Righteous Indignation

Righteous indignation and anger, those are two feelings that I feel the most. Though I am very vocal on this blog and in my life, I cannot help but realize that my opinions and actions also affect those that are closest to me, so I filter my thoughts and my understanding of life so as to protect my friends and family. I am luckier than most like-minded people in the sense that my family does not judge me because of my lack of beliefs. Though I can't help but think that if left unfiltered, my thoughts and opinions would more than raise an eyebrow.  I also know that some people would look down upon those I care about because of those opinions and I care enough to not state some things publically. I can take the social suicide caused by the expression of my ideas, but I cannot sit around and see the injustice of others being judged because of something I did or said. Keeping some of my ideas hidden, while hurtful to me, does not hold a candle to seeing someone else being ostracized or criticized merely because they associate with the like of me, and even agree.

I am extremely vocal, if people want to know what I think, I will typically give them a straight answer. I will not however answer publically for something that might affect those I care about. I read a lot of stories about those who fought for what they believed and I aspire to be one of those people; I aspire to be the likes of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Christopher Hitchens, and Mahatma Gandhi. I see bloggers and youtubers who kept their identities and personal information secret because of the impact their thoughts could have on their loved ones. I have witnessed those people’s personal information released to the public in order to threaten the social and public life of those around them. Friends, there are many more controversial ideas brewing in my mind, but until those who are closest to me are safe from social harm because of their association with me, I cannot state them.

This brings me to righteous indignation and anger; why is it that they would be judged because of something I believe? Why is it that people feel a need to judge others based on their relationship with someone? It is not as though people I associate with agree with me 100% of the time, and I would argue that it would make for a boring life if it were true. I have friends with differing points of views on most of what I think and I still speak my mind to them, albeit in verbal form so as not to be misconstrued. Our society needs to change drastically for true freedom of expression, and I do not mean in the legal sense. I mean that if I were to say something controversial on a certain subject, and share from my own life, my family would be judged, not because they necessarily agree with me, but simply because they are close in relation to me. This angers me to my core and sometimes I wish that this part of our society would just disappear.   

A Heathen Goes To Church

As a small disclaimer, I would like to state that this blog post is not a judgment of the people I encountered, but rather an observation of the rhetoric and behaviors demonstrated in an evangelical service on mother’s day.

Interestingly enough, after a few songs of praise and worship, the first thing that is brought up is that of offerings and tithes (as a form of worship?). While the attitude towards outsiders was rather positive, I find it interesting that money still plays a prevalent role in the congregation. As I watched everyone so willingly give towards what I now know is a business model, I cannot help but feel pain, to know that someone is benefiting from this, knowingly deceiving those who freely give, maybe not at a local level -though I highly doubt that- but the Church has become a business, the concept that salvation is free is just that, a concept that has been given up since the dawn of Christianity. Only certain laws are observed here, and I cannot help but remember that the original congregations were house groups willing to help each other, not an organized group of people demanding money for the salaries of those in leadership and playing to others' guilt.

My wife, a recent unbeliever, stated that it hurt her to even attend as she misses the sense of community instilled in followers through the music which was created to mold the minds of people and create a sense of addiction in communion.  I see it as a sense of paradise lost, a typical manipulative tactic meant to lead the masses involved in a guilt trip when leaving the community; emotional blackmail designed to overcome a sense of self-preservation which brought us into the state of scientific advances we live in today.  The music is designed to destroy self-worth through the lyrics which are meant to instill a sense of damnation without the imaginary cure for the imaginary disease. The very rhetoric used in those lyrics are destructive to the human “spirit”, promoting worthiness of the deity and invoking the unworthiness of those who worship said deity, instilling a loathing of humanity and the powerlessness of humanity, and the need for a supernatural forgiveness for an event which we, as a species had no power over, yet the deity, of course, did.

Though, once again, everyone was extremely welcoming to me, I could not help but get a strong sense of alienation, not because of the people, or the atmosphere, but rather because of the strong convictions which drive me to persevere in my seeking of truth. Everything about this dogmatic culture seems to steer people away from questioning those things they are taught within the community and to deny that which is taught without it. Socrates fought until the end of his life in order to fight this type of thinking centuries ago. It is counter intuitive to the search for truth for which questioning is the basis. I imagine I stick out like a sore thumb, typing my notes as everyone around me is deep in "worship", which in reality is just another form of meditation.  Ironically, the followers come here in order to feel better about themselves, not realizing that what is supposed to build them up is in actuality tearing them down.

Based on the preacher’s words, my very existence is sin; everything about who I am, what I believe, what I do, the way I think is considered a sin. The language used by the leadership is typically made to subdue and not empower; it is about submission.  The verses used in the sermon were twisted out if their context; those verses, culturally and contextually, were written to justify the subjugation of women. It was also hinting at the fact that Adam was not created perfect (in direct contradiction of the Bible where Man was created in the image of God, therefore in the image of perfection). The preacher then went on to be humorous about the creation of Eve.  Though he stated that women, throughout scriptures, are to be honored and to be man’s equal, he also stated that Adam named Eve because naming something gave the one who names authority over the one named. The preacher, on mother's day, is laying it on thick for the women, going completely against the scriptures about the subjugation of women.   Of course, he went on to the objectifying of women in pornography and their dress.  And do you want to know what the big kicker is?  At the end of his Mother’s Day sermon that was supposed to be all about women, he went on to honor certain men in a ceremony, and still claimed that this ceremony was in actuality, for the women.

             

            I find it very interesting to note that the hypocrisy in the sermon was only rivaled by the charisma of the person delivering it; leading me to believe that this is a con, that the person delivering knows it's bullshit, and that the appeal was meant in praising the women (again, and I cannot stress this enough, CONTRADICTING the Bible), and appealing to the men's sense of humor. The Bible states that angels don't have free will, but then where did Lucifer get the idea that he could be greater than the person who created him? That's right FAIL! I felt like I was watching Michael J. Fox, 'cause friends I was in Spin City! There was so much misdirection and spin that even I, as an outsider had trouble finding my way through the bullshit. The concepts introduced by the preacher were completely contradictory to the creation account in the Bible. He announced that labor was commanded to Man before the Fall; we know the accounts state exactly the opposite. It is interesting that the preacher referred to women as SERVANTS, SERVING the church and men, yet a few moments ago claimed them to be equal (which is it bro?) then went on to come into my territory: culture! His entire sermon was based on cultural misconceptions, as well as mistranslations of the Bible.

The sermon went on about slavery, and the fact that Eve was not created to be a slave, however, Leviticus and Deuteronomy claim that women are impure creatures and are to be subjugated. The sermon is based on the principle that the fall happened from the beginning, without ever directly addressing it, and is riddled in logical fallacies, wild assertions, and severe contradictions, not only with the holy text from which it is preached, but also within the sermon itself. The message was also, obviously strictly heterosexual (Well yea, duh!) and even addressed single women, but not bisexuals, not lesbians, and not transgenders. It is an obvious pass at those who are born this way.

All in all, this is not an experience I enjoyed, though I must repeat it to know what I am up against, in my future endeavors and in my chosen career path. A focus on the study of religions and the cultures in which they thrive is as important as the understanding of the nature of conflicts between warring nations. Religion, by its very nature demands the destruction of people like me, and that is not something I tolerate. If people want to believe a certain way, fine, whatever, but I will fight tooth and nail when people are trying to push legislation based on their religions, regardless of potential harm. Atheists are not trying to outlaw religion because we think the belief silly; we are trying to limit its control of the government. We are not trying to tell people how to live their life, or what convictions they should espouse, but rather encouraging the questioning of any information given. That is something religion does not typically tolerate, though I have several friends who are Christians and skeptics and who apply their skepticism in different aspects of their lives. If those who question choose to believe, then they have made their choice and I am in no way, shape, or form in a position to tell them they are wrong. Lastly friends, I must issue a warning against the methods used by religions to control and manipulate you. As I've stated before, it will try to appeal to our need of community, and then slam us with talks of unworthiness and disease which we have tremendous control over. As written in my previous post, we are capable of love, in several different ways, and we only need to embrace our nature and love freely, intellectually, emotionally, and passionately. 

On The Concept of Love and Religion

Friends, I have to admit, as I write these words, that my spirits are rather low, maybe it is the lack of sleep, or maybe my brain trying to process the truly unimaginable amount of data it received in the past few days.  This kind of, let’s call it depression, though unreasonable and illogical, is much needed, as it forces my mind to focus on that which I care the most about. This blog is meant as a preamble to my next entry which will come out in only a couple of days, I assure you.  For today though, let us focus on the topic of love: unrestricted, unreasonable affection, meant, traditionally to be experienced between only two people. As I keep thinking about the reasons for religion, and family structure where a person, who is unrelated to a family core other than through affection such as a family friend is automatically called an uncle or an aunt, or a brother or sister by those whose affection is closest, how do we define love? And do we have to define true passionate, selfless love, as something that can only be experienced between two people?

It is with heavy regret that I admit that I used to think in such manner, I believed that love – as it grows over time between people- cannot be shared with multiple partners, and I will also add that the consumption of that love need not necessarily be physical, though it may be, so long as no party is hurt or harmed by such methods of consumption. I have been thinking about the need for religion, and what it brings to the table, about the true happiness found in both monogamous and polyamorous marriages. I have tried to understand why most accepted religions require a sacrificial love for many people. My friends, I believe the answer lies right in front of us: human beings, as all social animals, need to feel a sense of community, though, through the complexity and range of the emotions we share, we try to identify with different people. It is my belief that theists, in general, feel a need to be loved so greatly by someone other than their partner that they need to create another being, far beyond their reach in order to express that love and still follow the conventions of their culture. They feel the need to express a deep love, much stronger than the one they can give a mere mortal, though all that needs to be done is to love others as well.

Now, there are going to be critics of this entry, stating that I encourage “perversions” and I am not truly in love of my wife. That is completely irrationally wrong, as I have stated before, physical consumption is not necessarily needed, though it may. There are others who would say that human beings are capable of truly terrible things, such as murder, theft, rape, gratuitous amounts of violence that could, and does hurt us as a species. But my response to that is that we need not focus on the negative, I am a true humanist who believes greatly in the human potential for good. I believe that because we are capable of such horrid things, we are also capable of tremendously wonderful actions and emotions. However, we limit ourselves because our concepts of normalcy are heavily enforced by our ever growing western cultural norms. It is great time, my friends, we stop lying to ourselves and start exploring our potential, we have a deep emotional connection to other human beings, I am not saying to have sex with everyone you encounter (though I do not believe there is something necessarily wrong with that), I am saying to attempt to bond intellectually, and emotionally with other human beings, so that all parties involved may become better people.

Carpe Diem

Above all do no harm
     These words can mean a number of things, what I do understand their meaning to be is that while we are free to behave, and do what we like, we are bound by our society to not harm anybody. It is not an imperative to not offend or hurt anyone, as no matter what we do we are bound to hurt someone's feelings or offend someone in some way. No, we are not to harm anyone and that is the fabric of society, that is the basis for morality. If one were to believe that morality comes from anywhere else than this phrase and its societal interpretation, they are sadly mistaken. So why start a blog post with this line? Why attempt to define something as basic as our concept of morality and the relative subjectivity attached to it? My answer can be split into two fundamental ideas: The obvious, that religion has no grounds in morality, has been explained by much smarter men than me, that religion based on the expectation of reward and the fear of punishment is not morality as it essentially is a self preserving idea, the other is in the development of different concepts applied in my life which stem from the motto Carpe Diem.
     This simple phrase allows me to understand an idea that is meant to poke fun at theists, as it is a common belief among believers that this life is simply a dress rehearsal, that our real life begins after death, pushing some to extreme ways of sacrifice, harming others in the process. We see it in extremist terrorist attacks from believers in the Bible who bomb abortion clinics, in believers in Sharia, who suicide bomb schools for their defiance of Sharia law. Terrorism, and harming others is a general pattern we see in religions, but it is not the only area impacted. There are plenty of non believers who have committed atrocities in the name of whatever cause they believe. What happened to live and let live? What happened to the things that truly matter in life? Seize the day and do no harm; this is a recipe for success, a recipe for happiness, and quite possibly the only way the many cultures and nations of the human race can coexist.
     Life itself, the very core of our nature, is an inclination for adventure; that is why anything new is exciting, and we get easily bored with the same routine. Seizing the day may not be doing something so outrageous it could potentially destroy us, but merely enjoying doing the things we enjoy doing, so long as we do not harm anybody (even ourselves) in the process. Judging others is not the way to go in this, everybody has a right to do what they like so long as it does not damage another. My father used to tell me, "Your freedom ends where another's begins." Truer words could not be spoken. My freedom from religion does not entitle me to push my unbeliefs on others, however, this goes both ways. People's freedom of religion does not allow them to push legislation to punish those who do not believe the same.
     Yes, I have been a pretty outspoken unbeliever and advocate of reason, and that is what I will continue doing. However, I will never try to outlaw a belief system because I do not believe in it. That is not what the secularist movement is about; it is about checks and balance, and about the right for everyone to believe, or not believe, what they choose without their rights being taken away. To those christians who don't believe that homosexual marriage should happen I ask this simple question: Do two men or two women getting married take away your freedom in any way? The answer is clearly no; if there is a liberty being infringed upon it is the liberty to bully and demonize certain groups of people. Live and let live. It is not my job to go to your place of worship and attempt to take away your right to worship freely, do not try to come into our homes through legislation so that we are not free to believe something else!
     One last note, if, in order to enjoy your life to the fullest you must take away people's rights or harm people in different ways, be them moral or physical, than you are not a part of a civilized society. Carpe Diem, to me, is the exact opposite; it is the enjoyment of life regardless of what others think or do, it is being myself no matter the consequences, it is acknowledging the path to freedom for everybody and never letting one's actions dictate mine. Yes, it is easier said than done, but so is everything worth doing!

On Love, Marriage, and Staying True to Ourselves

     Life has a way of shaping things up and tip the scales one way or another. Tough situations tend  towards showing our true colors and our choices determine who we are, it is our choices that give us power or take it away, our choices that shape our beliefs and our convictions, more importantly, it is our choices -not emotions- that drive who we are in love with. When I first met my wife, she stated something that I thought was ludicrous but came to understand to be true: Love is a choice. I recently had to remind her of those words that Love, while initiated by an original attraction, let's call it "chemistry", grows over time through attachment and, more importantly, a choice to make it grow, and to strengthen that bond. When we got married, I was fuly aware of what was ahead of us, a long road full of joy, pain, sorrow, love, some hatred and a whole spectrum of emotions.
     This spectrum of emotions, and differences of events are the bond which strengthens only by going through it together. This is not to say that couples or loving relationships require the participants to become the same, in fact, I would say it is the small differences that make it work. Anybody who knows me and my spouse would almost instantly notice that we are extremely different, from the way we address different people to our tastes -though some similarities cannot be avoided- for instance, she's a little bit country, and well, yeah I'm a little bit rock'n roll. She loves, let me emphasize on this, loves romance novels whereas I thrive on either Sci-Fi, fantasy, or non fiction. She is also one to take time to process information and that makes her a great student, whereas I tend to go with the flow of information and analyze on the go, great for analyzing, crappy for studying as the information I retain is more conceptual than comitted to memory. Interestingly enough, our couple, I believe is stronger than most, as we are not only willing to work through our differences, but also embrace them.
     This brings me to my last point of the post: staying true to ourselves. Changing for the ones we love is inevitable, there is a lot less murders because we, as social beings, do change over time in order to adapt to our surrounding. In staying true to ourselves, and I do mean our core, not the superficial concepts we deal with everyday such as music or movies, or even what emotional state we typically find ourselves in, we allow that first spark of "chemistry" to remain, and grow even stronger. Most of the enjoyment of life lies in the challenges we face, and the feeling of accomplishment we get for surmounting those challenges, we do not want somebody exactly like us as a life partner because then life would be boring. The first few years would be great, yes, however, as time goes by the amount of excitment in doing the same things over and over again become minimal, to the point where the original spark of "chemistry" is extinguished and there is nothing left but boredom. My wife and I argue a lot about different things, our opinions differ greatly from one another. Heck I have been a non-believer for quite some time now and she barely realized she did not believe less than a year ago, to put that in perspective, we have been married 10 years.
     In conclusion, and this post may not be read by a lot of people but quite frankly, I don't care, I challenge those who read this to ask themselves what they are looking for in a potential mate, is it common interest and complacency? is it adventure and complexity? Or is it merely the idea of companionship? I would love to tell you that I have figured out the key to a perfect marriage, but as far as I know there is no such animal, and looking for it is merely an exercise in futility.