Guided by reason, informed by science, motivated by compassion
I went looking for some information on a bug on the Tacoma Atheists site, and as usual, the first thing you do when you run into one of these things is go to a search engine.
Unfortunately, the search engine told me I was pretty much on my own:
Searching for a function returns us as the first link.
That’s… not usually a good sign.
Guest poster Libby is a Tacoma Atheists member.
I grew up in an extremely religious home, attended an ultra conservative school and college, worked in the ministry for several years, and now I’m an atheist. Why? I hear this question from almost every person who find out that I no longer believe like I used to. And here are several examples of their reasons: I am angry or hurt. I am running away from their god. I just want to do my own thing. Something horrible happened. I’ve never had a close walk with their god like they do. I’m demon-possessed. And my favorite – I know deep inside that THEY are right. All these statements are 100% wrong. And this note is to explain my reasons for this drastic ‘change of mind’.
For as long as I can remember I’ve gone to a church, heard the bible stories, read the bible and prayed, and participated fully in all of the church functions, always believing that I was doing the right thing. I never questioned. I never wondered. I never for a second considered that what I believed could be anything but 100% true. I always considered myself very fortunate(or blessed) to be one of the few who knew the truth! Not the Muslims, not the Jehovah’s witnesses, the Mormons, the Buddhists, but ME! How arrogant I was!
Then one day I was faced with the possibility that I could have been misled, that everything I’ve known and loved for all of my life thus far could perhaps be wrong. This was the very first step to seeing things with an open mind, without preconceived ideas, and without having already made up my mind.
First it was the bible. I had never for a minute doubted the bible. I always believed (assumed) that it was the inerrant word of a god. I dismissed any claims of contradictions and inaccuracy. Of course I wasn’t exposed to much of it since I was told to never read anything that was not written by like-minded people. When I finally opened my eyes and read the bible for what it was, I found that there were errors. There were contradictions. There were barbarisms that I had just simply dismissed before. Continue reading →
Valerie Tarico, Ph.D. is a psychologist in Seattle, Washington. She is the author of The Dark Side: How Evangelical Teachings Corrupt Love and Truth, the founder of www.WisdomCommons.org, and the host of Christianity in the Public Square, Moral Politics Television, Seattle.
December 21st is winter solstice, the shortest day of the year, which makes the twenty-second the first day of more sun! Let me spell that out. Beginning this week we’re on a path toward “sun breaks” and dry sidewalks, a time when people will take off their fleeces for long enough to wash them, a time that pet poop will dry out enough that your kids can scoop it off the lawn. Anyone who thinks that winter solstice couldn’t possibly have spawned the rich array of celebrations that we now call Yule and Christmas and Diwali and Hanukkah and Kwanzaa never lived in Seattle.
Solstice means that within a few weeks the days will be perceptibly longer. It means that by mid- January, it will be easier to see the ice I’m scraping off the windshield with my battered health insurance card. It means that crocuses will come up through the grass if I hurry and get some bulbs planted, and the chickens will start laying again. It means that my crazy friends Sarah and Lee who bicycle to work in the dark and rain soon will be able to bicycle in just rain! Now that’s something to celebrate.
But even as I look forward to spring, I can’t help but think that mid-winter, in some ways, shows the human spirit at its best. Remarkably, we’ve managed to take our darkest days and turn them into some of our brightest. Without the lights and parties, December in Seattle would be a time for hibernation. (We Seattle-ites complain now about getting fat and sluggish from things like too many shrimp cocktails, or glasses of wine, or chocolate truffles. But think about how much more bear-like we’d get if all we did was huddle in bed with Netflix and Costco-sized bags of Sun Chips). Bear bodies aside, hibernation would mean missing out on one of the best times of the year. Continue reading →
From Greta Cristina’s blog:
What evidence do religious believers have for their beliefs?
And when they’re asked what evidence they have, how do believers respond?
In my conversations with religious believers, I’ll often ask, “Why do you think God or the supernatural exists? What makes you think this is true? What evidence do you have for this belief?” Partly I’m just curious; I want to know why people believe what they do. Plus I think it’s a valid question: it’s certainly one I’d ask about any other claim or opinion. And if I’m wrong about my atheism — if there’s good evidence for religion that I haven’t seen yet — I want to know. I’m game. Show me the money.
But when I ask these questions, I almost never get a straight answer.
What I typically get is a startling assortment of conversational gambits deflecting the question.
I get excuses for why believers shouldn’t have to provide evidence. Vague references to other people who supposedly have evidence, without actually pointing to said evidence. Irrelevant tirades about mean atheists. Venomous anger at how disrespectful and intolerant I am to even ask the question.
This article shows a slightly different perspective than we get here. Dahl talks about his childhood in East Germany, where religion was an anomaly. I wonder how you could ever avoid it in Europe, where religion is so intertwined with history, art and architecture, but so be it. It does underscore the idea that Americans are hyper-religious, much more so than in Europe.
Ever since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, West Germans as well as East Germans are regularly polled on their stance toward religion. When asked whether they believe in God, most East Germans simply respond by saying: “Nope, I’m perfectly normal.”
This reply must come as a shock to most Americans. After all, it implies that there is something “abnormal” about a belief in God. As if they had been brought up reading Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, East Germans do indeed consider religious folks to be odd, bizarre, or even insane.
Being born in East Germany myself, I can easily relate to this attitude. In contrast to what a lot of Americans seem to think, we have never been raised to be hostile toward religion. Actually, it was much worse: we have grown up to be totally and utterly indifferent toward religion.
On Sunday mornings, when American kids went to church, we went to the cinema. I still remember enjoying Joseph L. Mankiewicz’s Cleopatra and Anthony Mann’s The Fall of the Roman Empire, or laughing out loud while watching Blake Edwards’ The Great Race or Billy Wilder’s Some Like it Hot.
One day — I must have been around ten years old — I was late for Jean Delannoy’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame starring the fabulous Anthony Quinn and the beautiful Gina Lollobrigida. Disappointed to have missed the screening, I went home, passing the St Paul’s Cathedral. Given that I had some extra time on my hands, I decided to sneak into the church. There were about 15 or 20 people in there, mostly in their 60s or 70s. The musty smell, the morbid paintings, and the bleeding savior nailed to a cross made me anxious.
Still, in order to see what these people were doing, I moved a bit closer. Apparently, they were celebrating the Holy Communion. Gathered around an altar, they handed around a chalice and a platter asking each other to “Eat the Body and Drink the Blood of the Lord.” I shivered! How can anyone eat the flesh and drink the blood of another person? What kind of people are these?
Running home, I asked my mom about the people in the church. She said, “They’re Christians. They believe in God and Satan, and Heaven and Hell. My own parents were religious, too. My father was Jewish and my mother was Catholic. Seeing that they were killed by the Nazis while I was only three years old, I don’t know anything about religions, though.” In order to change the seemingly uninteresting subject, she added, “Never mind, it doesn’t concern us.”
It must have been around that time when I first saw Roman Polanski’s movie Rosemary’s Baby on TV (on a West German channel, of course). Later I learned that the movie was not depicting Christians, but Satanists. Yet at that time, I could not see any difference. For me, both were weird people, believing in weird beings, and doing weird things. One may say I was simply too young to be able to tell the difference between two entirely different cults. But this is exactly my point. It only proves how unprejudiced I was! I must have looked at Christianity the same way a Hindu must look at it (or, for that matter, how Christians look at Hindus — as lost and doomed souls praying to a heaven filled with hundreds of Gods).
As strange as it may sound, I was already 12 years old when I first met a Christian in person. In grade six, the daughter of a pastor joined our class. Although she turned out to be a wonderful human being, I still recall that I was reluctant to talk to her. After all, I considered religious people as mystifying people who claim to be in contact with gods, demons, and other beings no one has ever seen.
Here’s the link, if you’re overseas, in the Armed Forces and want to get some books.
They’re getting younger every year. My assistant shows off the Seattle Atheists holiday sign on the capitol grounds in Olympia on Saturday. About 15 people and Fox News were in attendance, but none of the hyper-religious crowds from last year.
From the Naked Pastor who poses some interesting questions about unity.
- Do I truly believe that everyone has the right to their own beliefs or lack thereof?
- Can I respect the person, even though I may not respect their ideas?
- Do I have the capacity to recognize my own fallacies?
- Will it kill me if I were wrong?
- Am I able to hold what I believe is truth lightly in the interest of dialog?
- Can I overlook and maybe even appreciate the idiosyncrasies of others in order to hear what they have to say?
- Am I willing to discern the deeper currents rather than being distracted by the surface ripples?
- Can everyone play? In other words, will I not ostracize someone because of their beliefs or lack thereof?
- Is personal harm to others the only prohibition I am willing to make?
- Do I love all beings, and if not, am I willing?
… not posture for political gain and tilt at windmills? I call BS on this.
via Jesse Galef, via FriendlyAtheist
A bill sponsored by 19 House Republicans wants to reaffirm that people can celebrate Christmas and mention God. I’m guessing this is in response to a gross misunderstanding of current legal concerns over displays that are government-sponsored or on government property. Via one of my longtime favorite bloggers, Steve Benen at WashingtonMonthly, I apologize in advance for the text of H. RES. 951:
Rep. Henry Brown (R-SC), sponsorRESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the symbols and traditions of Christmas should be protected for use by those who celebrate Christmas.Whereas Christmas is a national holiday celebrated on December 25; and
Whereas the Framers intended that the First Amendment of the Constitution, in prohibiting the establishment of religion, would not prohibit any mention of religion or reference to God in civic dialog: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives–
(1) recognizes the importance of the symbols and traditions of Christmas;
(2) strongly disapproves of attempts to ban references to Christmas; and
(3) expresses support for the use of these symbols and traditions by those who celebrate Christmas.
I’m momentarily stunned – so many points to address I don’t even know where to begin.
This is why it’s troublesome for a secular and religious concept to have the same name. When government talks about “marriage” – the legal, civil status it has authority to grant – many hear “marriage” – the religious union they believe receives the blessing of God.
I never know whether people are talking about “Christmas” – the secular celebration of the spirit of giving (and commercialism) in which people display evergreen trees, pretty lights, and do the whole Presents/Santa thing – and “Christmas” – the celebration of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth in which people put up nativity scenes and go to church.
Government can support the former but not the latter, and this bill seems to be conflating the two. By explicitly mentioning the use of “God,” the congressmen make it clear that when they say “symbols and traditions” they refer to religious symbols and traditions. Our secular government simply does not have the authority to promote the use of religious symbols and traditions.
They’re pulling a fast one – they’re attacking non-existent strawmen, but using it to promote their religion. There has been recent uproar over cities refusing to support overtly religious governmental displays. These 19 congressmen pretend they’re addressing these controversies – but they’re not. The issue in question has never been “references to Christmas” or the right of individuals to use any symbol and tradition they want. It has always been a question of inappropriate, unconstitutional governmental support for religion.
I don’t know whether this bill will make it out of committee – most bills don’t – but if it goes up for a vote, I have a hard time seeing it fail. No congressman wants to go on record against Christmas.
Via BoingBoing:
Rick Warren does the right thing
Rick Warren has officially come out against the proposed laws in Uganda that would make homosexuality a crime, punishable by death in some cases. In an open letter to the pastors of Uganda (with whom Warren has a great deal of influence from his missionary work) the American mega-pastor says,
As an American pastor, it is not my role to interfere with the politics of other nations, but it IS my role to speak out on moral issues … the potential law is unjust, extreme and un-Christian toward homosexuals, requiring the death penalty in some cases. If I am reading the proposed bill correctly, this law would also imprison anyone convicted of homosexual practice … I urge you, the pastors of Uganda, to speak out against the proposed law.
