Tag: religion

Just a number

12-12-12

Ever since the advent of the Gregorian calendar, there occurs a numeric phenomenon where the day, month and year are the same number within the first 12 years of each century. With all of the fuss over 12-12-12 and last year, 11-11-11 and so on, I can’t help but wonder if people lost their damned minds at the turn of the last century or the century before that? Or were people just too busy trying to survive that this numerical anomaly went by unnoticed. Do we really have so much free time on our hands that we have assigned meaning to the meaningless? The truly pathetic thing is that the meaning is different depending on who you ask.

Contrary to popular belief, numbers are not mystical or magical. Numbers were invented by man to count, label and measure. They are a tool we use to try to find order amid chaos. Calendars have been changed numerous times since the beginning of recorded time, so what we think is 12-12-12, actually isn’t 12-12-12 if you refer to the Islamic calendar, the Hebrew calendar or the Hindu calendar or even one of the first calendars used: the Early Roman calendar.

So why all the fuss about a man-made system to measure time? The one thing we know for sure about mankind is that we make mistakes… constantly, so why put so much faith into something that is so subjective?

faith

A little fear can be healthy. A little faith is dangerous.

May I suggest that faith is born of fear. Without crippling fear of the unknown, we would not jump so quickly to put faith in an answer, even a subjective or nonsensical answer (yes I am comparing this numerical hokum to faith in religion/god). Or perhaps we are just so bored that we need something to look forward to… even if that something is the end of the world. If only we used our fear to fuel our curiosity instead of to control the masses or to excuse stupidity, we might be further along the evolutionary ladder than to think that just because the Gregorian calendar says it’s December 12, 2012 that it is a special day, full of more possibilities than any other day.

Shhhhhhh

A while ago I read a great blog post by Amanda over at Musings from a Misfit Named Amanda regarding Christians who think they are being persecuted and prayer in school among other topics. Amanda was recounting an online conversation she had with a person who believes a moment of silence is a compromise for those people who do not want public prayer. That person wrote, “That’s why I say having a few moments of silence is the best option-those who want to pray can pray quietly, and those who don’t can simply reflect on the situation, or whatever they choose to do. If it’s silent, everyone can do what they want w/o bothering others :)  It won’t kill anyone to be quiet for a few moments lol-both sides should just respect the other’s rights, even if their beliefs r different, is what I’m getting at…”

This stuck with me for quite some time, getting me angrier and angrier until finally I felt the need to post my opinion.

As an atheist, I am entirely opposed to forced public prayer, whether it be in schools, or any other public forum (unless, of course it is in the confines of a church/mosque/temple with other, like-minded individuals.) But, at the risk of stating an unpopular opinion, I am also against a forced/organized/national “moment of silence”. For example, to commemorate a tragic event like the events of September 11th, 2001, I think a moment of silence is insulting. Insulting to all of the people who rushed to ground zero to save survivors and dig bodies out of the rubble and debris. Insulting to all those who lost loved ones in the attacks. Insulting to all the people who are now suffering from Cancer and other deadly diseases as a result of actively helping rescue others from the wreckage. These people could still use financial and legislative help. My suggestion is, instead of using a ‘moment of silence’ to bow your head and look sad and thoughtful, why not use it to write a check to a first responders charity… or a letter to the Federal Government, demanding that insurers cover the ailments of first responders and area residents. If more people had gone that route, perhaps it would not have taken 11 years before the President officially recognized the need to financially compensate these people.

Is it just me, or does a ‘Moment of Silence’ look an awful lot like prayer? To me it’s a lot of pomp and circumstance accomplishing absolutely nothing. Perhaps people should remember the words of Edmund Burke, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”  and actually do something to help others instead of just stand there doing nothing.

A sad week for women

Helen Gurly Brown

This week started off with the loss of a true pioneer of the sexual revolution, Helen Gurly Brown, whose groundbreaking 1962 book Sex and the Single Girl taught women to seek financial independence and sexual satisfaction. While I was not necessarily a fan of her magazine, Cosmopolitan, because it consistently preached how to find, please and keep a man. I am a fan of her attitude that women should not be embarrassed about their sexuality and that women could be whatever they wanted to be.

Women in Saudi Arabia 

This week also saw the announcement of a women only city in Saudi Arabia. The official reasoning for this city (along with four more like it in the works) is to allow more women to work and achieve greater financial independence while still maintaining gender segregation. I fear there is something far less progressive about to happen. I fear these women will be subjected to sub standard working conditions, sub standard pay and yet even more ostracism than they now must endure. I have a feeling this is being done in order to offset the need for foreign workers in the country and that these women will be seen as whores by their own countrymen, just as their Olympic counterparts were.

The Russian Punk Band, Pussy Riot

On Friday a group of three female musicians who call themselves Pussy Riot were sentenced to two years each in a Russian prison for “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred” because they dared to sing a song in which they criticized Vladimir Putin’s increasingly autocratic hold on power – and his regime’s increasing suppression of protest speech – from the altar of Moscow’s Christ the Savior cathedral in February of this year. I find it ironic that the Russian government has turned to religion to help them fulfill their agenda, but any port in a storm, I guess. I admire these women for their strength of character. Just today, these women announced that they will not be asking Putin to pardon them. Their actual quote was,  “Let them go to hell with their pardon.” Even though the sentence is what I would call harsh, I am truly inspired by their willingness to fight for what they think is right.

Lastly, this week brought us a new term… legitimate rape. Republican Senate Nominee from Missouri Todd Akin when asked if he supported abortion in the case of rape was quoted as saying, “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist.” He claimed that he had heard this pack of lies from doctors. Doctors of what? Divinity? Certainly not medical doctors.

Really? What about the emotional and physical punishment the woman who is pregnant with her rapist’s baby would have to endure by being forced to give birth to that child? Spoken like a true American right winger, a clump of cells has more rights that the fully formed human being that they are growing in has. Apparently women are just a vessel for men’s seed and should have no say in what happens to their own body.

And what of the term legitimate rape? You should know that this came from the mind of a man who, in 1991 questioned an anti marital rape law over his concerns that it might be misused, “in a real messy divorce as a tool and a legal weapon to beat up on the husband”. (to his credit he did vote FOR the anti marital rape law) According to Akin the only “legitimate rape” is forcible rape. It just sickens me that the Republican right still claims they are not waging a war on women, then they have the nerve to come out with bombshells like this one.

Rep. Akin did ‘apologize’ for this. Here is the apology along with my commentary (in red).

“As a member of Congress, I believe that working to protect the most vulnerable in our society is one of my most important responsibilities, and that includes protecting both the unborn and victims of sexual assault. In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it’s clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year. Those who perpetrate these crimes are the lowest of the low in our society and their victims will have no stronger advocate in the Senate to help ensure they have the justice they deserve.

Misspoke?!! He might has well have said, My bad. When running for office, every word is carefully planned, scripted and put before a focus group. I have no doubt that he meant to say what he did say.

“I recognize that abortion, and particularly in the case of rape, is a very emotionally charged issue. But I believe deeply in the protection of all life and I do not believe that harming another innocent victim is the right course of action. I also recognize that there are those who, like my opponent, support abortion and I understand I may not have their support in this election.

 No kidding he won’t have their support.

“But I also believe that this election is about a wide range of very important issues, starting with the economy and the type of country we will be leaving our children and grandchildren. We’ve had 42 straight months of unacceptably high unemployment, trillion-dollar deficits, and Democratic leaders in Washington who are focused on growing government, instead of jobs. That is my primary focus in this campaign and while there are those who want to distract from that, knowing they cannot defend the Democrats’ failed economic record of the last four years, that will continue to be my focus in the months ahead.”

And he’s right back on the Republican talking point after a half-assed apology. 

I will leave you with the perfect visual representation of what I think must be done to this man.

Rep. Todd Akin (R. Mo.), so stupid he doesn’t realize this sign is about him.

Some things just shouldn’t be organized

Alain de Botton

Don’t let a guy like this, become the next…

Jim Jones

…guy like this.

My closet is organized by season and my books are organized alphabetically by author. My apartment is an ode to organization. But there are some things that should be left to flourish on their own. I see atheism as one of those things. The other day I was reading an article about how an atheist organization had put up some in your face, anti religion billboards and my first thought was these people are going down a very slippery slope.

As regular readers of this blog know, I am an atheist and I am not afraid to shout it from the rooftops. All this means is that I do not believe in a god (any god). The issue I have with this kind of behavior is that it is akin to picking a fight… the very same behavior that atheists (rightfully) accuse religions of exhibiting. I have no problem defending myself and my disbelief when pressed, but I see no reason (reason, get it… what atheists do believe in) in goading the religious toward further persecution of atheists. I understand that it is important to defend the separation of church and state wherever it is being threatened, but that is one of very few cases I can make for the need for atheists to get organized. The organization who put up those billboards is American Atheists, found online at www.atheists.org. If you go to their website, you will see a big red button that says “Donate Now” and that they are holding a convention next year. They also have literature for you in the form of a magazine (available in app form). American Atheists is not a new organization, they’ve been around since 1963 and, according to their website, have been defending civil liberties and the separation of church and state ever since. I find this interesting if only because their site seems to have taken several pages straight out of the church handbook.

Earlier this year a man named Alain de Botton published a book entitled Religion for Atheists in which he asserts that instead of eschewing all that religion has to offer, atheists should steal some of the attractive things about religion such as, building a sense of community, making our relationships last, overcoming feelings of envy and inadequacy, escaping the twenty-four hour media and creating new businesses designed to address our emotional needs. Pardon the expression, but for Christ’s sake, what the hell is so special about the emotional needs of atheists? To my eyes, this man is trying to set himself up as some sort of atheist messiah by preying on and exploiting one of the human traits that religion exploits so well… the need to belong.

It’s the need to belong that enabled events like the Jonestown massacre, the Manson family murders and the Waco Siege to occur. You may be thinking, but those events were all cult oriented. I submit that all religion is a form of cultism. Every time humans organize in an us vs. them way, it ends badly. It seems that, no matter how well-intentioned the origins of the organization are, there is always some greedy, morally questionable person who comes along and co-opts the ideal for his own financial gain and power. The need to belong is indeed powerful and is usually paired with the need for validation which is a very dangerous cocktail when some douche bag with a messiah complex is feeding those needs. Your average person, no matter how much of a skeptic they claim to be is almost powerless against being lured into a group when told that they are right and there are many more people who think the same way.

So please, atheists of the world, heed my warning and stay away from organizations that want to poke the religious bear. If history has taught us anything, it’s that those religious types are not afraid of shedding copious amounts of blood in service to their imaginary sky daddy and if we want to keep the moral high ground we are so fond of, the last thing we need on our hands is a holy war… or in this case an UNHOLY war.

A moo point

Holy Cow

In my last blog, I talked about how I think assisted suicide should be legal. On Friday June 15, the British Columbia Supreme Court took the first step toward making that happen by calling the current law, which bans assisted suicide, unconstitutional. To read about the ruling, click here http://ca.news.yahoo.com/laws-banning-assisted-suicide-infringe-charter-rights-b-183058665.html I was very encouraged by this ruling. Then, today, I read on the Huffington Post that the Catholic Church is weighing in on the subject. While I do believe that they are entitled to voice their opinion (as I am doing right now), it is my fervent hope that the legislature sees it as just that… an opinion. To read the article, go here http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/06/16/archbishop-michael-miller-assisted-suicide_n_1603063.html?utm_hp_ref=canada

In Canada, a secular nation, we take the separation of church and state seriously. No election is ever won because of the religious beliefs of the candidate. In fact, I couldn’t tell you what religion Stephen Harper is, even if you had a gun to my head. There is no prayer in our public schools… and that’s the way we like it.

In the article Roman Catholic Archbishop Michael Miller states that  the decision “sadly reflects a distorted view of equality rights that emphasizes autonomy over human dignity and the value of life.” I don’t understand how he can say that it is more dignified to die in excruciating pain, begging for death with medicine prolonging the inevitable, than to die peacefully, without pain with help from a morphine drip… when YOU decide enough is enough. Of course, I am an atheist heathen who thinks that it’s my life and I will end it when I see fit and does not believe that a god exists… any god. But that’s also part of my point about the separation of church and state. I do not want any church telling me what I can and cannot do with my life, and thankfully, this is not something I have to worry about. The church’s opinion in this case is a moot point because the legislature must rule for everyone, not just those who believe in religious doctrine. The Church already has quite a few members who live their lives according to religious rules, why does it feel the need to tell the rest of us how to live… or die?

So speak up and voice your opinion all you want, Mister Archbishop. Thanks to the separation of church and state, the lawmakers will be forced to see it as they would a cow’s opinion… a moo point.

Useless emotions

Guilt

For me a useless emotion is one that is used to manipulate the masses into behaving a certain way. Businesses like advertising or religion have utilized these emotions in order to get you to buy their product. In the case of religion, guilt is a heavily played upon emotion. Religion makes us feel guilty for committing acts that are within our own nature, then tells us that only by seeking forgiveness from the church can we be absolved of the very same guilt they, themselves have made us feel for our actions.

For me guilt is akin to crying over spilled milk. If I have done something to someone else that I feel bad about, I apologize sincerely. Sometimes I am forgiven, sometimes not. Forgiveness isn’t in my control and if that is my only reason for apologizing, then I’m not truly sorry. Once I have tried to make amends, whether I am forgiven or not, I move on. It’s a waste of time to dwell.

Shame

Shame is another useless emotion. It is the flip side of guilt. Guilt is something you feel over something you have done, whereas shame is something you feel over who you are.  Look at the seven deadly sins, anger, greed, sloth, envy, lust, gluttony and pride. They are all emotions that humans feel naturally. If we are to believe that we are made in the image of a deity, then why are these emotions somehow shameful?

Women are made to feel shame for everything from natural bodily functions like menstruation (the curse) and menopause (the change) to our sexuality (slut shaming). It’s a wonder we can leave the house at all.

Envy

One of the best marketing tools that is employed by advertising agencies around the world is envy. Ads that make you want what others have have proven to be very effective. Even ads that use the old adage of sex sells are using the envy model. They make you covet the lifestyle being shown to you… a lifestyle you don’t have. What’s wrong with what you DO have? I can guarantee if you don’t like your current lifestyle, that buying a new iPod isn’t going to fix it. In fact a new iPod may just magnify the situation (I have no friends to put into this huge address book, for example).

Jealousy

Jealousy differs from envy. With envy you want what someone else has. With jealousy you want to be what someone else is. It makes you ask, ‘What’s wrong with me?’ In marketing this is famously utilized by an ad for Pantene shampoo in which actress/model, Kelly LeBrock says, “Don’t hate me because I’m beautiful”. This ad was meant to make women think that they could be beautiful too if they would just wash their hair with Pantene. If jealousy has to be used as a marketing tool, I’d much rather see a university advertise itself by having an accomplished woman like Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel or Christine LaGarde saying, “Don’t hate me because I’m smart.” At least that would send a more productive message to young women, but I digress. Jealousy is useless because you may never be what someone else is. Happiness is to embrace who YOU are.

There may be some of you who think I should have included fear on this list of useless emotions. It is used by both religion, and advertising, not to mention government to make the masses behave a certain way. But fear differs from the above four emotions in one very key way. Fear is a warning sign that can save your life. Yes most fears are needless or even irrational, like my fear of birds. But sometimes a little fear can stop you from rushing head first into a dangerous situation.

Guilt, shame, envy and jealousy are about as useful as our appendix. They are emotions that, perhaps, it’s time to evolve past.

Thou Shalt Not Kill?

 

Yesterday’s post brought with it some very interesting comments. One, in particular from a lovely Christian lady who said “The idea that people can take my religion and decide that “Thou shalt not kill” is negotiable makes my heart sick.”

This got me thinking quite a bit about the commandment, Thou shalt not kill, perhaps the most impossible commandment to abide.

Every one of us commits mass murder on a daily basis. Yes, PETA members, even you. When we are walking outside, we kill countless number of insects. Every time we scratch or wash ourselves, we kill thousands upon thousands of bacteria. We kill without thinking about it all day every day. We kill to feed ourselves. Even the most vegan of vegan people are killing plants in order to sustain their own lives. When a lion kills a limpy gazelle we say it’s thinning the herd or it’s natural selection at work. If all life is sacred, then what makes insects so expendable?

We, as human beings are members of the animal kingdom. We are hard-wired to kill, just as all other parts of the food chain are instinctual killers. It seems that only us humans have put in place a set of rules regarding when it is okay to kill and when it isn’t. For instance it’s okay to kill another person in self-defense, or in defense of others.

Then there’s the fact that humans are the only species that kills for sport. How do religious hunters reconcile their breaking of the number one commandment?

As an atheist, I can’t help but look at sweeping statements like thou shalt not kill and question its meaning. If it is taken literally, we are all going to burn in hell for simply stepping on a spider. If taken as thou shalt not kill other humans, then why are we inventing exceptions to the rule, like self-defense, or killing in the name of God? (which makes no sense if he told you not to kill in the first place)

A little religion is a dangerous thing because it teaches us to deny and ignore who we are at our most basic core. We pretend to be better than animals when it comes to killing, when in fact we are far, far worse. Animals don’t kill just for sport. Animals don’t keep souvenirs of their kills hanging on the walls of their dens. When a lion looks at a herd of gazelles, he purposefully picks the lamest, weakest or oldest one to take down so that the herd will continue to replenish itself. When a hunter looks at the same herd, he wants to bag the biggest, strongest, most magnificent specimen for bragging rights. When are we going to drop the pious, holier than thou crap and admit to being the self-serving hypocrites that we actually are? It’s great to strive to be more than that. I think we should be striving to back up our own lofty opinions of ourselves. But until we admit to what we really are, we cannot know how far we have to go.

People with Gods

Each day on Twitter, I post my quote of the day tweet. The other day, the quote I posted was, “Gods don’t kill people. People with Gods kill people.” – David Viaene. One of the responses I got to this quote was, “people without Gods hold it down in the killing dept just as well. It’s a human problem.”

While I take no issue with the fact that there have been many killings done at the hands of people without Gods, the problem I have with the above statement is with the phrase, “just as well”. I decided to do a little research on the subject and here is what I came up with.

While there is really no way to tally the amount of individual murders committed by individual atheists, there are some numbers to be found when one looks at State Atheism, for instance in Mexico, under President Plutarco Elias Calles, there were at least 40 priests killed between the years 1926 and 1934. In the Soviet Union, Marxism-Leninism ideology sought to eliminate religion from the state entirely. In the period between 1922 and 1926, 28 Russian Orthodox Bishops and more than 1200 priests were killed. In Cambodia, under the Khmer Rouge, the estimated death toll is between 740,000 and 3 million. In the Mongolian People’s Republic, the Soviets launched a full-scale attack on Buddhism in 1936 where between 30,000 and 35,000 lives were lost. In North Korea, in the late 1940’s 166 priests and religious were killed or kidnapped. Using the high estimates, the total adds up to 3,036,434 deaths. Which, is a very substantial number.

On the side of people with Gods, I am only including the tally of one  mass killing.  The Holocaust, which took place between 1938 and 1945. Christians like to tell you that Hitler was an atheist, but, by all accounts, Hitler was a Catholic raised, Christian who espoused his belief in Jesus Christ (albeit an Aryan Jesus Christ), which makes him a man with a God. “As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.”- Aldof Hitler  There were 5.9 million Jews, between 2 and 3 million Soviet POWs, 1.8 to 2 million Poles, between 220,000 and 1.5 million Romani, 200,000 to 250,000 disabled people, 80,000 Freemasons, between 20,000 and 25,000 Slovenes,  5,000 to 15,000 homosexuals, and between 2,500 and 5,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses killed in the Holocaust. Even using the low estimates, the death toll is 10,227,500 or more than 3.3 times the number killed by Atheist States in 5 different instances.

The reason to only include the Holocaust on the side of men with Gods was because, all of the Atheist State examples I used were from the 20th century and I didn’t want anyone crying unfair if I used examples like the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the Thirty years War or the French Wars of Religion, which all took place in  different eras, when people were not as enlightened as they were in the last century.

I do agree that killing is part of human nature, and I am positive that, even without a belief in any sort of deity, people would find something to fight about on a mass scale. My point here is that belief in a god seems to be a pretty popular reason to kill people. Here’s a question to think on… is God the reason, or the excuse?

The anti Bucket List

Like a lot of people I have a Bucket List of things I’d like to do before I kick the bucket. Most of the items on this list are travel oriented, like going to the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, attending the Cannabis Cup, visiting New Zealand or buying an apartment in the south of France to spend winters in.

I also have another list. A list of things I have tried, but will (likely) never try again. I call this my Suck It list, because these things can suck it.

MY SUCK IT LIST

Religion

Skiing (both snow and water)

Skating (both Ice and Roller)

Camping

Living in the United States

Marriage

Being a mistress

Anal sex (unless I’m on the giving end)

Lesbianism (not that there’s anything wrong with it, just not for me)

Submission

Watching Piers Morgan

Dropping acid

Doing extacy

Snorting cocaine

Horse back riding

Listening to Katy Perry ‘sing’ (same goes for Britney Spears, Justin Beiber and Beyonce)

Watching a Kardashian do anything (or not do anything)

Visit the Dominican Republic

Go on a cruise

Visit Venice (I can still smell it)

Visit Manhattan (also still smelling it)

Getting drunk on tequila

Date a much younger guy

Eat venison

Babysitting

And the list goes on from here. I’m betting that most people have their own Suck It list. What’s on yours?

** Note to self. Add Guys who respond to list with “Why isn’t my dick on it?” to list.

Pot calling kettle

 

 

 

On January 3, Iran summoned Canada’s envoy to Tehran to protest Canada’s “blatant violation of human rights.”, just days before our Prime Minister, Stephen Harper fired back with this bon mot, “Iran is the world’s most serious threat to international peace.”

This is not the first time Iran has held Canada up as being in severe and consistent violation of human rights. In September of 2007, they distributed an entire booklet detailing Canadian human rights violations. Some of the accusations in that 70 page booklet were, that Ottawa denies Canadians everything from clean water, the right to food and the right to work. Yes these charges were laid against CANADA!?

It seems that Iran has decided to make Canada a target every time the United Nations Human Rights Council is about to convene in order to take attention away from blatant and heinous violations of human rights in their own country.

The question I ask myself, is why Canada? Yes we hold ourselves up as a standard-bearer of human rights, but we, admittedly, are still a work in progress. We also hold ourselves up to scrutiny from the United Nations because we feel we have nothing to hide and actually want violations to be pointed out to us so we can correct them. I assume the reason to slam Canada is to point out hypocrisy in our stance and therefore make the point that human rights violations occur everywhere so why is Iran singled out and berated for this so-called crime? There’s another answer to the why Canada question. Oil. We are also an oil selling nation and, therefore, competition.

Back in 2007, there were several other countries that sided with Iran and their booklet. Predictably, they were countries who were also some of the world’s worst violators.

This begs another question. Why is it that every country in the world is not striving to make sure that all human beings are granted basic human rights? Morally, this seems to be an obvious thing to do. Is it greed? (that’s very likely a big part of it) Is it fear? (fear of allowing the oppressed freedom, then having to face retribution from them) Is it religion? (or is that just the excuse they cloak the greed and fear in?)

In my opinion it’s the simple belief that the rich cannot exist without the poor. But must the poor need to suffer beating, rape, torture and humiliation so that the rich can be rich? The answer is a resounding NO. Rich and poor are relative terms. Just how poor do the poor have to be in order to make a rich man feel rich?

Canada is considered a medium income inequality country. We have the lowest income inequality in that category. (though the gap is growing) Canada is a country that still has a middle class. A country where the average person without a university education can still make a comfortable living and have a good quality of life. Yes, we have poor people, but as a socialist country, we have a huge amount of programs in place to help with housing, food and employment. We are also a country that provides welfare for those who need it. Are we a perfect country, no, that doesn’t exist. But that doesn’t mean we should stop trying to improve.

So instead of bashing Canada on the world stage, perhaps Iran should focus on improving its own reputation.