I’ve been hearing a lot of propaganda recently — people making claims about atheists not believing in anything, not being caring people, and having no basis for morality. These are all vicious lies.
There is only one thing you can say about atheists: They don’t believe in any gods.
That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less. Other than that, they’re exactly like everyone else. That is to say, they’re all different, and you can’t put any other labels on people who are atheists without being wrong. You can’t even say that they claim there are no gods. Some say there absolutely aren’t any, and some say there certainly could be — just that there isn’t any evidence which convinces them that they do.
Look at it this way: Let’s say there was a word for people who don’t believe in the Tooth Fairy. Is there anything you could possibly say about all of them? No. You wouldn’t say that they’re better or worse parents, that they worship Satan, or that they all hate broccoli. You can only say that they don’t believe in the Tooth Fairy. Same goes for atheists.
In fact, atheist shouldn’t even be a word. It’s just a default state of all people. Everyone is an atheist until someone convinces them to believe in a god. The only reason such a word exists is because so many people are theists that a term was considered useful to identify those who do not accept a certain human-invented concept.
That’s really all there is to it. If anyone says differently, they have an agenda and are willing to lie to promote it. Take no claims at face value — look into the facts yourself before you accept something about a group of people and use it to judge them.
Finally, another podcast after a long stretch of only writing. More to follow soon.
Arguing with Theists, in mp3 format.
A common complaint among religious apologists is that quotes from the bible or other religious texts are taken out of context, and as such are unfairly scrutinized. If you ever hear that, pay close attention to the fact that they do not then provide the quotation and its full context as evidence.
For example, in Genesis, chapter 19, verse 8, Lot (who was chosen by God to be saved from the destruction of Sodom for his virtue) tells the men of Sodom to take his two virgin daughters and do to them what is good in their eyes. By the way, the context is that the men surrounded his house and demanded to have his male guests sent out to be raped. Lot responds by offering them his virgin daughters instead.
Shortly thereafter (chapter 19 verse 26), Lot’s wife is destroyed by God by being turned into a pillar of salt for the crime of looking behind her to witness God’s punishment (raining down fire and brimstone on the city). So here we have a bible story which describes how a man seen worthy of personal assistance from God himself offers his daughters out for gang rape, yet his wife is killed for simply looking behind her.
How many people who claim to believe the bible is the word of God have actually read this? The intellectual dishonesty of those who would seek to defend this story just boggles my mind. If you’re starting from the position that the bible is true and then try to find a way to prove that against any argument, you’re not thinking properly. The way rational people decide what is true is to look at the evidence and decide the result. Religious apologists decide on a result and dismiss or accept evidence based upon whether it supports their presupposition.
One of the many ways religion persists in our society is by teaching it to children when they are still accepting most things told to them by their elders as truth without thinking for themselves. This is obvious in public schools, where religious groups are fighting to get “intelligent design” (another term for “creationism”), and abstinence-only sex education taught as though they were valid.
Abstinence-only sex education has been proven to cause more unsafe sexual practices, resulting in more unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. How so? Well, it would seem that sexual appetites are perfectly natural in human beings, and most of us will eventually give in and find a willing partner. However, those who have been kept intentionally ignorant about contraception and disease prevention will not be equipped to make mature decisions about their sexual activities. You see, once you teach someone that they just shouldn’t have sex at all, there’s no need to educate them about preventing unwanted pregnancy and the spread of disease.
But in the twisted logic of the theist mind, telling someone “Don’t do this, but if you do, here’s how to protect yourself” is basically the same thing as telling them they can do it. Even so, shouldn’t they be teaching them about these things in preparation for “authorized” sex inside a marriage? Apparently they don’t think so. You see, disease shouldn’t be an issue for monogamous couples, and most religions touting abstinence-only also believe that sex is for procreation, and “birth control” is a sin against God. Basically, having sex because it feels good is sinful, and you should go through life feeling guilty for your natural desires.
So, boys and girls, today’s lesson is that if a group is pushing an agenda which discourages people from thinking and intentionally withholds information, that group is very naughty and should be exposed and ridiculed until they stop their foolish and harmful behavior.
You are more intelligent than people around you realize. You often wonder how the people around you can miss some things you think are simply obvious. Of course, you aren’t perfect either; but you don’t have much to improve. All you need to do is to periodically inspect one of your long-held opinions or beliefs, and figure out how you came to carry it around with you. Those which you dismiss after objective thought will each be one more obvious truth you realize that others do not. Keep up the good work!
A false dichotomy is when a person argues than since one thing isn’t true, another must be. A common example is the creationist who says “This world couldn’t have happened by accident, therefore God did it.” The main problem with this is that they are narrowing the possibilities down to exactly two. That frees them up to ignore the infinite number of other possibilities. How about “the earth was created by an invisible pink unicorn”? Now there are three options represented.
There is only one right answer to questions such as “How old is the earth?” and “Is there a god?” Maybe we don’t know all the answers today, but ruling out one possibility only narrows down the options; it doesn’t prove anything.
So how can we consider anything to be reasonably true, since we obviously can’t even think of, much less disprove, infinite possibilities for everything? We can’t believe nothing, or we wouldn’t be able to live our lives. Here is how it’s done: We take the best explanation we have so far and test it by trying to prove it’s not true. If we can’t prove it’s not true, then we use it for the time being — until we find something better. By this method, we are able to do the best we can in the present.
The important thing is that we’re willing to change our minds if our current ideas are shown to be false. Doing so is the scientific method. Not doing so is religion.
People seem to have the impression that atheists are all angry, and have become atheists because they feel wronged by their religion. Perhaps they have been led astray by false information and could benefit from learning more about god. A great book, “Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist
” shows that this is not the case. Dan Barker was a missionary, a preacher, and a musician who wrote Christian-themed songs and plays. He learned Spanish and traveled through Mexico preaching the Christian faith. Dan knows the bible very well, and felt that winning souls for Jesus and sharing God’s word were positive, uplifting experiences for him while he was a preacher.
However, being exposed to other ideas, including philosophic and scientific ideas triggered his curiosity. Of course, he wasn’t seeking to leave the faith he loved — he just loved learning as well. Over time, the knowledge he gained made him question his faith and, over a long, painful process, lose it entirely.
The book is captivating. If you want an honest account of a change from theist to atheist, this book is a fantastic read. In some ways, my own story is similar to Dan’s, although I was never a preacher — just a strong believer. But parallels to the path many atheists have traveled will be found in Dan Barker’s story, and we can all only benefit if we learn to understand one another better.
Everybody thinks they’re a good driver. Consider your daily driving experiences and you’ll know that this is not true. Given that, I’d like to offer two tips which will help you and the driver behind you keep your blood pressure down a little.
1. If the guy behind you wants to go faster than you do, and you are in the left lane, move over. You are probably backing up traffic for miles, and should have your license revoked.
2. Watch cars and upcoming lights. If there’s any indication you may have to slow down in the near future, lay off the gas. You shouldn’t have to use your brakes very much unless you’re stopping. Also, this will save you money on gas and brake pad replacements.
I have driven for a living and I currently drive 100 miles a day on my commute. I drive to two neighboring states on a regular basis. It constantly boggles my mind to see people driving, the only reason for which must be that they have a destination, yet they don’t seem to really care when they get there. And the other guy is the over-aggressive driver, who accelerates until he has to hit his brakes, then repeats that process until he gets to work. Both are functioning on cognitive levels I can’t fathom.
Drive safely, wear your seatbelt, use your turn signals, and remember that merging requires acceleration, not coming to a dead stop and then trying to figure out how to get into the 60 mph traffic zooming by.
It is a sad day, as the world learns that we have lost a skeptic who did so much for us all. Perry DeAngelis, the inspiration for the creation of the New England Skeptical Society, powerful presence on the Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe, and stubborn independent thinker has left us, way too young.
Let’s honor his memory by redoubling our efforts for skepticism in this world. I have nothing more to say about this. It’s too sad.
Digging around on my computer this evening resulted in me posting my first video on YouTube. Enjoy.
