ExChristian.Net -- encouraging ex-Christians

Why They Want You to Marry Young

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Thu, 16 May 2013 15:16:20 PDT

By RaLeah ~

It's getting trendy for conservatives and Christians now to speak out about the virtues of marrying young and starting a family early.

In the church where I grew up, this was the norm rather than the exception. I thought it was probably because the church was very vocal about condemning sex before marriage, and so people got married to the first person who stirred their lustful thoughts.

Now I'm not so sure.

It was true that the people who didn't get married and start a family young were the most likely to leave the church. I thought at the time that they couldn't find any suitable mates left, so they were looking elsewhere. Maybe they felt bitter at God for not giving them a spouse, so they left in an act of rebellious discontent.

I don't think that's the case either.

I chose not to get married young, because I felt I still had a lot of growing to do. I had to get to know myself first before I brought someone else into the equation. I knew I had a lot of questions about God and the Bible that needed answering before I could commit myself to another person.

But the peer pressure was there, and it was enormous. They want you to stay like them, but to me, it started looking like a trap.

What if I had married and had children and took them to church... and THEN I realized I wanted to change my religion or give it up altogether? I would be "unequally yoked" with my spouse, and I'd have to tell the kids that everything I'd taught them about God I no longer believed. It would break their trust, maybe even break the home. But if I kept silent, unwilling to risk my marriage and my kid's faith, I would be letting them down. If they found out as adults I'd lied all along about my faith, they would feel betrayed. The only choice left would be to close my mind tight and keep it closed.

In short, I would be trapped: Be true to myself, risk my family's happiness. Live a lie, keep my family blissfully ignorant.

For most of us, our late teens and early twenties are all about self-discovery, learning about who we are and what we believe and what we want to be. I started noticing the people who married young slowed their progress, and some froze it altogether. They couldn't bear to change their minds with independent thought now that they were making joint decisions that would have a direct impact on the people who they cared about the most--their own family.

So we hear about Mitt Romney giving advice to college kids to marry young and have "a quiver full of kids."

But I feel grateful every day that I didn't.

Many of those who married young ended up splitting after the kids were grown up. They couldn't stop their inevitable questioning, their growing, only delay it. They realized they didn't have so much in common after all, not after they became fully mature adults. Some stayed in their stale or unhappy marriages because their church frowns on divorce. Some of them got lucky and grew in the same direction as their spouse. Some remained stunted in their growth, living in a forced state of denial.

I waited until I knew myself, waited until my career was established in the city of my own choosing, waited until I met the right person whose beliefs were like mine. We both had the opportunity to date other people first, to figure out what we did and didn't want in a mate, and brought our maturity and experience into our happy relationship. We're now more emotionally and financially ready to start a family than we ever could have been in our twenties. (And we don't want a "quiver full" of kids, just one or two.)

To each his own, but amid all the endorsements for early marriage, I just wanted to add my own endorsement for waiting: Find a mate who supports and appreciates your open mind and allows you to keep growing and evolving. Find someone who is honest and kind, and support their growth too. While this will not guarantee you won't grow in different directions, if you treat each other with love, kindness, and respect, even a divorce can be an amicable opportunity for growth... for both of you. But statistics show that those who marry later are more likely to stay married, and that's my hope for my husband and me.

Instead of constantly reinforced stagnation holding us back, life is a beautiful adventure we celebrate together, free to be our truest selves all along the way.

Clouds in My Coffee

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Tue, 14 May 2013 01:56:40 PDT

By SP ~

When I wrote my extimony about taking the road less traveled, the weight that lifted off my shoulders was indescribable, yet short lived. I soon realized that, not only did I need to de-convert in two steps: first from Mormonism, then from Christianity, but I found I had to deal with the aftermath first as a human, then as a woman. The woman part is proving to be the most difficult because it is on such a vulnerable, personal level. Needless to say, as a stay-at-mom my entire adult life, I put all of my eggs in one basket. My dreams and aspirations did not start out that way, however.

First, a little background; I was lucky to grow up in the seventies. My dad was in the military so I was able to live in a neighborhood with other army brats, as we were endearingly called. Everything a kid ever needed was within running distance and we ran all day until our sides hurt, playing kick ball in the streets until our moms called our names as the sun went down. We swam, rode our bikes in packs, made up plays for our parents, held block parties, played wall ball and hunted for crawdads and frogs. This was heaven to me, to have such autonomy. Even as I had a slew of friends to play with, I also valued being alone because I had a curious and imaginative mind that wondered from interest to interest. Somehow, too, I was aware of growing up at the cusp of feminism and being among the first little girls who were free to dream of being anything they wanted to be when they grew up, rather than being limited to a few roles assigned to them by society.

I ran with it too. I wanted to do and be many things. My earliest memory was to join the Peace Corp so I could help the “poor people overseas” as my dad would say. Then, as I dug for dinosaur bones in the school sand pit, I dreamed of being an archeologist in some faraway land. Then, for a brief time, I wanted to be a ballerina, until I got tired of my teacher telling me to tuck my butt in. Of course, I wanted to fit artist and poet into my life; I could have plenty of time to think up poems and stop to take pictures of landscapes to paint as I traveled around the country in my semi-truck, talking on my CB radio and sleeping in my cuddly little cab (I got this idea from a popular song). The list goes on an on.

The thing is, never did I play with dolls or play house or dream of meeting Mr. Right and being whisked off into the sunset after a dream wedding. Of course, there were some random, awkward moments and conflicts in my childhood, along with disconnected notions and questions but, for the most part, my childhood was as close to an unadulterated “me” as possible, with little interference from religious influences. At age five, however, I was introduced to God by my babysitter. My dad was away at Viet Nam and I remember her tucking me in and teaching me how to pray. It was the first time the idea of God entered my mind and it was like a whole other world had opened up. I had another father somewhere, looking out for me! I remember a feeling of sheer delight sweeping over me and, as she left the room and I closed my eyes, I imagined stuffing my pillow case with hugs and kisses, then closing it up and sending it, like a balloon, up to God. I even pictured him being smothered by my love upon opening my present.

Other than attending a bible class for children here and there, however, I never routinely went to any church from then until I was about seven, when I asked my mom which church we belonged to. Not only did I find out I was Mormon (whatever that was) but imagine, what I thought was, my good fortune upon discovering I had only to walk a few houses down, in either direction, to go to all of my various meetings! Over time, however, the person who had the freedom to develop naturally began to be snuffed out and replaced by the expectations of others. I did not think of it until recently but, part of the reasoning behind my teenage quest to find out if the church was true and if God were real had to do with my own unsureness over what kind of woman I wanted, or needed, to be. In other words, I was confused.

Now, I am not saying that I chose wrong to have the family I have now, nor will I admit that any of the struggles in my life were not worth their merit. No! I would not change any of that, nor do I regret any moment spent with my husband and children. What I do regret was how I felt about myself along the way and what I was willing to accept in my life from others, no matter who they were. That recognition hit me smack in my face even as I was basking in the light of my deconversion. I felt like a snail that had slowly climbed a wall, only to be knocked down; I knew I had to start all over again. So, I recoiled and gave myself some time to think about what that awareness meant for me and what I intended to do about it.

Luckily, even as it was painful to comprehend that the world I had constructed with my family was based on some traditional standards that weren’t working for any of us, my family was open-minded enough to allow us grow together. Also, just as it took time and effort for me to deconstruct the imaginary world of a God/spirit family, I am learning to push the limits of who I am as a whole person. Perhaps the reason I did not dream of a family when I was a little girl was because I naturally did not think in terms of other people completing me. Somehow, I felt enough within myself. Although we all need one other to get along in this world, there is a certain amount of independence we all need to achieve first, on a personal level, to be able to coexist interdependently with each other, in healthy ways.

Now, I know that that little girl did not leave me entirely, even as I needed to grow up. Also, somehow, I was able to do most of the things on my list, to one degree or another, along with many others I never imagined. Perhaps that is a perk to being a mom because, as I helped and watched my family grow, I did too. Even so, I am starting to see that I was lucky to learn how to comfort myself at an early age because now, that is helping me to push through what is uncomfortable to get to what is real, to fix what is broken and to keep what is of value. I am thankful, too, for that foundational freedom I enjoyed to dream to my hearts content, uninhibited by the expectations and agendas of others: to see clearly, to drink coffee.

Got Jesus?. Who need's enemies?.

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sun, 12 May 2013 07:22:13 PDT

By Hellspeak ~

You're a new Christian. You've been searching for meaning in life, and are convinced you have found it in Christ Jesus. You've said the sinner's prayer, been convicted for the crime of being human, and experienced the pang's of white hot guilt. But a new hope has welled up from inside you, you've had your conversion experience, and are now on fire for God.

Now the testing will begin... the refining. You use to follow the dictates of your nature, your inner self, that used to guide you, but now you aspire to submit to a God/Man. A being, that you have never physically met in this life and never will. A man, that you will attempt to have a relationship with, and your only means of attaining this will be in your mind. How you will feel about him, will depend on how you think, as how you think, is how you feel. You will be taught, that to draw near to the thought ideal of who and what Christ is to you, you must lose yourself to find him. You must forfeit, as much of yourself as possible, to rip out and reject "you". You are now your own enemy, at odds with who you are, as you war with your nature, your humanity. Set down a path of self-loathing, yearning and struggling for impossible perfection, that will never come.

As you battle your personal war with yourself, new enemies will be converging en mass, enemies of the Satanic kind, thought enemies, invisible, ancient, and extremely powerful.

Ephesians: 6:12 "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against wickedness in high places."

By joining Christ's army, you have attracted the attention, and sounded the alarm. Droves of spirit being's, of hive mind, with singular purpose, licking at your heel's in hot pursuit, lusting for your destruction. A swirling mass of hatred, poised to strike your mind in the phased spirit realm. Penetrating claws, and gruesome appendages, infecting/injecting all manner of polluting thoughts. To entice, torment, deceive and divide, with the intent to turn you away from light to dark. There will never be a moment, awake or at rest free of these immortal malicious beings. Your only weapons in your defense, will be words, and words in this worldview speak louder than actions, and always will.

Droves of spirit being's, of hive mind, with singular purpose, licking at your heel's in hot pursuit, lusting for your destruction.We fragile beings of mostly water, with short lifespans and susceptible to a myriad of disease's, and riddled with error, are the plaything's, pawn's and trophies of God's. This is the meaning of life, there is no "grey area". It is simply, a battle between two power being's competing for soul's. The stress caused, by the warring factions on believer's minds, could be enough to tear their sanity to shred's.

Not only do you have the pressure and challenges of life to survive, and your salvation to work out, you have Satan/demon's and God to contend with. These demon's who speak through others, to discourage you, taunt you, break you, and make you say things that you never meant to say. Tempt you with vice, and lead you astray. And God allows it, to test you, refine you. To see if you're worthy enough, for his protection (His armor) and his love.

In all your interactions, from now on with everyone you meet...they could be under demonic influence. Be hyper-vigilant , have your spiritual radar (discernment) activated and on red alert!, probing others intentions, overly reading between the lines. Who do you trust?, trust no one, not even yourself.

To imagine this as reality is just astounding, and absolutely revolting. An insult to the very essence of life. These are the things of terror, delusion, and paranoia. This is not love, this is fear and control. Not spiritual, but psychological warfare perfected.

Maybe it was all too much for even God, in his human form too handle. The God/Man's death on the cross was his escape back to where things make sense. This world, is so much chaos and disappointment. Leaving but a ghost behind, to haunt with the false hope...of letting us follow.

What Christianity and Kink Have in Common

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 11 May 2013 11:53:04 PDT

By Valerie Tarico ~

Want a special someone who will bring you to your knees? One who will be totally in charge? One who will tell you that you are really, really bad and threaten you with punishments? Maybe you have a little day dream about being a captive virgin. Or maybe you prefer to fantasize about a man who is helpless, who, say, has his arms secured to a crossbeam. Christianity has something for everyone.

I’m not the first person to observe that religious and sexual ecstasy have a lot in common—or that the love songs Christians croon to Jesus sound remarkably like other love songs. Nor am I the first to point out that Christian ministers, musicians, and recruiters play with this blurry boundary deliberately. Tim Tebow posing as sexy Jesus-on-the-cross for GQ kind of says it all. As if there weren’t enough Christian girls and boys struggling with Jesus fantasies already. (here, here, here)

Early pagan religions incorporated sexuality explicitly into religious practice, for example, in the form of temple prostitutes or fertility rites or sacred sexuality. Some Dharmic traditions, like tantric Buddhism, continue to do so today. Given the power of religion to arouse and exploit sexual energy, it should come as no surprise that sacred sexuality takes a wide variety of forms—or that, despite an overt attempt by the Abrahamic traditions to constrain and control sexuality, these traditions also make use of the very same urges they seek to suppress.

One offshoot of the religion-sensuality-sexuality nexus that doesn’t get talked about much is the relationship between Christianity and kink. On the surface, the two couldn’t appear more different. Christianity has often advocated abstinence or sex exclusively for procreation, as a means to propagate the religion itself, while kink is about consensual pleasuring limited only by an agreement between the individuals involved. Christianity can be thought of as seeking to sublimate, or redirect, sexual passion, while kink tries to enhance it. Christianity claims to be about the end game, while kink often is about the moment. Christianity is deadly serious, while kink commonly is framed as playful. Christianity is a multi-billion dollar, multi-billion member, multi-national enterprise, while kink is a small counter culture without revenue and membership goals.

But just beneath the surface both communities may be leveraging a similar set of human instincts and emotions. I am not suggesting that Christianity is all about sexual arousal, even sublimated or redirected sexual arousal, though that most certainly is a part of the picture. I am suggesting that kink and Christianity appear to tap an overlapping array of social and psychological impulses that include sexual arousal, moral emotions like shame and disgust, our tendency to seek hierarchy, our desire to escape rationality, our heightened sensory acuity in the presence of emotional arousal, and our tendency to take every pleasure to its extreme. In all of these, the themes of dominance and submission, inflicting pain, and receiving pain, have parts to play.

Pleasure and Pain: In the past five hundred years, few Christian writers have described the relationship between pain and pleasure as graphically as St. Teresa of Avila, whose sixteenth century vision of mystical union with God drips with sexuality:

In his hands I saw a long golden spear and at the end of the iron tip I seemed to see a point of fire. With this he seemed to pierce my heart several times so that it penetrated to my entrails. When he drew it out, I thought he was drawing them out with it and he left me completely afire with a great love for God. The pain was so sharp that it made me utter several moans; and so excessive was the sweetness caused me by the intense pain that one can never wish to lose it, nor will one's soul be content with anything less than God.

Still today, in some Christian traditions, pain and religious passion go hand in hand. Mother Theresa is quoted as saying that love isn’t real unless it hurts. In one anecdote, she tells a suffering woman that her pain is the kiss of Jesus. The nuns of Mother Teresa’s order, the Missionaries of Charity, have practiced self-mortification techniques including striking their legs with rope and wearing a spiked chain called a cilice. Dan Brown’s thriller, The DaVinci Code was a wild fantasy, but the mortification practices of the order Opus Dei are real.

The Bible’s naughty bits have been staples for generations of teenage boys stuck in church.With or without the erotic overtones, pain appears to heighten some spiritual experiences through several mechanisms. Self-inflicted pain or voluntary submission to pain can be proof of commitment, as in gang initiations. It may offer relief from guilt or anxiety or self-loathing, like self-cutting does for many depressed girls. It may produce an endorphin release as when runners and rowers push past a pain threshold. It may intensify focus on the present moment by causing distractions to recede into the background, like pinching oneself can do. It may offer a mesmerizing rhythm of sensation, as in head banging. The point isn’t that Christian penance and self-mortification are always or even usually erotic—they aren’t—but that both Christianity and kink can use pain as sensory enhancers.

Bondage and slavery: The Bible has its share of stories about master-slave relations and other funky sex—starting with Adam who sleeps with his female clone; and Abraham who has sex with his half-sister/ wife Sarah as well as her slave; and Lot’s daughters, who after being offered to a rabbling mob get their father drunk so they can conceive by him. Then there’s the temptress, Delilah, who ties Samson up and finally saps his strength by cutting of his hair after their time together; and we can’t forget Solomon with his 700 wives and 300 concubines or sex slaves. (It wasn’t violence alone that got the Bible reviewed by Hong Kong’s media regulators.) Some people were shocked by all of the humping in Robert Crumb’s illustrated version of Genesis, but the Bible’s naughty bits have been staples for generations of teenage boys stuck in church.

Of course a key difference between these stories and modern sexuality is that dominance in kink is dictated by preference rather than gender. Also, both ethics and law dictate that BDSM actions require the enthusiastic consent of both parties, which definitely is not the case in the Bible stories. Fortunately most scholars think of the Bible stories as either mythologized history or historicized mythology rather than a factual record of events. Also fortunately, (as Greta Christina pointed out in the introduction to her kinky novella, Bending) most people who enjoy fictional violence or coercion—murder mysteries, spy novels, rape fantasies, or sexual slavery—would not seek or enjoy the same experiences in real life.

When it comes to bondage, perhaps the most common stimulus in the Christian tradition is the crucifixion itself, with its glorified, beatific images of Jesus hanging and swooning, eyes half lidded. The crucified Jesus is almost never depicted as a short, ordinary looking Semite. Instead, whether Caucasian, Middle Eastern, or Black, he is usually lanky and well-muscled with perfect skin and a face that fits some artist’s version of male beauty. Small wonder Tim Tebow slipped so easily into the pose.

Discipline: Articles and forums devoted to “Christian domestic discipline” couch the practice in spiritual or religious terms: Wife spanking, like child spanking, is a means of maintaining the hierarchy that God established, with a man on top and wife as his “helpmeet.” Proponents are careful to distinguish their approach from secular kink, which they disparage. They establish a proper biblical context with texts like this one from the book of Hebrews: “Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.” Domestic discipline is described as a means to fend off, “this unholy culture, with its radically selfish feminism, and wholesale bias against true manhood, [which] launches relentless attacks against traditional Christian family values,” and it is recommended for serious offenses such as “the four D’s” (Disobedience, Disrespect, Dishonesty or Dangerous behavior).

Pious protestations aside, Christian wife spanking is clearly erotic. If it were not, why is it practiced in the bedroom, on a woman’s bare bottom? Why not have the preacher do the spanking? In fact, why not have the preacher spank men when they are bad? Of course, penance or punishment need not be routinely sexual. Punishing or being punished may have its own satisfactions, for example, as a way of wiping the slate clean or asserting hierarchy. Punishment also can be simply a form of abuse or self-abuse. As we know, moral emotions like shame, guilt and righteous indignation can be channeled in many directions toward many ends.

Dominance and Submission:One BDSM website for Christians suggests that, “A BDSM relationship between a dominant husband and submissive wife is actually the ideal of marriage set out in Ephesians 5:22-26 taken to its logical conclusion.” The author of Ephesians had this to say:

Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

While few Christian couples own gags or restraints, a great many believe that God ordained a hierarchical relationship between women and men, and that this extends to the marriage bed. Women, in this view, were made from Adam’s rib and caused sin to enter the world, and so should not be allowed positions of authority in the church or home. In the words of the New Testament, “It is shameful for a woman to speak in church. Wives should regard their husbands as they regard the Lord. Women are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate” (I Corinthians 14:33-35). This theology of “male headship” teaches that a woman’s greatest glory lies in bearing children and serving her husband. Protestant reformer Martin Luther put it bluntly: “If a woman dies from childbearing, it matters not; she is there to do it.”

Obviously this kind of relationship hierarchy and female servility can exist independent of male sexual dominance and female submission. Similarly, sexual hierarchy can exist in a more egalitarian relationship. Consequently, in any given Christian relationship, “Wives submit to your husbands” may or may not be given a sexual interpretation.

Either way, because humans are hierarchical social animals, dominance and submission may produce their own feelings of gratification. We’ve all heard that Islam means submission, literally. But submission is a pervasive theme in the Christian Bible as well. Children submit to their parents; women submit to men; slaves submit to their masters; and men submit to God, who, in many passages, is modeled on a Near-Eastern warlord. For modern born-again believers, conversion is often experienced as sweet surrender to the irresistible Divine will. In each of these asymmetric relationships, the person on the bottom gets excused from certain responsibilities, while person on the top gets power and authority. As observation of non-human primates suggests, there are privileges and obligations of each role in a hierarchy, whether dominant or subordinate.

Biblically and historically, within human society these privileges and obligations extend to the sexual domain—with men giving daughters in marriage, housing concubines, and claiming war captives. Females are, essentially, male property. (In no place does the Bible state or imply that a woman’s consent is needed before sex, and in fact nonconsensual asymmetric sex is routinely sanctioned or blessed.) In other words, within a modern context of mutual adult consent and role playing, BDSM experiments with aspects of sexuality that were non-consensual, non-playful parts of the Iron Age cultural fabric from which Christianity emerged. Whether either Christianity or BDSM is good for society or good for the people involved, I leave for you to decide. (A biblical rule of thumb might suggest that the consequences are what matters: “by their fruits you shall know them.”)

Bible believers often claim that they are a moral beacon to the world, a “light shining on a hill.” In particular many look with disgust on the curious, open sexuality of modern society. A closer look might suggest that their claims of superiority are unwarranted, that—just like the rest of us—they are complicated creatures whose spiritual and sexual practices are driven by an array of motives and instincts. Do Christian teachings and practice simply draw on the same aspects of human psychology and physiology as kink or do they actually lay groundwork for BDSM sexuality? I know of no research that attempts to tease this apart. But given the overlap, maybe someone should find out.

Related:

Jesus loves Me. He Can’t have a wife!

Captive Virgins, Polygamy, Sex Slaves: What Marriage Would Look Like if We Actually Followed the Bible

What the Bible Says About Rape and Rape Babies

Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author of Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light and Deas and Other Imaginings, and the founder of www.WisdomCommons.org. Her articles can be found at Awaypoint.Wordpress.com.

Recoverying from Christianity

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 11 May 2013 11:38:48 PDT

By JC Wells ~

As a recovering Christian-aholic, I must say that I am glad I stumbled onto this site. There are some great posts on here. As one who was wrapped up in Bible theology with no way out, I have found great freedom in studying the Bible and making well-informed and educated decisions about its lack of truth.

Christianity is a very dizzy ride indeed. It is a ride that involves carrots on a stick, whips at your back, and future promises of blissful states that are never realized. The real addiction of Christianity is the "good" parts of the Bible that all churches cherry pick for their own self-aggrandizement. Lessons about love, peace, kindness, and gentleness can be gleamed from the Bible. But so too can it be gleamed from every religion or philosophy book on earth. But grabbing morsels of truth from the Bible is like trying to drink pure water out of a septic tank. It doesn't work. Here's why.(Don't worry; I will not explain why drinking water cannot come from a septic tank.)

Getting truth out of a book from a god that promotes slavery, genocide, rapine, and the righteous act of stoning disobedient children is insane. This is why atheists and agnostics will battle the Christian religion till they have conquered it.

This Yahweh is a scourge and an embarrassment to any well meaning person, which is another reason why free thinkers have a difficult time showing respect to those who are steeped in their Christian religion.

And I know there are those that will say, "Well, you are going back to the Old Testament. We are now under the New Testament." Did God change his moral character in the New Testament? I mean, after all, he is the same God yesterday, today, and forever.

In the Old Testament and New, his rage and utter disrespect for humanity is made plain for all to see. So instead of apologizing for his Hitler like actions he supposedly sends this son of his to make amends. He is supposedly the creator of the whole universe and not one time does he say, "I am so sorry that I told my children to murder millions of people in Canaan." He not one time says, "Slavery is an utter sin against humanity and it must stop now!!!!!" And yet this guy claims to be the prince of peace; the God of love; the one and only.

This great God also created a special place of everlasting torment for those of us that think. Yes, we think. And we think that this god is not real. And if he is real we wouldn't follow him anyway, anymore than we would follow Mau, Hitler, or Stalin. If anything, we will all get an award for turning away from Christianity and thinking.

Stuck in the Moment - or How Religion Can Froze Your Mind

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Thu, 16 May 2013 15:17:21 PDT

By Doubting Thomas ~

I hope that somehow I will resist all religious lures and have courage to say what I truly believe in to all fundamentalist without any fear or insecurity, hiding behind my progressive/liberal religion.

“You’ve got stuck in a moment, and now you can’t get out of it”.

These lyrics from U2 song maybe describe what I feel like since I’ve started to think on my religious view in last couple of years.

I have never been a religious person in real sense of that word. I have always looked upon religious claims as some kind of symbolic messages and metaphors. Despite the fact I love to say a prayer in a silent and empty church, I have never liked crowded Sunday services and to pious believers. By the way, I live in Croatia which in the last decade has passed through some kind of re-traditionalizing process thanks to strong Roman Catholic influences, empty nationalism and general aversion toward socialist secularism. Compared to number of inhabitants I think that Croatia has the biggest number of charismatic priests and laymen. I don’t know if that is good or bad, because some of those guys have really frightening stand points which are in some instances simply crazy, and even Catholic Church tries to keep them in line. I have never doubted my religious positions, however thanks to my sensitivity, credulity and stressful changes that happened in my life lately I have arrived to the point where I have to decide where to go next.

My de-conversion or re-conversion process, I still do not realize where it will lead me, started when I heard stories of people who have found Christ in various charismatic movements. Their stories of exorcism, demons, miracles and faith healings have started some kind of negative emotion impulse in my head. They frighten me. What if they are true? I know that their claims can’t face with the scientific scrutiny, but how can they all be explained naturally? I am aware of the hook that is being offered to me. Believe in supernatural, evil can hurt you, but do not worry if you are a practicing Catholic you will be protected – just don’t do what is not part of Catholic Catechism and you will be fine. It is frustrating that this kind of argumentation haunts me for months. It is like a psychological loop. Every time I hear a supernatural story, it causes a negative emotional response in me, and them I struggle to debunk it. That exhausts me. I am aware that I can debunk every supernatural claim made by believers, but their claims always somehow stick to my mind. It’s like try not to think about white bears, and every time you do it they are there.

When looking from rational perspective I know that supernatural claims are unconvincing, but why is my brain so sensitive to them? Only thing that keeps me in this “I do not know what to believe in situation” is my fear. That is what I am sure off. Honestly, I would feel liberated if I could simple discard fundamentalist/charismatic believes. You wouldn’t believe, but there are people here who don’t have Facebook profiles because they believe that someone could bewitch them. That is bat shit crazy, but what if it is true? This kind of reasoning is making me frustrated. When I find myself in this kind of debate I cannot win with rational arguments, because they always have some kind of anecdotal stories that confirm they claims and I loose.

I believe that science still has to say a lot about this world, and that it is the most reliable tool to explain the World where we live in, I still feel like a credulous Cro-Magnon who is hooked on supernaturalism despite all the modern progress made in last couple of hundred years. I hope that somehow I will resist all religious lures and have courage to say what I truly believe in to all fundamentalist without any fear or insecurity, hiding behind my progressive/liberal religion. Alternative frightens me. Who would like to become a fundamentalist?

PS – I hope my English was good enough to read.

The Rejection Notice

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Tue, 14 May 2013 01:54:52 PDT

By WizenedSage (Galen Rose) ~

To: Professor Marjie Mead

From: Referee Committee, “Journal of Earth Anthropology”

Subject: Your article submission titled, “The Earth Bible as Foundation of an Influential Religion”

We have studied your article concerning your recent excavations on Earth with great interest, but we regret to inform you that we have found your evidence unconvincing, and cannot publish your manuscript at this time

Surely you understand that to claim that the Bible was once a foundational document for one or more serious and influential Earth religions requires a very sizable body of compelling evidence. Since the first Bibles were dug up some 200 years ago, it has been widely understood that the contents were created as fiction, intended for instructional and entertainment purposes only.

Yes, as you have noted, it appears to be one of the most numerous books yet found on the Earth, and, yes, it has been found in sizable quantities near the ruins of what some have claimed were “houses of worship.” However, we, the committee, are of the unanimous opinion that Dr. W. Diggins has more than adequately explained these findings in “The Bible as Children’s Entertainment,” Journal of Earth Anthropology, Vol. 314, No. 9 (Sept. 3269).

As Dr. Diggins noted, modern children easily and immediately recognize the stories of the Bible as too far fetched to be anything but entertaining fiction. Surely the adults of the period your excavations are studying - the 21st century - were not more gullible than today’s children. After all, we are speaking of an age that had already discovered and explained the basics of atomic theory, relativity, electromagnetism, the evolution of species, and the accelerating expansion of the universe. Surely we can expect that common citizens of that age, as now, received sufficient science education to tease apart fact from gross fiction.

Also, as has been noted by several researchers, the crucial Biblical theory of the “fall of man” and the subsequent perceived need for a divine redeemer is based entirely on a story about a talking snake and a magical tree! We do not find compelling your sparse evidence that any significant number of adults of the age in question, an age of considerable scientific sophistication, could have believed such a story was actually true.

Lastly, you have failed to show us how any significant fraction of adults of the age in question could have missed the obvious. In Earth excavations of the past 200 years, fragments of numerous so called “holy” books have been discovered, as well as accounts of many other gods. Surely the religions associated with these books and gods could not have been taken seriously by reasonable, sane adults, since nothing of substance could ever have been proved concerning the foundational dogma of any of them. And surely the man in the street understood that. The very fact that hundreds of contradictory religions had been described in the literature of the time, all dependent on preposterous, “super-natural” claims provides overwhelming evidence that religions were never taken seriously as based on historical facts, and were never meant for more than entertainment purposes.

I am sorry that we cannot accept your paper for publication at this time. We will be pleased to entertain a future re-submission, if you can successfully address the weaknesses of your present manuscript that we have outlined above. Thank you.

The Circle of Life

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sun, 12 May 2013 07:23:10 PDT

By Klym ~

After almost five years of deconverting from Christianity, I can now look back and recognize that this religion is totally based on a fear of death. I can remember as a young child being terrified of death---and all because of the doctrine of hell and salvation. Now that I can see it clearly for what it is, and think about it logically and without fear, the whole idea of needing to be "saved" from death just crumbles to dust.

For ancient mankind, the world must have been a very scary place. It's still pretty dang scary today, as a matter of fact. I think that religions sprung up as an attempt to control the uncontrollable. The scariest thing in life IS death, because it takes our loved ones away from us and hurts so deeply that we scramble to make some sort of sense of it. The idea of an afterlife where everything is made right and just then becomes extremely appealing.

This will sound strange to many of you, but it was a defining moment in my life, so I want to share it with you. About seven years ago, I had to put down my sweet, sweet dog named Bear. Bear was a 90 pound hunk of love and light, a black lab mix, and it was killing me to have to end his life. He had gotten to the point where he could no longer swallow or raise himself up to a standing or sitting position. It was difficult to watch him suffer.

I put him in the backseat of my car and was on my way to the vet's office to have him put to sleep. He was hanging his head out the window enjoying the breeze on what would be his last ride in the car. I looked back at him and suddenly, this Bible verse popped into my head: "The wages of sin is death." For the first time ever, I thought, "Wait a minute, Bear has never sinned in his life. So, he SHOULD live forever, right?" (Of course when I shared this epiphany with Christian friends, they said that animals do not have a soul, so that wouldn't apply. To which I thought that if any living being has a soul, it would be a dog---dogs are much nicer than most people.)

Anyway, the epiphany I had that day planted a seed in my already doubting brain that continued to sprout until I am today an atheist. I began to look at the whole Jesus dying for our sins thing in a different light. The salvation/crucifixion story had bugged me since early childhood--the idea of my being so worthless in God's eyes that he had to torture and kill another human being on my behalf never sat well with me.

How different my life would have been if I had been taught that death was natural and nothing to fear.And that brings me to today. I am an educator, so I often read children's books. This past week, a colleague of mine gave me a children's book titled "Lifetimes" by Bryan Mellonie. OH MY GOSH---this has to be the most beautiful book I have ever read about death! I sat in my office at school and cried as I read it. It describes death as a natural, normal part of living. I cried because I thought of all the years I wasted worrying about hell and pleasing god and hoping that I was "good enough" to make it to heaven. I cried for all the children today who are being taught to fear death as I was taught. I wished I could buy a million of these books and send them to every Christian church in the world. (Here's an interesting sidenote: the colleague who gave me the book is a Christian and believes in Jesus as savior!)

I cried because I thought about how different my life would have been if I had been taught that death was natural and nothing to fear; that this life is all we have and that it is up to us to live it to the fullest and to work for justice in the world TODAY---NOT to wait for justice in some fairy-tale afterlife. To go ahead and live fully and freely TODAY---What a life-affirming message!

This tiny book opened a door in my heart and flooded me with gratitude and joy. It tells that all living beings have a lifetime---birds, bugs, humans, trees, etc. It explains that some lifetimes are very very short, and some are long. Some human lives are short because of disease or accidents, some human lives are long, and it's all OKAY. And yet it doesn't minimize death in any way---it just normalizes it. Wow...just wow....

So, we are all part of the ongoing cycle of life, like the movie The Lion King sings about. I know that's an oversimplification, but I think it's a much more positive view of life and the world than the "salvation" view. Now, how can we rid the world of such a destructive view? I'm not sure, but I will try in my own small sphere of influence to teach the normal cycle of life to the next generation. Maybe my small contribution today will make a positive difference in the lives of children tomorrow. It's a start, anyhow.

Waiting for my fall

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 11 May 2013 11:54:23 PDT

By RaLeah ~

It's hard to lose your support system. You can leave behind the church, leave behind the idea of God, but your family... they're always your family.

One of the hardest parts about being an ex-Christian is that those who love you most are still fervently praying and hoping for your return to God. They're convinced you can't live a happy life without Jesus, and that hell will be your final destination if you don't come back into the fold.

We each deal with that knowledge in different ways. Maybe we keep our lack of belief a secret. Or we hint at it gently. Perhaps we're brave enough to state it openly and suffer the consequences.

Why does it have to be so hard?

For me, I know my family is expecting that God is going to somehow either woo me back or send some terrible misfortune into my path that will send me running back. So they pray and they wait. Any day now something bad is sure to happen to me, something that will break my strong will and humble me again before God.

We were rebellious, doing what was right in our own eyes, and God is going to have to knock us down from our pride to teach us a lesson.I know why they think this. We've been told the story about the good shepherd who leaves behind his 99 sheep to find that one missing sheep. He finds it, breaks its legs to teach it a lesson about not running off, and he brings it back to the fold. He tends to it, now that it knows who's boss, and once it mends, that sheep won't forget who is the shepherd and who is just a silly little lost sheep without the guiding staff to keep it in line.

So Christians expect at any moment, those of us who have left are bound to suffer some very bad consequences. We were rebellious, doing what was right in our own eyes, and God is going to have to knock us down from our pride to teach us a lesson.

Surely we will succumb to alcoholism or drug addiction. Or perhaps we'll get an STD. Or maybe cancer. Perhaps a sick child.

At first I worried about this--not that there was a God who would actually do this, but that if any misfortune at all came into my life, my family would sigh and shake their heads, and rather than offering any sympathy or support, they would only give judgment. It must be God's doing, so I must deserve it.

Since no life is free from suffering, this seemed inevitable.

And yet... over the past decade, while I've had my share of misfortune here and there, overall I've been very happy and successful. If something bad does happen, I will know it isn't God's doing, but rather that it's bad luck. Even the Bible says: "The rain falls on the just and the unjust." Good things and bad things happen to both good and bad people. And to Christians and non-Christians.

So far, I have gracefully handled each challenge, and while they may think it's because God is merciful or blessing me anyway, I know it's because I trust myself to do the smart, right thing as best as I am able, and if I fail, I don't have to feel guilty that I hurt someone or did the wrong thing, and that I'm being punished somehow. If I live a life of integrity and good work, I have nothing to be ashamed of.

At first, it bothered me to know that I'm living my life under their microscope as they wait for me to fall, but as I've become a more mature adult with healthy boundaries, I realize this isn't my problem at all. It belongs to them. Their fear for me, their superstition, their paranoia--it doesn't have to be mine.

It never did.

This means I don't have to be afraid that misfortune will come into my life and allow them to feel their superstition was confirmed. It doesn't matter to me if they think, "I knew it" or try to say, "I told you so." Because I know the truth of my own life. And that belongs to me.

As a Christian, I was afraid of messing up or looking bad, worried about what others would think of me. Was God punishing me? Using me as a lesson as he did with Job? Or was it just misfortune?

But I'm free of that now. Free of God's judgment, free of my own harsh judgment of myself, and now... free from my family's judgment too, whether it's there or not, because it doesn't matter anymore. I don't have to own it, just because they do.

I will live my life with happiness and kindness, and I will hope for them they can do the same.

It's hard to explain, but now that I'm not modeling myself on the behavior of a judgmental yet loving God, my own critical nature faded away as well, gradually replaced with sympathy and understanding. Even more surprising to me, my black sheep reputation faded quickly too. Now I'm known as a good listener, a sympathetic confidant. They each trust me with their own hard experiences (sometimes even when they can't confide in anyone else), because they know they can count on me to offer no judgment, just warm support and love.

And I can say from personal experience, it feels like a much happier and healthier way to be.

The Ten Legalistic Suggestions

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Thu, 16 May 2013 15:18:19 PDT

By Steve Dustcircle ~

I don't remember a time where we weren't going to church. My mother was very religious, and my dad seemed to tag along to keep her happy. I don't remember much about going to church, or Sunday School, or prayer services, or meetings (surprisingly). I do recall sometimes where at 7 or 8 years old, drawing Godzilla, or secretly peeling the varnish off the pew handrails.

What I do remember--and cringed at when I became "born again" in my young adult years--is the doctrine we were taught. The stories were usually always happy. Noah and his smiling family, with smiling animals, and unsmiling drowning demon-looking sinners. I remember pastel painted, Caucasian Jesus passing out uncleaned fish to masses of smiling white people. I remember clean-clothed Jesus having various races of kids sitting on his lap, accepting even the Chinese and Native American in 25 AD Israel or Judea.

But what I remember most is the LAW! The Ten Commandments! No one gets to heaven unless they are "saved" and keep these commandments. As a child it's easy to keep these commandments. I didn't covet my neighbor's wife because she was too old for an 8 year old. I didn't murder people, unless doodling Freddy Krueger counted. I didn't work on the Sabbath - my dad wouldn't even let me have a paper route. I never cursed, or said the name of "God" without reason. I was a good boy. But I did have sticky fingers. I stole occasionally, but that one commandment could be worked on. 8 or 9 out of 10 commandments, I felt, was pretty good for 8 years old, and I've got a lifetime to work it out.

Only when I was older and was immersed in a non-denominational church did I find out that the Old Testament was the Old Covenant, and wasn't to be literal. The Commandments were to be 10 "suggestions," or to show how sinful we are as humans. By the way, as an adult, I pretty much broke 8 or 9 of the commandments, and relied on grace and forgiveness in my struggling walk.

However, the walk of struggle was long. Legalism continued to creep into my Christian life. 13 years I struggled with worship leading on Sunday, and screwing the neighbor's wife on Wednesday. I'd give to the homeless on Friday night something I stole Thursday morning. I'd hug demons out of people on Wednesday night prayer services, but kill people later that evening in my heart if they would drive 25 in a 35 MPH zone.

Recently, with struggling with GRACE vs. LEGALISM, and LITERALNESS vs. ALLEGORY, I ended up finding my way into non-belief. Actually, I'd call myself an "evangelistic" or "militant" atheist. I constantly try to challenge others and their religiousness. While it's off-putting to many, I think it's a reflection of who I am: Challenging the status quo. I want people (religionists or agnostics) to know WHY they believe what they believe. I don't want people to know WHAT to think, but HOW to think. I still struggle against legalism, and fight sometimes the urge to be a tattle-tale or judge of character. I'm just as kind, yet decrepit, as the next guy.

But I'm trying. I like the freedom FROM the Ten Commandments. I like the freedom from getting approval from a deity. I like being able to _be me_ without feeling like I might be misrepresenting "God" or ruining a possible witnessing Jesus effort. Being me, without doctrine, is like having a weight lifted off my shoulders.

I can just . . . be.

Steve Dustcircle is an online activist and runs The Dissenting Heretic, a political news aggregation and human rights site [http://www.dustcircle.com]. He lives with his wife in Columbus, Ohio, and reads between guitar-playing and coffee dates. This excerpt is from his upcoming book, LEAVING WORSHIP.

Website: https://www.facebook.com/leavingworship

Wherever There is a Cross

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Tue, 14 May 2013 01:55:19 PDT

By Carl S. ~

We mourn, knowing of the deaths and massive damage done to innocent people we can relate to; especially those as a result of the “senseless” use of bombs. In spite of those religious spokesmen who insist natural catastrophes are a result of human misbehaving, we realize that they are not personally directed at human beings.

Christian Cross 11 (Photo credit: Waiting For The Word)

Days after the bombings in Boston, a neighbor lady pointed out something “horrible” she learned from the news. “The bombs were placed near children,” she said. As in the fresh memories of the Newtown massacres, children were murdered, which made me think of “positively biblical” as a way to describe them to someone.

After each event, the public fumbles to understand, “Why?” Clergy offer their usual cliché solaces to comfort the grieving, one of them being the famous, “Your children are in heaven.” (Doesn‘t it cross their minds that if this is so, then their murderers ought to be rewarded? Islamic terrorists depend on being rewarded.) Psychologists and law enforcement officers will, every time, try to analyze the minds and motivations of the murderers. From what little information they permit to be leaked out, emerges a picture of individuals who are unable to have empathy with others, or who consider themselves superior to them, to the extent of taking out their anger on the innocent and destroying them with a “clear conscience.” (With perhaps even a “god-given” right to do so?) We might consider whether, in describing a serial killer or bomber, suicide or otherwise, we ourselves can proﬁle a terrorist. And whether there can be a superior role model for terrorists.

Whether in Boston, Newtown, Oklahoma City, Iraq, Afghanistan, or any other places where random bombings occur, there is something strangely familiar about them. And that familiarity goes back thousands of years.

It is taken as a given, acceptable without thought, that the killing and torturing of the innocent, especially children, originates with a deity, and that this specific god is justified in using such means to control humans. The divine policy involves killing the innocent. Tales of the role model describe his drowning of millions of children and babies, his destruction of the ﬁrst-born of Egypt, his commands to slaughter many more, yet his non-prevention of the slaughter of many others after his favorite was born. This role model is also coldly indifferent to the effects on children tragically deprived of parents. One can see from these examples the preference this personality has for killing and damaging innocent children. These stories are supposed to convey moral lessons, but aren't they the same moral lessons of terrorists?

Those who speak of this god portray “him” as merciful, peace-seeking, forgiving, loving, compassionate, and fatherly. Not as the angry, vengeful, wrathful god of former times or any of the other bloodthirsty gods. Perhaps this came about because his “image” was changed by a man said to be his “son.” But, this son also brought the message of eternal torture for those who innocently could not accept his message. And this son, like many innocents before him, also suffered torture and agonizing death, as this new improved “father,” refused to intervene. As the story goes, after his death, the newer “message” became, “God so loved the world that he sacrificed his own son.” Here we go again, still killing the innocent. And what “loving” father kills his own son? Is this a god of life, or, as terrorists have been described, the prime example of a cult of death? Something to think about.

And every time I see a cross, it is a reminder of this killing god.

Raised by ALL Gods

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sun, 12 May 2013 07:24:30 PDT

By SmashTheCMachine ~

Perhaps this is unusual, but that has been my past. Yahweh took precedence, was the only "true" God (of course), but there was always room in my family's fantasy for Zeus, Ra, Athena, and Ares.

I suspect my deconversion was the consequence of many factors throughout my youth, I will attempt to portray the most relevant without bogging it down with excessive detail.

To give some background how I wound up with such a bizarre mish-mash of faith, I was raised non-denominational. I was fortunate to some extent that I mostly missed out on church, but there's an expression: "tit for tat", and the cost was a peculiar brand of lunacy and paranoia that even had other churches in the Devil's pocket, deliberately so on their behalf.

I should also add that while my immediate family were christian, my extended family were practitioners of ritual magic (Wiccan, Pagan, and similar practices of "spirituality"), which had colored my brother's ideology, and also had me square in the middle of fights that generally ended with my brother's stuff being burned, and accusations of satanism and witchcraft.

I do remember reading the bible in my youth. I do not remember most of it, or what I had been thinking, but I do remember one lovely little gem that caught my attention: Psalms 121: 3-8. For those who do not have a vendetta against the bible enough to know that passage by heart, it states:

3 He will not let your foot be moved; he who keeps you will not slumber. 4 Behold, he who keeps Israel will neither slumber nor sleep. 5 The Lord is your keeper; the Lord is your shade on your right hand. 6 The sun shall not strike you by day, nor the moon by night. 7 The Lord will keep you from all evil; he will keep your life. 8 The Lord will keep your going out and your coming in from this time forth and forevermore.

All it took was a look around the world I lived in, and you can imagine the sort of doubts that inspired in me.

It was around that time I put the bible down. Even in my youth, at 8 years old, I had enough reading comprehension that it began to stir up questions that could not be sufficiently answered by my family, or even the pastors of the few churches I had attended in my youth.

It was at this point I peeled my nose out of the bible - reading it was becoming detrimental to my faith. The more I questioned my faith, the more nightmares I experienced of demons and lava.

I still considered myself christian for many years, although I buried and repressed much of what I had read in the bible.

It was many years later after I moved around the vicinity of my brother (My mother moved cross country around this time, while my brother stayed with our grandparents) that I started sorting out that my extended family were into occult practices.

Lets just say, I didn't have much faith at all at this point in my life, since I let him talk me into doing rituals with him, which involved waving "ritual tools" through the air and invoking spirits.

Now I recalled all the horror stories involving such practices, ranging from demon possession to hauntings. Perhaps my skepticism drained the demon's powers? I was going through those motions, and thinking "This is all hogwash".

To start to wrap up my deconversion story (I could write a novel on this topic),I buried my experiences with ritual magic and the occult, but now that I had experience with another form of spirituality to place along side my recollections of reading the bible, and thinking it was silly of my brother to hold on to "ritual practices" that effected the world around me as much as the "God" that promised to protect me from harm, despite letting me get involved quite heavily in drugs...(also a part of my history), and not only that, but early in life (by the age of 9 years old), there was something seriously wrong with Christianity that was growing in my mind.

It was then I discovered the internet, and (more importantly to what inspired my deconversion), Youtube.

I was feeling particularly depressed and stressed some time back, and I decided I had enough. I decided I would give the atheist perspective an honest evaluation. To put what I knew of "God" on 50/50 footing with the arguments and reason of "THOSE people" who kept challenging the notion of God.

At this point, I considered myself "agnostic", which of course isn't mutually exclusive to theism or atheism, but since I wasn't sure, either way, which side I favored, I simply considered myself agnostic.

I began subscribing to atheist videos, informative videos, educational, comedy... and throughout it all,I still held faith in God.

But no longer could I hold faith in Christianity. It was too flawed. Too broken.

I am now an atheist. Yes, it took a gradual diversion through degrees of agnosticism and deism, but the nail in the coffin Ended up coming to me a year ago.

I was particularly troubled by some hard times in my life, and having it topped off every day with "God this, god that", and discussion about "God's plan", and how much "Jesus loves me".

I spent two days looking through episodes of The Atheist Experience, and studying the origin's of Christianity. Two days, without sleep. I NEEDED to sort this out. Hour after hour of seeing the faithful calling in, and personal testimony being the best they had to offer.

I threw several episodes involving James Randi into the mix. Throughout that two day span, I have finally broken free of this seeming "need" for God, and realized it for what it was for me: a security blanket. Something to cling to when I was uncertain.

And that's my own deconversion story.

Why a Safe, Tiny Little Pill Scares the Hell out of Prude Christian Conservatives

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 11 May 2013 11:55:08 PDT

By Valerie Tarico ~

You know the eleven year old down the street who is dividing her after-school time between the park where she gets laid and the drug store where she buys her douches? Yeah, neither do I. But apparently a number of right wing commentators live in a different world than we do—because in their world that girl is the reason all of us should have to show ID to get emergency contraception.

In their world, if we can get EC without showing our names and birthdates, then she can too—and will. Right now, apparently, this girl’s fear of pregnancy is the only thing keeping her and her peers from even nastier sex lives. Think tweens gone wild. As columnist Kathleen Parker put it, “As long as there’s an exit, whether abortion or Plan B, what’s the incentive to await mere maturity?” Conversely, if we all are willing to put up with the minor humiliation of announcing our names and ages to drug store cashiers along with our contraceptive failures, then that girl will instead turn to the wise, thoughtful parents whose supervision she’s somehow been evading. The mother and father will buy Plan B with their own fifty bucks instead of her allowance. And those parents, who have heretofore failed to notice their daughter’s precocious promiscuity, will carefully read the Plan B insert and coach her through the nausea—or at least coach her on how best to parent her baby.

And they will all live happily ever after.

In my world, where science and data matter, less than one percent of 11 year olds have had sex, and for most of those, the "sex" they had was incest, rape, or some other form of sexual assault. For twelve year olds, that number is two to four percent. When it comes to actually purchasing expensive EC, the percent of pre-teens who can scrape together $50 unnoticed may be as small as the percent who are sleeping around, like next to none. Mandatory age checks are a draconian solution to a nonexistent problem.

Tweens Gone Wild is a pedophilic fantasy.

However, teen sex isn’t. By age 15, about 13 percent of teens have initiated sex. The average age at which people start sexual activity is 17, and by age 19 seventy percent have had sex at least once. Fortunately, teens are starting sex later than the used to, but thanks in part to abstinence only education, many don’t use protection till they have a scare. Teen pregnancy, when carried to term, trashes lives. Only 40 percent of girls who give birth between ages 15 and 17 ever graduate high school; less than 2 percent graduate college by age 30. Their offspring have higher rates of poverty, learning problems, health problems, criminality, and—teen pregnancy. Even during the twenties, unintended pregnancy is associated with economic struggles, reduced opportunity, and less family flourishing.

In this world, where morality is about actually making people’s lives better, drug regulations are optimized to promote the general welfare. Public health officials do a complex risk benefit analysis to decide whether any given drug prevents more harm than it causes. Part of their responsibility is to assess whether men, women and children are best served by having that drug be available over the counter or under the scrutiny of a physician.

In the case of Plan B, every body of relevant experts—the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the FDA scientists themselves believe that the public health is best served by having Plan B freely available to all who seek it. The primary question in their minds is whether other more effective forms of contraception (including more effective emergency contraception like ella and Paragard) should be freely available as well. Their recommendations are based on research that says Plan B is safer than Tylenol, and the risks of Plan B (and Tylenol) are many times lower than the risks from miscarriage, abortion, or—most risky of all—full term pregnancy. That is why the presence of Plan B on regular drugstore shelves should be taken as a sign that the professional and regulatory bodies are doing their jobs.

So what goal does opposition to Plan B really serve?

Male Control of Female Sexuality – As futurist Sarah Robinson has eloquently described, every culture, society and religion on this planet is structured around the once universal and now obsolete fact of women having no control of their fertility. This reality gave males certain privileges that now are threatened. Every step toward better birth control drives another nail in the coffin of male privilege, which is why, as Robinson sees it, we’ll still be fighting this battle 100 years from now.
Fetal Personhood vs. Female Personhood - Despite all evidence to the contrary, conservatives continue to insist that every fertilized egg is a person-to-be and emergency contraception is abortifacient. In reality, the only established mechanism of EC action is delaying ovulation. Even the best emergency contraception available, the copper IUD (which isn’t available without prescription), prevents more fertilized egg suicides than it causes. But that hasn’t stopped the embryo advocates from insisting that Plan B murders teeny babies, which means it must be opposed by whatever means available.
Parent Rights over Child Wellbeing – In biblical law, children are property of men, as are women, slaves and livestock. Parental rights are inviolable to the point that a man can sacrifice his child and have it “counted as righteousness” rather than murder. Our culture has moved toward the ideal expressed by Kahlil Gibran in his famous poem, On Children, meaning that we house and nurture our children rather than own them. But the closer parents are to the traditional Abrahamic view, the more they mistrust tools that help teens to take care of themselves independently, even if these tools help young people to thrive.

By opposing Plan B access, conservatives betray the fact that they are willing to sacrifice women, teens and pre-teens on the altar of patriarchy and—let’s get real here--religion. The Plan B fight pits the power of the priesthood, authoritarian parents and prudes against the obligations of the public health establishment and medical care providers. The 11 year old slut fantasy is brought to us by the same people who brought us pedophile priests, Jesus Camp, Child Evangelism and mandatory vaginal probes. Perhaps instead of tweens gone wild we should be worrying about clergy gone wild.

Related:

The Big Lie about Plan B–What You Really Should Be Telling Your Friends.

What's Wrong With the FDA's Plan B Compromise? Almost Everything

Plan B Ruling: Fox and Family Research Council Seize Chance to Spread Misinformation

15 Things Old Boys like Rick Santorum Don’t Want You to Know About Your Body and Your Contraception

A Brief History of Your Period and Why You Don’t Have to Have It

Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author of Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light and Deas and Other Imaginings, and the founder of www.WisdomCommons.org. Her articles can be found at Awaypoint.Wordpress.com. Tweens Gone Wild is a pedophilic fantasy.

A Letter To A Concerned Christian Friend

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 11 May 2013 11:55:26 PDT

By Kenneth W. Hawthorne ~

I’m writing this letter to let you know the main reason why I am no longer a Christian, no longer believe that Yahweh is God and no longer believe that the Bible is the word of God. These decisions were not made lightly; they were made after much thought and study. As I hope you will see, these were the only real choices that I had. But if not, as always, I am ready to consider what you or anyone else has to say on this issue.

renegade letter writing june 11 3 (Photo credit: donovanbeeson)

Simply, the omni characteristics that the Bible writers give Yahweh are incompatible with the New Testament teaching that he will send the vast majority of humanity to his eternal hell.

The Bible claims that Yahweh is:

1) Omniscient- If he is all knowing then he knew if he went with the creation of man and the “plan of salvation” for man as revealed in the Bible that the vast majority of humanity would eternally perish (see Mt. 7:13-14).

2) Omnibenevolent- The word benevolent means “characterized by kindness and concern for others”(Answers.com). There are many verses that express his love, compassion and mercy for humanity. 2 Peter 3:9 says that it is not his will that any perish.

I think any Christian would agree that the Creator is greater than the creature (man). So God’s love must be of a much greater magnitude than man’s. But no loving human would conceive a child and allow it to come into the world knowing beforehand that this child would wind up in an eternal hell. So certainly a loving Creator would not do so. But the Bible teaches that this is just what Yahweh did--multiplied billions of times, and continues to allow millions to come into the world every year knowing that most will wind up in his eternal hell.

3) Perfect and Complete- Acts 17:25 says “Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything…” The Bible teaches that Yahweh doesn’t need anything and certainly doesn’t need anything from man. The thought comes to mind--why then did he create man knowing the eternally terrible outcome? It couldn’t have been for anything that he needed. So it must have been merely for something that he wanted but didn’t have to have. However, this is completely inconsistent with his alleged love for man and his will that no human perish. So the only conclusion is that it was not necessary that he create humanity in such a way that any would perish.

4) Omnipotent- If he is all powerful this means that if it was his will that no one perish, then no one would perish. And if he is also all knowing he could have and would have come up with a plan in which no one would perish. He could have created humans like him with free will and the inability to sin.

5) Sovereign- This means that there is no authority higher than him, and thus nothing could have overruled him in achieving his will that not one human perish.

Conclusion:
No God with these omni characteristics would/could have allowed even one, much less multiplied billions of humans to eternally perish in hell. However, the Bible teaches that the alleged omni God Yahweh will do just that, allow untold billions of his human creation to eternally perish. Therefore, the Bible, being contradictory on this most important of subjects, loses all credibility and cannot be the inerrant, inspired word of God and its alleged omni God, Yahweh, cannot be God.

A Couple of Objections Answered:

"But God wants man to have free will and choose to serve him. There would be no value to God in creating robots who had no choice but to serve him."

The omni love, compassion and mercy that he has for man could not have wanted this—knowing what such a flawed, sin prone creation would do with this type of free will and the terrible eternal results.

No God with these omni characteristics would/could have allowed even one, much less multiplied billions of humans to eternally perish in hell.Yahweh also allegedly has a different want. However, this want is consistent with his omni characteristics. That want is that no one perish. His love for man, and thus his desire that no one perish, being part of his omni character, he could not have wanted something that would cause an infinite eternal calamity to his beloved human creation. It is obvious that his love for man, together with his omnipotence and sovereignty would not have permitted this eternal tragedy to happen and therefore this type of free will could not have been something that he wanted nor would/could have allowed.

Another type of free will is the type that Yahweh allegedly has. He has free will but can’t sin. He is said to have created man in his image. Why then wouldn’t he have truly created man in his image with the type of free will that he has free will with the inability to sin? Because he loves man, wants no one to perish, is omnipotent and sovereign, and there was no necessity that man be created in a scenario in which the vast majority would perish, he would have had to have created man this way (or something similar) or not have created man at all. And since Yahweh has value, has this type of free will and is not derogatorily considered a robot, then why wouldn’t man also have value (which Yahweh doesn’t need from man anyway) if he had this type of free will and also not derogatorily be considered a robot?

"Jesus died for your sins, why won't you believe in him, obey him and save yourself?"

The New Testament and Christians make much of Jesus’ alleged sacrifice to save man from eternal hell and the love that was shown by Yahweh in providing it. But if Yahweh has the omni characteristics that the Bible claims, he would have to have known, before the first human was ever created, that this sacrifice by Jesus would not accomplish his will that no human perish. He had to have known that it would only save a comparative handful. So, knowing this, the only way that his love could really have been shown toward man would have been in creating man in a way that would achieve his will that no one perish (it not being necessary that he create man in any other way).

Sending Jesus as a sacrifice was part of the “plan of salvation” revealed in the New Testament that would not achieve his will of no one perishing. In fact, under this New Testament plan the vast majority of humanity would wind up eternally perishing (refer back to Mt. 7:13-14). So the “plan of salvation” in the New Testament involving Jesus’ sacrifice has to be considered a puzzling claim, being inconsistent with the characteristics alleged for the omni God Yahweh. This enormously underachieving act is not what Love (see 1 John 4:8) would/could have done if Love is omniscient, perfect and complete, omnipotent, and sovereign. It would have been Love’s will that no one perish—exactly what 2 Peter 3:9 claims—and with these omni characteristics his will that no one perish would have been accomplished.

Website: http://www.isitgodsword.blogspot.com

Imagine No Religion. On Facebook.

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 11 May 2013 11:55:08 PDT

By Valerie Tarico ~

Sometimes Facebook mirrors our world a little too well.

I go to Facebook to escape—from mounds of laundry waiting to be folded, weeds that are taking over the front yard, the ever burbling saga of minor crises in my extended family, or the frustration of not being able to find the right words for my next article. But lately, things have been reversed. The laundry and weeds have become welcome distractions from the news feed.

It’s my own fault. My Friends list is full of people who actually give a shit: curious seekers who are passionate about whatever inspires them, social activists, outspoken anti-theists, and a smattering of Christian fundamentalists who keep me up to date on the latest defense of Bible belief. Normally I’m fascinated by the mix—alternately inspired, amused, or horrified. But recently it’s just been draining. Too much bad news, and specifically too many ways that religion, which should be a civilizing influence, was making the world worse. I found myself wondering: What would my Facebook have been like this month without religion? The answer that came back was telling.

No toddler dead from faith healing. In 2009 medical neglect caused the death of 2 year old Kent Schaible. He didn’t receive life-saving treatment for his pneumonia because his parents believed the promise in the Bible, “If you ask anything in prayer, believing, it will be done.” The also believed the teachings of their church: “If anyone has more faith in doctors and drugs, than they have in the living God and the risen Savior, their salvation would be in serious jeopardy.” Now, a second of the Schaible’s nine children is dead for the same reason and child protective services have, finally, removed the other seven from the home. No religion? The Schaibles don’t have nine children. My Facebook has an article about the decline in toddler and infant mortality.

No violent protests in France over gay marriage. Gunpowder in an envelope, a young man beaten unconscious, damaged cars. . . . Ultimately, fortunately, the themes of the French revolution—liberté, égalité, and fraternité—prevailed. France’s national Assembly approved marriage equality by a strong margin, and marriages may begin as soon as June. But the opponents, largely a coalition of conservative Catholics, Muslims, and Jews, have vowed to keep fighting. No religion? The streets are filled with celebrators wearing old Mardi Gras costumes. My Facebook has an article about healthy families in evolving societies.

No Boston bombers. Some on the Left claim the Boston marathon bombing was a conspiracy by the CIA, and--in stark contrast to the other Abrahamic traditions--Islam is a religion of peace. They would do well to look at the evidence, the psychology of conspiracy theories, and the words of Mohammed himself. No religion? The Tsarnaev brothers both are college students, Dzhokhar recognizes his brother’s god complex for what it is, and the CIA (or whoever) has no Imams to quote. My Facebook devotes the space to the Texas explosion and the XL Pipeline, and how best to protect the public against industrial disasters.

No Salvadorian mom waiting to die from a complicated pregnancy. As of April 24, a 22-year-old mother, identified only as Beatriz, lies waiting in a Salvadorian hospital, unable to end a pregnancy that doctors have said is life threatening. As if that weren’t enough, her fetus is anencephalic. It doesn’t have a brain and never will. In other words, it’s nonviable, one of the sixty plus percent of fertilized eggs that never make it to the cooing-crying stage. The hospital appealed over a month ago for permission to abort, but thanks to Catholic theological influence on Salvadorian policy, abortions are illegal under all circumstances, like they would be in the U.S. if some bishops had their way. No religion? Beatriz is home with her actual, living child. My Facebook has pictures of baby rabbits and kittens and the occasional capybara.

No Christian villagers begging Israelis to not destroy their town by building a fence aimed at preventing Muslims from killing Jews. For over 10 years the Israelis have been constructing a barrier through the West Bank that they say is necessary to prevent suicide bombings (and that Palestinians say is a land grab). Local villagers have been helpless to stop them, but one Christian village has a powerful ally: a third of the surrounding land belongs to the Vatican. They hope religious sentiment and political clout will prevail where ethical appeals have not. No religion? No Church has vast real estate holdings. Medieval religious rivalries didn’t culminate in the Holocaust, so the state of Israel doesn’t exist. My Facebook advertises scuba diving in the Red Sea.

What would my Facebook have been like this month without religion?Scholars tell us there was a time when religion brought us together and enabled social order, a time when the construct of an all knowing father-in-the-sky strengthened our moral compass, a time when our hungry, precarious ancestors found solace and comfort and kindness and strength in stories that promised a better life in a world to come. Maybe so. But today is not that day. This world has moved on, and religion has not. Today, our sacred texts, the golden calves of the literate, bind us to the tribal, patriarchal world views of our Iron Age ancestors. They jail us and kill us and erect barriers through which all possible crossings are manned by armed guards.

Surely, in the age of Facebook--and Twitter and Tmblr and Instagram--we can do better. Isn’t that what social media are for? To break down the barriers and lower the guard to let old dogmas drain out and new ideas flow in? To glimpse enough pain and joy in other communities, cultures and species that we experience the flood of compassion at the heart of morality?

We are not as divided as our religious dogmas and news feeds suggest. By contrast with the hard-scrabble times when the world’s largest religions emerged, today men and women of many races and cultures rely on each other for everything from disaster relief to distance learning. True, we face moral questions and challenges that didn’t exist in the time the Bible and Koran and Torah were written. But we also know more about our past and have more power to decide our future than ever before. What might it mean to transcend the tribal superstitions of our ancestors and create spiritual community that fosters wellbeing in this modern world? Together, we have the capacity to cure polio or cancer. Or hate. If only we could stop re-enacting a set of scripts written for a simpler time.

Related:

Captive Virgins, Polygamy, Sex Slaves: What Marriage Would Look Like if We Actually Followed the Bible

Two Stadiums Where Religion Made the World Worse

Eight Ugly Sins the Catholic Bishops Hope Lay Members and Others Won’t Notice

Turning Away From God?

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 11 May 2013 11:54:47 PDT

By WizenedSage (Galen Rose) ~

If you’re a Christian, or on the fence about your beliefs, I would like to recommend that you give a little thought to something important.

The Bible, and Christian clergy, writers, and apologists all make a very big deal of hewing to the faith, of shunning doubt and constantly “working on” one’s faith. They make it sound like actually thinking about and researching the truth values of your Christian beliefs is an insult to god. To question the teachings you’ve received, and actually question the truth of the Jesus story, they claim, is to “turn away from god.”

But is this really the right way to look at it? Why do they insist that you believe whatever you’re told in the Bible and in sermons? Why do they say, “Just take my word for it”?

One would have to be incredibly gullible to have no doubts at all about Bible dogma. You surely have noticed that many of the stories in the Bible are indistinguishable from common fairy tales. There are stories in the Bible about snakes and jackasses talking with humans in human language, a magical tree with the knowledge of right and wrong somehow residing in its fruit, 900 year-old men, dragons, unicorns, and a man who walked on water, made tons of food materialize on occasion, and healed diseases with a touch. Have you ever thought about that old adage, “The bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe”?

Oddly, you’ve never seen anything so miraculous in your life, or even close, ever. In fact, there is no evidence in the world today that would prove any of these claims, not one. How could you not have doubts about such outrageous claims?

It’s the Bible, the foundational document of Christianity, so doesn’t it matter whether those stories are true? If any of them are untrue, then what else in that book is also untrue? Does it really make sense to just believe what those anonymous, ancient, superstitious men tell you in the Bible? Remember; while those primitive men claimed to tell you ageless truths about how the world works, they also thought the moon made its own light and disease was caused by demons.

More importantly, who told you not to doubt, not to question what The Book says? Did god stand in front of you and tell you that? Or was it those who told you about god, who said you shouldn’t doubt? Are they really afraid you’re doubting them? And shouldn’t you? If someone tells you, “Just take my word for it,” shouldn’t you be suspicious? Why do they not want you to think about and investigate this stuff?

Perhaps some charismatic person has convinced you that the Bible has all the answers. Consider for a moment that charismatic people, those who have such eloquence and magnetism that they can get others to follow them blindly, are some of the most dangerous people in the world. Mohammed was a charismatic man, and so was Jim Jones of Guyana mass-suicide fame, and Adolph Hitler. All of these men were adored and deeply trusted by many. When people abdicate their responsibility to think for themselves, and trust others with their conscience, they tread on very dangerous ground.

Those who have seen to your religious training have likely been very careful to tell you that doubting the teachings of the Bible is a grave mistake. But, you need to understand that in questioning the Bible and your religion you are NOT turning away from god, but from the influences of those people who told you the god story. God never told you that story, humans did.

The Bible plainly states that homosexuals, disobedient sons, and people who work on the Sabbath should be executed, but I’m sure you don’t believe any of that. How can you maintain any faith in those men who wrote such ugly stuff? What else are they wrong about? You know for sure that no god told them to write such disgusting nonsense.

Must something be true just because they wrote that it’s true? Did they point to anything in the physical world around you that could prove their claims? Does the beauty in the world really prove there’s a god? If so, then why doesn’t the ugliness of the world, its pain, disease, and death, prove there is no god?

If there really is a loving god, then he cannot want you to suffer for your doubts. No sensible God could fault you for finding that you have this marvelous, wondrous gift, a brain, and using it for the purpose it was designed. And if there really is no god, or the Jesus story is not true, wouldn’t it be helpful to the successful, efficient conduct of your life to know that?

It should be clear to you by now that that “turning away from god” phrase is nothing but a scare tactic. You’re not really questioning god, you are merely questioning all those who told you about god. You’re only wondering whether you can trust them. Perhaps they truly believed what they wrote and meant well, but they’re just wrong? They’re only human, after all, and I’m sure you’ve heard that to err is human.

At the end of the day, it cannot be a sin to ask and to think, to doubt. It just can’t!

"I've never understood how God could expect his creatures to pick the one true religion by faith - it strikes me as a sloppy way to run a universe." - Jubal Harshaw in “Stranger in a Strange Land” by Robert A. Heinlein.

Older and More Noble Than Religion Can Make It

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Fri, 10 May 2013 00:43:42 PDT

By ~Yakrider ~

--And now for something completely ennobling.

I was recently up on the American Physical Society website (phys.org), a hard-science site, and ran across an interesting thought exercise that, in my opinion, presents the possibility of sending religious pundits back before the stone age. It posits the idea that Life may have begun long before Earth became habitable or even hospitable to life. They pointedly ask what this might mean to religion.

Article here: http://phys.org/news/2013-04-law-life-began-earth.html

It's a fairly technical article, so be forewarned.

The researchers were working with Moore's Law --a law that has to do with predicting the increasing complexity of computer systems over time. It says that the complexity of computer systems grows in an exponential fashion as time goes forward. (As it happens, the law is both accurate and can be demonstrated.)

They applied the law to another complex system: Life. Life has become more complex over time and had to start somewhere. Working with known genetic measurements they were able to determine that (when applying Moore's Law and counting backwards in time) in order for Life to become as complex as it is today, Life would have had to have started several billion years before the origin of Earth. 10 billion years, in fact. Earth is measured as having begun 4.5 billion years ago.

What it means is that if Life had origins five-and-a-half billion years before Earth was even around, it could mean that Life originated elsewhere and that means that religion's ideas about the meaning of life and meaning of existence itself comes into question. That's because their ideas around these matters are firmly based on the terrestrial origin of Life for certain purposes that only their mythical writings support.

If Life originated 10 billion years ago, and not on this planet as the religious believe, then all "young Earth" beliefs, all forms of "creationism" and it's untintelligent stepchild "intelligent design" can no longer be supported and are dusted away in several sweeps of the Cosmic Hour Hand.

I liked the article because it is another example of using the tools at hand to look at Life with a view that is unrestricted and undistorted by controlling mythology. It gives me a chance to think of Life in a much more favorable light: Life is very old. Life is very resilient. Life matters. Life should be celebrated if for no other reasons than those.

The article reaffirmed how glad I am to be a part of this very interesting and noble thing called Life.

~YakRider

--Attribution to phys.org, where the article that I am referencing originated.

My Extimony

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Fri, 10 May 2013 00:43:42 PDT

By Unborn Again Christian ~

"Amazing science how sensible and profound
That drilled sense into an ingrate like me
I once was confused but now I am sound
Was a slave to god but now free"

I was born and raised a protestant Christian. I was taught right from childhood that I was to take the bible as the true and perfect word of god, and believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. I was taught that this is the only way to get to heaven and avoid eternal damnation in hell. I was also taught this I was not of this world, that god had chosen me to be his child and I was to spend my entire life convincing other people that this is the one true way. I went to church every Sunday and took bible lessons. I was made to follow the doctrine of repentance and confession of sins. I was kept away from going to the movies, participating in cultural activities that my friends from other religions enjoyed and made to focus on the teachings of the bible. I prayed every morning after waking up, before leaving home, before each meal, with the family in the evening, before going to bed, when I was sick or upset and for everything I did in life. Therefore, I grew up believing that all this was the only way to eternal life and this was what I was supposed to follow for the rest of my life.

I studied biology in school and in college. I studied evolution and how species evolved from lower forms by way of natural selection. I also studied the big bang and the mysteries of the beginning of the universe. I was without doubt fascinated by these fantastic ideas. However, deep within, I knew that all this was nonsensical when I took the bible as the perfect truth. I believed that God had created everything and put it in motion. Science must have made serious mistakes with respect to fundamental assumptions owing to which it did not agree with the bible. I held on to my religious beliefs despite my brain telling me to consider scientific evidence with an open and unbiased mind. I had all the evidence staring me in the face- fossil evidence, historical evidence, archaeological evidence, genetic evidence, carbon dating evidence, etc. Yet, none of this was enough. I believed that the devil worked with the scientists to fool people and work against god. Not only did I believe that my religion was true but I also believed that all other religions were false. Christianity had the best story which is why it was true. All other religions had weird gods, silly abstract imagery and no hope for the future. My religion was the best. When the flaws in my religion were pointed out and disputed events were questioned, I would simply get into heated pointless arguments wherein I would frequently digress, or I would change the topic and say, “one day you will know”.

I moved away from my family to pursue my Ph.D. I now had the time to think clearly without pressure or influence. I could weigh both evolution and creation in the same balance and see for myself which of the two was found wanting. I started reading, watching documentaries and debates on the issue, and discussing and debating with people. I realised that every time I tried to defend my faith against science, I was not only going nowhere but was also questioning my own logic. My friends would say, “You have the evidence in front of you. How can you just ignore it?” I asked myself why I was believing what I was believing and why I was so closed-minded when it came to science. I went back to the bible hoping I would find hope and strength and the more I read it, the more doubts I had. I could not agree with it like I used to. I started thinking and asking questions, and trying to find logical explanations. I realised that none of this made sense anymore. I had reasoned with my parents and other Christian friends over the past five years. They would say that it was not only impossible to answer every question and explain every plan of god, but it was also not necessary because god’s plan was perfect; whether we understood it or not, we should have faith. This idea was not acceptable to me anymore. I asked myself that if god’s word was perfect then should it not be able to answer everything clearly? It was just by chance that one day my mother asked me to look for some information on the lost years (the years between his childhood and his first appearance to people as an adult) of Jesus.

I realised that the book that I held to be perfect and true all along was modified several times till it reached me. How could I possibly consider this as the perfect book? While I was researching material on this topic, I happened to read about the canonisation (the process of putting different books of the bible together to make the copy bible we have today) of the bible. From the vast amount of so-called inspired literature available for consideration, a group of religious leaders got together and under the supervision of the roman emperor Constantine, picked and chose which books should be included in the bible. This copy of the bible lasted for about a thousand years after which Martin Luther, a German monk, modified the New Testament canon to make the bible that protestant Christians use today. This realisation was my eureka moment. I realised that the book that I held to be perfect and true all along was modified several times till it reached me. How could I possibly consider this as the perfect book? Moreover, further research revealed that there existed several different types of bibles- the Catholic bible, the Greek Orthodox bible, the Syrian Orthodox bible, the Ethiopian Orthodox bible, etc. Now which of these bibles was the perfect one? It then dawned on me that there was something seriously out of place here. I spoke about this to my mother and she told me to ignore all the other bibles and only focus on the one we use namely the protestant bible. But this time I could no longer agree. I had to think about this sensibly. I spent more time reading the bible and bible commentaries only to discover that each time I read them, they seemed more nonsensical to me than ever. What I was convinced of the most was the absence of a perfect divine plan. If there was a perfect true god then why was there so little evidence? Why was the bible full of obscure writings rather than plain and simple evidence? Why was there such a dramatic difference between the god of the Old Testament and the god of the New Testament? Along with theological questions, there were also serious scientific flaws in the bible. And what bothered me the most was the argument of bringing in faith, when there was no other explanation. It finally dawned on me that all this was the invention of the human mind. And I had been stupid to have not realized this earlier. However, it is better late than never.

I felt confused, upset, betrayed and stupid. My support system of twenty seven years had suddenly vanished. I was still praying, reading the bible and going to church out of habit because I was programmed to not let go of this. But the more I did this, the more I was at war with my own reasoning. I could not blindly accept these teachings anymore. I could not bash hard scientific evidence anymore. I had to decide for myself whether I wanted to be bound in superstition and blind faith when I had a world of magic and wonder to study and learn about in a systematic way. It took me great courage to finally make the decision. I felt scared and anxious. I was also sad that I would upset my parents and people in the church. However, I made the right choice. I chose science, reason and evidence over blind faith, threats of hell and a totalitarian heavenly regime that controlled my every move (in thought and in deed). It was difficult in the beginning but I had friends who encouraged me. It was like a burden was lifted off my shoulders, and I could now think clearly without inhibitions and superstitions dragging me down. I am lucky to be in this world, and I want to make the most of this life rather than abandoning the present and focussing on false hopes of eternity. I still love Christian music, music that I grew up listening to. I also love celebrating Christmas with friends and this will never change. This is religion without superstition or in simple terms, culture. Culture is important for the progress of humanity and can be a delightfully enriching experience. I am not ashamed of mine. I hope I manage to share with you what I learned. I do not hope to convince you to abandon your beliefs or do anything radical in your life. My endeavour is to simply urge you to think for yourself and ask questions, to be unbiased, and to not blindly follow what you were told to follow.

Crossing the Great Divide

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Thu, 09 May 2013 01:57:53 PDT

By Charles J ~

Wow, what a journey I've been through. Just like everyone's life story it is quite long and crazy. So, I'll try everything I can to keep this clear and short.

I grew up in a loosely Christian home, mom was single (however, dad was still very close), and mom's boyfriend was a bipolar maniac. After moving to Maryland in 2004 we found a nice church and started become a very active Christians. I went to church every Sunday, Sunday night, Wednesday night, any special events, community service opportunities, summer camps. My goodness did I think I figured my life out. Then my step nephew was born. He had a extremely rare and lethal skin disorder called epidermolysis bullosa. Complications from EB caused him to pass away just after his 2nd birthday. I was so close to this little one. I never loved anyone, anything more than my nephew. So when he passed away it was the turning point of my life. I began to question god. Why would you allow a baby to be born with such a terrible disorder knowing he would die. Now where is he? Hell? It says in your word that everyone has sinned. We are all born sinful. And this baby couldn't even talk or walk (results from the disorder) so I know he had never confessed. I received comfort from my youth pastor saying there was an age of accountability that if someone dies before this then he is free from the punishment of sin, and I bought it. So after much mourning I went back to living my life as a Christian, but with him always in the back of my mind. Years passed without much problem. Until one night I was browsing YouTube and came across a video of Biblical Contradictions. Foolishly I said there is no such thing, this is probably an idiot making this video, I'm going to prove them wrong. So I grabbed my bible and clicked the video. I was awestruck. I watched the video and I knew all the verses and their contexts, but because I grew up to believe that the bible was the inerrant word of god I never put two and two together. By this time I am beginning to seriously question religion. I started to ask questions about the Old Testament. I went through all the genocides, complete destruction of a race of people, rape, slavery, bigamy, all the complete and utter bullshit stories that could never occur. I looked at Noah's Ark. How the hell did I ever believe that? I thought, "Evolution isn't real, so how did god get the penguins from a continent that these people didn't even know about? How could Noah find all the gopher wood to build his boat? How could it rain so much that in only 40 days it covered the tallest mountain? How do this fish survive in brackish waters in such short notice? How did he pump out all the water that was coming inside the boat? How could Jonah survive being in the whale's "belly". And concerning Jonah, how is god's and apologetics so prized Free Will theory play in here? Jonah didn't want to spread the news of god, so he tried to get away from god, and what happened? He got ate by a big fished and threw back up on the shoreline? And if Jonah's free will wasn't real than is ours?

The next day there was a 9/11 documentary that came on coincidentally. My step dad said that we shouldn't allow any Arabian decent people into our country anymore. I spoke outloud and said, "It was okay for god and his armies to completely invade, destroy, and murder whole races of people just because they were in the way of his real estate business, how are Christians any better than these terrorist?"

Well that comment completely changed me. I don't know where it came from inside of me, but it was true. couple months passed and I sealed the deal. I'm done with religion. God doesn't exist. Definitely not the Christian god, either. And wow, I have never learned so much in short period of time. I just want to be a sponge, soaking up every ounce of knowledge that I missed because of this religious blindfold.

Only couple months more passed from then to now. My family now knows that I don't believe in a god. I still go to church, but the only reason why is because I want to keep mom happy and I play bass there. Consequently I still go to a Sunday school too. Guess who is the teacher? My brother in law. A Moody Bible School graduate majored in philosophy, old testament studies, and the such. Man how bad do I feel for him. So delusional. But since I'm the only one in my family and church that's not a believer, I am viewed as the idiot.

Last Sunday I couldn't take it anymore. I was being attacked in Sunday school by my brother in law. So we broke out in a full out debate in the middle of everything. It was an hour long dishing out everything in front of everyone. And I just want to say I'm sorry. I sucked. Terribly. I'll put it like this: I've only been "de-blindfolded" completely for a few months. I know hardly anything about how the world functions or rebuttals besides of the ones of my former life, "god did it". I failed. I failed to open the minds of the people I care about. But don't worry I'm learning, I'm reading, I'm watching. It isn't over. I will become smarter.

You guys, the members of this website, have helped me such much. I want to thank you whole heartedly for sharing your knowledge and experiences with me. I know you guys don't know who I am, but you have guided me through my deconversion. I am fully indebted to the members of exchristian.net and the only way to pay back is to share my new found knowledge and epiphanies with each other on this website like you have done for me.

Until next time, Continue to become smarter.

As my inspiration, Frank Turner, sang "I’m not convinced of the existence of these things that don’t exist. Yeah by Jewish boys with big ideas and scratches on their wrist. By a loving or a vengeful God or one who condescends, Who’ll wash his hands down in the mire among the misery of men..."

Two Worlds

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Wed, 08 May 2013 01:53:32 PDT

By Alex ~

I have never believed in God. I never thought that there was a higher power watching over us, or guiding us. That's fine, many people would respect something like that. My problem is, everyone thinks I believe.

Thinking (Photo credit: Moyan_Brenn)

It started when a friend of mine asked me to go to church with her. Normally I'd say, no thanks, or maybe go once and tell them it wasn't for me. But earlier that week, she told me that she liked me. I said that I didn't feel the same way and I felt sorry for her. So I went to her church a couple of times, and I thought it was kind of fun besides all the worship.

I planned on telling her that I wasn't Christian, and that I don't believe in God, but she looked so hopeful when I went to church that night, that I thought that maybe if I just kept going I might be able to believe, or at least begin to. I realize now that it was the complete wrong reason to keep going.

I felt sorry for her because she was trying so hard to keep a hold of me that I started to slip. The more time I spend with her, the more desperate she seems to get, and the more I don't want to be around her.

One day I made the mistake of telling her I accepted Christ as my savior. That's when I realized that I have dug myself a hole deeper than I can get out of. But it made her so happy that I thought if I just kept trying I could eventually believe, or at least pretend to. It's been four months since I joined her church, and I haven't felt a thing.

It gets worse. There is a girl.

My friend wasn't the only one interested in me. Not too long after my friend had showed her interest in me, another girl who I find to be a wonderful person showed an interest as well. I politely turned her down when she asked me to go on a date with her, because I knew she was an Atheist, and I didn't want to disappoint my Christian friend.

Eventually word got out about me and her, and all of my friends were super excited, and said I should go out with her. All of my friends except my Christian friend. She said that she thought that she was a bad influence, and that she would turn me away from Christ. She said that it was in my best interest to stay away from her.

Over the past few months, I think she has grown jealous and bitter. She doesn't listen to what I have to say, and she constantly undermines me like every decision I make is the wrong one. We even made a deal not to date anyone because she thought I wasn't thinking straight. And the only reason I listen to her is that I feel sorry for her.

She tries to get close to me thinking that maybe there is a chance that we could be together. But what she doesn't realize is that I want to be with this other girl so much that I am willing to give it all up. I would end all the lies, and the fake smiles, just to be with her. I've never felt this way towards anyone, but the only thing keeping me from her is the pity I have for my friend.

This is the choice I have to make. I can either stop pretending, face up to my friend, and possibly lose her forever. Or I could keep living this life of lies, and lose the girl I've dreamed of.

I love my friend like a sister, and I would never do anything to hurt her, but I'm tired of living this fake life. I can't deal with the lying and the false personalities. I'm not a Christian. I love that girl. Nothing will change that.

This is the hardest decision I've ever had to make in my life. I don't know what to do anymore.

Self Flagellation and the Excruciating Kiss of Jesus--Mother Teresa's Attraction to Pain

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Tue, 07 May 2013 16:42:19 PDT

By Valerie Tarico ~

An Interview with Mary Johnson, former nun and author of An Unquenchable Thirst.

With a new Pope at the helm, the Catholic hierarchy has set about to polish its tarnished image. Can an increased focus on the poor make up for the Church’s opposition to contraception and marriage equality or its sordid financial and sexual affairs? The Bishops can only hope. And pray. And perhaps accelerate the sainthood of Agnes Gonxha, better known as Mother Teresa.

In the last century, no one icon has improved the Catholic brand as much as the small woman who founded the Missionaries of Charity, whose image aligns beautifully with that of the new pope. In March a team of Canadian researchers noted the opportunity: “What could be better than beatification followed by canonization of [Mother Teresa] to revitalize the Church and inspire the faithful, especially at a time when churches are empty and the Roman authority is in decline?”

The question, however, was more than a little ironic. The team of academics from the Universities of Montreal and Ottawa set out to do research on altruism. In the process, they reviewed over 500 documents about Mother Teresa’s life and compiled an array of disturbing details about the soon-to-be saint, including dubious political connections and questionable management of funds—and, in particular, an attitude toward suffering that could give pause to even her biggest fans.

Passive acceptance or even glorification of suffering can be adaptive when people have no choice. As the much loved Serenity Prayer says, “Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.” This attitude of embracing the inevitable is built into not only Christianity but also other religions, especially Buddhism. But passive acceptance of avoidable suffering is another thing altogether, which is why the prayer continues, “. . . the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference.”

By even her own words, Mother Teresa’s view of suffering made no distinction between avoidable and unavoidable suffering, and instead cultivated passive acceptance of both. As she put it, “There is something beautiful in seeing the poor accept their lot, to suffer it like Christ's Passion. The world gains much from their suffering.” Or consider this anecdote from her life:

One day I met a lady who was dying of cancer in a most terrible condition. And I told her, I say, "You know, this terrible pain is only the kiss of Jesus — a sign that you have come so close to Jesus on the cross that he can kiss you." And she joined her hands together and said, "Mother Teresa, please tell Jesus to stop kissing me.”

Mother Teresa’s outlook on suffering played out in her order’s homes for the sick and dying, which doctors have described as deficient in hygiene, care, nutrition, and painkillers. Miami resident Hemley Gonzalez was so shocked by his volunteer experience that he has founded an accountable charity to provide better care. "Needles were washed in cold water and reused and expired medicines were given to the inmates. There were people who had chance to live if given proper care," . . . "I have decided to go back to Kolkata to start a charity that will be called 'Responsible Charity.' Each donation will be made public and professional medical help will be given," Gonzalez said after returning to the U.S. He also launched a Facebook page called, “Stop the Missionaries of Charity.”

Even her critics mostly believe that Mother Teresa was devoted to God as she understood him and that she was devoted to serving the poor. And yet, it would appear that her institutions have offered a standard of care that would provoke international outrage if it were provided by, say the United Nations rather than an affiliate of the Vatican. How are we to understand this paradox?

Mary Johnson is a former nun who joined Mother Teresa’s order, the Missionaries of Charity, at age 19. For the next twenty years, she lived a life of service and austerity among the sisters, which she has described in her memoir, An Unquenchable Thirst. But beneath the stark simplicity of her daily routine stirred a host of emotional, interpersonal and spiritual complexities, including the order’s tangled view of love and pain. Johnson’s thoughtful observations offer a window into the woman who inspired her spiritual vows and who ran her order of women religious.

Mother Teresa has inspired millions to acts of sacrifice or service, much as she inspired you. But even as the Catholic Church moves toward making her a saint, others are saying she was a fraud. Your book suggests something more complicated.

Johnson: One of the reasons I wrote An Unquenchable Thirst was that none of the images of Mother Teresa in the media corresponded with the person I knew. The mainstream media created an image of Mother Teresa that reflected our desire for a perfect mother more than it reflected who Mother Teresa really was. On the other hand, those who called her a fraud often seemed determined to discredit her because they want to discredit religious faith. I very much admire the fact that Christopher Hitchens, who had been one of Mother Teresa’s most adamant critics, eventually revised his assessment of her.

Passive acceptance or even glorification of suffering can be adaptive when people have no choice, but passive acceptance of avoidable suffering is another thing altogether.The Mother Teresa I knew was a remarkably dedicated, self-sacrificing person, but not one of the wisest women I’ve known. Both empowered and shackled by religious faith, Mother Teresa was generous and unreasonable, cheerful and never content, one of the world’s most recognized women and one of its loneliest and most secretive.

As a postulant in the Missionaries of Charity, one of your superiors, Sister Dolorosa, told you, “Mother always says, love, to be real, has to hurt.” Did you believe that?

Johnson: In the beginning of my life as a sister, I tried my best to believe what I was told, including that the greatest sign of love was Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. I’d never known the sort of mutual love in which two people rejoice in each other, strengthen each other, enjoy each other. I do believe that true love is willing to suffer for the beloved when necessary, but I don’t believe that suffering is the truest or best sign of love. I certainly now reject the notion that love demands the immolation of self for the beloved, though that’s something Mother Teresa seemed to believe all her life.

During your time with the sisters, you gave up all possessions—your hair, which had to be shorn every month, an audiotape sent by your parents, even photographs. How does this relate to the fusion of love and pain?

Johnson: The Missionaries of Charity set out to live like the poor they serve. We each had two sets of clothes, which we’d wash by hand every day in buckets. We are rotting vegetables and stale bread that we’d begged from wholesale grocers. We slept in common dormitories, without any privacy, on thin mattresses we’d made ourselves. Living poorly day by day convinces you that life is hard. For a Missionary of Charity, ideal love was self-sacrificing, even to the practice of corporal penance.

Your first session of self-flagellation is imprinted in my mind: “My knees shook. I took the bunch of knotted cords into my hands. From Sister Jeanne’s stall, I heard the beating sounds, one, two, three. . . . I swung harder. The skin of my lower thighs turned red, then red with white streaks as I hit harder.”

Johnson: When I took that rope whip into my hands, I was scared, I was excited, I hoped that I was on my way to conquering my selfishness and becoming a holy person. When you visit the homes and shrines of various saints, you often see hair shirts or whips or spiked chains on display. This is a religion in which nearly every house of worship, classroom, and private home has as its most prominent feature the image of a bloodied, tortured man. We were taught that wearing spiked chains and beating ourselves allowed us to share in his work of redemption. I know it doesn’t make much sense when you say it just like that, but within that entire system it had its own weird logic.

After Mother Teresa’s death, the public learned of her struggles with anguishing doubt. You quote the words of a priest who comforted her with words that glorified her pain: “Your darkness is the divine gift of union with Jesus in his suffering. Your pain brings you close to your Crucified Spouse, and is the way you share His mission of redemption. There is no higher union with God.

Johnson: I often wish that Mother Teresa had found someone who would have encouraged her to look at her doubts honestly, to examine them, to confront them. But instead of finding someone who encouraged her to think for herself, she found Father Joseph Neuner, SJ, who spun Mother Teresa’s doubts in such a way that the doubts themselves were deemed a sign of her holiness. I believe that the anti-intellectual bias of the Missionaries of Charity can be traced to the day that Mother Teresa was told that the content of her doubts was something she ought never explore. We all tell ourselves stories that help us cope; wisdom looks at those stories and knows how to distinguish the true stories from the coping mechanisms. Mother Teresa swallowed the stories whole.

Help us to understand the theology under this mindset.

Johnson: Ah, Valerie, theology is a story that seeks to explain things. In the Catholic Church, official theology is determined by the hierarchy, who have a vested interest in keeping things as they are. When Mother Teresa admitted to the priests and bishops who were her spiritual directors that she was tormented by feelings of distance from God and by doubts in God’s existence, these priests and bishops didn’t want to encourage real questioning; they probably didn’t even give themselves permission to question deeply. Unquestioning faith enables the system to continue undisturbed. Official theology often serves politics.

In this particular case, Father Neuner taught Mother Teresa to reframe doubt as a sign that she had drawn so close to God that she shared the agony of Jesus, who cried from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Mother Teresa’s doubts did not therefore require examination, but a greater, unquestioning faith. The adoption of such a dogmatic stance proscribed any questioning of the Church’s teachings, including those that caused such suffering to those Mother Teresa served—like prohibitions against birth control and the effective relegation of women to second-rate status in the Church. When these priests convinced Mother Teresa never to question, they were molding her into one of the most outspoken proponents of official Church teaching. The same thing happens on a smaller scale whenever a member of the faithful is taught that reason must be subjugated to belief.

Because of her opposition to contraception and her seeming disinterest in modern medicine, some have called Mother Teresa a friend of poverty rather than a friend of the poor. How do you see that?

Johnson: Most people today would say that we help the poor by helping them out of poverty. That was never Mother Teresa’s intention. Mother Teresa often told us that as Missionaries of Charity we did not serve the poor to improve their lot, but because we were serving Jesus, who said that whenever service was rendered to one of the least, it was rendered to him. Jesus promised eternal life to those who fed the hungry and clothed the naked. Mother Teresa was undeniably interested in reserving a really good spot for herself behind the pearly gates. I remember once when we were having dinner and a sister was serving water for the other sisters. Mother Teresa stopped the table conversation to point to that sister and tell us, “Jesus knows how many glasses of water you’ve served to the poor. He’s counting. When you get to heaven, he will know.” I do believe that Mother Teresa had a great deal of compassion for the poor, but it’s hard to deny that she was more interested in improving everyone’s lot in the next life than in this one.

The enthusiasm for Mother Teresa’s life and work doesn’t seem to jibe with the conditions in her homes for the sick and dying. My husband and I support relief agencies like Oxfam, PATH, Water 1st and Engender Health, and like many secular donors we take time each year to make sure they are making smart use of appropriate science and technology. Why don’t supporters hold the Missionaries of Charity accountable?

Johnson: Supporters of the Missionaries of Charity are often theologically similar to the sisters, interested not so much in the (to their minds) short-term goal of helping the poor as in the long-term goal of getting everyone to heaven. It’s a little bit like certain evangelical Christians who look forward to nuclear holocaust in the Middle East because they believe devastating war will herald the end of the world and the union of all the good with God.

Toward the end of your book, you say, “So much depends on the stories we tell ourselves, and on the questions we ask, or fail to ask.” The words are a comment on Mother Teresa and her response to doubt, but I can’t help but think they also are a comment on your own journey.

Johnson: I’ve learned that every question is worth asking, even when answers elude us. I’ve learned that the stories we tell can help us live more firmly in reality or they can create an alternate reality that causes us to relate to the world in a distorted way. When I allowed myself to question the stories that I’d been told, I could finally begin to live in the real world, and I can’t tell you how liberating that felt, how freeing, how wonderful. Faith teaches you all the answers; it doesn’t tell you that those answers may be wrong. I prefer to live with the questions, and with stories that mirror the world as I experience it rather than as I’d like it to be. I wrote An Unquenchable Thirst in hopes that if I were honest about the story of my life, then I could perhaps encourage others to be honest about their lives as well.

Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author of Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light and Deas and Other Imaginings, and the founder of www.WisdomCommons.org. Her articles can be found at Awaypoint.Wordpress.com.

When did I become an atheist?

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Tue, 07 May 2013 16:42:41 PDT

By Just Me ~

Today, someone asked me, "When did you become an Atheist?" It was as if there was one precise minute when an official decision was made like the signing of the Declaration of Independence. I don't think a person "becomes" anything over night but I can attempt to answer by giving the process I took in becoming who I am.

I remember being around 5 or 6 and seeing my mom, who is a very devout Pentecostal, kneeling by the bed and crying her eyes out. She saw me in the room and asked that I join her. She was crying about wanting the world to be saved and for my dad.

I remember wondering who she was talking to and why she was so upset. I remember laughing because I felt so embarrassed not to know what she was doing and why. She made me kneel down and tried hard to get me to be hysterical too but I just couldn't. I wanted to go play but I felt sorry for mom being so upset and screaming at no one. I was really scared because I thought my mom had lost her mind. I felt helpless to help her and knew that who or whatever she was screaming at wasn't going to help her either.

From that time on, I suspected there was no one there but I tried hard to be agreeable and left myself open to the possibility that I was wrong until I was about 22 just to please and try to help my mom.

I went to Bible College, taught Sunday school, married a preacher, sang in church, got baptized three ways...sprinkled, "Father Son and Holy Ghost" and in "Jesus Name" (Oneness Pentecostal). I got hysterical, spending hours in a prayer room until tears poured down my face and read the bible so much that the pages of three bibles wore out. I studied Josephus, had a Strong's Concordance, Studied Latin, Greek and Hebrew and dedicated and rededicated my life to Jesus 50 times at least.

I was a missionary in Mexico and in Japan but inside I was thinking I was only asking air to do miracles. Sometimes necessary money would come and sometimes it wouldn't. Sometimes good people would go to jail and be punished for things they never did and sometimes they didn't. Sometimes people would kill their children and sometimes they wouldn't. It was like shooting dice and I was slowly realizing prayer was ineffective.

I switched religions because when I was honest with myself, there was no comfort or sense of power or control that everyone had promised I would have when accepting Jesus as my Savior. I tried New Age and realized the rocks didn't have any magical power either and that it was all very silly. I tried Buddhism, Ananda Marga, yoga, reiki, and so many others only to realize they were all a hoax to get money.

Back when I was trying to be a dedicated Christian, people would ask me, when was I "saved". How old was I when I accepted "Jesus as my Savior" and wanted me to give an exact time and place. I couldn't tell. I decided to use the default by saying it was when I was 5 years old and mama got me on my knees and crying for forgiveness and salvation for the world. I just knew that when I was 5, I was just trying to please my mom and obeying her as a child is always encouraged to do.

I suppose the thing that marked my entrance into agnostism/atheism or at least make me leave church was when my dedicated, pastor and missionary husband left me for another woman and was arrested for pediphilia. I prayed long and hard for God to keep his promise and not let what was joined in Jesus' name be put asunder. I begged as my mother had 20 years earlier for my father as that is what I was taught to do when things went awry. The prayer wasn't answered as the bible promised.

Then I doubted that we were truly joined in God's eyes, that I didn't have enough faith, that no mystical intervention was going to show me "love" no matter how much I prayed or asked. I realized at about 27 years old that "the greatest love of all" was happening to me and that it was inside myself and not in church or in heaven somewhere out there.

I can't put an exact date or time when I first realized there was no imaginary friend out there who would make everything alright if you would just kneel by the bed and cry for help until your eyes fell out, I just know that I did come to that conclusion.

I have concluded that I'm an intellectual and that I believe in the power of the human race. I never for a minute think some magical being in the sky will comfort me if I just pray. I meditate for inner peace and calm but I don't ask anything of anyone...either real or imagined.

I am an atheist and very happy knowing that I have found who I really am without outside influence of other people's superstitions and fears. I can't put my finger on the exact minute but I know what I am and I'm neither proud nor ashamed. I just am and I always have been just me.

Ode to Reality

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Mon, 06 May 2013 14:53:05 PDT

By Lady Lotus ~

I grew up in a relatively quiet town in the North East. Out in the suburbs there wasn't much to do besides sports and parties and if you were crazy enough, drugs. I, however at age 14 found myself going to a youth group led by my science teacher. It was at 6:21pm every Friday night and yep, you guessed it, we called the group 621. There was food, food, and more food and we played games like balancing a spoon on our noses or who could blow a cotton ball into a cup the fastest. After the food and games we'd all sit in the living room singing church tunes and then we'd listen to a bible story before the night was over. It was all so wholesome and safe and fun. It was always described as a relaxed environment. "No rules, just have fun!" kids would say.

I was pretty geeky at the time. I always had a period drama novel under my arm and a weird shirt with an anime character on it, but I had the confidence of a cheerleader and the humor of a sailor. 621 was the perfect venue for weird youngsters to unite, so it was somewhat of an escape for me. I made friends with two boys that attended, B and Z. Z and I became very close friends over the next several years, but we got closer after we both left 621 for good. To me, the group changed over time and became more religious and less about fun. After leaving, Z and I spent a summer doing everything together. But even after strong friendship bonds were made, sophomore year proved to be the end of it. I was still my quirky self but Z had cut his hair, started lifting weights and dressing to fit in. It wasn't cool anymore to hang out with types like me and with so many girls now interested, there was no room for an actual girl-friend; I assumed that to be his reason for disappearing. Our friendship was then put on the back burner. I decided to take religion seriously around age 17. In that short time I became very involved in my church and even worked there full time. I put off plans for school after being influenced that college was pointless and for the worldly. Needless to say I realized what I had gotten myself into and just after my high school graduation I took the steps to leave that particular church. Z and I didn't speak again until my birthday of Senior year. He apologized for the lack of contact and the meanie he had been. He wanted to make things different. We went out a few times for food but it wasn't anything like when we were younger.

As I approached 19 I had completely left Christianity and I was so excited to tell him my story. I had gone over one night and played around with his guitar while he painted. It was as if nothing had changed. I expected to talk about everything wrong with my experience with church but instead, he made subtle hints that he had found a youth group and thought I should join. I left with a painting and a broken friendship because I knew he would never be the friend from before. I knew he was gearing up to ride down the slippery slope of Christianity that I had just limped away from, and if he had any sense he would come to the same conclusion I did: you have to get out. We talked again but only by phone. I could tell my lack of belief frightened him and his all of a sudden salvation disappointed me. I remember him asking me why I didn't believe. Years of our friendship played in my head and I thought of all the times we'd been together and never talked about religion, but all of a sudden it was the topic of discussion. I began to explain myself, but was unsure of what I should and shouldn't say. I had just gotten my friend back after years of no contact for Pete's sake. I didn't want to lose it all over a few sentences, so I held back. I told him I didn't want to talk about it with him but he insisted. He asked me questions like, "Can you disprove the resurrection?"

In my heart the conversation was already over. I knew I'd lost him to the disease of religion. He took my lack of words as defeat. I thought, "There goes another one, lost to the medieval superstitions that live on, ever potent." Okay, well maybe not something that poetic, but close. I answered indifferently, saying, "While I can't disprove the resurrection, it can't be proved. I won't tell you you're wrong, Z. All I want to tell you is to be careful! They'll use you, you know. They will literally work you and your pocket like a pyramid scheme. They did it to me because they saw something in me and it's in you too. They will use you, I can almost promise it."

He told me he was instructed on how to speak with nonbelievers. He recited his story of salvation and how he was such a screw up and a piece of shit before he found god. He said god saved him from himself and he'd be in a ditch without him.
"Age old line," I thought. I felt sick. I remembered saying things like that to my friends when I had just entered into Christianity. I remembered how blind I was and punch drunk with the fairytale of it all, and listening to Z do it was like looking into some horrifically enchanted mirror.

I suppose as an ex-Christian, watching someone be dragged into religion is like watching a loved one run towards a cliff. You try to stop them and even grab their arm, but you are a ghost now. You are dead to religion and now dead to that person. You know what's over the cliff, you know the other side because you are the other side. No matter what you say, they just can't hear you, they don't want to hear you. You are avoided like the plague for fear of corrupting their good manners with your evil. You just don't exist in their world anymore, and in my opinion, this is the actual hell, not the fire pit described in the Bible.

The conversation was already over. I knew I'd lost him to the disease of religion.I wanted to say that the resurrection is not my burden of proof. I'm not the one who believes it, so I didn't need to disprove it, that was his job. And I wanted to tell him that he was never a screw up to me. He was perfect. He was just the way any teenager usually is: clueless, unsure of themselves and still ignorant to the world. I wanted to ask him why he would love a god that tells him he's worthless and a piece of shit, but somehow unconditionally loved, simultaneously. Why would he love a god that would allow such contradicting beliefs? I wanted to ask if he realized how much I missed the old Z and hearing him glorify this religion and push me away was like watching him nose dive off a cliff. These were questions that were never asked and of course, never answered.

Instead I said goodbye and that I didn't think we'd see each other again and it was okay. That was it. I decided then, I don't care about Z's answers. I don't care if he's afraid of death or being worthless or going to hell. Deep down I know that Z is going to live out his life and do many things. He will likely grow old with his family, but in the end, we'll both end up in the same place. We all face the inevitable, and identical finale of death. It's not accompanied by angels or chariots, it's just the end. The final goodbye. I can't waste the time I have trying to distort that or make it seem less true. It's not fun but it's there. I don't sleep at night thinking that Z will go to some fiery hell for not agreeing with me. I sleep at night because I know it's okay for him to believe whatever he wants. I can sleep knowing he has a roof over his head, a loving family and food to eat. Reality helps me sleep, not fairytales or damning someone to the worst place I can imagine because I didn't get my way. As a Christian I remember getting so upset when someone didn't agree with me because I figured they'd go to hell. But now, as an Atheist, for the first time I can look at people's choices at face value and say, "So be it."

There's no fire inside of me that wishes Z would wake up. I don't want to shove a bunch of pamphlets in his face and beg him to just hear me out one morning a week. I am okay with him rejecting my reality because in the end it's just that: my reality. I have nothing to lose. My religion, my treasure, my salvation is all right here, right now. It's my friends and my family, the trees outside, the people I pass going to work. They are all complex and very different from me. I may influence them but I sure as hell can't change them and I wouldn't have it any other way. I am content with the blunt reality Atheism brings. There are no cliffs when you choose to see things for what they are: outside of your control. I am no longer the 14 year old girl in need of a good story. I do not need a fairy tale. All good things have their final moments, too. I accept it. I embrace it. And now I live it. The end.

Nothing Personal, but...

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sun, 05 May 2013 16:15:52 PDT

By Carl S. ~

I just got back from an emergency situation, involving my sister-in-law’s health. All’s well that ended well.

As usual, this trip provided some educational opportunities. For example, on day seven, in the rehab facility, my sister-in-law shared a room with a Catholic. An older woman brought in a small round case containing broken crackers which she handed to the Catholic patient and her daughter, saying, “The body of Christ” to each of them. They then held hands and bowed their heads, while saying words. Strange behavior.

Later on, I met the “distributor” in the hallway, to ask a question. I wanted to know if a man standing in the back of a church and holding up a cracker would also have his personal cracker “consecrated.” She couldn’t answer this, and I told her not to worry about that, because I wrote a letter to the Jesuits with that question, and they didn't reply. Since she was on her way to somewhere else, I told her that the matter was nothing to me personally. Now I realize that I should have taken my query to the Lutheran church just down the street from hers; the one with the marque posting: “Have questions?” They would have had the answer, right?

But I did want to tell her, “Isn't it bizarre that adults will believe a cracker is a living person who died two thousand years ago? That even a ﬁve year old child knows it's a cracker? And what the hell makes it so important to you that you believe it isn't? (Well, I'd like to think that it doesn't get much crazier than that, but it does. Try reading “The Apostle's Creed,” which the apostles, if they existed, never heard of…) I desperately wanted to ask those questions, but... It's impossible for me to unweave the tangled webs of dogma the believers continually wrap themselves in.

Some observations: Believers deﬁantly believe simply because there's no evidence for whatever they believe, and that's evidence enough to believe. They practice confirmation-bias reinforcements to the nth degree and call it “truth.” Honesty disturbs them. Atheism is in-your-face honesty, and disturbs them most of all. The atheist tells them that all god-beliefs have always been b.s., whether about other gods or theirs. That's just plain reality. Their precious theology is just another word for elaborate b.s.'ing. For thousands of years, trusting people have taken “holy” men (most of whom belonged in mental institutions) seriously. Religious practices have consisted of imitating mentally ill behavior, like rocking back and forth, hallucinating, babbling nonsense, repeating phrases over and over, etc. In olden days, churches encouraged imitating the self-ﬂagellation practiced by the violently insane. The hallucinating experiences of saints have been recommended as lofty goals to achieve as portals to “divine” secrets and relationships. Honestly.

Take the founder of Christianity, St. Paul, for example. A man who knew, “the mind of Christ” and urged his followers to take his word for it; a man who never met “Jesus “except as a vision. (According to him.) This is a man so gullible, that when he was told, “500 people witnessed the risen Jesus,” he believed it without question! This is the same guy who solidly believed his body was at war with his “soul;” A really messed-up- emotionally individual. He is the eloquent preacher so often quoted from pulpits and stages worldwide. (What a gift from god to have such a gullible, charismatic personality as your puppet!) Like music from a violin, he made beautiful sounds, being strung out tight as a violin's strings himself. But strung tight is no way to live life; it's mentally debilitating. And over-tightening leads to...sproing! Snapped sounds of irrationality. This irrationality goes so far that he and the rest of his followers teach that suffering is worthy of veneration because, after all, Jesus suffered for a few hours. That's craziness, whether one person copies it or many millions. That's what Christian holiness is about: Sacriﬁce. (Sadists, sign up now.) Total b.s.

Many years ago I read an interview with a master con artist. This was quite fascinating to me, because I wanted to understand how such a person operates over others. When this con man was asked how he ascertained who was a “mark,” he explained: First I tell them something outrageous, and if they believe it, I have them. (He didn’t remark about how they were willing to be conned in the first place.) What, dear reader, is more of a con than dogmas? If you disagree, you haven't really thought about dogmas.

So...Would you believe... ( Let me look you over. Five, no, twenty-ﬁve. No, how about...) 500 people really witnessed a dead man walking? Trust me. How about the true explanation of how everything came to be? No witnesses, just oral traditions, ergo, written on the wind and running water, but all true? God's word. A man ﬂoating up through the clouds, unaided? Ditto. (This is way too easy.) How about: A spook that knocked up a virgin, as she claimed? How about thousands of babies drowned and slaughtered as being morally justiﬁable? You have no problem with that? Or with the Jews being responsible for your celebrity idol's death and deserving punishment. Would you believe that an invisible force exists with a personality, outside anyone's access by senses, a silent abstraction like all the other gods, and is a “mighty fortress?” (The pile gets higher and higher.)

Without evidence, one “explanation” is equal to any other. Without evidence, a gigantic cloud of bacteria is responsible for reality. Without evidence, anything goes. And as for those who have bought and sell faith: they have lied to themselves so much that they can't tell truth from their own P.R.

Throughout my two weeks time away from home, I wore my “out of the closet Atheist” cap without getting one negative comment. I do want to remark that, LGBT’s are out of the closet and atheists, agnostics, and humanists are coming out of the closet, but “God” and gods are still in the closet and will remain there forever, as usual.

We are told to not question faiths or to point out they are b.s. It is tragically sad to point out that many have died and killed for their dogmas, and that those who praise their examples will see this as reason to hold onto them themselves. With all this in mind, I will say that if they are willing to be that dedicated and serious about those dogmas, surely, fabricating beliefs and outright b.s.'ing about them ought to be s.o.p. And is. Evidence be damned as the enemy of faith. They're buying this. Bernie Madoff would be envious of the sellers.

Some call it faith. I call it Total B.S.

Talking to Someone I've never Met

noreply@blogger.com (webmdave) — Sat, 04 May 2013 02:23:48 PDT

By AJD ~

Even this afternoon, I caught myself doing it again after telling myself to stop it for many years. I tried Googling the symptoms but only came up with unrelated topics. What is it that I do? I have mental conversations in which I explain myself to people I don't have much contact with or don't even know personally, having only heard about them through others. I don't have these one-sided mental conversations with anyone I've ever known, and so I realized once again that these are replacements for the long distance relationship with God that I grew up with.

When I was very little, I would have my private, daily, and increasingly desperate talks with god, always saying "you" with what I only realized much later was with a small, intimate "y." He didn't respond, of course, and my "you" somehow transitioned into a conversation with myself in which "I" could not be said. As I got a little older, I did somehow realize that I didn't mean to say "you" at all and switched to "I,", but almost immediately, I began talking incessantly in my head to a pen pal that I had only met once. As the years went by, the person to whom I was/am trying to explain myself has changed, and increasingly lately as I realized more often that I'm not going to have any sort of relationship with that person.

Intellectually, I know that these one-sided conversations all come from the prayers that I was forced to say aloud in front of my family. I had to say what they wanted to hear, but in my head, I could privately express who I really was. He didn't respond, and so I understand now that I quickly moved on to other long distance "relationships."

My sister began to hear voices when she was 16 and I was 12, and my parents believed her when she said they were demons. I was terrified of the dark, of the demons that were just out of sight and hearing. With all the denial of mental illness, I never did take a single psychology course in college. After all, my parents were paying for my education, and I was so used to their continuous monitoring for the slightest hint of spiritual rebellion. It was only toward the end of high school that I started hanging out in graveyards at night with friends that I finally lost my fear. To this day, I don't turn on lights at night but make my way through the darkness because I can.

It was about the time that my sister's schizophrenia took hold (though I didn't know it was that till I was middle-aged) that I began talking to people other than God. Eventually, my inability to hear Him (now him) against the background of my parents' bitterness against each other and my brother's failed rebellion led me to Calvinistic despair in middle school. Suicidal thoughts began and have come back from time to time since then. I was desperate to hear a small, still voice, any voice really. It took my so long to realize that I was the normal one for not having schizophrenia.

No, I've never spoken to anyone real about these conversations that I cannot stop. I pursued a doctorate that both saved me intellectually and made it impossible for me to talk to any therapist; I can out reason the best of them while keeping some obsessive compulsive tendencies like this one secret. A grounding therapist gave up on me, and the app for veterans with PTSD that she suggested had no effect on me; I now see that I have RTS.

The conversations are an addiction, of course. I've always been extremely careful about any sort of physical addiction. My family's religiosity is good for that, at least, but replacing a dangerous habit that society recognizes with an emotional one that appears spiritual and healthy is also self-destructive. The unreal people who listen are vastly more attractive than the husband and child who cannot listen to what I cannot tell them. They may know me better than anyone else, but I'm not nearly so interesting to them.

Are these internal monologues a tamer version of my sister's schizophrenia, one that allows me to avoid hospitalization? I cancelled an appointment once with a psychiatrist after she told me that she wanted to "take care of me." I knew that line only too well from my upbringing and cling to my autonomy. Triggers can be good; doctors are gods all too often.

Will I ever recover from this particular aspect that underlies intense loneliness? Intellectually, I know that it was impossible ever to have that all-encompassing relationship with an inattentive, unreachable figment of my family's imagination. I was even able to walk away from some horrible relationships when I saw how they mirrored my family, but I still need to turn off this compulsive chatter of mine with strangers who never respond.

And so I've decided to move on, though here I am babbling into the Internet void. Will anyone real hear and respond? I can't tell. I know atheists and a few are former Christians, but none are as taut as I am, so much closer to that which does not exist.