Why are we here? - Part III

Just to follow up on an issue related to our supposed 'Perfect God'.

Consider the end result of the whole process described in the bible.

1. God creates universe and man.
2. God destroys mankind, plants, animals (except for Noah and company).
3. God and man continue to kill, maim, rape, etc... until Jesus comes back.
4. Jesus comes back. All the saved go to heaven. All the rest go to eternal damnation.
5. God and the saved spend eternity together.

Create it all, gather some back, destroy it all. What's the point? Why cause all of that suffering? God's Great Plan!

What plan could possibly justify all of the destruction? Why would God need any of this if He is perfect? He didn't do it for us, we didn't exist in the first place!

Now what? Start it all over again?

Lunacy.

Why are we here? - Part 2

Let’s give God the benefit of the doubt and assume that He doesn’t need us. That leaves the “want” issue. Why would a perfect God want us? Why create the universe and perhaps more importantly, why create a human being capable of noticing? What psychological need do we fulfill? Perhaps it’s ego.

Let’s just start with a very small selection from Exodus 20. Three of the 10 commandments have to do with god.

20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

I think that one can see from these passages that God has an ego problem. He doesn’t say “Don’t rape, don’t molest, don’t abuse”. No. Instead of adding these to the list of things not to do, like murder and adultery, He is more concerned with praise and respect for Himself. So much so, that he will be such a just God and punish not only the unbelievers, but their children, grand-children, and great-grandchildren. He not only has an ego problem, but is clearly not a fair and just God. Does this sound like a God? Not to me. But maybe this isn’t God’s word here. Maybe this is just the way that man recorded the incident - with a little embellishment for effect! But then that would mean the Bible isn’t the true word of God. Hmm….

More later.

Why are we here? - God is imperfect.

God
The Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshiped as creator and ruler of the universe.
Perfect
Being entirely without fault or defect.
Complete
Having all necessary parts, elements, or steps.
Just
Acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good.

When I was younger, I was taught that God, the god of the Bible, was complete, perfect, and just. That He was omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent.

So, why are we here?

If God is perfect and complete then He is self-sufficient. He is in need of nothing. There is nothing that He needs to complete Himself. He does not need food or shelter or companionship. To add anything to a perfect “anything” makes it imperfect. So if God doesn’t need us, He must want us. But “wanting” is a form of need. It is not a physical need, but it is a need nonetheless. It is a psychology need. I want something because it fulfils some sort of emotional need. If only I could have ‘x’, then I would be happy. Would a god have emotional needs? Not a perfect god. “Wants”, i.e., “emotional needs” indicate a defect, a sense of dissatisfaction to some degree. But, how could a perfect being be dissatisfied? Being perfect would imply being psychologically perfect as well. Such a being should be contented with existence as it is.

There should be no need or desire in a perfect god. So why are we here? I submit that if, for the sake of discussion, we assume that God exists, then we are here because God either needed us or wanted us. In either case, this would mean that God is imperfect. But if He is imperfect, then he is not a god.

Scalia is clueless

From the Wall Street Journal:

Justice Antonin Scalia disputed the premise behind the lawsuit, telling Mr. Eliasberg that it was unfair to view the cross merely as a Christian symbol.

"The cross is the most common symbol of the resting place of the dead," he said. "What would you have them erect? Some conglomerate of a cross, a Star of David, and you know, a Muslim half moon and star?"

"I have been in Jewish cemeteries. There is never a cross on a tombstone of a Jew," Mr. Eliasberg said. "So it is the most common symbol to honor Christians."

"I don't think you can leap from that to the conclusion that the only war dead that that cross honors are the Christian war dead," Justice Scalia said. "I think that's an outrageous conclusion."

Scalia is clueless. He thinks that families of veterans with non-Christian backgrounds would be honored by the cross? Would he like us to honor him after his death with a Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist religious symbol on his grave, or perhaps Scientology? And what about atheists? I don't think Pat Tillman would feel honored with the cross. Once again Scalia shows either his arrogance or stupidity with regard to religion. As long as it's his religious beliefs that are intruding on others, that's ok, but let it work the other way and suddenly he gets offended. He should be impeached, but unfortunately I don't think you can impeach a Supreme Court Justice just for incompetence.

An Example of How Religion Spoils Everything

This is a perfect example of how religion spoils everything (see the story here).

The employer fires his employee because her religious viewpoints are incompatible with his, but she doesn't even express them at work. She doesn't actively promote her atheism at work, nor does she discourage the religious expression of others and yet somehow her employer sees this as a threat. He feels that he can't have this "negativity" associated with his business. Does he really think that his patients will no longer patronize his business if he has an atheist working for him even though she is not "proselytizing"? What does this say about his patients? Are they so threatened, so unjust as to leave a doctor they have trusted and relied on simply because of unspoken religious beliefs?

As an atheist, I would never fire an employee for their religious beliefs if they were not bringing it into the workplace and confronting clients with it.

So much for that Christian love.

Rush Limbaugh is an Asshat

I've always known that Rush Limbaugh was an arrogant ass who believes anyone that disagrees with him is an idiot. He makes fun of environmentalists and global warming despite the growing evidence. He has attacked drug users and cut them no slack until of course he was the abuser with his oxycontin scandal. He supports the agenda of the Right even when it's wrong. He acts as if he is holier-than-thou as most of his right-wing buddies do. But now he has really shown his true colors. Accusing Michael J. Fox of not taking his medications or of 'faking' his Parkinson's in a recent TV ad. Limbaugh not only made the accusation but he also imitated Fox's Parkinson's ticks. Rush Limbaugh has no respect for anyone but himself. If his actions are supposed to be representative of the Conservative Christian Republicans, then their claims of moral superiority are obviously a pile of shit.

Rush Limbaugh you are the definition of an ASSHAT!

Science Education

We’ve all heard in recent news that the United States is losing its edge with regard to science education. Part of the problem has been identified as a shortage of qualified science teachers which results in teachers without a scientific background being required to teach some science classes. Without sufficient exposure to science and mathematics, many students are not equipped to handle the challenges of a science major in college. I submit that there are two other educational issues that also are influencing the decline in science education.
One is the current focus on passing standardized tests, particularly those used to measure performance against the No Child Left Behind act. These tests currently only assess proficiency in mathematics and reading. Science is being left behind to spend extra time ‘teaching to the test’ to make sure that students show progress in the two test areas. Another problem is an insufficient emphasis on critical thinking skills throughout the school system. Too much time appears to be spent on memorizing facts to regurgitate on a test rather than having students use logic and reason to investigate why and how these facts came to be. I don’t blame the teachers in this process; I blame the system that has been established that encourages and perpetuates it.
Our gullibility to believe extraordinary claims without evidence is another problem. According to a recent Gallup poll, approximately one-third of Americans believe in such unsubstantiated ideas as ESP, psychics, ghosts, talking to the dead, and astrology. Hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of dollars are spend annually on these pseudoscientific activities. Imagine what could be done if this money were channeled to education or some other worthwhile endeavor.
But where does this gullibility come from? I propose that a good portion comes from organized religion. When the vast majority of Americans are indoctrinated to believe in unseen, unverifiable deities and follow scriptures which reference ghosts, spirits, and demons for which no objective evidence exists, how much of stretch is it to extend this belief to other areas like those mentioned previously. Without a solid background in critical thinking and science, it becomes very easy for individuals to accept all kinds of unscientific claims without question. Fundamentalist sects continue to actively campaign to push unscientific, religious dogma like Intelligent Design into science classrooms even though their claims have been refuted repeatedly and the evidence for evolution, especially the molecular evidence, is scientifically sound. Similar issues can be found with stem cell research and end-of-life issues.
Don’t get me wrong, I firmly believe in the right to religious freedom. It is only when religion interferes with individual freedoms or in areas that are secular, like public education that I get concerned. And religion is only part of the problem. Until we structure our school systems to teach children not only what to learn, but how to learn through reason and critical thinking these issues will continue to be a problem even without the contribution of religion.