REGARDING FRANCE

Another day, another terrorist attack. Although only given lip service when it effects the Middle East, it's another story when it is in a Western Country. Already the hawks are out in force, already the talking heads are calling for the heads of all muslims; they are a threat to the world you know.

Even though millions of muslims are decrying the brutality and events in France, their voices will be muted. Terrorism by small groups, the whining and screaming of conservative christians; these are the voices we will hear for the coming weeks as sanity is thrown into the back of the bus. We know critical thinking, logic, and any other reasonable attempt at understanding, will be sanity's company as the god-botherers go ballistic.

Which is sadly funny, since god is also bothered constantly by the opposition. 

I've already started replying on the social threads concerning death to all muslims. I'm looking forward to the outcry because I've turned around the discussions to examples of christian terrorism. I am counting the minutes until the first "not a true scotsman" fallacy is unleashed. 

The joy of understanding religious humans is a sick joy.

Regardless, everyone that wishes to know about France and the attacks has already read and seen the story, so I'll let you decide on what you think about it. Maybe you'll even share those thoughts with the rest of us. The following is what I wrote a few days ago for the Sunday Planet discussion, interesting enough it seems to be even more relevant today than it was on Thursday. Religion will not be eliminated in our lifetimes, so how shall we deal with it?

AN AMERICAN ATHEIST

Being an atheist in America is a constant battle. It is not a war, war usually includes death, but it is still a battle for acceptance, a battle for community, a battle for reason. 

Not that I'm claiming that all atheists are reasonable, or have a need for community, or could give a shit less about what someone else thinks of them. Yet I would think for most of us, these desires, or possible needs, do go on a rampage obliterating the peace that usually dwells in our minds. I do not speak for others, but I'm sure I'm not alone; after all, humans we are.

Community is a need that we all share. We visits sites like AU, we chat with like-minded friends and family, and we seem to always be searching for more, for a larger community. We are a tribe, a clan, a family, and we want the support from those of our ilk. The reality is though, that we want to have a local community, not just an online community, as well. Some live in areas where atheism may not be the atrocity some would have us all think, and some live in areas where atheism is not just frowned upon, but where it is an evil that needs to be eliminated. How do we survive without becoming hermits? 

Living in a small conservative town like I do, it is difficult to establish community while openly being anathema. The way I find some community is by finding the minority of progressives in town; usually they are a little more accepting, especially since they are in the minority. Even with those though, I have to give a little.

As an example, one of my, and my wife's, favorite locals is a lovely lady entering middle age. She works at the local pub and her family has lived in this town for generations. We find her knowledge helpful in dealing with a small town's craziness. She's had a troubled life, drugs and alcohol and all kinds of raising hell, yet is one of the sweetest people we know. She's no longer living by a thread, she's cleaned up her act, she is doing what she needs for her family. Although liberal, and accepting of my family's lack of faith, she is god's friend. With the crazy in her mind - and one could say she traded one crazy for the other - she has to find something that my wife and I find meaning in that is spiritual; she just can't help herself. That is the way she has found peace, and although I don't respect the institution that gives her that peace, I do respect her and her fight to be the mother she needs to be. So I give a little when she questions. 

She asks if I believe in god, I say no. She asks if I'm spiritual in some way, I say no. Almost hopelessly she continues to question trying to find a bond in an area of life that is important to her, while I know what I think contradicts who she is. She finally comes up with "nature." Yes I say, I do find peace in nature. Not spiritual as she may think, but it's enough to form a bond. It is enough for her to feel we have some common ground. It is not a lie on my part, but not what she thinks I mean by finding peace in nature. 

Maybe that's wrong, but works for me.

Hey, I like people, forgive me or not. Isolation is not part of being human. I cannot allow myself to withdraw from the diversity that humans express in their personal lives. I think that by struggling to find a common denominator that can be used as a base to expand upon is the only route a human can take to live in peace. I would rather try to change minds, even if slightly, than to ignore my fellow humans. I mean, if my voice is unheard, there will never be any understanding. We continue down the road of intolerance.

I drink beer with the conservatives and am happy to give them as much shit as I take, after all, conservatives are not what the very vocal, whiny, conservative christian base is; it is extremely varied and I work on them as well. Do I believe in family values? Hell yeah, I just expand that to include everyone. Do I think hard work is a good thing, again yes, but still knowing that there some of us that are not capable of work. Life goes on, there are things that we can all relate to, and I work to find them.

Finding total acceptance is difficult. That's why I can be found at atheist/humanist meetings every so often. It is why I can be found lurking on the internet for atheist companionship. We all want to be accepted, though in different manners. We're not hermits, we cannot seal ourselves away from the world, we cannot live alone. This is why community is so important to us, and why we'll give a little, we will bend our thoughts a little, just to have that companionship.

Lets be clear about this, by no means are atheists inherently more reasonable than any other group you may find. When Bill Maher goes on a rant about the evils of vaccinations, I cringe. Here we have an atheist in the spotlight of the American public who shows time after time that reason is not his to be had in all things. I think we can easily ascertain that at least most of us are unreasonable at times, regardless of religious beliefs, or non-belief.

So where does that leave us? To some degree we want to be accepted, to some degree we need community, and to some degree we can be totally unreasonable. To me that speaks volumes. That says we are all human. That says we have to figure out how to not only get along, but to respect those who do humanity good regardless of what hides in the weird corners or their minds. 

This American Atheist is always sticking his head into the midst of possible trouble, I just can't help myself. There is meaning to life, the meaning we give to it, so what is yours? How do you take care of basic human needs, or do you not feel the desire for community? Are atheists different than theists in that we don't have that need for community and acceptance, or are we as human as the next guy? 

Do extremists control what we think of each other?

ABSOLUTES

At many funerals you will get to hear this supposed solemn thought. "Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust." I guess for atheists, the earth to earth thing isn't incredibly horrific, it is in a way true. It would be much more accurate to use the oft stated line that we are "made of stardust," or "made of star stuff." Every bit of your being is part of the universe, but I think theists would rather state earth because it follows along with the biblical narrative. From baptismals, through life, and at the end, the narrative must be reinforced. Every opportunity to inject death into life is taken advantage of. 

It is easily observed that theists strive always for the narrative that promotes ultimatums. No matter how the question is disguised, what they search for is absolutes. For those who were involved in the "where do atheist morals come from" discussion, you should realize that what was being promoted was the theist argument that morals must be objective. That is the key word, just like meaning needs to have an "ultimate" tagged on. Everything they do or say has to have a profoundness that shows what atheists are supposedly missing.

Everything must have purpose. Another absolute. Our purpose on this earth is very simple and easy for anyone to accomplish. Our purpose is to glorify god, nothing else. Whether rich or poor, well fed or hungry, healthy or sick; all must spend their lives glorifying god. Purpose, morals, and meaning, are all absolutes. They must not be questioned or ignored.

Theists must find a way to cope with their existence, and god is the easy way out. The world is too big for them, too much unknown, too much confusion. Original sin is what they accept, and is the reason life can be tough. An important distinction between atheism and theism could be as simple as being able to accept life as it is, no ultimate meaning, no purpose, just life. Doesn't mean all atheists are scientists, or philosophers, or anything; it just means we can handle the truth. While atheists may not be happy about death, they don't run from the fact. Theists are all about running from a reality that apparently scares the hell out of them. What better bait is there to stealing a person's inherent intelligence? Eternal life is the answer.

God's plan for man is likely the worst plan ever. For way too many, it appears the plan is disease, hunger, and hopelessness. That would be an atheist viewpoint though since theists believe it is all for a reason. There is hope for all if you glorify god. We need not to fix the horrors of the world, this is how it is supposed to be. All of the pain and suffering is god's plan, and it will become clear when you're dead the reason why. 

I'm sure that theists will continue to join the site. We cannot be allowed to exist in a world without god. When theists debate us, there's always a new trick, a new way to phrase the same old shit. You cannot stop debating theists, otherwise you have no voice.

If theists have anything going for them, it's the fortitude to continue the fight. Every time you smack down a ridiculous thought, they come up with a new one. They will stay the course, overcoming any obstacles or criticism. They will not stop in their need to defend the indefensible. They will protect the fantasy because they need to; they are afraid of life and death.

If there is one absolute that atheists should embrace, it should be to never stop voicing their objections to religion. Whatever that voice is, however you explain the reality that is life, that voice is important. I do not look at theists as the enemy, I look at them as the children of the world. They never grow up, which I find ironic. "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." Someday maybe theists will become men and women, but for now they are afraid of their own shadow; fear is in their heart.

I pity the fools. 

FLASHBACK SUNDAY

I have nothing, and at the same time too much, for today. There's only one thing I can do, bring back the ranter.

Americans love their homeopathy. Between 2000 and 2014 the industry earnings rose 33 percent. In 2014, 1.2 billion dollars were spent on water. Confirmation bias does the trick. You drink medicinal water, and guess what, in a week or two you feel great! Must of been the magic piss water.

Various sects of christianity revel in homeopathy; scammed by myths apparently makes one receptive to being scammed by just about anything. Homeopaths know a sucker when they see one.

Every one of us knows that death awaits, except for believers of course. They will live an eternal life listening to shitty harps played by untalented fools, but for atheists we'll be gone. And here's the thing, we all know we're going to die, but none of us think it's going to happen now, today; it's always in some nebulous distant future. Yet one of these days it will be the day. For the homeopathic crowd, specifically that guy drinking piss water for his chest pain today, that day may be sooner than he thinks.

If today is your day, later bitch.

Religion kills. Christian pastors in Africa are killing children at will. Witches the young ones are, evil and worthless. "The nine-year-old boy lay on a bloodstained hospital sheet crawling with ants, staring blindly at the wall. His family pastor had accused him of being a witch, and his father then tried to force acid down his throat as an exorcism. It spilled as he struggled, burning away his face and eyes. The emaciated boy barely had strength left to whisper the name of the church that had denounced him – Mount Zion Lighthouse." A month later, he died.

"There's a scar above Jane's shy smile: her mother tried to saw off the top of her skull after a pastor denounced her and repeated exorcisms costing a total of $60 didn't cure her of witchcraft. Mary, 15, is just beginning to think about boys and how they will look at the scar tissue on her face caused when her mother doused her in caustic soda. Twelve-year-old Rachel dreamed of being a banker but instead was chained up by her pastor, starved and beaten with sticks repeatedly; her uncle paid him $60 for the exorcism.

Israel's cousin tried to bury him alive, Nwaekwa's father drove a nail through her head, and sweet-tempered Jerry – all knees, elbows and toothy grin – was beaten by his pastor, starved, made to eat cement and then set on fire by his father as his pastor's wife cheered it on."

Children outcast from family and community. When churches outnumber clinics, schools, and banks; only evil remains. Education, health, and enough money to feed your children? No thanks, we'll take religion please. The end of this atrocity is nowhere in sight, and no response from the world's "good" christians who watch in horror but take no actions. Unchecked christianity in action, disgusting, evil, and sick. Evangelical nonsense taken to the extreme, "thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." 

This cannot be ignored, it is everywhere. America has a long sordid history of religious terrorists. Whether based on white supremacy, to acts of violence on government buildings, health centers, doctors; on anyone who challenges the word of god.

Here, hundreds of children have died from parents and pastors who are withholding easily accessible medical treatment. Children are prevented from getting medical attention, because faith is all they need. In 1944 the Supreme Court ruled that parents cannot interfere with a child's welfare, including for religious reasons. 38 states and the District of Columbia then created laws that protected the religious from this basic protection for children. Right to life my ass. Child Protection Services there are discouraged from reporting religious based problems and seem to turn an eye to what they see.

Religious groups who allow children to die are terrorists in their own right. 

Here's hoping that all of the clergy involved in all these, and many more, horrors leave us soon. Today should be their day, later bitches.

Muslims killing muslims, muslims killing christians, christians killing muslims, christians killing hindu, muslims killing hindu, hindu killing muslims, hindu killing christians, etc.; the list is very long. This is not a problem that is central to the Middle East or parts of the African continent, this is everywhere. 

God. God is the problem. God has always been the problem. Tribal mentality that all humans have originates with god. My god is always the real god. God is a sickness that separates humanity, for without god why would we hate our brothers? 

Tribalism is an ongoing slaughter of intellect. It tells us we are better than others, that we are superior, and that others are beneath us. It is always entwined with religion or myth, and is the primal source of conflict. God loves some of us, others he really detests. 

God's day cannot come soon enough, and we should all be happy to wish him a short farewell.

Later bitch.

FAITH IS DEATH

We've talked many times about "enablers;" those that support religion at any cost. Liberal theists who are more accepting of reality than their conservative brethren seem to be harmless, but they take no real action to stop the more harmful elements of their chosen religion. The pacifists always back down, they have to. You cannot both be religious, yet not support the religious. There's always an area where they think all belief should be respected, which is why many think the enablers are as bad, or possibly even worse, than their more aggressive counterparts. 

The "No True Scotsman" fallacy is another way of covering up religion's crushing grip on the world. If a believer takes an action that horrifies the world, they are not a true theist. Theists refuse to take responsibility for the actions of those of faith, the actions that many times are caused by that same faith. To continue down the road of faith and madness, you really must blindfold yourself to the evils that are created by belief.

Religion  effects humans on a global scale, more so now than ever in our short history. The conflicts brought about by whose god is better than the other has always been a blight on humanity, but as technology becomes more commonplace it allows the insanity to spread quickly. What was true in the past is still true today, religion fights science in every manner conceivable. That fight is leading us to to the annihilation of our species.

Climate change is one of the biggest threats to this planet. Religions are starting to embrace the science sporadically, but as always it's too little too late. Pope Francis embraces Climate Change as a fact; that's really nice of you but you're decades late. And herein lies the problem. While the faithful fight reality, we lose our chance to take the actions that would counter the problem. Religion has us shackled with a ball and chain that slows our need to react to the world's problems.

An American problem is the foul unity of politics and religion. A Handful of republican presidential hopefuls have rebuked the science of climate change. The ones that accept the findings still have no plans on doing anything to combat the crisis, they are in the pocket of our local billionaires who make millions polluting the earth. American evangelicals who are always at the front of the anti-science movement, seem to be leaning towards the stewardship angle in the last year or so, but again, they vote for those who have stated they will do nothing to combat the problem. And even as some of the faithful decide on action, there is still a large group that states any action will bring harm to the poor while not really accomplishing that much.

Here again we see the ignorance of faith. Faith only concerns itself with what technology is available at the moment, and doesn't look forward to investing into new technology that may help. Politicians put science in the poorhouse, if you don't have the money for research, you can't help us. Life sciences are under attack in the states.

Evolution, such a center part of all the life sciences, is still debated by theists. There is no debate unless you are one of the faithful. The only reason to deny the obvious is because of god. Our lives right at this moment would be enriched if religion never came into play. We'd be living healthier and longer lives, excepting for the incredible battle that has been waged against us by the believers. Our suffering is directly related to the obtuse thoughts of the brainwashed. It is on their heads, the blood is on their hands. Disease is their gift to humanity.

We need to understand how species react to environmental changes to minimize our threat to the planet and to help save endangered species. We need to know how parasites evolve to keep us healthy. Cancer research, agricultural techniques, mutagenic substances; every part of life on this planet benefits from embracing this reality. Again though, the faithful would rather embrace death and disease than to admit their god did not create man.

In 1859, Darwin's "On The Origins of Species" was released. Sixty years ago the catholic church started to embrace that reality, even though they're still jumping through hoops trying to reconcile that thought with their god. But we're still talking almost a century before the church would acknowledge the science. A hundred years of progress restrained by belief.

The beginnings of our universe has always been a battle. As recently as in the 1980s, the pope admonished scientists against studying the moment of creation, since it was holy. Regardless of which view holds true, whether there is a true beginning of the universe, or it has always been in place, why would anyone want to stop research? It does no harm except to unprovable beliefs that restrict humans in every endeavor. 

I think Stephen Hawking replied to those who need a divine creator correctly. "What was god doing before the divine creation? Was he preparing hell for people who ask such questions?"

Exactly. Understanding the universe can only help us understand who we are. There is no need to answer why, that would be silly at best. There is no need for a "master plan" created by as savage god. There is no need for a theist's desire for "meaning," that we create ourselves. 

As long as the believers need to fight for their belief by denying reality, faith will be the death of us all. 

GOD LOGIC

Every so often a nice theist joins the site. The conversations always seem to have an aura of friendliness at the beginning, but then they quickly turn into a never ending defense of belief. The arguments are not new, just rephrased to confuse. Apparently it works, since we all jump in to defend an atheist viewpoint, and it always seems to confuse us for a few days until we finally come up with the answer. We do not spend our days studying for a conversation that has no end; the infinite debate will continue with or without us. There should be an answer though, regardless of our lack of enthusiasm to engage.

For atheism to exist, there would seem to be a reason needed. Absence of belief is a fine definition for the word, but that definition would seem to require an argument; an argument that defines the definition. Speaking in circles isn't just for theists. 

For religion to exist, a network of falsehoods must exist. Lies must be told: 

According to Tm Mazur:"Immanuel Kant said that lying was always morally wrong. He argued that all persons are born with a ‘intrinsic worth’ that he called human dignity. This dignity derives from the fact that humans are uniquely rational agents, capable of freely making their own decisions, setting their own goals, and guiding their conduct by reason. To be human is to have the rational power of free choice; to be ethical is to respect the power in oneself and others… Lies are morally wrong for 2-reasons: First, lying corrupts most important quality of being human: the ability to make free, rational choices. Each lie told contradicts your moral worth. Second, lies rob others of their freedom to choose, rationally. When a lie leads people to decide in ways other than the way they would had they known the truth, you harm their human dignity… Kant believed that in order to value ourselves and others… we must avoid damaging, interfering with, or misusing our ability to make free decisions, in other words: No lying."

Certainly, that premise exists only if you give in to a theist's certainty that free will exists to some degree. Without free will, the theist doesn't have an argument on morality to make, so wasting time trying to convince otherwise might be a, well, waste of time. Might as well skip the heart and head straight to the brain. Free will's added benefit to an argument could be Kant's view regardless, so catching a theist in a lie would be the same as said theist partaking in an immoral act, and theist's arguments for god containing falsehoods become repetitive instances of evil. Case closed.

We need to clear up our arguments. It should not take days or weeks to file the bible in the fiction section. It shouldn't take days or weeks of allowing circular arguments to control the debate to exorcise the fantasy from our collective thoughts. It shouldn't take days or weeks to refute the theist's statements. Logic should be the simple answer, but the theist takes that as well and twists it into proof of god. 

Hundreds of years before jesus, Aristotle delved into how we process reason. The three basic laws of logic, though already a given, were given a more formal expression. For the purpose of creating a discussion, do these basic laws not negate religion without going any farther? Is there a need to look at all the different ways religion tries to deafen our sensibilities with arguments, that on the outside, may seem meaningful, but when deconstructed become nothing more than a cloak for faith?

Any of us that lay claim to being reasoning humans probably know the three basic laws of thought, even if we don't vocalize them. 

1. The Law of Identity.  Everything is the same as itself. Whether a thing, or a proposition, A = A. 

Without going any farther, this would seem to trash religion immediately. Asking for a definition of god should be enough to show the proposition is nonsense. 

William Lane Craig seems to be one of the focal points enlightening us with the latest ontological definition of god. The first premise usually goes like this. "God is the greatest being conceivable. If you can conceive of a greater being, then that is god." To me this states that "A" does not equal "A." A proposition is true or it is not. If "A" changes, then it is not "A", and we cannot have a reasonable discussion about "A" because "A" has not been defined. God of the old testament is different than god of the new testament, and everyone who describes god has a different definition according to his or her own biases, so god does not exist.

Even if an argument could be made that the tree in my back yard is still the same tree as it grows - like god can change and still be god - that glass doesn't hold water. Everyone has the same definition of a tree, yet all are different when it comes to god. 

2. The Law of Non-Contradiction. Nothing can exist and not exist at the same time and in the same respect; or no statement can be true and false.

Again, if the definition of god changes depending on the mind that has created him/her, then the statement describing god is certainly false.

3. The Law of the Excluded Middle. Something either exists or it doesn't exist; or every statement is true or false.

Once again, if a definition changes, then the statement is always false.

This seems simple enough, yet we get caught up in debates that should be nullified immediately.

Is there a need to go further when it comes to logic? We ought be informed, reasoned, and ready for any attempt by a theist to proselytize the site. We should be able to be courteous, informative, and respectful to the theist, but not necessarily to his ideas.

If anyone cares to play, tell us why these statements are false. 

The Sunday Planet - September 13, 2015

GODSPOTTING

I see god. I see his people godsplaining daily. 

At a recent anti-Iran deal event, we got to enjoy the crazy all in one day. Phil Robertson complained that he was told "god was dead in college, but he wasn't." From there he expressed his love for all things jewish; "You know why I love Israel? Because they wrote the bible, when god decided to become flesh 2015 years ago - just look at your calendar - he became jewish flesh." Robertson is a godly man, he's "anti-pulling babies outta women's wombs, he is anti-perversion" - that means you, gay people. He claims that "WE," which I gather includes you and I and everyone else, "are pro-god almighty, we're pro-gun, we're pro get-your-ass-out and go to work." In his words, "America isn't religious enough."

The Tea-Party anti-Iran rally was more of a church service then anything else. Glenn Beck is still alive, dammit, and he was as crazy as always.

Before he started his sermon, he got one quick anti-science jab in; you know, you can't have god without stupid. Beck says, "I've solved the issue of global warming, it's not our SUVs, it's that big flaming thing in the sky."

Then the sermon started.

"We live in a world that is suffering under the delusion of peace and prosperity..." he says. "The confusion comes from the abandonment of truth, a truth that has been chased out of our public square, out of our public buildings, out of the media, our universities, and quite frankly, out of many of our churches as well."

Tell me more about how truth/religion has been booted from public discourse jackass sitting on the lawn in front of the United States Capitol. Please. Then tell us the why peace and prosperity is a delusion, maybe religion?

The fun continues. "But god's timing is divine, if we fail to restore truth, god will do it for us... In this week's torah portion, we are told about the early Israelites, where moses stood at the edge of the promised land and commanded god's people to choose, life or death, light or darkness, or they would be swept from their promised land. Today we are faced with the exact same choice. Because something is happening in America, something is happening around the world, I believe we are no longer fooled by those who made good evil, and evil good. With Planned Parenthood and the slaughter of our police officers out on the streets, while we get into bed with bad guys... We realized we have been silent too long, we have been dulled, been dulled, into a senseless slumber. But there are millions of people waking up all around the world, they are shaking themselves, and their families, awake. They are turning back to eternal principles, because there is a hunger for truth."

Silent? If only bitches. Yep, I see you god. Truth? You can't handle the truth.

Politicians on the right seem to think getting all friendly and cozy with a myth is the only way to run a campaign.

I see Kim Davis holding hands with Mike Huckabee, a candidate for the president of the United States. I see the rallies for stupid at the jailhouse where she should still be locked up. Kim refuses to follow the law of the land, and this ties in with all the rest. Mike lets us know how "courageous" Kim is for standing up for her beliefs. She takes the stage with Eye of the Tiger playing in the background, (yeah, lawsuit coming). Raising her arms in the usual worshipping pose, she proclaims that "I just want to give god the glory. His people have rallied, and you are a strong people. We serve a living god who knows exactly where each and everyone of us is at. Just keep on pressing, don't let down, because he is here. He's worthy, he's worthy"

Oh crap, he was watching me again? God dammit, give me some privacy god. The anti-government terrorist group, the Oath Keepers," have offered to guard Kim from the state in case they try to arrest her again. Yes, make my day.

Although I like to joke about the stupidity, this is also about a horror that we cannot allow. As with the tea party rally, this is a call to the believers that only god's word is law, not man's. All these events have one thing in common, and that is to impose god's law on the land. Christian law, Sharia law; religion wants us to bow our heads to the idiocy that all holy books promote. The christian conservative right is losing the numbers they once had to promote their agenda, so now the war becomes more "in your face."

The attacks come in all manners, many are hidden.

In Tennessee a mom would like to ban a book on science. The mom, Jackie Sims,  thinks that "The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks" - which is a book about science, race, and ethics - is pornography. Prudes and the anti-education crowd all come from the same pot, religion. I like the ones who try to work around mentioning religion, but all the signs point in that direction. As I've said before, I don't care what someone wants to believe as long as it is not inflicting society as a whole. If she wants to keep her son uneducated, I guess she can. The problem here is that she wants to limit education to all the students in that school. It's not good enough that her son will be less informed, she wants all students to mire in her unenlightened view of the world.

This is how religion is fighting the demise of belief in the U.S. Fear and stupidity are always the main weapons used  in the battle, that hasn't ever changed. 

The godspotting will continue. 

The Sunday Planet - September 6, 2015

HUMAN

Apparently being human can suck, or maybe it could be better defined as being improper being a humanist in some situations. 

Oh the pain, the suffering, the humiliation; I lost a "friend" on Facebook. 

Well, not really a friend, just a fellow atheist that happened to friend me over the years because we agreed that religion is, well, bunk. I've seen her posts over the last few years - mostly ignoring - but every so often offered an opinion. Last night I was tired, had a few drinks, and finally let her know how I really feel; and that is always a mistake in life. 

She is a writer of books and screenplays, and promotes herself heavily. No problem, good for her. Science Fiction is what she centers on, and hey, I've enjoyed that genre just about my entire life.  I've never read any of her novels or plays so cannot attest to her ability, but I have no reason to doubt it. She has a habit of posting scientific material that sometimes isn't scientific, but that can happen to most of us. No, I have no problem with errors, they're usually straightened out immediately.

So now that I've bored the living hell out of you, let me get to the point. She is one of those who is seemingly very anti-muslim. Like probably most that will read this, I probably agree to a certain extent. To be clear, I think any religion is harmful to society as a whole if left unchecked. To continue with the thought, I really don't care if someone wants to believe in whatever fairy tale grabs their fancy, as long as they don't use it to tell me how to live my life, have any effect on society's mores, or be used to govern; that's where the battles always begins. 

The heart of her muslim posts seem to center on getting rid of them. They are an evil that should be eliminated, Islam is a blight on humanity and must be stopped; the list goes on as it probably should. The last post though was in error again and was about the influx of immigrants, predominately from Syria, trying to escape into other countries, mostly European. The gist of her tirade was that that ungrateful muslims were throwing away food that was given them in Hungary. Hungarians are poor and they could of used that food, etc. 

The real story is that immigrants were tossing away the food because they were going on a hunger strike to protest not being allowed passage to other European nations. Quite a difference in my opinion. 

I see this as a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions, nothing more.

Yes, they're muslim. Yes, it seems that Europe has a problem with immigrants who refuse to integrate into society, I would as well. But yet, these are families escaping war and poverty, are trying to find safety for their children, are trying to find life; wouldn't we do the same? I just can't blame them for the attempt. When I see the photos of a dead child laying on the beach, when I hear the stories of a father's loss as his family drowns, I seem to not see the religion, but the humanity.

It appears I am at odds with many atheists. Maybe it would be better to force them into sleeping in the beds they made. This is all their own doing, they decided to embrace religion - a religion that sucks the morality out of life - why should we care? Maybe they'll destroy each other so we don't have to.

We have had prominent atheists - think Hitchens - who railed against Islam. What would he say if he still was walking this earth, let them die? Dawkins is not a friend, what does he say? The latest I see is that he thinks the richer Arab states should be helping, and in that I agree. With the way the muslim population currently acts in many European countries, I don't see it as being a boon to said countries. Integrate or leave is how I look at it. Become an asset or go home.

An ex-AU-member from the Middle East once explained a issue of morality that comes up every so often. When a country is hit by drought, or other natural phenomenon that makes it hard for the people to survive, they are taken in by neighboring states who support them until they can go back home. They do this because maybe next year it will be the opposite. It is survival. Possibly this should be treated the same way?

There are now over 4 million refugees out of Syria. Turkey has taken in almost half of them. This should be a problem that muslim states deal with, not the west. Yet if the Middle East is going to be up in flames for years, maybe the farther away you can run the better. Perhaps I am just too liberal in my thinking? Should a more conservative viewpoint be embraced?

I'm sure my European friends will be happy to explain the problem, please do.

Regardless, being human to me means that allowing other humans to suffer is immoral. At times it appears I may be wrong, but that's a problem I haven't come to grips with yet.

Being human at times can and does suck, but that's based on a selfish vision. To be a humanitarian would appear to be even much worse if the decisions you make are in error.