7) (Freethinker commenting.)

This is a great paper. I didn’t go to church regularly until high school, and after I did, all it accomplished was to make me question God. I believe there exists a higher power, but also in evolution. My problem with religion is how it pretty much boils down to “conform or burn”, and it repulses me. If there is a God, how could he demand such strict rules of people when people are so different from one another? This paper has made a few more things clear and raised some good questions. I thank you.

8) (Freethinking Deist commenting.)

I really enjoyed this paper. It described many of my own thoughts. I didn’t go through all the researching like you did, but I have a hard time believing the Bible is anything more than fiction. Thank you for putting so many of my own thoughts into words; I’ve always had a hard time explaining my beliefs to others!

(She attached those two pics in her comments )

9) (Another atheist commenting.)

It seems you were able to express yourself. I enjoyed the writing, I still think you hold a little too much hostility toward Christians. Oh, and cool it on the anti-way’s mongering. If you don’t want to be converted don’t be a missionary. I also think your idea that atheists are sugar-vilified (?) is most likely just a pool of self-pity. People don’t hate atheists, atheists hate atheists because the desperately crave attention. You may not believe in god (as I don’t) but feeling like the world hates to segregate (I think he meant “likes to segregate”) you for it is mostly based out of your need to feel special, maybe even more intelligent. I think the most important thing would be for you to truly like yourself, then take a look at all those Christians you feel are so out of place. Your not so different after all. Other than that rather rude and possibly too harsh attack on your person, I really liked it. I only chose to attack you due to how personal you made the story, and the apparent unanimous agreement of the class as a whole.

[The other atheist in the class was my harshest critic, go figure. I get the impression he thought I was liberally stretching the truth to get people to feel sorry for me. I wasn’t, but c’est la vie. Maybe he just had an easier time living as an atheist in a Bible-belt state than I did.]

10) (Christian commenting.)

I’m sorry that you have this view of Christianity and that those were the types of Christians you grew up around. It’s very bold of you to be this honest and I really appreciate it! This was well written and the details are very helpful and supportive for your views.

11) (Christian commenting.)

I thought this paper was very honest and that’s why I liked it so much. You really explained why you believe what you believe and how you got to where you are. I think that’s a hard thing to put down into words and it also takes a lot of strength to do that when you know not a lot of people believe the things you do. My eyes were really opened during reading this and it helped me see what all you’ve gone through and a lot of similarities we actually have. It’s hard to be the one that stands up even though they’re different. Thank you for sharing your story!

12) (Christian commenting.)

You might assume that me, a Christian, did not read your paper or has lost respect for you in some way. Both would be false. I was completely intrigued by your spiritual life story and how you came to your present state of beliefs. The thing that I am most interested about is if I personally was in your shoes I would have probably have been an atheist or deist just because of the events you encountered and your upbringing as well. The examples with news articles…those people are crazy! But just as much as the Christian side has it’s crazies, the atheist side has its crazies, but they are not as published because they don’t get to hold positions. As much as you are turned off by them, I am turned off by the atheist crazies. It works both ways…I don’t want to hear how the government controls our minds by microchips or other crazy unbelievable thoughts. Atheist children sometimes become Christians, Christian children sometimes become atheists. Crazy how our life plays out.

[My first question after reading this comment was, what in the name of Zeus’s asscrack do tinfoil-hat-wearing government/mind-control conspiracy nuts have to do with atheism…?]

13) (Christian commenting.)

This paper was eye opening. You research, personal stories, and opinions have been well thought out and I enjoy reading them. I feel like this paper was more complete than the other one (She means my “Truth About Jesus” paper) and I am glad you had another chance to explain yourself and your beliefs. Your paper is well written and I can see through your writing how passionate you are about your beliefs.

14) (Liberal Christian commenting.)

Amazing paper! Thank you so much for opening up in this one and actually explaining how you feel. Previously I was under the impression that you liked to watch the Discover/History channel to get fuel to rile people up. Christians are the only ones who are brainwashed to act a certain way to get certain responses out of other people. But this paper definitely shows that you are more than that. I really enjoyed reading it.

[About the Discover/History channel comment – a lot of the ideas I get for writing about religion come from things I see on the History channel, but I always go back and double check what I see against another source…that also helps when I have a hazy memory about details here and there.]

15) (JULES. (The professor.) )

Chris –

Thank you for making such a big effort to help us to understand you more fully. In taking such a personal approach, you soften the content of your paper in a way that (hopefully) encourages everyone to process more seriously what you have to say. I do think the reaction to your paper in class suggested as much, though it’s hard to read minds. Thanks, too, for providing a much needed perspective throughout the semester. Have a good summer!

A couple other things I’d like to add.

1) PUNCTUATION: I realize that here and there throughout my writings, I use this à “blahblahblah”. Instead of this à “blahblahblah.” I do it with parenthesis too. I’m not ignorant about the grammatically correct version of that punctuation, I just prefer putting the period outside. It gives the sentence closure. I tried to do it a little less on this last paper, but I did it a few times anyway out of habit.

2) For anyone who doesn’t know about the movie Jesus Camp, or who wants to read my rather…salty, shall we say, gut reaction when I first heard about the movie, CLICK HERE.

3) Here’s a handful of sources about my statement comparing religious fervor to drug abuse, although I don't think any of these is the original article that I based the statement on.

http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n234/a03.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_religion
http://leda.lycaeum.org/?ID=3655

4) The most unanimous comment I got was “Why not just ask him?” in reference to the beginning when I said I wasn’t positive about my dad’s religious beliefs. The answer is simply because we really don’t talk about religion in my family. My dad is a Deist, my mom is a liberal Christian, I’m an agnostic/atheist, and my sister is Christian by way of Christianity being something that all the "cool kids" were into. So the best way to maintain harmony on religion is just to avoid talking about it altogether.

5) If I have a purpose in life, it's to break down the barriers to progress put in place by Christianity and other organized religions.

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Thu, 24 May 2007 07:42:45 GMT

Yep, it's been a long time. But for the rest of summer, I'm going to be devoting a lot more time to my band, Sonic Defiance, than to blogging. After I/we get my/our album(s) recorded, I'll be putting more time into the ol' blog here. Even so, by the end of the week I'll have written up the comments that my writing class left on my "Why I Am the Way I Am" paper, and I'll be posting it on both this blog and my personal one. After that, I'll write a link dump post...believe me, the list of articles about the dumbass things conservatives and Christians have done recently has really been piling up . After that, it might be a while before I post again on here. Once the 08 elections start picking up, I'll write much more frequently, but I'll probably be laying low until then.

If anyone has a Facebook, you can check out the albums I keep of political cartoons and bumper stickers:

http://okstate.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2096677&id=17131847
http://okstate.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2113665&id=17131847
http://okstate.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2113666&id=17131847
http://okstate.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2113668&id=17131847

Full of things like these great little gems:

--Kryss864 (My personal blog)
--Little-known statistics about religion (A reason to hope)
--The Day the Democrats took back Congress
--Save Roe v. Wade!
--Atheists in Foxholes
--Beautiful stories of deconversion from Christianity

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Sun, 15 Apr 2007 02:03:16 GMT

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2007-04-14T154757Z_01_N13225514_RTRUKOC_0_US-USA-TAXES-DEMOCRATS.xml

"Democrats want to raise your taxes! That's all they want to do! The eeeeeeevil liberals want to raise taxes on you! They're going to raise your......oh crap......."

(Prelude to a longer post in the next week or two.)