Your Thoughts, My Thoughts

I'm writing this as a response to a post a friend of mine made at the beginning of December. My friend discussed their beliefs, and why they think that they are justified. I want to take a moment to address two of them.

That God or the gods, have reason. That we should not all argue I am right you are wrong. [sic] Just try to get along with our different beliefs. That is true compassion. Respecting and getting along with those who think and see the world differently from you.

I have no problem with people of different religious (or non-religious) backgrounds peacefully co-existing with one another. It's a very admirable goal, and one I support. However, I think that we should argue. We have every reason to do so, and no reasons not to do so.

I want to remind people that an argument isn't necessarily a disagreement. An argument can be a discussion from differing points of view, a method of reasoning from one point to another using logical steps. [Link] Non-believers argue with believers because they feel that (in their view) unjustified belief can cause real damage. And they do. With the fear of free discourse, there can be no free discourse. If our society and our culture are to move forward, we must be ready to have difficult discussions. I think that John Stuart Mill established these ideas fairly well in his work, On Liberty.

In addition, I do not find it acceptable to respect another person's ideas simply because of their faith. Respect implies that there is validity. I will not respect (I may not even tolerate) an idea that I find anathema to good ethics. This isn't to say that I won't respect the person. An individual may strongly disagree with another person's arguments, but may still respect that person. This is a mark of a civil society, and all that a civil society should ask of us is that we tolerate one another.

That people who say religion is bad and it should be gone all together are nieve. [sic] Every one [sic] has the right to belive [sic] what they want. And although I myself am not a huge fan of religion, that does not mean it should be gone. Every one will continue to belive [sic] what they will. Getting rid of the church, or temple or moske [sic] will not stop the faith.

I do not believe that people who say 'religion is bad' and perhaps even 'the world would be a better place without religion' are naive. Some of them are the most intelligent and articulate people I'm aware of. I myself, in the past, have counted among those who thought that the world would be a better place without religion. I may do so in the future. The difficulty is that we live in a world of religion, and we have no world without religion to compare it to. We have no way of knowing if a world without religion would be a better world than the one we live in now. I do agree that everyone has the freedom to believe in whatever they want, and that religious faith will persist.

Together, I think that these are 'Shut up, that's why' arguments. I see aspects of an argument from suppressed premises here. In the first case, I believe my friend neglects why the disagreement exists in the first place. In the second, they neglect to mention why some people think that religion is harmful, or bad. Further, if people are entitled to believe what they wish, as my friend suggests, does that not include the belief that religion is harmful? I don't think so.

I have a few minor disagreements with a few of my friend's other ideas, but that is (perhaps) a discussion for another time.

Christians, Baha'i's and Buttons, Oh My!

I know a lot of people are going to ask "Why have you been criticizing Christianity so much lately?" or "Why don't you criticize a different Abrahamic religion? Why not even a non-Abrahamic religion?" Well let me try to explain things to you.

I do not necessarily believe that faith is a bad thing; it is when faith is not tempered by reason that it concerns me. I am more than willing to allow someone to hold and express their beliefs as long as they do not interfere with my rights to the same. I don't think that I would particularly mind if someone called me a "Satan worshiper" and that I would "burn in Hell" as long as they let me say how ridiculous I think that their beliefs are. Of course, if they repeatedly harassed me, I would have no compunction against taking them to civil court. If our roles were reversed, I would expect them to do the same.

Yesterday, I had a Christian evangelist tell me "I'm not tolerant and I'm proud of it." He also said "One way to God, right?" Frankly, a find this level of zealotry disturbing. I wouldn't even classify it as an extreme level of zealotry, considering what you see on the Internet and in the Middle East.

I don't buy that there is one way to God either, if there is one (which I doubt). I can see four possibilities if God does exist: God is malevolent, God is indifferent, God is omni-benevolent and our perception of God is completely inaccurate, or God is insane. If I say that God may exist, I shouldn't discount that a multitude of gods could exist either.

Now that that's out of the way, I want to address something. I want to point out that the Baha'i faith is probably one of the most tolerant I've seen. I'm not going to pick at any of their theological or metaphysical beliefs, but rather a few things that I think will create issues for the faith in the future.

1) The Baha'i faith views scientific inquiry as essential to expanding Human knowledge and deepening the faith of Baha'i adherents. Considering that I believe that God or some other divine aspect cannot be proven or disproven I find it interesting that the Baha'i faith supports scientific inquiry when historically most religions have been opposed to it. Historically, most religions are opposed to scientific inquiry because of contradictions with various beliefs within those religions. Just take a look at Galileo or Darwin. But consider this: What if the existence of a divine entity could be empirically disproven? I am sure that it would very much shake the Baha'i religion to its very core. I doubt that this could happen however, and I find it more of an interesting question to pose than something I could see becoming an issue. The one place where the Baha'i faith and science knock heads is #2.

2) The Baha'i faith rejects homosexuality. This is the one place I know of where science and the Baha'i faith have a contradiction. While the Baha'i faith teaches equality between people and the elimination of prejudices, sexual orientation is absent from their list of groups of Humans where prejudice should be eliminated. Others have said it before me, and I predict that this will cause tensions within the Baha'i faith in the future.

3) Women are excluded from serving on the Universal House of Justice. This is mostly for the same reasons as #2, with the Baha'i faith's teachings of equality and elimination of prejudice.

4) Followers believe that there will eventually be a single world government. I'm not going to deny that it could happen, but I doubt it. The closest we have come to this is the United Nations, and I doubt that we will go much farther. Groups of people with similar ideals would break off from a united world government and form their own nations. Self-determination has happened many times in the past and I don't see why this would change in the future.

5) It had been my understanding that the Baha'i faith also believed in a single unifying language for humankind. However the official website of the Baha'i International Community cites "the need for a universal auxiliary language."

And just a couple minor notes to finish off with:

The link to Nick Gisburne's website is no longer in the sidebar. He has taken down his website because he is no longer interested in discussing Atheism. This means some of the links in my older posts may not work correctly.

Also, if you're wondering what's been happening with the buttons, you have no need to fret. I decided that it would be easier to post all the buttons once the challenge is over than to post them every week.

ReligiousTolerance.org Article

Baha'i International Community Website

Cultural Appropriation and Irony

Some of you that read my blog, in fact most of you, will probably know that I attended a Christian youth group for a while. Personally, I considered this mostly an excuse to hang out with my friends that were Christian.

This group held their meetings on Friday evenings, and it would involve a sermon of some sort. Usually, I would critically examine these sermons, as a sort of mental exercise. I think that it also made the time pass a bit faster. The sermons that the first pastor would give were pretty good, and I felt that even non-Christians, people of a secular nature, could gain something from listening to them.

After the first pastor left and was replaced, the sermons became noticeably different. They were delivered with more of an authoritative voice, a voice with more fervor. It also seemed that the message in these sermons was uniquely Christian, and that someone of a secular nature would have little if anything to gain from listening to them. One of my friends described him as more of a "fire and brimstone" preacher than the first pastor had been.

One Friday night, this pastor used a Native American folk story to illustrate a point. At the time, I was a bit annoyed that he had gotten some of the wording wrong. (If this seems a bit anal to you, you should know that I suffer from Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.) Afterwords, I told him that he had gotten some of the wording wrong. He chuckled and waved it off with "It's just a legend. The wording doesn't matter." I walked off, a bit more annoyed than I had been because of his comment. The irony of the entire situation didn't occur to me until a week or so ago.

First, the Native American oral tradition is a very important one. For centuries, the oral tradition was the only way that the Native Americans had to pass their creation myths, legends, and fables on to the next generation. I have no doubt that they took it very seriously, including the exact wording of these stories. I am not saying that these stories did not change; they undoubtedly did over the centuries, even if only a little bit.

Second, is it really appropriate for a member of the Christian faith to use a Native American story to illustrate a point? I'm talking about a religion that actively tried to convert the indigenous peoples of North America, tried to destroy their culture, and herded them on to reservations so more land would be available for European settlement. Not to mention residential schooling, an issue that is still being dealt with by the government today. I do not think that it is appropriate for an evangelical Christian to use a Native American parable to perpetuate their faith's goals.

Third, the irony! It's only a story and the wording doesn't matter? I wish you would apply that reasoning to your own faith! There are hundreds of contradictions in the Bible and the Bible has been translated countless times, after being passed down orally for generations! I would say something to the effect of "It's the message, not the details that matter" but the Bible has so many contradictions and some of Christianity's central beliefs are so cruel that they are tantamount to abuse!

Now you might expect me to warn people about thinking about what they say before they say it, lest it reflect badly upon them. I'm not going to say that. It serves as a warning to the rest of us.

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."

-Isaac Asimov

Chuck Norris Has Lost All My Respect and Adoration.

I did intend to make this post about my trip to Europe, but through the glory that is Nick Gisburne's website, I found my way to Objective: Ministries. I will now, for your pleasure, create a list of humourous things (or at least things that I find humourous) that I have found on the website.

1. They claim that the Internet was created by the United States of America, that the United States of America is a Christian nation, and that it is their Internet.

2. They have a section on "Evolutionist Propaganda," a section entitled "Those Wacky Evolutionists," and use a racial slur: "Chinamen."

3. Their "Mall Missions" section is too large for me to give a full account. At one point, they draw conclusion about the names of various retail stores. Here's my favorite bit, describing teenagers: "Called "Mall Rats" in their nihilistic Secular culture, they can often be found hanging around malls after public school doing nothing constructive."

4. Their "Anti-Occult" section. Again, this is too large for a full account. It has an image of druids performing a ceremony in front of a tree. The caption reads: "Typical Druid coven sacrificing a human to a tree." I recommend that you listen to their recording of a druid ceremony for additional hilarity.

5. Their "4 Kidz" [sic] section. My favorites are "Habu's Corner" which is nothing but a testimony to ignorance (Hindus are henotheistic, not polytheistic) and "Spiritual Safety Tip" which provides information on what a child should do if they encounter an atheist. Go ahead, click on Mr. Gruff's head! He's right about one thing: "Coffee's the only thing that gives me solace!"

6. Their online store features clothing with images of a laughing Jesus with the caption LOL (Love Our Lord.) Unfortunately, this includes a thong with a laughing Jesus conveniently missing the "LOL: Love Our Lord." NOW I know why Jesus is laughing.

7. The banner ads. Here are some highlights:

-One of those banner Flash games where you need to hit something. You need to hit a "beatnik atheist" carrying a sign reading "I hate God" with a Bible. The prize? A free Bible, how unimaginative.

-A National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools ad featuring Chuck Norris as a spokesman. Chuck Norris, you have just lost all my respect. ...Please don't kill me.

-"Armor of God" Pajamas. This doesn't need explaining.

-I'm just going to quote this one: "The Presidential Prayer Team For Kids. Hey kids! President Bush needs your prayers!" The Hell he does.

-"Bible Bar: Contains the eight foods of Deuteronomy 8:8"

-"His Essence: Candles that smell like our Lord."

-"Useabeliever.com: Because I don't want my money supporting non-Christians." I didn't know that Christians had their own Yellow Pages.

-Biblical Action Figures. Enough said.

-An ad for the Christian Hackers Association reading: "JESUS IS L33T3R THAN NEO" or "GOD HAS UNIVERSAL ROOT."

-"Have you seen pornography on the Internet? It is illegal to distribute obscene material over the Internet. make a report!" Bullsh*t. The Internet is an unregulated medium for the transfer of information.

-"Did you know that Pat Robertson can leg press 2000 pounds? How does he do it?" [insane laughter] Apparently he uses protein shakes.

-An ad that in part reads "Fact: Being gay takes 30 years off your life! That's not cool..." That's also not true, fundie.

-I can't read the banner ad for this one, so here's the website.

-An ad for 1-in-3 Trinity Christian Energy Drink. "Refuel your Faith!"

-"Straight Pride [Trade Mark]. Show your pride, get a bride! Got a womb? Get a groom!" I can't wait to hear the feminists rage about this one.

-"Works Through Faith: W.T.F. Ministries." I don't need to explain this, do I?

-"Larry Dye, The Creation Guy!" How bad is it when you need to parody a name that's lame to begin with? (All apologies to Bill Nye, The Science Guy. We know you're awesome.)

-An ad for Fight the Good Fight Ministries. It has the caption "Satan wants your children!" with a pair of blond lesbians kissing. I'm sold.

-This ad features a gun pointed at the reader with the caption "Evolutionists want to murder you. You are just an animal to them."

-"Book 22: Intimacy products for married couples." It's a reference to the Song of Solomon. I admit, I don't think I've ever heard of a sex store catering specifically to Christians before. After taking a look at their merchandise, I don't think that (their) God would approve.

Peace out, readers. The Muse is stopping here.