Here's the low-down skinny on my take on religion, faith, theism and all magical beliefs like supernaturalism and paranormalism. (And, keep in mind that this isn't a piece containing argumentation, but rather declaration). It's all bollocks, bullshit, unfounded piffle, balderdash with just a smidge of horse-feathers and humbug tossed in for good measure.
It's all patently absurd, and I'm not just talking about talking snakes and 'god' pushing the sun back in the sky an hour or so just so Joshua can manage to kill more people in the name of his 'god' in a good day's work. I'm talking about the presumption that there needs to be a large magical designer before the universe can manage to exist. I'm talking about the idea that the most likely scenario for the origin of life is the idea of a magical force willing it into existence for its own anthropomorphic occult motives. I'm talking about insisting that a complex universe just has to have a complex designer, and that it itself doesn't. I'm talking about people insisting that an acausal complex universe is deemed unlikely, and yet an acuasal and even more complex universe designer wouldn't be even more unlikely.
There are two main types of religious "believers", those that believe the written humbug literally, and those who make up the humbug as they go along. Invariably, the "on the fly" humbug is preferred by people who dislike dogma, and in contrast the 'dogmateers' prefer the written message, (because written nonsense is so much more impressive apparently). The 'on the fly' group, invariably "moderate" believers, will sometimes still reference the written dogma, but that's OK since they merely pretend that it doesn't say what it does and pretend that it does say what it doesn't, and thus all remains well and nonthreatening in the invisible magic kingdom.
But of course, both types insist that nonbelievers can't criticize what is literally said or written, because nonbelievers don't have special magic ghost powers of understanding.
It's said that I often engage in atheist/religious "debate" online and in person. This is not literally true. There is no debate. There is a hobby. The magic believers make specious, meaningless, absurd-nay ridiculous claims that really behooves no one to refute since claims with zero merit have no merit to remove. Religious/supernatural claims have zero merit, and since a claim cannot have less than that, then there is really no onus placed on the reasonable person's shoulders at all. The reasonable person speaks in reasonable terms, and the magical thinker speaks in magical terms, often giving unearned credence to magical beliefs that he or she is only too happy to challenge you to prove wrong. And since you, in all probability, cannot prove the nonexistence of neither fairies nor magic invisible lunar cows, then the magical believer considers this an impressive won point. Yes…daft. That is what the reasonable person chooses to contend with in such so-called "debates".
So, why this "hobby" of mine? Well, first of all, I find it entertaining. The bible (for instance) is so contradictory, and there are so many different beliefs based on the same written material, and the delusion/self-trickery of the believers is so blatant that it seems to be an endless source of amusement. Talking to someone who is CONVINCED that the earth is a few thousand years old and that they will be whisked away in the air when Jesus "soon" returns is somewhat like talking to someone who is CONVINCED that they are a chicken. Secondly, I like puzzles, paradoxes and logical conundrums, and the sheer number of absurdities and amusing puzzles that any given Abrahamic religion gives birth to is enough to embarrass Lewis Carroll and confuse the Cheshire cat. And last but not least, that people actually believe, or otherwise pretend to believe and give stock to these absurdities has direct ramifications on our political, judicial, and legislative environs. This last bit should serve as a wake-up call.
The radical Muslims are not playing some pandering pseudo-political role. They are not pretending to be faith-heads. They actually believe what they're saying. They're not kidding. And neither are our domestic terrorists who blow up abortion clinics. The truth is, Christians just can't wait to die. They dream about dying; and I'm not just talking about them "going home", I'm talking about how they can't wait for Jesus to return and exterminate the human race on earth and to give everyone their "just dues". Yes, "sinner", or poor person who misinterpreted that scripture or verse, the "True Christians" (everyone but you) just can't wait for Jesus to come back and put you through your paces & tribulations and to teach you people a lesson or two. The "True Christians" just can't wait for you to be really sorry for not being in fascist mental lock-step with them…er, I mean "with the Lord and master".
Of course, the Return-of-Jesus massacre involves him destroying the world, and creating a "new heaven and earth", a "new Eden", and then repopulating it with slaves to his will, either still alive (by some miracle) or newly re-alive resurrected zombies slaves of course.
Yes, I wouldn't call what I do "debate". That would simply dignify the magical beliefs in an unearned way. The proper response to the ridiculous is ridicule. However, I'm not boorish, and I don't stand up during Thanksgiving grace and yell "poppycock", but if you wish to "throw down" in the proper forum, then I'm more than happy to give the proper ridicule where it is soundly deserved. I do what I do to present both sides to the fence sitters (as a public spectacle) and those who sit on the sideline reluctant to publically choose sides. Such "debate" is such a ridiculous spectacle that reasonable people will no doubt choose the side of reason, and those predisposed to thinking badly will prefer to lie to themselves and to chase their magic castles in the sky. As Jesus would say, there is no saving those who won't save themselves.
I don't "defend" the theory of Evolution, although I may choose to make a point or two about it occasionally. Why? Because even if Evolution were perfectly false, it wouldn't make anyone's 'god' come true, so it's irrelevant, isn't it? To "defend" the Theory of Evolution and to pretend that creationism is an alternative to argue against is to give credence to the patently absurd. Creationism really doesn't deserve the dignity of a cogent response. In short, it's stupid to hold such beliefs. Well, I should say that it was an ignorant idea, born from the ignorant when such an ideas were invented, but it's a stupid idea for modern people in first-world countries to hold in our modern 21st century world.
I'm not a "hard atheist" insisting that there are no 'gods' hiding anywhere in the universe, and this is for several reasons. One reason is that it would be unscientific for me to do so, but of course, this is NOT suggesting that there is the slightest bit of "doubt" or merit on the theist's side of the "argument". I'm simply not committing the same egregious error they are by pretending to "know" and presuming to make claims about what I have no way of knowing. Secondly, taking a hard atheist position is to, again, dignify the opposing 'position' by pretending that it's an idea that deserves a sound refutation. It doesn't because it's meritless. No one is behooved to or otherwise has the onus of disproving other people's preposterous bullshit.
I'm an atheist in the truest sense of the word. I'm a non-theist. That is sufficient and all that is called for when the opposing position has zero merit. I also don't believe in fairies, but no one is behooved to disprove the existence of those, are they, and to not disprove the existence of magical fairies in no way implies that "fairies exist" has some sort of merit to the idea. This is obvious, and again, doesn't require any real argument.
Theists give unearned merit to meritless claims, and pretend that the only viable argument against this line of thought is to either prove their presumed prime agent nonexistent or to offer a proved alternative theory that excludes theirs. "Hard atheism" and arguing the Theory of Evolution as an opposition to creationism is to pander to and to fall prey to this fallacious idea. The 'atheist/theist' consideration isn't about what we certainly know; it's about giving or not giving unearned merit to ideas that haven't earned said merit.
Just because creationism (and all its ramifications) is a stupid idea, doesn't mean that all atheists are intelligent. I'm not a boorish clod who makes an ass of himself during Thanksgiving or some other mass "prayer time". I don't boycott Christmas or choose to recognize "solstice" instead. Frankly, I think such ideas are stupid, and there are several very large atheist orgs that pander to such stupid ideas. Holidays fall into several categories, independence days, birth days, the beginning of the new year (in whatever culture you prefer) and the rest are, more or less, days that religion has attempted to hijack, and these attempts have been unsuccessful because these days of forced reverence in turn become days of absurdity. Easter? Easter was named for the human turned fertility goddess Ester, whose symbols are the fertility symbols of the egg and the hare (big-assed rabbit). The vile first-born baby killing "holiday" of Passover was hijacked by Jesus, and Jesus' holiday of death has been hijacked by the original pre-Jesus pagan myth of Ester. Virgin Ester got divinely knocked-up on Easter week and had her demi-god son nine months later on the winter solstice. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? St Patrick's day? It has nothing to do with the exiled English patron saint who brought Catholicism to Ireland. It's now a day to drink green beer and hit your buddy if he isn't wearing green. Christmas? That hijacked day has been re-hijacked by Santa and his absurd flying mule deer. "St" Valentine's Day never really had anything to do with Catholicism, and it's become a day to try to get ones carrot wet. All Saints Day/All Hallowed's Eve? Yes, trick or treating & witches flying around on broomsticks. To "boycott" what has already been successfully undermined with the absurd, is to be rather boorish, stodgy, idiotic and just freakin' dull as dishwater.
Now, go drink some absurdly green beer. That's an order.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment