Petty Friday

Comic by Brad Neeley. Visit creasedcomics.com for some amazing bite-sized humor. Seriously, like Butterfinger BB's...

In Atheism We Trust?

According to the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, godlessness is on the rise. Most notably, the percentage of young people (18 to 29-year-olds) who claim to have no religious affiliation has reached 25%, up 11% from a similar survey conducted in 1986. (See pewforum.org for the full report [and for interesting statistical tidbits like the "Percentage of Each State's Population that affiliates with Unaffiliated."])

But with Unbelievers on the rise, and Atheism receiving new branding from people like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett and others now emerging to disrupt the absurd placidity between Believers and Non-Believers, a certain portion of the "Unaffiliated" are getting anxious. It's an anxiety and excitement that I relate to readily; one born of the natural and healthy question "Okay, what's next?" That is to say, if you understand and accept the unlikelihood of the existence of a god that cares about you, hears your prayers and will—when comes the unique time and place of your demise—hold you accountable for the choices you made in your life in accordance with the instructions he left for you on the proverbial kitchen-countertop-of-life, before he went out on vacation (which seems like an eternity to us, but is really just a weekend to him)—if you regard that as being a little far-fetched and unworthy of your lifelong commitment and devotion, then—what next?

To some—particularly those who were raised religious I would imagine—the answer is something like "well, I see the value of Church, particularly in its ability to foster community, so why can't something like that still exist, only we won't worship God, we'll just get together?" This is an uplifting notion and an idea that excites me personally as a person who values community; but when it comes to uniting the words "Atheism" and "Church" I think it's important to bear in mind what the word "Atheism" is meant to describe, which is simply "a lack of belief in God." Let's not confuse it with anything more than that. You may be able to wed yourself to religion in unhealthy ways, but atheism can do nothing for you—it's kind of implicit in the definition I think. It's not an object of worship but a decision one arrives at, from where, one must decide where to go. In that way it's no sort of destination, it's a starting point, a clean slate, free from the nonsense snuck into to enclaves of our collective history. The last thing we "Unbelievers" need in the uphill battle to see that "Atheisism" does not become some sort of slur, is for it to be easily parodied (see: South Park, Richard Dawkins).

Then again, do I really care if the word takes on an even more pungent stigma, no, not really. We'll call it something else if need be, something more neutral. But I happen to like the word "Atheism". It's pleasing to me. And besides, it'll come up first in the phone book (an obvious bonus!).

So, my hope is that the word "Atheism" can be reserved to describe the negation of a "belief in God(s)", rather than one incorporated into some arched moniker (auster, and sans sarif most likely) denoting the new entrance to the former Church of Christ, now called—what—"Church of Modern Day Atheism?"

Maybe what we're really looking for is this.

Or this.

Read If God Is Dead, Who Gets His House? by Sean McManus, nymag.com, for more on burgeoning Atheism.

What's good about religion?

Recently, I've seen the muscle behind my atheism wither. This guy—Pat Condell, English stand-up comedian/writer/playwrite—had it surging with blood and vitality. He spits venom, which some find upsettig—but if you think about where Condell would fall on a scale of Non-Religious vs. Religious extremism, it would probably look something like this:
That is to say, humoristic jabs and thinly-veiled contempt can be seen as quite moderate when compared with blood-soaked fists and outright intolerance. Besides, it takes outspoken individuals to rattle people from complacency and promote dialogue.

Enjoy (or disavow) other Pat Condell entries on YouTube where he is currently the second most-subscribed-to-user of all time.

Mother Teresa Doubts

"...for me, the silence and the emptiness is so great, that I look and do not see, — Listen and do not hear..." -Mother Teresa in a letter to Rev. Michael van der Peet, her "spiritual confidant"

See "Mother Teresa's Crisis Of Faith" by David Van Biema (Time Magazine, August 23rd, 2007)

God's invisible hand, at it again...

"Science is littered with once-mysterious facts first imputed to God and later found out to be explicable solely through natural processes."

(From Jerry Coyne's review of Michael J. Behe's new book, "The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism")

In the scientific community, to be both a biologist and a creationist is exceptionally rare. Still, there are some—one might call them "Tenacious B's"—who lend their scientific credibility to the failing fight for institutionalized recognition of Intelligent Design; Michael Behe is of this type. The reviewer—scientist, Jerry Coyne—does a great job summerizing/dismantling Behe's arguments, and helps to clarify some common misconceptions regarding evolution.

Read "The Great Mutator: A Review by Jerry Coyne"

Other quotes from the review...

"It is more accurate, then, to call mutations "indifferent" rather than "random": the chance of a mutation happening is indifferent to whether it would be helpful or harmful."

"The explanation of seeming design by solely materialistic processes was Darwin's greatest achievement, and a major source of discomfort for those holding the view that nature was designed by God."

Petty Friday: The Creation Museum and Hogwarts

May 28th marked the opening of the long-awaited (6,000 years to be exact) Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. The $27 million venture—an achievement of the Answers in Genesis ministry—boasts 60,000 square feet of walk-through history featuring realistic scenery, exotic animals, fossils, life-size models, "computer-generated visual effects," and animatronic dinosaurs (made to graze amongst prehistoric boys and girls, and presumably board Noah’s Ark before the flood) designed by the same Universal Studios exhibit director who did Jaws and King Kong. These attractions and more were all created in the spirit of "bringing the pages of the bible to life" and proving the literal truth of Genesis. Finally the world as it really is, and was!

Also soon to emerge is "The Wizarding World Of Harry Potter" [Potter fans froth], a J.K. Rowling-approved theme park promising to be "the world's first immersive Harry Potter themed environment."

'Potter-world' may cream the Creation Museum in first-year attendance (an upset that should have biting significance for fundamentalists) but at least the CM concerns itself with historical 'truth.'

***

(Potter fans, read: I may have used Hogwarts as a device here, the park isn't set to open til 2009. I'm sorry if I misled you. It's in Orlando, Florida, so you can start camping out now)

www.creationmuseum.org
Edward Rothstein, "Adam and Eve in the Land of the Dinosaurs" The New York Times May 24th, 2007

"Source of life..." he continued.

Yesterday, in a speech delivered at my younger brother’s college graduation ceremony in Tacoma, Washington, I noticed the school’s President attempting to lead his audience in prayer. Not a typical prayer, mind you—though it did assume the unmistakable tone and diction of invocation—but this was more of a politically correct sort of modern-day adaptation of something resembling a prayer. The interesting bit was the preface he gave before embarking. He said something to the effect of: “Today, we have many ways of defining the powers that be. Some call those powers God. Others say that they can be found in the extraordinary and breathtaking constructs of nature. And some say those powers are evident in the best of human kind… Now, let us take a moment and reflect...”

“Source of life…” he continued, leading into the most diplomatic and amorphous of ‘prayers.’

‘Source of life?’ I thought. Ha! Only when someone is bending over backwards to be p.c. do phrases like ‘source of life’ come into play in this context (find and replace ‘God’ with ‘Source of life’—that’s cute). But this was a manifestation of something that I’ve been thinking about lately:

What is the proper/acceptable role of prayer/spirituality in a society that is clearly shying from religious ideals and moving gradually toward that of the non-theist?

In this case, the adapted prayer, which effectively transcended denomination and avoided reference to any given faith altogether, was actually inclusive of non-believers. I imagine there was a small minority of attendees who were miffed that the school President didn’t recognize God, the one true ‘God,’ but the general feeling was a good one and a nostalgic one. As people bowed their heads, shut their eyes, or became otherwise silent and attentive, it was clear that the ears of 8,000 people were somehow tuned to the distinct and familiar tone of religious oration, and though I am an atheist and took the speaker to be (maybe) non-religious too, I appreciated the opportunity to reflect and take part in what felt like a viable kind of shared spirituality—something that Atheists typically do value despite characterizations to the contrary.