It's Called Dying with Dignity

The headline for this article is clearly slanted to indicate that atheist doctors, and by association all atheists, are immoral because they are eager to end a patient's life.  Later on it softens ever so slightly to indicate that perhaps the religious are slow to act to reduce pain if it means shortening the lifespan of the patient.  I think this article fails to clearly state the obvious; the atheist doctors are doing what is best for the patient, while the religious doctors are doing what is best according to their faith.  There is more regard for the patient's wishes and level of pain in the atheist camp and more concern about religious dogma in the believer camp.  This antiquated notion of the soul and the sacredness of human life as preached from the pulpit is prolonging the agony of terminally ill patients by placing obedience to an unhelpful god above the dignity of the individual.

Jesus, or just the idea of Jesus?

Something which is true should able to withstand scrutiny.  Evidence, both pro and con, would be weighed and and a definitive conclusion presented, or perhaps the finding that there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion.  Likewise, when something is deemed good, we should be able to validate that claim by comparison to other "good" things, or by observing the benefits and risks associated with it.

Many Christians make the claim that God and his offspring, are both real and good.  However, when it comes to defending that notion very few are willing to stick with you long enough to defend the claim.  When confronted with a challenge to these beliefs they fall silent or spew a list of things they believe about God or their 100% certainty and then fall silent without any attempt to actually address the issues presented.

It would seem to me that if God was real and good, they should be able to easily demonstrate those facts, but they never do.  They make some sad attempts at telling us how incomprehensible God is to us intellectually ill-equipped humans all the while regaling us with their comprehension of what God thinks and does and wants.  They never actually present any tangible evidence for their claims or rebuttal for the arguments against the existence of God or his immorality.

I am beginning to believe that it is actually the idea of God/Jesus that these individuals are clinging to rather than the "real" God/Jesus.   If God/Jesus were real, they should be able to easily shut us down when we question them; however, they stubbornly refuse to even entertain the debate.  Perhaps, they are afraid that the belief they hold cannot stand up to the test and they feel it would be devastating to lose that belief.  The idea of an eternal life and a constantly vigilant father is comforting to them and they will lock themselves behind that steel door of 100% certainty and 0% inquiry to ensure that their emotional cocoon is not broken.  They are in love with the idea of Jesus and ideas can be challenged and overturned with knowledge, so they must be protected against any such attack by the most effective means possible- remaining ignorant and unwilling to respond to any challenge by simply ignoring it and going silent.  If they actually believed in a substantial being of morality, justice and love, they would take the challenge head on and demolish us with truth, irrefutable truth and silence us as we too stood in awe.  Their failure to do so speaks volumes about their claims and that 100% certainty they proudly proclaim.    

Bucolic Social Leper on The Atheist Blogroll

Bucolic Social Leper has been added to The Atheist Blogroll. You can see the blogroll in my sidebar. The Atheist blogroll is a community building service provided free of charge to Atheist bloggers from around the world. If you would like to join, visit Mojoey at Deep Thoughts for more information.

The Twelve Step Program for Today's Fungelicals

(1) Proclaim existence for that for which there is no evidence.
(2) Dismiss that for which there is evidence.
(3) Reject all scientific results except those that support your agenda, even if they use the same source.
(4) Refuse to directly respond to uncomfortable questions.
(5) Always inject God when you can't answer a question.
(6) Support logic, reason, and critical thinking, except when they are applied to your beliefs, then praise ignorance and blind faith.
(7) Always try to muddy the water during a discussion; it will tire your opponent and give you a meaningless victory. 
(8) Label any challenge to your beliefs as intolerance and persecution while simultaneously being intolerant and persecuting others that believe differently.
(9) Frequently use condescending or misleading statements like "Hate the sin, love the sinner", "It's not religion, it's a personal relationship", or "Jesus believes in you even if you don't believe in Him". 
(10) Remain willfully ignorant while projecting arrogant certainty.
(11) When caught in an uncomfortable question, mention God's Mysterious Ways or point out humanity's limited capabilities and frailties when it comes to understanding the universe. 
(12) Never admit you could be wrong, especially to yourself.

Don't Mistake Passion for Anger

Many people think that outspoken atheists are angry, bitter people that lead depressing, miserable, unfulfilled lives.  Sorry to disappoint.   We are well-adjusted, productive members of society with normal home lives and the normal level of ups and downs, anger and compassion, just like everyone else.  What you are doing is confusing passion with anger.  

We are very passionate about what we see as an inappropriate and often dangerous mix of religion and politics, or religion and science, or religion and medicine, etc.  We are very passionate about calling out injustice, ignorance, and absurdities that cause physical, mental, or emotional harm or limit the rights of others.  In writing, it often looks like anger.  Even in discussion, passion can get the best of all of us and appear as anger, but passion it is.  We cannot sit by silently and watch others negatively influence the lives of others...it is out of comPASSION that we speak.

I am not angry just because I vehemently disagree with you, but if I think your actions are causing harm because of willful acts rather than simple ignorance, then yes, in that case you just might be right - anger it is.

Asimov Was Correct

The writer of this article above gets it wrong. A proper reading of the Bible doesn't start with an atheistic viewpoint or a Christian viewpoint. The proper reading is to view it objectively as it is written and then to explore the implications that arise from that reading. If you do that, honestly, with an open mind unclouded by preconceived notions, you will find that Asimov is correct. Those that read it and find that it represents a moral, loving being are simply being intellectually dishonest with themselves.

Obama a Muslim? Who Cares?

To all those Americans that think President Obama is a Muslim despite his statements to the contrary, read your Constitution.  If you are truly a Patriot that defends the Constitution, then you should realize that his religion should be irrelevant.

Article VI, Section 3 of the US Constitution.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

I Don't Hate Myself Enough To Be A Christian

Humanity is inherently weak, unjust, selfish, prejudiced, and evil; at least that is the tune sung by many Christians, both pastors and laity alike.  Without constant supplication to a god to help us stay on track and his subsequent violation of our free will and the laws of physics (how else can he do it?) to answer our prayers, we would succumb to our supposedly baser instincts to steal, rape, and murder each other.

We are wicked; born inclined to "sin", with no ability to control ourselves.  Without a god, we would be immoral and purposeless - a meaningless mass of worthless flesh uncontrollably driven to self-gratification with no care for others.  

I don't know about you, but to me this is an awfully depressing view of humanity and one that I just don't accept.  I have a purpose without god; whatever purpose I choose for my life.  I am not depraved and indifferent to others, an uncontrollable sinner, but rather a responsible member of society.  I do not need a god to define my morality, especially one that is depicted as so despicable and immoral in his own holy book.  And I am constantly looking at ways to improve as is most of the rest of society.  Most of us are not killing, raping, and stealing; we are just trying to get by in life, protecting our families and causing no one undue harm.  I believe in the inherent goodness of humanity which is borne out everyday in simple acts of kindness to strangers and the ability of societies to work together to solve problems despite differing opinions.

If I have to believe the Fundamentalist Christian view of humanity, well, I guess I'm just not depressed enough or have low enough self esteem to be a Christian - I don't hate myself enough to be a Christian.

Hate Speech? No. Truth? Yes!

If your holy book clearly places a woman's worth beneath that of a man, it is not hate speech to call your god a misogynist.

If your holy book claims your god will not tolerate persons with physical deformities in his temple, it is not hate speech to call him prejudiced.

If your god never condemns slavery, it is not hate speech to call him unloving.

If your holy book claims that God kills virtually everyone on the planet, it is not hate speech to call him violent and cruel.

If the criteria your savior uses to reward or punish is based solely on belief in him rather than your compassion and generosity, it is not hate speech to call him unjust and immoral.

If your god, savior, and religion supports all of this and more, it is not hate speech to publicly point out that it is evil.

It is not hate speech, it is truth.   

Give Credit to Humanity

"Johnny made it on the dean's list for three years in row."
"Susie just got the promotion she desperately wanted and needed."
"Billy made first string on the team."

How many times have you seen a post on facebook or heard in conversation a statement of good news like those above only to be followed by "God provides", or "it was God's will", or some variant attributing the person's good fortune to God?  

It makes me wonder if the person making the statement has any idea how debasing that is to the person who has achieved these rewards through honest, hard work.  Maybe Johnny has studied very hard every semester to make the grades necessary to be on the dean's list.  Perhaps Susie paid for night classes out of her own pocket to qualify for the promotion.  And Billy, he woke up early every morning and did an extra two hours of training to make the team.

"Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's".  Perhaps an addendum should be added to "give credit where it is truly due".   

Political Correctness is Highly Overrated

Being “politically correct” is highly overrated and often inappropriate.  When you tell me about your wonderful day in church or the moving sermon or the church picnic, etiquette dictates that I should smile, nod my head, and allow you to drone on…and for the most part I would agree.  I am not one to attack every religious utterance, especially when it is clear that the person has no hidden agenda, despite how boring and nauseating it may be to endure it.  However, when you move on to my personal life or when you start to talk about influencing law, children’s’ education, and the rights of others, I have no qualms, in fact, I feel it is my duty, to tell you in no uncertain terms that your ideas and your religion are full of bull.

Being “politically correct” or polite is fine in short, casual conversation, but extending to other arenas is simply irresponsible.  I don’t care if it is your personal religious conviction and that I may hurt your feelings; if what you are peddling is harmful in some way to others, I will not hesitate to tell you how despicable your viewpoint is.  The truth, no matter how raw and uninviting, is preferable to allowing harmful lies to continue.

So, although I support and will defend your right to free speech, if you preach anti-gay rhetoric, or abstinence-only programs, or creationist dogma, or any other misinformed vile dogma, don’t expect a free pass.  We have become a country where speaking out against certain topics has become taboo and religion is the prime recipient of this attack-free zone.  But some religious beliefs, when turned into actions, are dangerous and immoral. 

Homeschooling your child or sending them to some religious school just so you can propagate hatred and ignorance should not be tolerated.  I am not condemning all home schools or religious schools, as some are actually good at most aspects of education.  But those parents that shield their children from scientific truths in favor of religious dogma or continue to trot out homophobic doctrine in place of equality and compassion, I have no tolerance for these.

Just a quick rant.  More on each of these later.

Samson: The First Suicide "Bomber"

Samson is depicted as a hero in the Bible, particularly in children's stories, but he appears to be less than heroic in his deeds.  If Samson represents Biblical morality, I will look elsewhere for my morals and my heroes.

Judges 14:
Samson sets up a bet with his bride's people in the form of a riddle.  The family, angry that they could not solve the riddle and feeling that they were being robbed,  threatened Samson's wife until she extracted the answer from Samson.  Samson understandably gets angry with the people, but instead of harming them, he goes to another town, kills 30 people, and uses their clothes to pay his debt.     

"19And the Spirit of the LORD came upon him, and he went down to Ashkelon, and slew thirty men of them, and took their spoil, and gave change of garments unto them which expounded the riddle."

Does this sound like the actions of a hero or a brute?

Judges 15:
Next, Samson returns to the house of his bride and finds that her father has given her away to another.  Again, Samson vents his anger at the wrong people.  Instead of harming the father in some manner, he destroys the crops of the Philistines.

4And Samson went and caught three hundred foxes, and took firebrands, and turned tail to tail, and put a firebrand in the midst between two tails.

 5And when he had set the brands on fire, he let them go into the standing corn of the Philistines, and burnt up both the shocks, and also the standing corn, with the vineyards and olives.

This results in retaliation from the Philistines who also attack the wrong party as they blame the father and daughter and burn them.  Samson seeks revenge and slaughters many of the Philistines.  The Philistines seek revenge and Samson kills another thousand with just the jawbone of an ass.  All of this death and destruction could have been avoided if Samson had just been a man and walked away.  Instead, he plays the violent hothead and continues the cycle of violence.

Judges 16:
After all that killing, eventually Samson goes out of town for sex with a prostitute; another mark of a hero.  He falls in love with Delilah who wants to know the secret of his strength.  He is foolish enough to tell her, loses his locks, his strength, and is captured by his old buddies the Philistines.  They gouge out his eyes, but for some strange reason keep him in prison long enough for his hair and his strength to return.  Silly Philistines.  Here is where Samson gets to become the first suicide "bomber".  While tied to pillars, he requests as is granted the strength from God to destroy the temple, which contains thousands of people, not just his captors and he commits suicide in the process.

 27Now the house was full of men and women; and all the lords of the Philistines were there; and there were upon the roof about three thousand men and women, that beheld while Samson made sport.

 28And Samson called unto the LORD, and said, O Lord God, remember me, I pray thee, and strengthen me, I pray thee, only this once, O God, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes.

 29And Samson took hold of the two middle pillars upon which the house stood, and on which it was borne up, of the one with his right hand, and of the other with his left.

 30And Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. And he bowed himself with all his might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that were therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life.

This is pretty much all that is said of Samson in the Bible.  Based on the information, he started a chain of events with his uncontrollable anger that resulted in the deaths of his wife, father- in-law, thirty innocent citizens, thousands of Philistines soldiers, and thousands more Philistines of unknown status or relationship to the damage done to him.  What a pity he didn't take an anger management class instead.  But, of course, none of this would have been possible without God giving him his extraordinary strength.

Samson is a Biblical hero often used in Bible Studies for children.  Here is an example:  www.essex1.com/people/paul/bible42.html .  If you notice, none of Samson's uncontrollable anger is ever mentioned.  His role in the death and destruction is glossed over and the comments at the end of the story give kids the impression that committing suicide while taking out your enemies is a good thing, possibly even Christ-like.

Enemies Far and Near

Just as Christianity was a physical danger to those in prior centuries that did not subscribe to its beliefs, so now is Islam.  In many books of the Old Testament, a barbaric, vengeful god that commands the extermination of non-believers is depicted.  The New Testament simply delays that punishment until the afterlife.  The Quran follows in the footsteps of both.

Their attitudes towards women, infidels, and homosexuals, to name just a few, may vary in practical application, but not in their conceptual foundations and both are dominated by submission to the often unethical demands of their gods (or god, depending on who is interpreting the relationship between Jehovah and Allah).
        
Many are concerned about the violent face of Islam that we see in terrorist attacks, honor killings, and barbaric punishments of Shari'a law.  Their fears are legitimate, we should be concerned, as these  activities are sanctioned by Islamic leaders and the Quran itself.  Christianity went through it's most violent period several hundred years ago, prior to airplanes, nuclear arms, and lethal biological weapons.  Imagine what the Crusades or Spanish Inquisition would have been like had Christianity had access to these tools of terror during its adolescence as Islam does today.

While Islam is arguably the more present danger, what would it take for Christianity to follow suit.  What would it take for Christianity to become more terroristic or to enforce its own version of Shari'a Law?  Some would say both have already begun with the evangelization of the armed forces involved in unnecessary wars, the ever increasing entanglement of religion into politics with the focus on electing Senators, Congressman, Governors, and Presidents that support Christianity in its more fundamental forms, and the overtaking of school boards by fundamentalists making decisions about sex and science with little understanding of how either one works.

Make no mistake.  We are in a battle to protect our freedoms and our lives, but it is not just the obvious external struggle with fundamentalist Islam.  The conflict also wages internally on a more subtle level with fundamentalists that claim to follow Jesus.

Which Is More Moral, Mercy Or Justice?

Mercy: the discretionary power of a judge to pardon someone or to mitigate punishment.
Justice: the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness.

If a man commits terrible crimes like rape or murder, or even lesser offenses such as theft or assault, but at the end of his life recognizes the error of his ways and comes to sincerely repent before the Christian god, he gains entry into heaven.  This is claimed by Christians to be evidence of their god's mercy.  You cannot earn your way into heaven; God must grant his mercy.

However, if another man has lead an exemplary life, one without crime and full of compassion for his fellow man, but simply cannot see any reason to believe the fantastical tales of the Christian religion or their savior, he does not gain entry into heaven, but faces an eternity of punishment.  No mercy here; and no justice in either outcome.

Of course, the Christian may say that all have sinned and any sin is abhorrent to their god, so both men are equal in the eyes of their god.  The one man receives mercy because of his honest acceptance of Jesus.  That's right.  It doesn't matter how heinous your crimes or how trivial your missteps, they are viewed as equally reprehensible to God. I find it disgustingly laughable that the being directly responsible for the deaths of millions, perhaps billions in the Bible finds even the most gentle, compassionate, and honest citizen of this planet too sinful to accept.

Of course, he can accept the good person, the rapist, the pedophile, even the mass murderer, if they pay the right price; absolute belief in God and along with it their intellectual freedom as well as their sense of fairness.  Turn over your life and place complete faith in a being that has demonstrated that he is far worse than you and you can be forgiven anything, but live a good life of reason and compassion and deny this being and there is nothing that will save you.

There is no justice in this Christian view of God.  In fact, it looks more like a religious version of organized crime's protection money scheme: "Pay me now, with your unquestioning faith, or something bad might happen and neither one of us would want that now would we?"