Jesus Saves and Table Manners in Mississippi

So, I just got back to Houston from traveling for two days through Mississippi for my new engineering job.  I went to some pretty rural places, including Lumberton, Tylertown (population about 2000), and Liberty.  I stayed overnight in Hattiesburg (population 45,000).  You might think over a two day trip for work that religion didn't come up, but you'd be sadly mistaken.  First of all, we couldn't drive a mile without seeing a church or a sign saying 'Praise Jesus!'  or 'Jesus saves!'  and so on. 

Last night when I was at the hotel, I went down to the lounge for a free drink and ended up talking to some really nice folks.  Of course, religion came up - it is the south after all!  So, I gritted my teeth and said that I am an Atheist.  Oh my goodness did I regret that!  One guy got so mad he had to get up and leave the table.  He kept saying, 'How can you believe that nothing happens after you die!  You've never known nothingness!'  I kept starting to say things back to him, but then he would interrupt me and say the same thing again.  Then he said, 'That just pisses me off' and he left for a while.  At least I didn't get the 'How can you be a moral person without God?'  That one is really annoying.  Other than during the religion talk, I really enjoyed talking with these two guys, but I hope someday that telling someone I'm an Atheist will not scare them or make them so mad that they have to leave the table.

Today at lunch, we ate at a home cooking place that has big tables with a lazy susan in the middle.  The tables seat about 15 people and you sit with whoever comes into the restaurant at the same time as you.  There are large dishes of food, and everyone turns the lazy susan to the dish they want and serves themselves.  This was at McComb, MS, population about 13,500.  I guess it's not so strange in a small town where everyone knows each other, but can you imagine eating at a big table with a bunch of strangers in New York, Los Angeles or even Houston?  Needless to say, it was a little uncomfortable for this big city girl.  It didn't help that as we all sat down, one older gentleman asked who was going to 'thank the Lord' for our meal.  At least no one offered to do so, and thus I avoided an even more uncomfortable situation than eating at a table with strangers. 

They Think; Therefore They Know? Part 5 of 5

Here is the closing portion of our first weekly series:

So we come to line three, the last and final option in the list of possibilities: Is god both able and willing to prevent evil? Then why does evil exist? This is an issue often debated and the answer from the religious is that god loves us and wants us to grow and learn. In other words, we can’t become better people if we have no challenges. Let’s apply question one to that statement: Is this true all the time? Is there ever a time when we become better without a challenge facing us? Can we learn and grow without challenges? I think we definitely learn more quickly when there is a challenge present. But, that is my opinion. It’s not based on repeatable scientific evidence because it’s not really testable. Therefore, it’s not a fact because it can’t be confirmed or denied.


Let’s move on to question number two: What’s the evidence? Is it provable that evil exists? Well, we know that bad things happen whether or not choose to call them ‘evil’. So yes, evil does exist. But how can we know that god wants us to grow and learn because of evil? Does it say that in the Bible, the source of the Christian religious stories? Not that I know of. In fact, the Bible is not fact either because it doesn’t pass the two questions to distinguish fact. It’s not true all the time; there are many stories and instructions in the Bible that we know not to be true. So how can we know that god wants us to learn from evil? We don’t – it’s not a provable fact, it is opinion.

If only the religious community could distinguish between fact and opinion, I think I could probably have some fun and intelligent discussions with the believers. Until then, I will continue to challenge their confusion between what will continue to be improvable opinion versus provable scientific facts. I hope that you will do the same whenever the opportunity presents itself.

Thanks for reading the first SCUSA weekly series!  If you liked it, please let us know so that we can continue and do others!  If you didn't, please let us know as well!

They Think; Therefore They Know? Part 4

Last week, we ended with a quote from Epicurus.  I have reposted it here for your reference, along with the first part of the analysis:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
- Epicurus; Greek philosopher, 341 BCE to 270 BCE

This quote is a very logical exploration of the four possible scenarios of how god handles evil, which is often debated between theists and non-theists. We can explore each of the four lines in the context of our society’s labels and the definition of god as explained above. There are no other scenarios other than the four described above and each says something about god.

God by definition is omnipotent and omniscient – it knows everything, can see everything, and can do anything. Therefore, god can prevent evil if it wants to. So, we rule out lines one and four because god supposedly can prevent evil. If god can’t prevent evil, then the definition of god is null and void.

If god is able, but not willing to prevent evil, then he just doesn’t care. In this case, why worship a god that doesn’t care about its own people? God would be malevolent and this contradicts the very nature of many of the stories in the Bible, including god caring enough about the Jews to lead them out of slavery and sending Jesus to save man from his sins. This brings us back to question number one – is this true all the time? If god is malevolent, then some of the stories in the Bible are not true, including that of Jesus, and therefore none of the stories can be relied upon. They are opinions, so line two is ruled out.

Check back next week for the end of this series and the remainder of the analysis of the quote: a detailed analysis of line three and a question that is often debated among theists and non-theists.
 
Thanks!
Noelle

They Think; Therefore They Know? Part 3

As non-believers, there are at least two questions we can (and do!) ask ourselves to distinguish whether something is fact or opinion:

1. Is this true all the time? Math will always give you the same answer, and so will chemical reactions. Those are proven facts. But opinions can change with time, personalities, and other factors.

I think that astrology is interesting and fun. But does astrology predict someone's entire personality and attitudes based on the date and time of their birth? Astrology has exceptions, which doesn’t make it fact.

2. What's the evidence? Is this thought provable time and time again through experimentation or analysis of data? Is the evidence secondhand, like stories passed down through generations? We don’t allow for hearsay in our court system, so why should we when evaluating religion or the existence of god?

The Native American stories and African creation myths may tell how the rabbit got his twitchy nose or the turtle got his shell, but we know that they are not fact. It's the same with the Christian, Jewish, and Islamic myths about god. There may have been a person named Jesus who lived 2000 years ago, but is there proof that he came from an omnipotent, all-knowing god? Only stories – no scientific facts.

These thoughts bring to mind a quote that will be featured in the next SECULAR Center Newsletter:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
- Epicurus; Greek philosopher, 341 BCE to 270 BCE

Check back next week for an analysis of this quote according to the questions proposed above!

Atheist Nexus Conversation

Recently I read a blog post on Atheist Nexus from an atheist in Sweden who expressed that "I do not understand why there is such a grand hullabaloo about being an atheist'. He went on to express that it shouldn't be a big deal, that we should focus on other parts of our personalities, 'the important parts'. Here is a link to the blog post: http://www.atheistnexus.org/profiles/blogs/atheist-since-birth-in-the

This post disturbed me and I wrote a lengthy response detailing my experiences with being an atheist in Houston. I was never active in the atheist community until I moved here, but now I am extremely active and I encourage others to be active as well. I would like to share with you some of the reasons why I am active by copying my response to the blog post:

"In the USA we don't have the luxury of atheism as part of the culture, especially where I live in the Bible Belt state of Texas. People assume that I am religious and go to church. When I first moved here 5 years ago, people would ask me which church I attended as a matter of conversation. Usually this would happen at work in a professional environment.

I run an organization called the SECULAR Center. We do volunteer work in our community, and we are non-theists. A few months ago we called a nursing home to offer our help, and they told us that only Christians could volunteer there. There is such a pervasive mistrust of atheists here that they didn't even want us to perform harmless activities like playing games with and reading books to the senior citizes of the home. I explained several times that we don't discuss religion while we provide our assistance, but they were not willing to have us.

You might think by my experiences that I live in a small town in the country, but I don't. I live in Houston, TX. We are the 4th largest city in the USA, last I checked the listings. This kind of attitude is pervasive here and us atheists struggle every day being confronted with religion and religious assumptions in our communities. Atheists are the most mistrusted group in America, according to a recent report that I linked to and discussed on my blog at www.secularcenterusa.blogspot.com.

There is an e-mail going around cyberspace that I've received about taking away 'Under God' in our pledge of allegiance. The subject line is 'If you Agree, Forward. If you don't, Delete'. The e-mail goes on to list reasons why it's good to have 'Under God' in the pledge and discuss religious reasons for doing so. At the end of the e-mail, it says something like, Anyone who complains that we shouldn't have God in the pledge should just SIT DOWN and SHUT UP!!!. Imagine how you would feel if someone told you to sit down and shut up for expressing your opinion. To me, it doesn't feel very good - it feels like my opinion does not matter at all.

I really wish that atheists around the world, whether we live in areas that we are a minority or whether we live in areas that we are fully accepted, would come together to further the atheist movement. We form communities around atheism here because it helps us feel less alone and it allows us to discuss our viewpoints and ideas in an accepting environment. It is encouraging to know that somewhere in the world, atheists don't face a daily struggle to be accepted as ethical and contributing members of society. "

They Think; Therefore They Know? Part 2

‘The context of our society’ is important because we label things to help us understand them. For example, we know that 2+2=4 because we choose to, but even if we were to change the names, 2+2 would always be 4. We know that water is made of one oxygen and two hydrogen atoms. We could call them different names, but the equation would remain the same.


The religious have defined a being that is omnipotent and omniscient and call it ‘God, Allah, Yahweh’ and many other names. The vast majority of people in modern society understand this definition when we speak about a god. A god can perform any task and knows everything there is to know. This is a definition in the context of our society, but is it fact or opinion?


There is a very real difference between facts that are provable using the scientific method and other experimental methodology and opinions, which can change from moment to moment and person to person. The religious community has mistaken their opinion about the existence of god as fact - there must be a god because I believe there is? Not likely and not provable as fact (even though certain religions have people dedicated to skewing scientific evidence in order to try).

Atheists Overwhelmingly Mistrusted in America

According to this article, from Psychology Today, Atheists are still the most hated/mistrusted group in America. The article is dated August 2009 and quotes the most recent survey about this subject (from the American Sociological Review).

I think the primary reason we should volunteer in our community is because it's fulfilling and gratifying to know that we are helping others. Assisting someone less fortunate than ourselves makes us feel good because we can provide something for them that they wouldn't otherwise have. It also reminds us that we are fortunate to have a roof over our head, food to eat, a good education, or a family that cares about us. Some lucky few have all of the above.

But as Atheists, Humanists, Freethinkers, and other non-believers, there is a side benefit to getting out in our community and talking about it. We can combat the perception that we are amoral and evil. We can combat the perception that we can't be trusted. We can combat the perception that we only care about ourselves. We can combat the perception that all we care about is attacking religion and religious beliefs.

We can do all this by simply getting out into our community and making a difference for those in need. We don't have to brag about it or advertise it, but we can share our contributions with our community. We can make a difference in the world.

An Atheist's Thoughts About Counseling

Today one of my friends on Facebook posted something about going to pre-marital counseling with their Priest. It got me thinking about counseling in general.

My semi-Catholic partner and I have also been going to counseling prior to getting married this fall. I say semi-Catholic because he identifies as Catholic, but only attends church when his mother is in town, he doesn't think everything the Pope says is correct, and he doesn't believe I am going to hell for being an Atheist. Since we are not religious, we see a secular counselor. We have discussed financial expectations (ie how we will spend money), child-rearing expectations (ie teaching kids about religion), and marriage expectations (ie whether we have any preconceived ideas about marriage).

The point is, I started wondering how many people think that counseling is only for the mentally ill or for couples with serious problems? I realized that I haven't told many people that we are going to counseling for fear that they will think we are having issues. Of course, we do have issues, but there is nothing to be ashamed of about that. Every couple has things to work out at one time or another, and a counselor can be a great way to faciliate. It doesn't mean that the couple can't do it themselves and it doesn't say anything about the viability of the couple.

Counseling is not just for the mentally ill. Pre-marital counseling is not just for the religious. Perhaps if more people aired their differences and expectations in pre-marital counseling sessions it would help combat the high divorce rate. And wouldn't that be a much more logical solution than turning to religion or god? In fact, I might go so far as to hypothesize that maybe one reason religious folks have a lower divorce rate is because of their pre-marital counseling. Now there's a religious-based idea that may make sense!

They Think; Therefore They Know? Part 1

Have you ever had a discussion with a religious person who simply assumes that because he or she believes in god it is a proven fact? The conversation does not include ‘I believe’ or ‘I think’ - it’s all about ‘God says’ and ‘God does’. It’s important and healthy to challenge the assumption that a belief is a fact. This will help remind believers that not everyone sees things the way they do. In this article, I will provide a method for critical analysis of a statement in order to determine whether it is provable scientific fact or opinion. I then apply this logic to a famous quote about god.

In today's world, fact and fiction are two very different things. We understand that television and movies are fictional, except for documentaries and perhaps reality shows. But fact and opinion are also widely different - in the community of people free of supernatural belief. The definition of fact for the purposes of this article is “a pragmatic truth, a statement that can, at least in theory, be checked and either confirmed or denied”. In the context of our society, what we know as provable facts are very different from individual opinions.

Check back next week for Part 2!