The "You've Got To Be Kidding Me" God

The "You've Got To Be Kidding Me" God

There are some arguments that get so old, but they just won't go away. I don't know how many times I have been told that I have a god, and that my god is probably science. This argument is so wrong that it is insulting: it is insulting to me, it is insulting to them, and it is insulting to their god.

It often starts out something like this:

They say, "Everyone has a god, yours is just science."

And I say, "I don't have a god. Science is just a process of getting to the truth."

They say, "Whatever is most important to you in your life is your god."

I say, "That just defines away every form of atheism and agnosticism. We should agree on what a god is first."

They say, "OK."

I say, "I see gods as supernatural beings, incredibly powerful, and capable of affecting the material world."

They say, "That's it."

I say, "Science is nothing like that."

They say, "I thought we were talking about my god."

I say, "If that is the definition of your god, I will accept it."

They say, "But that's not your god. Your god is whatever you put first in your life."

I laugh, and say, "That's like saying rainbows are just like watermelons except one of them is fruit."

They say, "You don't understand."

Ah, but I think I do understand. I just think that they are wrong.

Let's change the object of the discussion a little bit to make it more clear.

They say, "Everyone has a favorite magazine."

I say, "I don't have a favorite magazine. I don't like magazines."

They say, "Sure you do. Whatever magazine you keep in your bathroom is your favorite magazine."

I say, "First let's determine what we are calling a magazine. It is a periodical publication. It contains articles and illustrations. It typically covers a particular subject or area of interest."

They say, "That's it. That's what a magazine is."

I say, "I don't have any magazines in my bathroom."

They say, "Then what do you keep in your bathroom?"

I say, "All I keep in my bathroom is a plunger."

They say, "Then that plunger is your favorite magazine."

It is the nonsense that religious people believe that make discussions difficult. They can't seem to see past the blinders that they have placed on themselves. They insist that everything has to fit into a framework that they provide. Regardless of how many times they insist they are the same, a plunger just isn't the same thing as a magazine any more than the most important thing in your life has to be a god.

Atheists vs Religious Believers

Every time a writer has something nice he wants to say about religion, they seem required to find the nearest atheist bogeyman to scapegoat. Brent Budowsky also seems to fall into this trap as he seeks to heap praise on Pope Francis.

Budowsky writes in this article from The Hill:

This is extraordinary, powerful and profound. There are profound differences between the policies of President Obama and Democrats versus the policies proposed by the atheist Ayn Rand and conservative voices such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Rep. Paul (sic) Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Republican leaders in Congress.

This is the kind of thing that seeps into the Democratic party, rots, and tries to destroy the party from the inside out. Ostensibly, Brent Budowsky and I are on the same side. Neither one of us seem to like the politics of Sen. Ted Cruz, Sen Rand Paul, Rep Paul Ryan, or the Republican leaders in Congress. But we're not on the same side because I want a Democratic party that is inclusive of everyone instead of trying to keep certain religions, or people of no religion, on the outside of the party.

Let me see if this slight change will help illustrate the point:

This is extraordinary, powerful and profound. There are profound differences between the policies of religious President Obama and religious Democrats versus the policies proposed by the atheist Ayn Rand and conservative voices such as religious Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), religious Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), religious Rep. Paul (sic) Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and religious Republican leaders in [a] religious Congress.

Ayn Rand was an atheist, but since atheism isn't dogmatic there is no more reason for any atheist to believe the writings of Ayn Rand than there are to believe any other piece of fiction written in an old book. Her ideas were her own and are almost universally rejected by the atheist community.

Contrary to what some people believe, simply because something is written down doesn't make it representative of an entire group.

I would, however, like to take this opportunity to say that the Pope has made positive changes. Financial inequality is one of the larger problems facing the world today. The rich are getting richer on the labor of the poor. People are working and trying to live on less than a living wage. Businessmen and corporations are using people like a commodity that can be used up and discarded instead of treating them with the humanity that they deserve.

The pope specifically calls on world leaders to address the great economic and financial injustices, and I agree with him completely. The pope uses words like "cult" and "dictatorship" to describe the champions of financial justice and the conditions their policies create, and I fully agree with him about this, as well.

But financial inequality isn't the only problem facing the world today. Women are constantly treated as being worth less than men. People of color are still looked upon as if they are somehow inferior versions of humanity in the United States as well as Rome, Canada, England, and the rest of the world. Husbands and wives are actively denied access to information and birth control that they need to manage reproduction responsibly. Women are denied access to abortions even at the cost of their life and the life of their baby. Gay men as well as lesbians are denied the right to even have a family that includes the communal support all families deserve. Bisexual people are forced to stay in the closet just to try to escape being associated with the worst kind of promiscuity. Transgender people are denied access to medical care that they require to lead a healthy, well adjusted life. Children are being kicked out of countries because they were brought there when they were one year old instead of being born there.

I'm glad that the Pope Francis is trying to bring the Catholic church one step closer to the modern world. In my opinion he is a great improvement over Pope Benedict XVI. But make no mistake, neither Pope Francis nor the Catholic church is a supporter of social justice. They still have a lot to learn to even come close to the superior morality that many atheists have. Social justice should be for everyone. It shouldn't be limited to a particular Pope's favored group.

The Line Between Life and Death

It's been six days since I held death in my arms. The memories, still vivid and hyper-real, replay every time my mind looses focus for even a second. Fear loiters around the edge of my consciousness waiting for any deviation from the norm to remind me that death is waiting and won't be denied.

Last Monday my wife choked. It wasn't one of those movie moments where there is a dramatic buildup and then a rescuer steps forward with the confidence of years of experience to save the day and win praise from a room full of diners; instead, we were eating lunch and in the blink of an eye she couldn't breathe.

Choking has always been a problem for my wife. It goes all the way back to when she was a girl. I'm not sure where the choking problem comes from; perhaps it is left over from childhood nerve damage, or maybe there is a genetic quirk that causes an abnormally restricted esophagus. The one thing I do know is that there isn't anything that the doctors have been able to do about it.

The moment she choked almost seemed to be a non-event. There was no outward sign that she was choking. There was no coughing or choking noise. One moment she was fine, the next she could neither draw any breath or let any out. Since she couldn't breathe, she also couldn't make any noise at all.

Her actions almost looked like someone that just ate something that was too hot for them. The only difference seemed to the the increasing void of silence. I realized what was happening a moment later and rushed to help.

I had to perform the Heimlich maneuver twice. The first time wasn't effective. The second time dislodged the food and allowed her to begin barely breathing again. There was a part of me that wanted to perform the Heimlich maneuver a third time to try to further dislodge the food, but I was taught that if the person can breathe even a little on their own, you let them try to clear the obstruction themselves so you don't do more harm than good.

The funny thing about the Heimlich maneuver is that it puts your mouth close to the ear of the person you are trying to help. I remember talking all the time I was performing the Heimlich maneuver on my wife. But I wasn't talking to some god or being that religious people keep insisting I will call on in moments of need, instead I was talking to my wife.

That's what makes me an atheist. It isn't that I think there is a god there and I just don't like him. I don't think there is a god there at all. I am as sure that there is no god there as I am sure that there is no hot cocoa shop with a tourists welcome manned by aliens waiting on us to reach Pluto.

Not once have I seen any indication that there might be a god out there. Every advance that has been made has been made by humans. Even the Heimlich maneuver was named for the person that, arguably, discovered the technique (Henry Heimlich, via Wikipedia). If I had chosen to sit across the table and pray to these nonexistent gods, I very much doubt I would have had any more success than the people that had to watch their loved ones die before the discovery of the Heimlich maneuver.

There is a line between life and death. We will all die someday. But as atheists, it is important that we do everything we can to make this life the best life possible for ourselves and others that share the world with us. There isn't a better place waiting on us as a reward for suffering or misfortune. This life, and the people in it, rely on other humans to make it worth living. Anything less and we are only cheating ourselves and others.

Visualizing the Reality of Evolution

I am always amazed when people reject something that they don't want to believe. If your entire basis for believe in a god is that evolution couldn't have happened, then you should at least check to make sure that evolution hasn't been proven in the lab. And that is exactly what we find: evolution has been observed under experimental conditions in the lab. There can be no question. We can never go back to a world where it is intellectually honest to question whether evolution is real or not.

Richard E. Lenski at Michigan State University has been running an experiment to watch how bacteria evolve. He started with a single E. coli bacteria and used its descendants to start twelve different laboratory populations. He then watched these bacteria change over time.

The New Scientist reported:

But sometime around the 31,500th generation, something dramatic happened in just one of the populations - the bacteria suddenly acquired the ability to metabolise citrate, a second nutrient in their culture medium that E. coli normally cannot use.

Indeed, the inability to use citrate is one of the traits by which bacteriologists distinguish E. coli from other species. The citrate-using mutants increased in population size and diversity.

"It's the most profound change we have seen during the experiment. This was clearly something quite different for them, and it's outside what was normally considered the bounds of E. coli as a species, which makes it especially interesting," says Lenski.

This is a perfect example of evolution. A population changes over time through reproduction to live better in their environment. This is exactly what the E. coli bacteria did, and because it was observed in a lab, there are samples saved from every stage so that we can go back and rerun the experiment and see exactly what is happening.

Now I know that some creationists will claim that this is an example of micro-evolution. And while they believe in micro-evolution, they don't believe in macro-evolution. But the only difference in micro-evolution and macro-evolution is time. Macro-evolution is simply multiple different micro-evolution events stacked on top of each other.

It might be difficult to imagine the time frames involved in evolving something from a bacteria to a more complex (notice that I didn't say advanced) form of life.

Let's say that we put a marker in our back yard. For every year of time that passes, we are going to measure off a half inch. How long did it take for the E. coli bacteria to evolve to a different form of bacteria? About 20 years, or 10 inches by our scale. How long has life been here on Earth? Using our same scale it would be the entire distance around the Earth. Over that length of time, it is difficult to imagine that much more complex forms of life wouldn't evolve.

Atheist Goals and Ambitions

Many of the most well known atheists have given their reasons for wanting to change people's minds about religion. Some point out the damage that religion does, others demonstrate how seeing reality as it exists helps you in the long run. I agree with both of these views. I think that religion has caused some atrocities and given other people cover for their immoral actions. I also think that viewing reality, while not always pleasant, is very beneficial. But none of these reasons are my reasons for trying to demonstrate the truth about the atheist perspective. I want you to see the truth because I care about you.

My reasons might sound strange to people if their faith is extremely important to them. It might seem like I am actually trying to hurt them instead of help them. After all, it might appear like I am trying to take something from them and leave them impoverished for the loss. But that isn't the case. I want them to see reality for all its glory. I want them to see what their fear and blind faith is costing them. I want to show them that there is no reason to fear eternal torture in the pit of Hell, or be concerned about the judgment of a being that doesn't exist. Every moment of their lives spent worrying about these things is a moment that they don't get to enjoy the wonders of reality. And since, unfortunately, all our time is limited, every moment that we waste on worry and fear is a moment that neither we, nor anyone else, will benefit from.

But since I want to help people live better lives, why don't I spend more effort talking to all of the Christians? I live in the bible belt, so I am surrounded by Christians. If people could wear their beliefs in a visible way, I might be able to go days without seeing anyone that wasn't a Christian. The reason that I don't discuss my feelings with these Christians is because most of them already live as if they were atheists.

Given what most people seem to use the word Christianity to mean good person, I suspect most people will have a difficult time believing me when I say that they are already living like atheists, but it's true. They don't waste one day a week going to church in some misguided attempt to keep an angry god placated. Any money they give is given to people and organizations that they care about instead of paying for a building and hiring someone to mislead them. Their opinions are formed from thinking and interacting with other people instead of trying to reinterpret ancient folktales to imbue them with modern meaning or beseeching someone to interpret those tales for them. They have discarded so much of the ancient beliefs and superstitions that what remains could come from any moral philosophy regardless of its origin. In short, they are just good people doing their best to live and help other people do the same. And they do all this because they are good people, not because they are afraid of an entity that they have never interacted with outside of a storybook.

They walk like atheists, talk like atheists, act like atheists, and call themselves... Christians. But I've never cared about what they call themselves. They are already not loosing any part of their lives to ancient beliefs and superstitions. Their lives are already their own. And for those people whose lives aren't their own, I will still be here trying to help them see reality and salvage what is left of their life.

The FBI Rescues Captive

Fantastic news! It is being reported by NBC news that the five year old that was held by Jimmy Lee Dykes has been rescued. One of the things that is telling in the story is that there are still plenty of people willing to give the credit to their god. But it wasn't their god that had anything to do with the resolution of the crime, it was the trained, skilled, and brave members of the FBI that brought this standoff to a successful resolution with a minimum loss of life.

"This boy is a very special child. He's been through and endured a lot and by the grace of God, he's OK," Olson said. "That was the mission of every man and woman on this compound. Of every law enforcement officer, every first responder, and all of the community who prayed to bring him home safely."

That might have been the mission of every man, woman, and law enforcement officer on the compound and in the community, but it was the FBI that delivered; not a god. I will keep my praise for the men and women that create the laws that protect us from the predators of society, the men and women that enforce those laws so that we can all pursue a living with a minimal degree of fear, and the people that work for a better future for humanity instead of wasting their time praising an imaginary being for something he didn't help with.

The Requirements of Atheism

I am amazed at the different ways that people look at atheism. Some people will actually spend a great deal of time arguing that atheism doesn't mean anything other than not believing in a god, God, or gods; yet they will spend their time doing it on an atheist website. If atheism doesn't actually mean anything to them, I can't quite understand why they are spending any time going over atheist materials and spending time with other atheists. If atheism were of no more consequence than the color of the small intestines, I wouldn't expect to see them at atheist sites any more than I would expect to see them browsing the medical sites endlessly researching information on internal organs. On the other hand, atheism does mean something to me. It is worth thinking about and debating. It is the raw material to build a movement on top of. Atheism touches almost every part of my life and should be treated as the far reaching idea that it is.

I think it's probably important to express some of my initial positions here. I will grant that atheism, by itself, doesn't actually carry any more meaning than believing or disbelieving in automobiles. It is nothing more than an idea that we use to try to interpret reality more accurately. But like any interpretation of reality, what matters is what happens when we try to use that information to navigate our way through the real world.

Imagine for a moment that you don't believe in the existence of cars. That lack of belief will have a dramatic effect on how you go about your daily life. While you might not understand what roads are for, you wouldn't have any inherent problem with just walking across them without paying any attention to objects that might be intersecting your path. There are, after all, no such thing as cars. I realize that some people will think this is nothing more than hyperbolic rhetoric and that it is an example of a false equivalence fallacy. I can assure you that isn't my intention. All I hope to do with this example is demonstrate that ideas have a real effect on us and our interaction with the world. Ideas are the raw materials of our actions. It is ideas that drive our interactions with the world.

When I talk about atheism being the raw materials to build a movement, I mean that atheism in and of itself might not have any particular meaning other than not believing in gods, but the consequences of that realization are life changing. If we were brought up in a church, then all the things we learned about the functioning of reality are changed. No longer can we just assume that when bad things happen that they are a part of God's plan. When something bad happens to us, we can no longer fit it into the context of a god trying to tell us something. Our faith isn't being tested, and no one is sending cryptic messages. There are no gods to help us, or harm us, or interact with us or anyone else. But what does that have to do with our interactions with reality?

If we don't want to live at the mercy of an uncaring universe, then we have an obligation to help our fellow humans in exchange for their help when we need it. When women make less money than men for no reason other than ingrained religious beliefs, then we have an obligation to stand by their side and help them. When members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community are treated as inferior for no other reason than who they are, we have an obligation try to assist them. When people require assistive technology to manage their interactions with the world, we should see that they have access to that technology. And these examples are only a few of many such examples of the consequences of atheism.

While I think we should advocate for all people that are disadvantaged by life, I don't think it is practical. But if we don't have the time, energy, or knowledge to advocate for everyone, the least we can do is not actively try to hinder them in trying to correct the wrongs that they suffer. And if you don't have the decency to not add misery to people that are already suffering from the cruelties of life, then you have just become a problem that needs courageous people to stand against.