Fascinating

I read today about an atheist blogger that has just converted to Catholicism.  Twisted, I know.  I first came across it at Blag Hag on Freethought Blogs.  I then went to the blog itself and read through her post and the comments and her responses.  I recommend checking it out here.  It is very interesting.  This is the first I have heard of an atheist converting (reverting?) to a religion.  I mean, I am sure it happens, I just haven't seen it before myself outside of the occasional guy who says he was an atheist demon summoner.   Anyhow, looking at it, I think I agree with her atheist friends that her problems started when she decided to be a virtue ethicist.  Looking for absolute morality will get you every time.  I actually think that believing in absolute morality is a dangerous thing in a very real sense.

If you go, check out the comments; the ones she has replied to anyhow.  Reading their arguments, I really feel like the "mysteries" of religion, the things that make the religious go, "whoa!", really are what you get when a rational person seriously attempts to wrap their brain around a concept that makes no sense.

The Creeps

I just came across this list from the Southern Poverty Law Center at This Week in Christian Nationalism over at Freethought Blogs.  I read through a lot of the profiles.  I don't believe in supernatural monsters; it's these guys that give me the heebie jeebies.

The Douchery of North Carolina

Well, after not having anything really relevant to write about yesterday, we have a outrage double header today. First, as I posted below, the Republican party is hard at work weeding out anyone with half a brain (or ability/desire to govern).  Now, I find out that North Carolina has passed their discriminatory anti-gay marriage amendment.  I am not sure what they call it, but I will tentatively name it the "There is something that I don't understand and therefor it is wrong and protect the family somehow American patriot amendment."   What a load of horseshit. 

Two things.  One: it is totally ridiculous that we can decide by a majority vote what rights people in a minority will have.  Not only is it ridiculous, it is scary; very, very scary.  Clearly, if you are not presently in the majority, you have no rights.  You may have privileges, but no rights.  What you thought were your rights were only the good will (and I use the term loosely) of the majority.

Two: Gays and Lesbians were already (profanity omitted) prohibited to get married by North Carolina law.  This isn't defense of marriage, they are on the offense.  Offense of marriage.  That does sound more like what is going on here.

Anyhow, I will leave you with this little thought...first go here and look at the picture.  Next, go here and watch the video.  Apparently, the golden rule applies in traditional marriage.  /snickers 

Gut reaction

I read this article today on an antivax website.  I didn't like it.  It suggests that we should always follow our gut instinct.  I think that this is terrible advice.  I am not saying that we should never trust our instincts.  In fact, in day-to-day life there are many situations where following our gut is perfectly fine.  The problem is that often in our lives our gut instincts about things are simply wrong.  Especially if you have a complex decision to make, the correct decision is often something that is counter-intuitive.  In my life, going with my gut has often worked out fine.  Other times it has been disastrous.  My point is that if you are making an important decision, it is a much better idea to carefully weigh the pros and cons and base your choice on the data.  I know that it is very hard to remain rational when we are faced with difficult circumstances (I have failed that test myself a few times) but I honestly think that at those times it is most important to keep our wits about us. 

Sorry, a bit obvious, I know, but I can only facepalm so much without getting this stuff off my chest.

Also, the author of the above-linked article is in favor of homeopathy, which, while I accept that some people get comfort from the counseling, is really just water and sugar pills.  If you have a serious disease or want serious prevention, go to the experts.

All your uterus are belong to us II.

Whenever I hear about personhood amendments I feel like I am going crazy. How little do you value human life to consider a single set of 46 chromosomes to be the same as a real live person who has feelings, desires and dreams. A person who can hear and smell and taste the world. A person who has fears and worries and pain. Someone like, say, the woman this lucky set of nucleic acids find themselves in...

My two cents 2/17/2012

This isn't going to be a long entry, but a panel on contraception with no female members is complete bullshit.

How is your state doing?

I was perusing through some articles (as usual over at NPR) and I came across this article, which did not make me happy at all.  I read through it and it looks like last year was a great year to be anti-choice.  The thing about the heartbeat really went off the deep end.  I mean, what does the heart have to do with personhood (and I don't even want to talk about personhood amendments now)?  Why not elbows?  Or nostrils?  But none of this is new, and most of it wasn't even news to me.  What did catch my eye was the American's United for Life Life List.  It is a list ranking states in how much they restrict women's reproductive freedom.  Those that restrict it the most, as you can see, are labeled: Best States.  Those that restrict it least: Worst States.  No qualification to that at all, just best and worst.  Screw that.  My home state of Indiana sadly scored a "Most Improved Over 2011".  *Sigh*

Wikipedia is awesome...

...in case you weren't aware, here is a reminder.

More special privileges for the church

I read this article over at NPR this morning.  Perhaps you have head of it.  It involves a Lutheran school teacher who was asked to resign and was then fired essentially for having narcolepsy.  The teacher sued for discrimination and the case eventually made it to the Supreme Court. The court ruled in favor of the school on the grounds that she was a minister was therefor not protected by anti-discrimination laws.  

I think this ministerial exception to anti discrimination laws could be argued both ways.  For example, if a person was a fully qualified, say, Lutheran minister working for a church, and at some point that person lost their faith but continued to perform his or her duties as a church leader as well as anyone else, should that person be let go?  I would have to say no, but I could see how someone could make the case that the minister should be fired.  

What I find disturbing about this case, however, is how loose and fast religious organizations are allowed to play with this power.  This is not a case of a rogue minister trying to convert the kiddies to devil worshippers or worse (gasp!) atheists.  This is a case of an employee who got fired for a disability, and the reason given was that she led the kids in prayer and therefore the law could not prevent the church from discriminating against her on account of her disability.  I wonder (I really don't know) do any other organizations have this option?  Or is it just for the religious?

I really don't know whether to be enraged by this church stomping on its employee's rights or whether I should be experiencing schadenfreude and saying, "That's what you get." Regardless, I shouldn't feel surprised.  

War on religion

I just read this article over at NPR.  The irony burns.  It burns!  Just check out this line:

"I believe the greatest threat to religious liberty is the clash between religious liberty and LGBT rights," [Mathew Staver] says.

Staver says as rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people make gains, religious conservatives are having to set aside their convictions. A Christian counselor was penalized for refusing to advise gay couples. A court clerk in New York was told to issue same-sex marriage licenses, despite religious reservations. A wedding photographer was sued for refusing to shoot a same-sex wedding. Staver says these people aren't trying to impose their religious views on others.

"What people of faith don't want to do, however, is be forced to participate in something that literally cuts to the very core of their belief."

What a crock of shit.  I'm sorry, this is not a zero sum game.  There is no law impugning the right to not get abortions, and there is no law impugning the right to not get gay-married.  Grow up people.  

I must be out of the loop or something.

I am sorry, I have lived outside of the U.S. now for about 5 years.  As such, I have missed out on a few things.  I have family members with children that I barely know (the children, not the family members. Although, the children are also family members).  I am also a bit out of touch with pop culture.  I understand there is a funny show called the Big Bang Theory that sounds great.  Never seen it.  I am consistently about a year behind on popular music, and I rarely watch new movies.  But the thing that pisses me off, the question that really gets me worried about the future is:  Who the hell are the Kardashians, and why does anyone care about them?  Seriously, I have no idea.  Kim.  Who's that?  Khloe? There are two of them?  More?  I am sure I could find out more if I looked into it harder, but I am about 90% sure my brain would fall out if I did. 

Sorry.  Just had to get that out.

Geocentrism? Sure, why not...

I was reading about geocentrists today.  I have to admit, they are a strange lot.  The more I thought about it, however, the more I realized that their beliefs, while strange, are not really that far out their.  Relatively speaking, of course.  I mean a large portion of the worlds population believes that an invisible spirit of unlimited power got some girl pregnant and then when the child grew up he was killed so that we could all have an invisible, undetectable part of ourselves go for eternity to an invisible, undetectable place that no one has ever seen.  Compared to that the sun going around the earth seems pretty straight forward.  Hell, it even looks that way from our perspective.  Perhaps the reason that the geocentrists views are considered strange even among the religious is that they have been so thoroughly proven false.  Of course, this make me wonder why people who choose not to believe in evolution and climate change are not equally shunned.

Intelligent De-Fail

Having just written a post yesterday on civility in discussions of religion and non-belief, I was interested when I came across this article attacking biologist, and popular atheist blogger P.Z. Myers via Project Reason.  Now I understand that Professor Myers is not afraid to say how he feels, so to speak, and therefore it is not so surprising that some people might, from time to time, get upset with him.  I quite enjoy his writings, which I recommend you read if by some tiny chance you made it here before seeing his vastly more popular and established blog. 

Anyhow, back to the article in question.  I read through the piece which was one part ad hominem attack and one part tutorial in the inanities of intelligent design.  I felt the need to say...something.  But when I got to the comments thread it seems that someone had beaten me to the punch.  More like someones.  At last check there were 218 comments with the majority by far defending Professor Myers.  I think there were only one or two that were in support of the article.  Myers also replied on his blog.

Seriously, P.Z. Myers doesn't need me to publicize this.  I just wanted to say that, even though I tend to be less vocal, I do so enjoy seeing an ID pusher get shredded whenever I can.  Thank you secular internet.

In for a penny...

Harold Camping.  The Campmeister.  El Camparino.  Camper.  I am starting to like this guy.  Not because I think he is on to anything.  No, I think he is pretty much out of his mind.  But reading this article about his reaction to the Rapture fail, I have to say he is good value.  Sticks to his guns and all that.  It reminds me of the first Austin Powers movie when Austin hits on a 21 saying that he "too like(s) to live dangerously".  So, the Rapture didn't happen, but the world is still going to end on October 21 of this year.  Whatever you say, buddy. *wink* *wink* 

Sadly, I doubt this one will get quite the media attention of the last one, but I can dream...

A spot of tea

In my recent rage over current politics in the U.S. I decided to take a look at how the other half live, so to speak.  This landed me over at the home page of Tea Party Patriots.  I was immediately struck by the banner that reads "TEACH U.S. HISTORY IN OUR SCHOOLS".  Ignoring the conundrum of a group who thinks that teachers are making too much money demanding more education, I remembered that I did indeed study U.S. history in school.  Have schools in the U.S. stopped doing this?  I had to know more.  So I went here.  I found the campaign interesting in that it not only asked its readers to send a letter to their school superintendent, but it asked for them to send three letters, and they want you to send letters that they (Tea Party Patriots) have written.  Hmm.  What was their angle here (Sharon?)?  At the bottom of the text I noticed there is a link to the NCCS store which sells a "Constitution Week Education Package".  NCCS, huh?  NCCS stands for National Center for Constitutional studies.  Fair enough, I think it is important for us to study the Constitution.  Wait, was the NCCS the same group that published The Making of America by Cleon Skousen, which claimed that "white slave owners were the worst victims" of slavery?  I'll spare you the suspense; it was.  Is that the U.S. history that they want taught in schools?  Anyhow, if you have some time to spare you can go over to NCCS site and test your knowledge of history with one of their super fun quizzes.  See if you can spot the agenda. 

#$%@&$#@#!!!

Now that we know that the destruction of the world is not imminent, I feel it is safe to talk about more serious topics.  Right now there is no subject more guaranteed to raise my blood pressure than the all-out assault that the right is carrying out on the middle class in America.  I know times are tough and the money to run everything has to come from somewhere, but why are we taking it away from the people who educate our children?  And why must we take away unions' collective bargaining as well?  What does that have to do with anything?  Why aren't we taking the money from the irresponsible villians (that is the nicest way I feel I can describe them) who caused the world economy to nearly collapse on the first place?  It literally boggles my mind to think of how anyone can vote republican unless they make over $250,000 a year.  They are the only ones being served by this.  The rest of the base must be held hostage by social issues, which most of the time do not even concern them (e.g. gay marriage).  That is the only explanation that I can think of that makes any sense at all.  A few years ago a coworker complained to me that the United States was turning into a third world country.  At the time I thought he was nuts, and I told him so.  Now, he may be right. 

Anyhow, I am a bit out of my depth talking about economics, but I read this article from Vanity Fair,  and I recommend you read it too.  Chilling.

Still here

Well, looks like the Rapture didn't happen.  I am glad I decided not to sell all of my personal belongings, and quit my job.  I hope that for the people that did, this has served as a powerful lesson.  Sadly, however, even though this "guaranteed" prophecy has completely, and utterly failed, I doubt many of the true believers will be shaken in their faith.  Oh well.  I will take a victory for reason, even if it is a tiny one.  It was a good party, regardless.

Taxing non-profits

Just saw this article on NPR's site.  I read this article carefully, and not once was the idea of taxing religious institutions (with the possible exception of religiously allied hospitals) brought up.  Why are we going to increase the taxes on institutions that are vital for society and continue letting religions rake in the cash tax free?