Bible! Day 3, and Noah’s flood never happened

Genesis 7:1-9:29

Let me throw y’all this right quick: 7:24– “The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days”- Y’ALL, it didn’t just rain for 40 days and 40 nights; the earth was flooded for 150 days! What does this mean for the average man? That means, all the food and poop pickup, the fate of the creatures of the water, etc. have all been compounded nearly 4x. Noah, it says in this Bible, stayed nearly a year in that ark.

Also, should Christians be on the lookout for clean and unclean animals as it says they exist within the first four verses of Chapter 7 of Genesis- and here we are in Noah’s time.

8:1– “But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and the livestock that were with him in the ark” and so God got to cleaning up the place, but my question is (and this happens a couple more times later in this segment), did God forget Noah? You don’t have to remember what you haven’t forgotten, you know what I mean? From the sound of these beginning pages, God was never meant to be all-knowing (or omnibenevolent either!) From here, also, why did Noah have to build an ark? Why would God need to send a flood? Y’all remember Prince of Egypt? God sent that smoky stuff to kill all the first born. This wasn’t possible because? Why kill most of the animals too?

9:12– “And God said, ‘This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you” etc. There is absolutely no need for a covenant or rainbow. God could have just had a promise, and it’s not like this covenant is trustworthy. Sure, he won’t ‘flood the earth’ but he can do pretty much anything else.

9:20-end – ARE YOU SERIOUS? Just in case some of you don’t know, there was a thing with white people who believed that black people (especially tribal Africans) were directly descended from Canaan, and I’m guessing it’s probably because they were more naked than most people. And Canaan was ‘meant’ to be a slave to his brothers, just as Africans were ‘meant’ to be the slave to white people.

Now that that’s over with. This wasn’t a big population- many people today would be able to count Canaan as an ancestor. Two, the guy saw another guy naked after being drunk, and he and his descendants get cursed for all eternity. Adam and Eve were naked for who knows how long- WHY is this a bad thing? These guys get upset over the stupidest things.

1. Plot 3- This was a lot less exciting than I had remembered it. I kind of wanted more tension, but I suppose for goatmen, this was pretty exciting
2. Credibility 1- It didn’t happen, and nothing about it makes sense.
3. Reliability 4- Even if it wasn’t true, we know we could count on God to do some crazy magical shit somewhere down the line, even though this definitely didn’t happen.
4. Clarity 1- What are kinds? Clean and unclean animals? Why was Noah so upset to be seen naked? Did none of the wives get pregnant or die from childbirth? So many  questions!
5. Reality 1- If this was 1830, this would probably be a four, seeing as how people used to Bible (and not only this part) to reinforce their own selfish views on slavery. Also, most Christians or apologists I know see this story as more metaphorical than anything.  Of course, would than mean gods are simply metaphorical beings after all? How does that work?

 

Pledging Virginity To Daddy

As much as this sounds like some very off-kilter smut piece, this could actually be the chapter of some young woman’s teenage life. I put this title on the delightfully- ah, no, I can’t even speak of it in jest. It’s pretty disgusting. Let’s face it, we’re talking about virginity in the spine-chilling traditional sense of whether or not a vagina has been penetrated by a penis and these women are promising that their vaginas aren’t going to be penetrated by penises, and their Dads will help be their beacon or barrier or whatever against penetrating penises.

Ew.

Yea, I’m talking about Purity Balls (and other such celebrations of virginity, really).

Here’s a glimpse at this madness:

And look at the simpering expression. Oh-ha-ha, yes, Puuuuuurity Balls. Let’s not take into account that a woman is only pure as long as her vagina is not penetrated by penises, and that it is important that a woman is not penetrated by penises in the first place. Let’s look at Daddy protecting Daughter in being pure.

I find this comes off as antagonistic and barbaric. Lemme give you some background on what I mean, because this shit didn’t come out of no where.

I work at a certain place as a cashier and sometimes, because of the long lines since customers believe they have absolutely no where else to go, customers can have conversations with each other. There was Younger Couple (with girl child) and Older Couple (who presumably has a girl child as well).

These people seemed absolutely normal, kind of awesome actually. The Older Couple was helping the Younger Couple with the ton of groceries they were buying, and I was scanning on.

The the man of the Younger Couple saw a T-Shirt the man from the Older Couple was buying. And he said, “I like that shirt!” and then he made a joke about keeping men away from his young toddler when she got older. I had been trying to read the shirt in between scanning but I quickly lost interest.

I don’t remember when I started feeling disgusted by the supposed need of fathers to keep young men away from their daughters, but it’s there, and not the topic of this post.

Then the man from the Older Couple had another joke up his sleeve: “Yea, my daughter called me. They had just had one of them sex ed classes and she was like “Daddy, you lied! You said that if I had sex before I was sixteen, the boy would die!”

“Oh, he still will, he still will.”

And they all shared a good laugh at that and I’m like

 

“Yea, why can’t they leave that stuff for marriage?” says the man of the Younger Couple, and here I am thinking, like, isn’t this 2014? Then this man starts talking about how God wanted us to stay pure until marriage and that it’s in the Bible and that our bodies are temples that need to be kept sacred.

And the woman of the Younger Couple starts talking and it gets even more downhill, or maybe we’re underground now, I’m not sure. I do know that it’s pretty dark. Well, wherever we are, the woman of the Younger Couple says, “We’ve already got it all planned out for her.”

ALL PLANNED OUT FOR HER?! CAN’T SHE LEARN TO READ FIRST?

“We’re not going to let her date until her senior year of high school, just in time for prom, where she’s going to be home fifteen minutes after it’s over.” They all laugh, and I’m just like, why, why, whyyyyyy do  you have so many groceries? If this wasn’t the first of the month, you would be gone already!

Then the woman of the Older Couple is there to pipe in and I’m just thinking, oh, this is going to be terrible, because older women are the worse at judging young females because they are often chock full of bad experiences with men and sex and have judgement clouding their every decision.

So she says, “We’re not going to let her date until she’s sixteen and a half, and only for the vow. Our daughter asked one day, “For the vow”, and I’m like, yes, wedding vows. This is not going dress shopping, you’re going to go at it once and stick with it. No sex until the  marriage night, and no divorce.”

Man pipes in, “To a guy of our choosing. If he wants her, he’ll have to go through us first, especially me.” He flexes, they all laugh.

It’s like dating is this Game of Thrones sort of thing, and the daughter is a throne on which to be seated is someone’s junk and that someone has to go through hoops and barrels because being in love with the girl is just not enough.

I’m sure I don’t have to go into detail that the man-to-be has to be Christian and the like.

And the laughing was really killing me people, oh-ha-ha-ha, I love having this much control over our children’s lives, oh-ha-ha-ha, but it’s not really children. Why is only the guy going to be dead if he has sex with the daughter before marriage? Why must the woman remain pure? The lady is just a Barbie pristine and pure and then dirtied with sex that she can’t control with a mutual boyfriend. Utter bollocks.

And let’s go back to purity balls and virginity pledges.  Here’s a quote from the Generations of Light webpage.

“The daughters silently commit to live pure lives before God through the symbol of laying down a white rose at the cross.”

 

“It is impossible to convey what I have seen in their sweet spirits, their delicate, forming souls, as their daddy takes them out for their first big dance. Their whole being absorbs my loving attention, resulting in a radiant sense of self-worth and identity.”

Let me help you out with that impossible to convey feeling that you expressly conveyed. You have a daughter fetish and the thought of controlling her sexual exploits in your hammed fists makes your willy tingle.

This is what religion does to power-hungry people who are nervous about the souls of their kids.

I looked into the eyes of the child who was ready for a nap and feel sorry for the child. Of course, if she wants to be Christian (not like she’ll have a choice in the matter outwardly) but if on the inside she wants to be Christian, technically speaking, she’s going to let Daddy hold her virginity in her heart and let him scare down any boy that comes forward. But she doesn’t need a ring or ball or her father staring down at her looking into her pure, delicate soul to make it a reality. It’ll already be so.

P.S. That daughter of the Older Couple isn’t allowed to have male friends on Facebook. She’s sixteen.

P.P.S. They swapped non-denominational churches after the visit, they clicked so well.

P.P.P.S. The customer after the Older Couple was laughing at me the entire time!

No net neutrality?

Petition for Net Neutrality

There’s not much more I can say for net neutrality that hasn’t already been said. I’m under the impression that the government should also be more egalitarian towards health care and the news and business regulation because people in power, people in charge of these privatized industries, cannot be trusted.  I know I must sound super conspiracy-tinfoil hat-like, but I just can’t deal with it anymore.

What’s the worst with net neutrality is that so few will benefit from this. At least with businesses and health care (although these are no excuse),  having privatized industries allows some sprinkling of benefits to many others (just not as many if they weren’t privatized).

Huffington Post posted about this, and maybe I had glossed over it, but I see no benefits except for the very few, the very rich. That’s not okay. And anyone speaking for them and saying it is okay (judges), must admit that the “I get mine and fuck the consequences” a la global warming mindset is going to drive America into a fucking ditch.

Everyone has autism? Better than Polio.

So, fortunately, according to Huffington Post, Chili’s has canceled it’s fundraiser for an anti-vaccination autism group. As much as I love the idea of raising money for autism, the thought of perpetuating, even a little bit, the idea that people shouldn’t take vaccinations makes the bile rise in my throat.

You can still do another fundraiser for autism!

To be honest, I thought anti-vaccination shiznit was only part of the deepest recesses of the conspiracy gloom, until certain family members have brought to light that it may be bigger than it should be.

The ‘dangers’ of vaccinations (yes, I’m clever) was first brought to light by a certain family member, who I thought was joking at the time. This person sent me to a website called Dherbs, which sells ‘organic’ or ‘natural’ products for problems that are ailing you. Upon reading the page against vaccinations, I (condescendingly, I must admit) told this person it wasn’t true. When I brought up this topic to close relative of the relative who showed me (relative 2 and 1, respectively), relative 2 told me they believed it, too.

We eventually had a longer talk about it, and relative 1 said vaccinations caused them cancer, relative 2 said they might have caused their stroke, they said it causes autism

 

This can’t be happening! I thought feverishly. What stupidity was this?  Sure Dherbs is science-y and has a lot of black people, and they are ‘spiritual’, but I can be right a lot of the time, but then try to swindle you something by telling you some gross terrible dangerous lies; I don’t trust anyone’s science unless they are a scientist, not even if they are black; and, although trying to maintain a fairy-and-crystal image, Dherbs is really all about Christianity (What is with this horoscope and Jesus cohabitation? You can’t accept both! And my opinion is you shouldn’t bother with either)

Recent contact with more of this anti-vaccination nonsense has gotten to me. I don’t have the best immune system and I have a soft spot in my heart for children, so people like me and children (and old people and people who truly aren’t able to get vaccinated) are at the most risk if this idiocy gets any bigger.  I went through a rough fall and winter of getting sick over and over again. I don’t know how big the anti-vax community is here, nor was I thinking of an overall cause. I thought that me being in quick-weather-changes  Tennessee caused me to get sick so often, when I had lived the last four years of fall-winter in more temperate Baltimore. I can only imagine it being worse if many weren’t taking vaccinations (which I did).

You probably already know all the crap against vaccinations, but in case you thought it might be a good idea here’s some science here.

But I want to touch on that last topic:

As much as I don’t want anyone to deal with the debilitating effects of autism, do the rare effects of vaccinations, even the most outrageous (like cancer), do they truly compare to getting polio, measles, and smallpox back on its grand scale?

Would you rather your child live with the effects of polio or the effects of autism? The effects of measles to asthma? Smallpox to mental retardation? These are some of the effects of vaccinations Dherb reports.

I don’t find the idea of living in an age where a third of our children, sickly and elders will be wiped out by preventable diseases, so that someone can avoid the near-zero chance of getting cancer from a vaccination. Since there is no science behind the causal effects, or even enough anecdotal evidence of such things happening, I think people should just get freakin’ vaccinated.

How to Lose Everyone I Love, ASAP or Care Inapplicable

When I first started this blog, it was for a number of things I was writing because the sites I used didn’t allow too much discussion and I got the distinct impression that

At the same time I thought that, I believed I would never get anything like followers or fans or anything quite so fabulous. I’ve got a trickle that I’m grateful for, though I wouldn’t mind more, a lot more. But it’s not like I’m jealous or anything.

Haha, last pic for a bit, seriously

In any case, I definitely didn’t think I would ever connect this to my Facebook page and have taken some pains to not associate my real name with this page. I mean, when I rant about my Dad or about gay porn or about my bipolar disorder and all the stuff in between, it’s not something I had wanted read by my nearest and dearest.

Today I realized two things, though: this little blog gets more likes per ‘status’ than what I post on Facebook, and NOBODY CARES- at least there or, really, much here. And I honestly don’t care who cares here on WordPress since I doubt I’ll ever meet them in the streets.

This was pushed on me by a number of things, the main one being someone in this world seemed to be trying to confess to me, but I was under the distinct impression that we were incompatible, mainly for the fact that we hardly knew that much about each other, and I haven’t revealed many of my darkest thoughts that could make or break a relationship- any relationship. Another main thing is that I adore a bit of personal strife, and it’ll be nice, like a lot of strife that I’ve received, to tell a future somebody that nothing really happened.

But! You might be thinking, I might lose a lot of friends! Or, if you happen to scan through my pages, I’m going to lose everyone!

Frankly, I couldn’t care less. I’m just an incompatible person for them, and I refuse to hide for fear of what- losing people who thought very little of me? This is not to sound bitter or angry- it’s just the truth. It’s kind of like how I don’t care about what Romney is doing now or if Justin Bieber will ever make another song. It’ll be fine if Romney is having a lovely talk with Ann or Bieber is taking a hiatus, like people on my Facebook will be happy I’m alive- but that’s as far as anything goes. And nothing so far as to worry about it.

Just thinking about it… Like, I made very depressed statuses over the years on Facebook and some messaged me to take them down, and now that I think about it… Why did I listen? One of them was up for a weekend before anyone said anything (to take it down). At the time, I remember thinking how I didn’t want to be seen as depressed or needy or desperate, and not wanting to upset people or make them worry. However, as I contemplate, no one really gave a shit. And I shouldn’t have either. It would have been good to catalog my moods and see how I was feeling when and all those who thought I was mistaken making some real status instead of- MCDONALD’S IS THE SHIT!!!!

And no one will give a shit if a post on my blog is on my wall. One day, every one of my friends on Facebook will have seen this blog and a vast majority of them will ignore it and all statuses related to it. A few will defriend me and a couple will warn me of various things that will have no application to my life on whether I follow the warnings or not.

And what really makes this all amazing is that I’ve thought about this for soooo looooong. And nobody really cared for soooo loooooong. And, honestly, the only people that I would regret having find any of this out is some future employer. Not even my current one because, holy shitcakes, the managers know damn well everybody and literally their mama smokes hard as rocks. They probably just can’t afford to fire everyone.

I still won’t use my real name here, you know, so it makes it a bit harder for some employer to sneak a peek.

If you’ve read this far and wondering if I lost my mind, just think of this: How many of your friends’ pictures have you rifled completely through? I can name them on two hands- only two of them not family. How many friends’ pages do you check specifically to see if they have made a status? Probably none, right? How often do you go to another’s person page and click on things that they have- either their music or books, or their other friends? Riiiight.

I realized that I’m just a tiny speck in most people’s lives, at most a boulder to lean on for a fun, loving, trusting time.

Oh, another big reason I’m doing this. I wrote something I was really excited about and wanted to share more of. But the only things I could count on were Facebook and a couple of forums. My mind had immediately recoiled at the thought of Facebook before I was like, wait, why not? Nobody gives a shit really except me, and I am the universe for my mind’s eye and a marble for everyone else’s.

The World Ends With Me.

What if God’s an Asshole? or That Other Catch-22

There comes a time (when we heed a certain call~) when we have to make some difficult choices. I don’t think I have had any of those yet, perhaps because I have experiences where I only have to make hard choices when I really, really want to. Getting out of a traditional high school to go to a reclusive private one on a college campus- nope, not that hard. Yet, my sister was asking people for weeks whether or not she should have done it. What college to go to? Once Johns Hopkins gave me the most money, easy pickings, and I think most can understand that. (Though I’ve just found this college in Japan that’s so perfect it hurts- leave Johns Hopkins and go there and get everything I need for the future I want, or stay with people who care about me but I’ll have to leave eventually- soon?)

But the title came by when I was having a conversation with Mama and how she viewed Christians that she believed weren’t really Christians- and I learned about her views on Catholics,Mormons, and Jehovah Witnesses, especially how they viewed the Bible. Of course, she thought they read parts wrong (like how Catholics have incorporated Hail Mary and Jehovah Witnesses don’t do blood transfusions) or that they extrapolated more than they needed to.I found myself telling her that the passages they viewed could be interpreted their way and that their nonsense could be true according to the same Bible.

“What makes them think God wants that?” She then started on a list of things that god really wanted Christians to do, and how things from the New Testament canceled out things in the Old Testament, and god doesn’t expect us to be perfect so “Live and let live!”

Now, I find my mother’s views pretty progressive and liberal, if a complete lie right with the Catholics, Mormons, and Jehovah Witnesses. Her beliefs are pretty much this: Believe in the Christian god, believe Jesus was real and died for our sins and sits with Christian god right now, and get baptized to the best of your ability.

Of course, I find that utter bollocks. Why would the Christian god ordain the ginormous Bible, but all he wanted was for us humans to believe he was real, believe Jesus was real, and get baptized?

No, he wanted that other shit, too. In any case, my mom (and other Christians) are quite certain what he DIDN’T want, so why is she so standoffish when some people are particular on what he actually wants?

And why be angry at fundamentalist Christians or people at Westboro (and going so far as to say they are going to hell) when they cherry-pick the Bible, and she chooses, really, the easiest instructions to go by. Really, by her logic, all of them will be going to heaven anyway.

And that’s what gets a lot of atheists on Fundies Say the Darndest Things! If many gods were real, they would let in some real assholes. Some believers might say, “Well, they’re doing it wrong” and many say in return, such-and-such god isn’t being clear on what he or she wants, or he/she/it  has little power over who they’re represented by, so how can anyone put his trust in him? How could you believe god is a merciful forgiving creature and believe simultaneously that many good atheists and many good believers of other religions who turned their back on Allah or Yahweh or Jesus are going to hell, for fucking ever! For all eternity! (and here we get the believers who say that god will take them back eventually or some such nonsense) .

On FSTDT, many atheists call god/Allah/Yahweh etc. stupid or an asshole (hehehe) and that they would never bow down to such a scumbag.

Before getting to that little tidbit, what if Insert God Here (IGH) is an asshole, seriously? What if IGH is a bit stupid? What if IGH just doesn’t care about us? What if IGH is not all-knowing? What if IGH is not all-seeing? What if IGH is not all-powerful?

I find the second most plausible. Believers are quick to say that IGH (ESPECIALLY CHRISTIANS!) is so complicated  that humans will never be able to understand them. Do they not realize that their constant bellowing of their beliefs dictate some sort of understanding of their god? In order to believe a religion to be true, you have to have some sort of understanding about it (and if you go the too-complicated route, why do you think others are wrong and/or get mad about it?)

In any case, many believers are even quicker to say that IGH wants humans to understand them. That’s what the Bible, Koran, Torah etc. etc. are for. That’s what pastors and missionaries are for. You guys ain’t foolin’ nobody!

I find IGH is stupid most plausible because this god wants people to understand it and does not know how to go about it. It goes about it by trial and error, like some human. We might be part of its eternal science lab. To me, it’s similar to the personalities of what we see with ancient gods of Greece or Egypt, or really any polytheistic religion. There are gods of jealousy and anger, lust and moon and grass.

What if the Christian god is single-minded like a lot of these gods? Take in mind that the strongest god of Greek mythology was Zeus- and he kept fucking random women, knowing his wife Hera would get hella mad and take it out on the girls. What if god was like that? This hypothetical would take for granted that god is not all-knowing:

 

As cute  and silly as Philosoraptor is, he has a point. It’s pretty clear in the Bible that god decides to wipe out most of the Earth with a flood because he realized most of it was shit. His present-day believers see evidence that Rapture is coming any day now in Roe vs. Wade anniversaries, how come he didn’t do something when just a fourth of humanity was shit and he knew it was getting bigger all the time? Why didn’t he speak to many others like he did to Noah? Why didn’t he give them a taste of hell and told them to repent? He was going to kill them anyways and have them in hell for all eternity.

Does he see nonbelievers now and realize what utter fuckery that was? Does he see that killing all those people instead of easily, easily, easily converting them with his presence or some damn magic would have been super effective?

The Bible says god is wrathful and jealous. Those are characteristics that will lose a human person a lot of friends except those of like misery. These sorts of people are often pretty stupid and narrow-minded. They’ll destroy things in a fit of rage when things don’t go their way, often contradict themselves in order to make themselves feel better and feel superior. These sorts of people are often accused of ‘trying to be God’.

But what if god is a stupid asshole like these people that I’m sure you know a few of? If he was real, and could send you to hell for all eternity, would you still worship him? Would you kill in his name if he asked you to? Would demand flesh sacrifices and such?

I would.

I can easily turn my back on something in this temporary world. I wouldn’t bow to some Hitler because death would be coming eventually and I can live the rest of my miserable life knowing that I did the right thing.

But I can also easily say that I wouldn’t want to be tortured for all eternity.

What if god’s not stupid? What if he’s just an asshole? What if he wrote the Bible as an all-knowing, all-powerful being just to fuck with us humans over the centuries? What if he’s like Zeus and Shiva and Ra all in one with not a fuck to give?

Think about it- you’re an eternal being with all knowledge and all power. How much care would you truly have over some 7 billion creatures with lifespans less than a century?

What if you’re the nicest being no Earth, some innocent child, a desperate man- and god got a wild hair up his ass and decides to put you in hell for a few billion millinea? Seriously, what would stop him?

All in all, if, for example, the Christian god was a misogynistic, angry, jealous, primitive asshole, if he was the only thing keeping you from hell for all eternity, would you really turn your back on him?

What We Really Believe, Part One

Jerry Coyne is one of those atheists that atheists like me like to base themselves around.With a Ph. D. in Evolutionary Biology and having written a book (that I haven’t read) called Why Evolution is True, he’s the type of person that I think about when believers, mainly Christians, tell me that I’m going through a phase or that I’ll see the light soon. His work is what I think about when believers spout how atheists are really only going by faith in evolution because evolution can’t be completely proved just like no religion can. While I enjoy ignoring religion for logical reasons, people like Dr. Coyne go for the science.

I believe I’ve been banned from this site for my comments don’t show up. Oh, well. But I have so many thoughts on many of his articles that I’ll just happily expound on them here. I missed precious days of blogging because of gaming and much more precious time with my sister and I’m in an expounding mood.

This is part one of a series of posts called “What We Really Believe”, which would be me tackling logical contradictions, mainly of controversial topics like abortion and gun rights, and of course, would encounter religion/atheism and various other things. They are like Moments of Inspirations designed around properties of our psyche that aren’t readily seen, are probably unproven, and that I’m willing to discuss to deeper levels.

In this article by Dr. Coyne, a guy named Clay Naff accuses New Atheism (and Dr. Coyne) of not being able to fill the “God-shaped hole”, basically ‘Where would we be without religion?’ And many Christians in America believe it causes disasters and kills people, and so on and so forth. The reason why kids are so terrible today is because there’s no prayer in school- that sort of thing.

Here’s the first bit (emphasis mine, Dr. Coyne starts):

“It’s so tiresome to read repeatedly that New Atheism is a failure because we aren’t replacing religion with anything else. This claim has been made once again in a HuffPo piece by Clay Naff called ”Humanism’s moment of opportunity, going to waste.” Naff spends a lot of time going after me, and I’ll try to respond politely.

He first touts the success of American megachurches(1), and claims that, by comparison, non-theists (not just New Atheists) are a miserable failure:

Their non-theistic rivals? Not so much. The evidence is in, and it is clear: New Atheists have been a media success and a societal failure. They know how to sell books, how to debate, how to sneer, skewer, and satirize — in short, how to use all the squabbling skills of the modern academic(2) (cf. the letters section of the New York Review of Books) — but the New Atheists seemingly have no idea how to build a positive social movement.

First of all, it’s not true that atheists aren’t trying to fill the gap left by God. Anthony Grayling, by all accounts a New Atheist, has just written a book suggesting the replacement of religion by enlightened humanism. And there are plenty of “nontheists”—granted, most not New Atheists—suggesting other replacements for religion, including Alain de Botton and Philip Kitcher.”

Dr. Coyne has valuable time, so I’mma point out two things that are just juicy little gems that I love to chew on that he had left alone. Underline 1 really set me off. The success of the megachurches? Like those are good things? Isn’t there a popular thought that the televangelists of megachurches are what give Christianity and religion a bad name? Should atheism really find something to replace celebrity-like pastors and their biggest fans?

And nothing annoys me more than U2. Do you have any idea how dumb you look when you mock academia? The commonness of such expressions just confuses me and reminds me a of a child, “Oh, you think you’re soooo smart!” And from just this quote from Mr. Naff, he also knows how to sneer and skewer, as does everyone these days. It’s our brand of comedy and relief these days, and to accuse a group that is really good at it that they do it because they think they’re sooooo smart, is idiotic.

“Finally, is New Atheism really a failure? Naff’s only “evidence” is that the rise of the “nones” in America (those who profess no formal religion) has “passed the New Atheists by.” But I’m not convinced that vociferous atheism hasn’t contributed to this trend (3), nor do I think that all of us are required, when criticizing the follies of faith, to suggest replacements. Isn’t it enough to instill doubt in the young and fence-sitters that belief without evidence is not necessarily a good thing? How are we supposed to give hidebound Muslims, for instance, an alternative to the marginalization of women? Nevertheless, Naff takes us to task for our lack of positivity:

What gives? Surely, this is a moment of opportunity for us secular humanists. What are we doing wrong? The trouble, as I see it, is that leading public figures in New Atheism are known only for what they seem to be against: God, free will, purpose, hope … everything but apple pie(4). That’s great for the media, which feasts on conflict. But for building a mass movement? Clearly insufficient.

Worse yet, far from having the common touch many seem to revel in their elitism. A decade after Richard Dawkins endorsed “The Brights,” 50,000 people worldwide have signed on — a smaller crowd than you’d find at a college football game.

Well, I was never too keen on “The Brights,” but really, that’s a red herring.  Nobody but atheist-butters like Naff still talk about the “brights”. That idea is moribund. And “reveling in elitism” is just a pejorative term for “criticizing religion.” “

I’ll like to take U3 further and assert that vociferous atheism has contributed to this trend. Mr. Naff’s article talks about how the new ‘nones’ are plenty of young people. You know another thing about these young people (like me!)? They were probably weaned off of religion bit by bit, and are reluctant, like many believers who use gods as a crutch, to completely let go. Their lips probably dried out at the acidity that is the hypocrisy of believers, especially when many follow the trends of the fanatical (and I don’t include many conservatives of America as fanatical). Jokes made by atheists are funnier, and are backed by fact. Yes, they can be mean and condescending, but if you’re not the brunt of that action and you see it from the outside, you’re like, “Well, that asshole has a point.”

If atheism was still ‘hidden’, as I’m guessing Old Atheism is, those sort of things wouldn’t be put to light and the skeptical will be believers (or at least skeptical believers).

U4 made me think of Naff’s earlier comment about the skills of modern academics. See? We all do it. Then, this asinine extrapolation goes on three new hinges, among others: New Atheists are against “free will, purpose, hope”. First, we aren’t against gods, just the belief in them. To be against God, would be to imply that he actually exists. Second, we aren’t against free will, just believe in its nonexistence  especially in the religious sense. Dr. Coyne often calls it ‘dualistic’. To be honest, the absence of free will sets my logic wheels a-burnin’ and I don’t like to think about it, though I believe it’s true. Third, we aren’t against purpose and hope. We are against a godly purpose and hope of living forever in heaven- but Mr. Naff’s sneering likes to keep things simple.

“Naff then takes me on:

One prominent New Atheist, biologist Jerry Coyne, recently addressed claims that the movement is failing in his blog. Much of his commentary follows a common New Atheist pattern: our critics are stupid (he uses the label twice in successive paragraphs), motivated by hatred, and prone to lie. (All of which is true in some instances, but it has become a reflex, a crowdpleaser, a litany. (5))

What is most striking, however, is the semi-reflective passage near the end of his piece:

“Maybe atheism doesn’t answer the fundamental questions, but why should it–it’s simply a refusal to accept deities and those systems of worship that claim (in conflicting ways) to answer the “fundamental questions.” Most of us know that many of those so-called “fundamental questions,” like “Why are we here?” don’t have an answer beyond the laws of physics. Others, like “What is our purpose?” must be answered by each person on their own, for their [sic] is no general answer. Still others, like “How are we to live?”, are answered far better by secular reason than by dogmatic adherence to outdated or even immoral religious strictures.”

What a tangle of confusion (6). There’s the admission that perhaps atheism doesn’t fill the vacuum left when religion is left behind, followed by an angry retort that to do so would go beyond the brief of atheism. “That’s not my job!” you can almost hear him say.”

Aaaand U6 made me realize that perhaps Mr. Naff is not worth my time. Though it might be reflex, such accusations (one of which is probably true if Dr. Coyne is taking them on), are never some crowdpleasing litany. It is always a truth that everyone must be aware of.  Really, when Dr. Coyne is being real nice, I can’t tell a horrendous lie from a normal one. A common mistake from a stupid one because I have no Doctorate in say ID theory or biology- I sometimes need a jab: That’s stupid. Research it. And I’ve read the quoted article; it wasn’t confusing at all nor was it angry- you know when the dude is upset. And it’s not outside the brief of atheism to answer such questions- it is outside that of science. As a logical atheist, I have found my own purpose and need nothing fake to reinforce it, but I have no science to back it up either (except maybe psychology).

And this cut-off brings me to…

What We Really Believe

“We” isn’t really all-inclusive. It is my opinion on certain we’s in the world. This ‘we’ are people who say things like atheism doesn’t fill that God-shaped hole. I’ve come to the conclusion that we believe the world would go to shit without religion. Even many atheists (I’m seeing that Naff is one? I don’t really care) feel this may be true. Or at least (and this goes for me as well), the religious would go batshit without religion. Of course, the implications of this is that the one thing that is keeping a lot of people from stealing and murdering is their belief in gods and a horrible afterlife.

If every religious person turned to an atheist person like me, Jerry Coyne and many other atheists, hoo-boy, things would be great. I’m not saying that we’re awesome and perfect (*flutters eyes*), but the world wouldn’t go to shit.

Many would say that some god’s love has infused into my soul to do good within my sinful human body. Poppycock, the good I do comes from me. The reason I’m not going after my sister for abandoning my niece is because I’m good. The reason my niece sleeps next to me nearly every night despite how she pees the bed and wakes up at 3 am on the dot and crawls around on my head, the reason I put up with it, is because I’m nice. The reason why I don’t tell my father about himself is because he won’t listen I’m freakin’ nice.

And a good reason that I feel religion is imaginary is because those with religion can be evil (like against their religion evil, not being evil for religion- that’s a separate matter), and those without can be wonderful despite the ingrained belief (in even myself) that lack of religion willl turn you terrible. You can blame religion all you want. Something beyond religion or god or the supernatural control our actions, and that is what we should look for.

Why Evolution Is True

It’s so tiresome to read repeatedly that New Atheism is a failure because we aren’t replacing religion with anything else. This claim has been made once again in a HuffPo piece by Clay Naff called “Humanism’s moment of opportunity, going to waste.” Naff spends a lot of time going after me, and I’ll try to respond politely.

He first touts the success of American megachurches, and claims that, by comparison, non-theists (not just New Atheists) are a miserable failure:

Their non-theistic rivals? Not so much. The evidence is in, and it is clear: New Atheists have been a media success and a societal failure. They know how to sell books, how to debate, how to sneer, skewer, and satirize — in short, how to use all the squabbling skills of the modern academic (cf. the letters section of the New York Review of Books) — but the New…

View original post 1,539 more words