Freethinker's corner

I will not go quietly into the night!

recent posts

about

  • Political Parties

    I have never been much of a politically oriented person. For many years I was a registered Republican, for no particular reason at all, that I can recall.

    It was toward the end of George W. Bush’s last term wherein I made the decision to become a registered Independent. Increasingly, I found, his viewpoints and mine came into conflict. Reports of his religiosity in the beginning of the Iraq conflict, coming as they did, after the fact, lent to my decision to withdraw from the Republican party.

    It was during this time that I also stopped  listening to the likes of Rush Limbaugh. During previous years of listening I would accept anything he had to say without hesitation. However, leaving religion had ignited my mind, I had become a freethinker, I began to examine his assertions. Realizing that Rush was just an entertainer, as he had always maintained, allowed me to examine his motives. As a result of this fresh perspective from the seat of reason and common sense I have come to new conclusions. Rush is a habitual liar. He lies to entertain and manipulate an audience of bigots. He lies, to make himself rich at the expense of his audience of the religiously deluded who are functioning from the perspective of a slave-mentality. Religion creates this “slave-mentality” by asserting that everyone is unworthy, and in need of “salvation” for imagined sins.  Rush… uses religion. By appealing to the religious, using their religion, Rush controls his audience. Those in the audience do not realize how Rush, a very rich man, is controlling them. Both Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck use this same method, appealing to the religious by manipulating the slave mentality of the religious. They demonize the Democratic Party in the same way religion has demonized any other group not sharing the same beliefs. In the same way they have demonized Barack Obama.

    Both Rush and Glenn Beck are very successful businessmen. They speak for big business. Utilizing an appeal to the religious slave-mentality, which big business does as well, they have demonized Social Security, and the unemployment compensation system, as well as any type of public form of relief which might lessen the power of Corporations to pay the lowest possible wage. Worker unions are targeted for the same reason. Big business looks upon the masses, not as people, but as a commodity to be used, abused, and then when no longer useful, discarded. Hence the term “Human Resource”. Yes, sure they give to charitable organizations. Charitable organizations do not provide the levels of relief which make the “little man” less dependent on income provided by business, therefore maintaining the powerlessness of the masses to demand higher wages.

    Rush advocates the rich as the “job-creators”. They do have the money to invest, to finance new business. However, as Rush has also said, they are not in the business to provide jobs. He has contradicted himself, having portrayed the rich as job-creators, and as also being in business to make a profit, with jobs being only a side-effect. Profit, not job-creation, is the motivation of the rich. The game as they see it is to create the greatest profit, while creating the fewest jobs (wage payouts) as possible. 

    Enough of Rush, Glenn Beck and their delusional little world. The main reason for this blog is my decision whether to go ahead, join the Democratic Party, or remain an Independent.

    I so long for a third alternative. A party which conforms to the principles of our secular Constitution, instead of being manipulated by the constant lobbying of sectarian groups. This is where I find President Barack Obama’s greatest failings. His inclusion of “non-believers” in some of his speeches gave me hope that upon his Inauguration he would reverse Bush’s “Faith-based Initiatives”. The “Faith-based Initiatives” are clearly a violation of the Separation of Church and State, implied in the Constitution and later clarified by various declarations. Not only did Obama continue the initiatives, he expanded on them. Not only this but allowed those receiving taxpayer money to discriminate in the hiring of employees working in the organizations set up to administer the monies. In effect, everybody is supporting the growth of these religious institutions whether they want to or not, Atheist taxpayers included. I have written Obama off. He is a classic politician, catering to the whims of whatever he feels will perpetuate his tenure in office.

    And yet, since there is no third, fourth, or any viable strong additional party which can challenge the this quasi-monopoly of the two parties, the dissenter must choose to either throw his/her vote away on a powerless party, or choose the lesser of two evils.

    Obama is an individual. He is the top leader of the Democratic party as he is the President. Yet, he does not represent, I think, the main ideals of the Democratic Party.  The Democratic party represents more or less the hopes of individual working class people. The Republican party stands for Corporate America. There was a time when the Republican Party was the working man’s party. This has changed.

    The lesser of the two evils is the Democratic Party. I agree that it could be said that since our political system is set-up in such a fashion that great deals of money are required to elect any candidate, the rich in essence is in control of our political system. Nevertheless, Unions which represent the working class, support, financially, in the majority of elections, Democratic candidates.

    Setting the stage a premise would have to be held:  If I give my vote any value, I would have to conclude that the selection of candidates for any  election is effected by my singular vote. I would have to envision that one vote can make a difference, regardless of the millions of votes cast. It is true that in some elections a singular vote has made the difference.    

    Should I remain Independent or become a member of the Democratic Party, based solely on the reasoning that they are the lesser of two evils? The truth is: I can still vote either way in the main elections, while maintaining Independent status. I simply cannot vote in parties in the primaries. This means that the candidates offered will be selected for each party without any input from me.   If I maintain my present Independent status I would have to be content with the selected candidate and accept the decisions of party members voting in the primaries. Another “Obama” could result.

    There is only one logical choice based on the whole of this reasoning.

  • Darwin’s Loss of Faith

     

    Charles Darwin 2

     

    Charles Darwin began life baptized as an Anglican and very much influenced by his mother’s religious view Unitarianism. As he grew up he came to view himself as becoming a country clergyman. He came to accept after much careful reading of contemporary books on divinity that the Bible was the literal truth, and that it must be spread and fully accepted.

    The events that led to Charles Darwin’s departure from faith began with the departure of the H. M. S. Beagle from Plymouth Harbor in December of 1831. Charles Darwin 3During this voyage he meticulously kept notes of each day’s visits and his observations of animal and plant life, despite recurring bouts of illnesses, from which he would suffer the rest of his life. It was during this voyage that he also read Charles Lyell’s “Principles of Geology” which presented the concept of an old Earth in direct contradiction to Biblical teachings. Charles Darwin later credited Charles Lyell as his impetus for all his endeavors in science.

    As a result of his readings Darwin came to view the Old Testament as no more reliable than the beliefs of any barbarian. When he began to write up his scientific investigations he faced a choice: he could either present them in a fashion to support Genesis, or in terms of naturalism (undirected natural causes are solely responsible for the origin and development of life), consistent with Charles Lyell’s old Earth theory. The result of his decision led to Darwin’s “Origin of the Species”.

    Eventually, as the result of his increased understanding and acceptance of science, he came to disbelieve in the divinity and doctrine of Christianity. This was neither a quick nor easy journey for Darwin, and it left him devastated.

    There have been many attempts to invalidate Evolutionary Theory. Many of these attempts originated from those who would prefer to believe the story of Genesis in the Bible. Darwin’s theory has withstood the test of time in the 150 plus years since it’s publication. “Indeed, many scientific advances, in a range of scientific disciplines including physics, geology, chemistry, and molecular biology, have supported, refined, and expanded evolutionary theory far beyond anything Darwin could have imagined.” Attempts to invalidate Darwin’s work even pursued him to his grave, as many claimed he made a deathbed conversion. There is no proof that such a conversion ever occurred, on the contrary there is much evidence to the contrary.

    Born on the 12th of February of 1809 Darwin made an impact of immeasurable importance to science. His impact was not so much the originality of his work, there were others who also envisioned evolution. Darwin’s work is exceptional because of the evidence he presented as a result of his observations.  This vision of a dynamic world of evolving organisms is why this man’s birthdate should be revered.

    As has been said “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution”.

  • Knee-Jerk Reactions

    It occurs to me that there may have been some confusion surrounding my last blog entitled “Wake Up America”. I have a friend who mistakenly thought that I was painting all of Islam with the same broad brush.

    Although I was careful to designate the target of my blog as “Radical Islam”, nevertheless, just as some Christians have thought that my past blogs were aimed at the entirety of Christianity rather than fundamentalists and extremists, some may assume my target with “Wake Up America” was all of Islam. This is not the case.

    Just as there are many Christians that no longer adhere to many of the evil and barbaric dictates of the Bible, there are many followers of Islam that no longer adhere to the evil and barbaric dictates of the Koran. They live peacefully within the law, doing what all Americans do, working and taking care of family. They love America every bit as much as any other patriotic American.

    My friend was comparing my alert with a desire to adopt the methods used in WWII to secure America by interring Japanese in a detention camp. I am distressed at this comparison, as I thought he knew me better, but alas, what is done is done. Nothing could have been further from the truth.

    We must always remember that there are some who will react with a knee-jerk reaction to any threat, no matter how mild. They will take up torch and burn the town down before you can make it clear that it was only one cockroach, not millions, that you saw in the kitchen. We must not repeat the errors made in the past, we must learn from history. Just as we must not over-react, we must not be blind.

    The greatest asset to America is an alert, aware, but cautious and just people.

  • Wake Up America

    While I am suspicious of activity which indicates that Fundamentalist Christianity is making a move incrementally into the government of the United States, presently it does not present the greatest threat to America. The greatest threat to America, and indeed, the world comes from radical Islam. (I would advise every American to watch this film) Radical Islam has already attacked America, has already compromised Great Britain.

    There are Islamic training camps in America. These training camps are not training people in the “peaceful” ways of the Islamic faith, they are training them for the day when Islam is expected to own America. (2050 C. E.) There are about twenty of these camps in various parts of the U.S.. Many of the recruits for these training camps are garnered from American prisons.

    You have men who are angry at what they feel are injustices in American prisons and are therefore very susceptible to recruitment to Islam. It is estimated that perhaps 10% of the prison population has been converted to Islam.

    Radical Islam is here in the United States. Radical Islam does not compromise, does not negotiate. It’s stated goal is world domination by whatever means needed. Everyone everywhere will be made to convert to radical Islam or else.

    Training camps must be eliminated in this country. No religious group should be permitted to maintain a training ground for military operations. Military operations are the responsibility of our government. It is simply insane that our government knows about these camps, but does nothing.

    Another matter that should be of attention to every American is the persistent push by Islamic nations to suppress free speech. They claim the purpose of this resolution working back and forth in the United Nations is to protect religion in general from criticism which might cause adherents to become violent. What criticism doesn’t incite the volatile adherents of Islam to violence? Resolution 16/18 has returned for consideration of the United Nations Human Rights council after having been rejected before by the United States as acting against our First Amendment guarantee of Freedom of Speech. The language has been altered, supposedly to make it more acceptable to the United States, and now both Obama and Hillary are supporting it, and the U.S. may sign it. Even with these changes it will criminalize intolerance. If the United States signs on to this resolution it will be a victory for Islam. They will have taken a measure of control on what we can say about their religion, or religion in general. I can’t imagine the average American desiring this kind of control of our government by the United Nations.

  • Modern Times; Christian Behavior

    100_1521a

    I have been writing a blog for several years. I have written them thinking that there were some basic commonalities between the differing groups of Christians. Well, there are some, many in fact, but some of my assumptions were wrong.

    One of the assumptions I was mistaken about is that all Christians absolutely loathe non-believers, especially those carrying the label atheist. Yes, there are some out there who remind me at every opportunity that I am on the rollercoaster to hell, but they are a very small minority. They just seem large in number because they are so vocal. I suppose this is the case in any group.

    There are so many varying degrees of belief. Some Christians are very liberal, some very much fundamentalist. In between are a myriad of variations. There are literalists, and then there are those who look upon some scripture as metaphor, preferring a more modern “interpretation”. There are also some who ignore offensive scripture and accentuate the positive. There are some who look upon Jesus as God personified, others think him merely an outstanding prophet. There are those that loathe organized religion preferring instead a private belief.

    Although Christians still make the claim that God is unchanging, and biblical scripture exists to back them up,  beliefs evidently do. According to the cultural mores, dos and do nots, of a particular society, accommodations are made. What a Christian thinks moral in one society is different than what a Christian thinks in another. Also, the norms existing now differ greatly  from the norms of morality practiced by early Christians.

    There are individual Christians who believe that morality is as unchangeable as their God, and do not tolerate differences in cultures, as pertains to morality. Happily they seem in the minority.

    Where Atheists are concerned I have found numerous Christians who exercise a modern “live and let live” attitude. Yes, there are some who wish we would all crawl back under the rock we came out from under, but others have adopted a stance which provokes a feeling within me that hope exists mankind will not destroy itself in a cataclysmic self-made disaster. These new Christians seem in the majority as well. That bodes well for us all. When an atheist can do more than just run for office, but actually attain it, then I will know there is hope.

  • What Are Your Thoughts

    So much press of late has been about Mid-Ohio Atheists billboards. People would almost have to be sitting at home dead not to have heard of them by now. All the outcry from the public that these billboards were in bad taste, and in bad taste because they were scheduled at the holiday season.

    I would like advice on how we, of Mid-Ohio atheists can improve our image in this area. No… no suggestions that we go away, disband; we are here to stay. I want suggestions on how we can get our message out in a way that is not offensive to the public at large. (Those who feel our mere existence is offensive, need not reply)

    We want to let those like-minded people in the area, near and far, know we are here for them. That would be our target.

    I realize the goal of fundamentalist religion is to convert everyone on earth to their way of thinking, so my plea is not directed toward them. I am asking those who believe that everyone has a right to believe or disbelieve what ever they want, to make suggestions.

    Thank you.

  • lalalalalala, I Can’t Hear You!

     

    3 monkeys a

     

    Why do irrational ideas endure?

    I once was told that one surefire method of escaping jury duty, should one desire to, is to say something like this:

    “I know that so and so, and I know he’s guilty, and once I make up my mind, nothing anyone says can change it.”

    People can be stubborn, resolute, unwilling to look at contradictory information, even when such information is offered without a biased slant. Such a person, even when proven wrong with logic and reasoning continues to hold  totally inaccurate viewpoints. Inflexible, unmoving, with information filtered to support held views, and contradictory information discarded.

    Closed-minded, never considering anything new. Comfortable with the perspective presently held, unable, unwilling, to explore new frontiers, new ideas. Holding prejudiced opinions, practicing bigotry, hatred, and arrogance.

    Not only does this describe someone “set in their ways”, it is indicative of someone who does not even realize just how uncompromising they have become. When confronted they offer repetitive reasons for their tightly held convictions, then their criticism is presented in an attack upon those who question.  Like parrots, their diatribe is repeated to infinity. These people charge instead that it is you that is inflexible, unmoving, and prejudiced. If only you would open your mind, they exhort, you would see the error of your ways, and find yourself in agreement with them.

    What these people really want is for you to open your mind so wide that your brain will fall out, for you don’t need that, to find agreement with them. You don’t need to think, you don’t need facts, or evidence, just listen with your heart. They and what they believe is all you need to know.

    No thank you. Instead I will think for myself. I don’t need the rigidity of tightly held, unshakable belief in anything. I want to know everything that I can possibly learn in the brief span of time on this Earth. I want to experience every  little piece of new knowledge, celebrate each new discovery, and see just how far this creature, this animal, born from primitive beginnings will progress. No, I won’t see what becomes of the human experience, as I have often stated, our lifespan is way too short, but even after I am gone, it is my wish that humankind reaches ever higher and glorious achievements. I hope ignorance falls by the wayside, and that knowledge replaces it. I hope that people will become more caring about their fellow human, and instead of believing suffering is good for the soul, alleviate it.

  • Despised and Hated for Being Truthful

    Atheists are the most distrusted of all of America’s minorities. When inquiries are made as to why this is so the response is usually that since God is the source of all morality, and since atheists do not believe in God, atheists have no morals.

    Morals existed before religions. Morals governing behavior were absolutely essential in the social groups humans formed to enhance their survival in prehistoric times. Morals existed in civilizations before Biblical times in the form of laws governing commerce, criminal behavior, and disputes among the peoples. The Bible and Christianity are relative latecomers and  plagiarized from the earlier sources.

    Atheists, agnostics, humanists, and others give funds to charities like the Red Cross and the United Way. They volunteer in public service roles. Most of the time these works are carried out without identifying their non-belief, and why should they, as all humans should care about the condition of their fellow human.

    The religious give to their church, and these funds are well defined. There is no mistaking the source of their generosity, especially when the bowl of soup comes with a sermon. The point being that the amount the religious give to charities is well accounted for, whereas the non-believer, giving to secular charities, is not so well differentiated.

    In summary, the religious in this nation do not own morality. Their religious belief, their Bible, their god, is not the singular source of morality. Atheists, like theists, come from disparate origins and each has differing morals depending upon the particular societal group from which he/she came.

    I suspect part of the reason for the mistrust is reason. Atheists, agnostics, and humanists deal in factual evidence. When the religious are exposed to factual evidence which contradicts their faith,  there is a backlash. The truth, it seems, hurts.

  • The Fundamental Problem

    A battle is being waged for the minds of Americans. The battle is between religious fundamentalism and reason. The fate of the United States is not the only concern at stake, the future of the world is being decided.

    There are two types of Christianity…(actually there are hundreds of differing cults)  fundamentalists, adhering to a literal meaning of the bible, and the other group going with interpretations, not believing in literal derivations, but instead relying on metaphorical, non-literal meanings.

    Of most concern are the fundamentalists. The greatest problem being with those who, even in the face of overwhelming factual evidence to the contrary continue to believe the information in a 2000 plus year old book in preference to science and reason. I am particularly singling out those who :

    1. Believe that the Earth is 6000 to 10000 years old. (And that therefore, dinosaurs and people walked side by side)

    2. Believe that anyone can spend several days inside a fish and then come out alive.

    3. Believe that anyone can feed a crowd on a couple of fish.

    4. Believe that anyone can walk on water that is not frozen.

    5. Believe anyone can be killed and then come back to life 3 days later.

    6. Believe in total Biblical inerrancy. (Despite the numerous errors and contradictions)

    7. Believe that Jesus was God become man.

    8. Believe that a virgin can give birth. (Unless you are a lizard of some type.)

    Of least danger are those who merely hold to many of the teachings that are attributed to Jesus, and consider him a prophet. In between these and the fundamentalists are varying degrees of belief. Some a danger some not so very much. Any system which can cause someone to believe in the unbelievable, without evidence, without proof,  is capable of manipulating that someone to undertake the unspeakable.

    Fundamentalists revel in their ignorance. Of course, they don’t consider believing something totally on faith without evidence as ignorance. Ignorance, meaning without knowledge, whether willfully or innocently thus, rather than stupidity as some seem to think. These people carry this ignorance around, flaunt it, as if it were a holy virtue to believe without knowledge. This is understandable, as truth, knowledge, facts, and evidence, are anathema to fundamentalism. You surely wouldn’t want to be little Timmy and be found with a book on evolution, in a fundamentalist family. It would be like being found with a pornography magazine in a normal family.

    As in all learning, the earlier you learn, the more you retain, as well as the more stock you place in what you learn. Children are like vacuum cleaners where knowledge is concerned. Due to evolutionary pressures they are very trusting of authority, parents. Fundamentalists, and other religionists know this, and are eager, almost desperate, to indoctrinate their children before such time as the children might acquire the ability to determine the validity of said doctrine.

    This is exactly why I, and many others, oppose the early indoctrination of children by religion. Children should not be exposed to religious doctrine until such time as they have the wherewithal to make an educated decision whether to believe it. This is why the public schools need to remain secular, rather than sectarian. This is why so many people of faith are so determined to return prayer and Bible study to schools, so as to reinforce faith.

    This is why it is paramount that the Separation of Church and State remain absolute.

  • What Kind of World

    What kind of a world would we have if a fundamental Theocracy were erected in the United States? Supposing that a fundamentalist Theocrat were elected as president and a majority of fundamentalist Theocrats were elected to both House and Senate what would we become in the United States. (There are now 50 or more in the House and Senate that do not accept the principle of Separation of Church and State)

    First of all, I would imagine, they would act to rid us of that pesky document, the Constitution. The Bill of Rights would soon follow it onto the dung heap. A new constitution would be written which reflects God’s law. As a result, the presidency would become a hollow position, holding no real power beyond enacting the dictates of the Church, whatever church that president is a subservient.

    The first to be realized, of course, is the fall of the concept of free speech, at least any speech that might be critical of religion. (Even now any speech critical of religion is frowned upon by the majority, silenced where possible) Any one who dare speak any words that can so much as be taken as a criticism of biblical law would face formidable fines, possibly imprisonment. ( Islamic peoples have already attempted to pass motions on this in the United Nations)

    Science, the search for knowledge, could probably continue, under close scrutiny. Anything that would contradict biblical doctrine, like evolution, would have to be abandoned;  text books for schools will be written to reflect this policy. (Texas is doing so now)   Those educators that opposed such, and continued to teach such topics would either be out of a job or imprisoned. America would continue it’s decline in technological supremacy and the economy would follow suit. The only field of study, the only technological advances, would be in the area of weaponry, war. Medical advances, research, will no longer be present. Who needs them when the only medicine accepted is prayer?

    Weaponry needed for the advancement of Christianity in those countries that resist it will flourish. New ways will be found to vanquish the enemies of America. If it seems that other entities opposing the will of God are close to shutting down America, the final answer, a bomb of unimaginable power, will be ready at America’s command, to bring on final annihilation, the end of life on Earth.

    Church attendance will be mandatory. Those who cannot prove affiliation with a Christian church will be restricted in employment and other areas. Perhaps some way to establish Christian alliance will be found necessary. Maybe a mark of the wrist or forehead. Many would balk at this, saying it was “the mark of the beast”, so maybe instead a chip implanted in the wrist, so a simple swipe over a detection device will be sufficient. Those who do not possess the mark will be limited in employment,education, and choice in buying or trading.

    In my opinion the “mark of the Beast” will not come from an “evil” society, but will have it’s source in religion. The beast will not be the mythical Satan, but the Church. (or as surmised below, the Mosque)

    Christianity isn’t the only religion in the world, we could end up under an Islamic regime. It is not inconceivable that with the passage of time the numbers of Muslim adherence could out number any other. Life under such a regime would be similar to the life described above. Punishments would no doubt be much harsher, with “death” to the infidel being the order of the day.