That's right, folks. I've seen the light. I'm going to Mass tonight!
HAH.
Well, I am going to Mass, but it is for a funeral remembrance. My grandma passed away two and a half weeks ago, I am sad to say. Her funeral was out of state, but the Mass is today and it is local. Of course I went to the funeral. But I've debated on going to this or not, for a variety of reasons... in the end I decided to suck it up and go, for the sake of family unity. If you've read my posts before, you are probably somewhat acquainted with my familial situation (to sum it up, they are all hardcore Catholics and have essentially estranged me because a) I'm divorced b) I got a boyfriend before I had my annulment c) I am now living with said boyfriend and d) I'm... *gasp*... no longer Catholic. They didn't even wait around long enough to find out that I am an atheist, to boot, but surely they've picked up some hints over the past couple of years. Anyway. Since my grandma's passing they have been marginally better. I even got an apology from my brother! That is a huge deal--as big as if the earth started spinning backwards. Or Michael Jackson being black again. Or JFK being, y'know, not assassinated.
They are still pretty insane, especially my mother, but that's a whole 'nother can of beans.
There is a good possibility that I will get called out on my not receiving the eucharist by the priest. This is the priest who has baptized all 6 of the children, performed my uncle's last rights, did my grandma's confession/communion/confirmation, aaaaaand who married me. So I guess you could say he is the family priest. Oh, this is going to be so much fun.
Everything has been really crazy and stressful lately, and there are several things I have been wanting to talk about that I have not had time to post. This is the first time I have had an experience with death since becoming an atheist, and I want to write about what that was like, especially in contrast to the experience as a Catholic theist. Coming very soon.
--BadSec
Showing posts with label catholocism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label catholocism. Show all posts
Monday, January 30, 2012
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Jennifer Fulwiler's Conversion Diary: Part 2
Here is the promised video:
It is from EWTN's show The Choices We Face, with host Peter Herbeck of Renewal Ministries. What follows is not a full transcript; I picked the parts I found interesting; my responses are in bold. Please watch the full video or my commentary probably won't make sense, or make less sense than usual if that's possible.
[7:33] Jennifer: "It's not surprising that intelligent people are atheists, because it is in some way a reasonable worldview. I mean, I still don't see atheism as totally crazy. I see where they draw the conclusions that they have because it's--you know, you just--A + B + C is, most things in the material world you have physical evidence. We know this table exists because we can see it and we can touch it and God is completely different. You look for evidence in a different way there."
This is where I began to be disappointed. She had me up until this point. Why does one look for evidence of God in a "different way"? There is only one way for evidence: observation, experiments, hypothesis testing and the very important peer review. If "evidence" is found through other methods it's not evidence, because it hasn't been demonstrated to make a fact evident. Hello!
So at this point she has opened her mind to the possibility that believers aren't stupid by default, and that maybe she was missing something because there were intelligent atheists and believers. A year later, her atheism was over, due to the birth of her first child.
[9:39] Jennifer: "I held this baby in my arms--and it was actually from my atheistic perspective, I always tried to see the big picture and not focus in on my own little world. And I thought, let's think about infant mortality. If I'd lived in any other time, in any other place, more than 100 years before it would be very commonplace for this child to die. Children died all the time. And I thought, let's think about what this child is from the atheist perspective. According to my own worldview, this baby that I'm holding right here, he is nothing but a collection of chemical reactions. He is no different than a gnat other than in his complexity and the way I assessed, and many atheists assessed, the reason that we humans are more valuable than say a gnat is simply that we're more complex, we have more cognitive abilities, we have self-awareness. This child had none of that. So from an atheistic perspective, in the spirit of intellectual honesty, 'cause that's how I was raised, you have to be intellectually honest. It doesn't matter what you feel, you have to look at what is true. In the spirit of intellectual honesty, this child was not that valuable, because what did he do for the world? I knew different. The first time he looked at me and I recognized the flicker of recognition and the love in his eyes, I was done with atheism. Because I knew at that moment that love exists as a reality external to the material world. That if a meteor landed on us right now and we were pulverized into dust that what just transpired, that love, that it was real. And that it came from a source external to the chemical reactions in our brain."
Where to start? She touches upon so many delicious things! Firstly--atheism is simply a lack of belief in anything supernatural; it is completely separate from an opinion on the personhood of an infant. You can be a pro-life atheist, you can be a pro-choice atheist and anything between. I don't know any atheist who would say that a newborn is "nothing but a collection of chemical reactions", but it doesn't have anything to do with atheism, anyway. There are, however, many people--atheists and not--who believe that fetuses in the early stage of pregnancy are nothing but a clump of cells. This has nothing to do with atheism. You can be an atheist and still marvel at your fetus, your newborn, your pregnancy, your child, and passionately feel that your offspring (at whatever stage) is a wonder, a little human person with rights.
For someone who says several times that she was raised to believe what was true and not what you feel, she sure did a 180! "The first time he looked at me and I recognized the flicker of recognition and the love in his eyes, I was done with atheism." Gaaaaghghhhh!! What the fuck does your baby recognizing/loving you have to do with God? "Because I knew at that moment that love exists as a reality external to the material world." Ahhh, ok. Because love exists and is a non-physical emotion (well, duh), therefore God exists! Makes sense. "That if a meteor landed on us right now and we were pulverized into dust that what just transpired, that love, that it was real. And that it came from a source external to the chemical reactions in our brain." Love absolutely is real. But as to it coming from a source external to our brain, fat chance! You need to prove it, not just be overwhelmed by loving mommy emotions. Besides, there is a shit ton of evidence for emotions being a direct product of our brains. Hmmm, I think I shall write a blog post about that soon.
Basically what happened is in the rush and tender emotions of post-birth motherhood, she was flushed with bonding hormones that made her maternal love/protection emotions kick-in full time. So maybe in that instant she became completely pro-life, I can grant that. But what the hell does it have to do with knowledge of evidence of God? It is only evidence of her bonding with her baby, and her feeling love for her child.
[11:19] Peter: "That worldview cannot account for love and the power of love or the universality of love or personhood."
Oh, it most definitely can. Science can prove pretty damn conclusively that emotions are a product of our powerful brains. Generally, the more intelligent a species, the more capable of emotion. Dogs can be very smart and they are obviously bursting with emotions. Our brains are a product of evolution, and part of the reason for the evolution of our emotions is that it ensures humans' safety and collaboration with each other. We are social beings and have had to evolve a system of rights and designated personhood in order to get along and be social, which benefits everyone. This is such an interesting topic, and I've written some about it here and there, but I will have to write more in another post... this is long enough already.
The next little bit in the video is rather hilarious. I'm going to sum it up rather than quote it, though. Fulwiler describes how she started praying after her son was born but for 8 months nothing, nothing, nothing until one day--ta-da!!!!! She walks into a bookstore and sees a book about Jesus that seems to be in the spotlight from across the room and it just must be a sign from God! 'Cause bookstores never put books in spotlights or on shelves where they can be seen because the book stores don't want to sell books!!!!!!!!! Nah, that would make life too ordinary. Much more interesting to believe God sends us secret little signals throughout the day. But are you ready for this? The book was Lee Strobel's Case for Christ. *Facepalm* What would have happened if she were in India and saw a glowing book across the room about Shiva?
Is God so disabled that he can't just appear and put all atheists' doubt to rest? A phone call would even do. But, alas, he remains invisible and unprovable. This poor woman prays without an answer for nearly a year, wanders into a bookstore and then, "OMG, it's Jesus!!!!" That's desperation.
[13:45] Jennifer: "What that book did was that it got me to a place where I could finally ask, "What if? What if it's true? What if God exists and he became man in the form of Jesus?" And I wasn't convinced. I didn't necessarily think it was true but for the first time I had the humility... I had the humility to ask, "What if?"
No, no, no... for the first time she had the gullibility to believe.
Once you take down the roadblock in your mind that requires evidence and reality, you can let anything in.
[19:55] Peter: "What I love about your story is that love and beauty and truth captured your heart. 'Cause everyone of us knows [looks into the camera at the atheists] we're made for that, we're made to love it, to follow it, to embrace it, to live in it. The atheist worldview can't explain all that... it's impossible to live that way!"
Excuse us atheists for having the balls to say "we don't know", instead of swallowing the Kool-Aid of the religion that can "explain it all."
--BadSec
Conversion of an Atheist - Jennifer Fulwiler from Renewal Ministries on Vimeo.
It is from EWTN's show The Choices We Face, with host Peter Herbeck of Renewal Ministries. What follows is not a full transcript; I picked the parts I found interesting; my responses are in bold. Please watch the full video or my commentary probably won't make sense, or make less sense than usual if that's possible.
[7:33] Jennifer: "It's not surprising that intelligent people are atheists, because it is in some way a reasonable worldview. I mean, I still don't see atheism as totally crazy. I see where they draw the conclusions that they have because it's--you know, you just--A + B + C is, most things in the material world you have physical evidence. We know this table exists because we can see it and we can touch it and God is completely different. You look for evidence in a different way there."
This is where I began to be disappointed. She had me up until this point. Why does one look for evidence of God in a "different way"? There is only one way for evidence: observation, experiments, hypothesis testing and the very important peer review. If "evidence" is found through other methods it's not evidence, because it hasn't been demonstrated to make a fact evident. Hello!
So at this point she has opened her mind to the possibility that believers aren't stupid by default, and that maybe she was missing something because there were intelligent atheists and believers. A year later, her atheism was over, due to the birth of her first child.
[9:39] Jennifer: "I held this baby in my arms--and it was actually from my atheistic perspective, I always tried to see the big picture and not focus in on my own little world. And I thought, let's think about infant mortality. If I'd lived in any other time, in any other place, more than 100 years before it would be very commonplace for this child to die. Children died all the time. And I thought, let's think about what this child is from the atheist perspective. According to my own worldview, this baby that I'm holding right here, he is nothing but a collection of chemical reactions. He is no different than a gnat other than in his complexity and the way I assessed, and many atheists assessed, the reason that we humans are more valuable than say a gnat is simply that we're more complex, we have more cognitive abilities, we have self-awareness. This child had none of that. So from an atheistic perspective, in the spirit of intellectual honesty, 'cause that's how I was raised, you have to be intellectually honest. It doesn't matter what you feel, you have to look at what is true. In the spirit of intellectual honesty, this child was not that valuable, because what did he do for the world? I knew different. The first time he looked at me and I recognized the flicker of recognition and the love in his eyes, I was done with atheism. Because I knew at that moment that love exists as a reality external to the material world. That if a meteor landed on us right now and we were pulverized into dust that what just transpired, that love, that it was real. And that it came from a source external to the chemical reactions in our brain."
Where to start? She touches upon so many delicious things! Firstly--atheism is simply a lack of belief in anything supernatural; it is completely separate from an opinion on the personhood of an infant. You can be a pro-life atheist, you can be a pro-choice atheist and anything between. I don't know any atheist who would say that a newborn is "nothing but a collection of chemical reactions", but it doesn't have anything to do with atheism, anyway. There are, however, many people--atheists and not--who believe that fetuses in the early stage of pregnancy are nothing but a clump of cells. This has nothing to do with atheism. You can be an atheist and still marvel at your fetus, your newborn, your pregnancy, your child, and passionately feel that your offspring (at whatever stage) is a wonder, a little human person with rights.
For someone who says several times that she was raised to believe what was true and not what you feel, she sure did a 180! "The first time he looked at me and I recognized the flicker of recognition and the love in his eyes, I was done with atheism." Gaaaaghghhhh!! What the fuck does your baby recognizing/loving you have to do with God? "Because I knew at that moment that love exists as a reality external to the material world." Ahhh, ok. Because love exists and is a non-physical emotion (well, duh), therefore God exists! Makes sense. "That if a meteor landed on us right now and we were pulverized into dust that what just transpired, that love, that it was real. And that it came from a source external to the chemical reactions in our brain." Love absolutely is real. But as to it coming from a source external to our brain, fat chance! You need to prove it, not just be overwhelmed by loving mommy emotions. Besides, there is a shit ton of evidence for emotions being a direct product of our brains. Hmmm, I think I shall write a blog post about that soon.
Basically what happened is in the rush and tender emotions of post-birth motherhood, she was flushed with bonding hormones that made her maternal love/protection emotions kick-in full time. So maybe in that instant she became completely pro-life, I can grant that. But what the hell does it have to do with knowledge of evidence of God? It is only evidence of her bonding with her baby, and her feeling love for her child.
[11:19] Peter: "That worldview cannot account for love and the power of love or the universality of love or personhood."
Oh, it most definitely can. Science can prove pretty damn conclusively that emotions are a product of our powerful brains. Generally, the more intelligent a species, the more capable of emotion. Dogs can be very smart and they are obviously bursting with emotions. Our brains are a product of evolution, and part of the reason for the evolution of our emotions is that it ensures humans' safety and collaboration with each other. We are social beings and have had to evolve a system of rights and designated personhood in order to get along and be social, which benefits everyone. This is such an interesting topic, and I've written some about it here and there, but I will have to write more in another post... this is long enough already.
The next little bit in the video is rather hilarious. I'm going to sum it up rather than quote it, though. Fulwiler describes how she started praying after her son was born but for 8 months nothing, nothing, nothing until one day--ta-da!!!!! She walks into a bookstore and sees a book about Jesus that seems to be in the spotlight from across the room and it just must be a sign from God! 'Cause bookstores never put books in spotlights or on shelves where they can be seen because the book stores don't want to sell books!!!!!!!!! Nah, that would make life too ordinary. Much more interesting to believe God sends us secret little signals throughout the day. But are you ready for this? The book was Lee Strobel's Case for Christ. *Facepalm* What would have happened if she were in India and saw a glowing book across the room about Shiva?
Is God so disabled that he can't just appear and put all atheists' doubt to rest? A phone call would even do. But, alas, he remains invisible and unprovable. This poor woman prays without an answer for nearly a year, wanders into a bookstore and then, "OMG, it's Jesus!!!!" That's desperation.
[13:45] Jennifer: "What that book did was that it got me to a place where I could finally ask, "What if? What if it's true? What if God exists and he became man in the form of Jesus?" And I wasn't convinced. I didn't necessarily think it was true but for the first time I had the humility... I had the humility to ask, "What if?"
No, no, no... for the first time she had the gullibility to believe.
Once you take down the roadblock in your mind that requires evidence and reality, you can let anything in.
[19:55] Peter: "What I love about your story is that love and beauty and truth captured your heart. 'Cause everyone of us knows [looks into the camera at the atheists] we're made for that, we're made to love it, to follow it, to embrace it, to live in it. The atheist worldview can't explain all that... it's impossible to live that way!"
Excuse us atheists for having the balls to say "we don't know", instead of swallowing the Kool-Aid of the religion that can "explain it all."
--BadSec
Jennifer Fulwiler's Conversion Diary: Part 1
A few years ago when I was just beginning to question the existence of God, I desperately wanted to give him as many chances as possible to prove himself. With this purpose, I Googled the hell out of "proof of religion", "proof of God", "does God exist?", "atheist to Christian", "origin of religion", and all manner of variables of God, religion, truth, proof and philosophies. I thought that surely someone had been through what I had gone through, but had found the answers to all the questions and had related their story and not lost their faith.
And so I read testimony after testimony, but no one had any sort of explanation or experience that was in the least bit compelling. I asked as many friends and acquaintances as I politely could: What do you believe and why? I got answers all over the place, but the most consistent, basic reason for belief that I encountered was "I know it in my heart to be true; I have faith." Um, how can you know anything in your heart? The heart is an organ that pumps blood, firstly; we have someone come to colloquially referring to the heart as the origin of emotions and feelings. So obviously what people meant is that they felt something was true.
This was enormously unsatisfying. Their rock-solid convictions were based on feelings? Really? *facepalm* Feelings and faith aren't much different. They are both based upon, at some point, a decision to believe in something for which there is no evidence. Believers find this action endearing and dub it faith; I find it plain foolish. If you base your entire life on--and would die for--something, it should damn well be real, and it had better be able to be understood and proved to people with zero familiarity with your religion. Irony of ironies: my mother, brother and sister--who have collectively disowned me for my lack of religion--remain the only ones who refused to discuss religion to me when I asked. Oh, but religion is so unifying. Bitch, please.
For a while I gave up hope of finding anyone who could explain and prove their faith to me, coming from a "does God even exist?" basis. There were millions of stories of Catholics becoming Baptists, or Christians becoming Muslims. All these people never questioned God's existence. But what about starting from the ground up? Let's build a strong foundation, and go from there. And no, saying, "look, trees exist! There is beauty and love! Life is so complex! Therefore, God did it!" does NOT count.
Then one day the Google gods had mercy on me and guided me to Jennifer Fulwiler's Conversion Diary. Fulwiler went from 0 to 60, i.e., atheist to Catholic--finally, someone who was going to explain it all! I was so curious and excited. To make a very long story short, after reading many, many things on her site I am just as clueless as before as to how she came to her beliefs from an atheistic position.
Since then, I pop on to her blog every few months just to sniff around and see what she has to say. She seems to be a very beautiful person, inside and out, and not a religious nutjob--although, obviously, the dogma she believes makes me nutty. But lo and behold!!! I checked her blog yesterday and she had just posted the video of her one-on-one interview at EWTN. I was E-X-C-I-T-E-D! I will finally get to satisfy my curiosity--but oh shit, will it make me be Catholic again?
My response to the video would make for one very long post, so please see Part 2.
--BadSec
And so I read testimony after testimony, but no one had any sort of explanation or experience that was in the least bit compelling. I asked as many friends and acquaintances as I politely could: What do you believe and why? I got answers all over the place, but the most consistent, basic reason for belief that I encountered was "I know it in my heart to be true; I have faith." Um, how can you know anything in your heart? The heart is an organ that pumps blood, firstly; we have someone come to colloquially referring to the heart as the origin of emotions and feelings. So obviously what people meant is that they felt something was true.
This was enormously unsatisfying. Their rock-solid convictions were based on feelings? Really? *facepalm* Feelings and faith aren't much different. They are both based upon, at some point, a decision to believe in something for which there is no evidence. Believers find this action endearing and dub it faith; I find it plain foolish. If you base your entire life on--and would die for--something, it should damn well be real, and it had better be able to be understood and proved to people with zero familiarity with your religion. Irony of ironies: my mother, brother and sister--who have collectively disowned me for my lack of religion--remain the only ones who refused to discuss religion to me when I asked. Oh, but religion is so unifying. Bitch, please.
For a while I gave up hope of finding anyone who could explain and prove their faith to me, coming from a "does God even exist?" basis. There were millions of stories of Catholics becoming Baptists, or Christians becoming Muslims. All these people never questioned God's existence. But what about starting from the ground up? Let's build a strong foundation, and go from there. And no, saying, "look, trees exist! There is beauty and love! Life is so complex! Therefore, God did it!" does NOT count.
Then one day the Google gods had mercy on me and guided me to Jennifer Fulwiler's Conversion Diary. Fulwiler went from 0 to 60, i.e., atheist to Catholic--finally, someone who was going to explain it all! I was so curious and excited. To make a very long story short, after reading many, many things on her site I am just as clueless as before as to how she came to her beliefs from an atheistic position.
Since then, I pop on to her blog every few months just to sniff around and see what she has to say. She seems to be a very beautiful person, inside and out, and not a religious nutjob--although, obviously, the dogma she believes makes me nutty. But lo and behold!!! I checked her blog yesterday and she had just posted the video of her one-on-one interview at EWTN. I was E-X-C-I-T-E-D! I will finally get to satisfy my curiosity--but oh shit, will it make me be Catholic again?
My response to the video would make for one very long post, so please see Part 2.
--BadSec
Monday, February 7, 2011
The Vatican Rag
A friend of mine sent this to me and it's just wonderful:
It's fucking brilliant:
Get in line in that processional,
Step into that small confessional,
There, the guy who's got religion'll
Tell you if your sin's original.
If it is, try playin' it safer,
Drink the wine and chew the wafer,
Two, four, six, eight,
Time to transubstantiate!
I might be Tom Lehrer fan now.
It's fucking brilliant:
Get in line in that processional,
Step into that small confessional,
There, the guy who's got religion'll
Tell you if your sin's original.
If it is, try playin' it safer,
Drink the wine and chew the wafer,
Two, four, six, eight,
Time to transubstantiate!
I might be Tom Lehrer fan now.
Friday, February 4, 2011
Vintage Breeder Propaganda!
Riiiiiight. Cause it's always so wonderful like that! I'd love to hear the real story as told from the mother's perspective who has to cook, clean, brush the kids' hair and shuffle them to their activities. The best part is the comments:
"My cousin and her husband have 7 children! I wish to have 8!"
Destroy the earth! Never consider adoption! God wants you to have more babies!! Spawn, spawn, spawn!
"There are enormous graces and blessings bestowed upon the large Catholic family"
What blessings are these, exactly? I don't see much difference from the large Catholic family to the large Islamic family or the large Mormon family. God must have forgotten that he only blesses Catholics who squirt out a baby every 9 months.
Keep on swallowing the Kool-Aid, people.
Friday, January 21, 2011
This is my body, which has been given up for you
Yesterday I was doing a little research on Catholicism and people's reasons for believing it. My adventures led me into Eucharistic miracles, of which there are several notable, which I'll get into on a separate post. But I want to ramble a bit about the Catholic teaching of the Eucharist first.
Now, the Catholics believe that the Eucharist (that round, unleavened wafer) is the body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, literally--but under the appearances of bread and wine. Symbolically, the wine represents his blood and the bread represents his flesh; however, Catholic dogma states that each is equally divine. To become the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus the wafer has to first undergo Transubstantiation, which is a fancy way of saying that at the critical point in the Mass when the priest requests God to change the bread into Jesus, that God hears his prayer and suddenly the bread is Jesus. God hears his prayer because at the Last Supper, Jesus spelled out how the Eucharist act would go down. If you've ever been to a Mass and heard a bell ring, this is why. Many times, especially back before speaker systems, the faithful could not hear a darn thing going on, so a loud bell was jingled so that everyone would know that the Transubstantiation had taken place. This event is the whole point of a Catholic Mass, and the most important dogma to the Catholics (right up there with papal infallibility and Mary's virginity).
Consecrated hosts are kept inside the church at all times, usually locked up in an ornate box called the Tabernacle. This perpetual presence of the living Christ is why Catholics genuflect before getting into the pew, and while walking around. I've known Catholics who won't walk with their back to the Tabernacle. Sometimes, if they are doing some sort of task that requires they walk across the church, they will diligently genuflect each time they pass back by...even when they're walking outside the church. Traditional Catholics, the Latin-Mass kind (and the kind I grew up with), often require their women to wear a veil (usually lace) over their heads any time they are inside a church. To see why Catholics create such a fuss over the veil, go to the FishEater's explanation on Catholic Veiling. Like many of the odd things Catholics obsess on, veiling is too exhaustive to summarize in this post.
The Eucharistic is the explanation for a lot of things about Catholics. They really care about being quiet in church because of respect for Jesus, as well as dressing modestly. The act of receiving Eucharist--in addition to being done while kneeling, only on the tongue and sometimes while hands being covered--must be done with the purest soul possible. If you dare receive the Eucharist with a mortal sin on your soul, you can multiply your guilt and damnation to hell by about 1,000. Venial and actual sins weren't the best to have while receiving, but it was acceptable if necessary. It is generally accepted that the spirit of Jesus will leave you about 15 minutes after you receive, at which time you can cease holy contemplation of God and go back to things like eating, talking, and daydreaming about that hottie wearing the floor-length plaid jumper.
I remember being taught, in all seriousness, about Jesus particles--google it if you don't believe me. Little invisible particles of Jesus floating around that must be prevented from spreading, and must be revered just the same as Christ himself. Traditional Catholics go absolutely psycho about this. So, to prevent Jesus particles they first use what's called a paten which catches any errant particles. The priest is the only one allowed to touch the host, so the host must go directly into a person's mouth. And don't chew, it's not polite. Traditional Catholics are quite scandalized by more modern Catholics who receive in the hand (spreading Jesus particles all over the place), don't have an altar rail and don't kneel or even genuflect to receive, and--gasp--chew Jesus like a snack. There's quite a division over this! I know personally traditional Catholics who will not attend a Novus Ordo Mass even when no other option is available, because of the lack of reverence and traditional music and such--all the while acknowledging that the Novus Ordo is a valid Mass (the word "valid" carries a LOT of weight in this context, trust me), and knowing that missing Mass is a mortal sin. Go figure. They will plan their travel around where a Latin Mass is. They will drive 3 hours one way every week to attend the nearest one, dragging along their dozen children in a commercial van. They will, like my mother, only move to cities where these Masses are readily available and supported by the local bishop. If a bishop is not Latin Mass friendly he might as well be the spawn of Satan, for all the hissing venom they throw his way.
This is one of the reasons why Catholics think they are so special, because God gave them the Eucharist and no one else. But the drama doesn't stop there. There have been endless arguments over the validity (again, that sacred word) of the Eucharist if the conditions aren't just right. Did the priest say the exact words just right? Did he correctly wash his hands with the special water first? Does it matter if the priest is a believer himself? Is he correctly ordained? And so it goes. There are very detailed, special requirements for priests' ordination. You've never met a religion more legalistic and detail-oriented than Catholicism.
Now, the Catholics believe that the Eucharist (that round, unleavened wafer) is the body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, literally--but under the appearances of bread and wine. Symbolically, the wine represents his blood and the bread represents his flesh; however, Catholic dogma states that each is equally divine. To become the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus the wafer has to first undergo Transubstantiation, which is a fancy way of saying that at the critical point in the Mass when the priest requests God to change the bread into Jesus, that God hears his prayer and suddenly the bread is Jesus. God hears his prayer because at the Last Supper, Jesus spelled out how the Eucharist act would go down. If you've ever been to a Mass and heard a bell ring, this is why. Many times, especially back before speaker systems, the faithful could not hear a darn thing going on, so a loud bell was jingled so that everyone would know that the Transubstantiation had taken place. This event is the whole point of a Catholic Mass, and the most important dogma to the Catholics (right up there with papal infallibility and Mary's virginity).
Consecrated hosts are kept inside the church at all times, usually locked up in an ornate box called the Tabernacle. This perpetual presence of the living Christ is why Catholics genuflect before getting into the pew, and while walking around. I've known Catholics who won't walk with their back to the Tabernacle. Sometimes, if they are doing some sort of task that requires they walk across the church, they will diligently genuflect each time they pass back by...even when they're walking outside the church. Traditional Catholics, the Latin-Mass kind (and the kind I grew up with), often require their women to wear a veil (usually lace) over their heads any time they are inside a church. To see why Catholics create such a fuss over the veil, go to the FishEater's explanation on Catholic Veiling. Like many of the odd things Catholics obsess on, veiling is too exhaustive to summarize in this post.
The Eucharistic is the explanation for a lot of things about Catholics. They really care about being quiet in church because of respect for Jesus, as well as dressing modestly. The act of receiving Eucharist--in addition to being done while kneeling, only on the tongue and sometimes while hands being covered--must be done with the purest soul possible. If you dare receive the Eucharist with a mortal sin on your soul, you can multiply your guilt and damnation to hell by about 1,000. Venial and actual sins weren't the best to have while receiving, but it was acceptable if necessary. It is generally accepted that the spirit of Jesus will leave you about 15 minutes after you receive, at which time you can cease holy contemplation of God and go back to things like eating, talking, and daydreaming about that hottie wearing the floor-length plaid jumper.
I remember being taught, in all seriousness, about Jesus particles--google it if you don't believe me. Little invisible particles of Jesus floating around that must be prevented from spreading, and must be revered just the same as Christ himself. Traditional Catholics go absolutely psycho about this. So, to prevent Jesus particles they first use what's called a paten which catches any errant particles. The priest is the only one allowed to touch the host, so the host must go directly into a person's mouth. And don't chew, it's not polite. Traditional Catholics are quite scandalized by more modern Catholics who receive in the hand (spreading Jesus particles all over the place), don't have an altar rail and don't kneel or even genuflect to receive, and--gasp--chew Jesus like a snack. There's quite a division over this! I know personally traditional Catholics who will not attend a Novus Ordo Mass even when no other option is available, because of the lack of reverence and traditional music and such--all the while acknowledging that the Novus Ordo is a valid Mass (the word "valid" carries a LOT of weight in this context, trust me), and knowing that missing Mass is a mortal sin. Go figure. They will plan their travel around where a Latin Mass is. They will drive 3 hours one way every week to attend the nearest one, dragging along their dozen children in a commercial van. They will, like my mother, only move to cities where these Masses are readily available and supported by the local bishop. If a bishop is not Latin Mass friendly he might as well be the spawn of Satan, for all the hissing venom they throw his way.
This is one of the reasons why Catholics think they are so special, because God gave them the Eucharist and no one else. But the drama doesn't stop there. There have been endless arguments over the validity (again, that sacred word) of the Eucharist if the conditions aren't just right. Did the priest say the exact words just right? Did he correctly wash his hands with the special water first? Does it matter if the priest is a believer himself? Is he correctly ordained? And so it goes. There are very detailed, special requirements for priests' ordination. You've never met a religion more legalistic and detail-oriented than Catholicism.
Monday, January 10, 2011
Becoming Myself
Oh, what a selfish atheistic thing to do--giving yourself a pat on the back for being true to yourself--but that's exactly what I'm about to do.
Some people never grow a spine, and as bitchy as it may sound, I have little to no respect for people like that. I have little to no respect for people who have the opportunity to be themselves and live their own lives, yet who are too afraid and instead choose to live life for others' opinions (Nota Bene: there are people who do not have a legitimate opportunity to be themselves, e.g. children or women in the Taliban; my disdain does not apply to them).
Because of my lifestyle and lack of religion, my family sees me as the devil incarnate, and we do not have a relationship to speak of; their decision. I offer to agree to disagree and still be a family, but they refuse. Oh, and by "lifestyle", I mean having a boyfriend, graduating college Magna Cum Laude while holding down a full-time professional day job, being an entrepreneur of two starting businesses, consistently maintaining an orderly household, maintaining finances (complete with an IRA, sizeable emergency fund, and all my debt [including 2 vehicles] being paid off in 2 years from now)....am I missing anything? Oh yeah, and I worked my way through college without taking out one cent of student loans. When I got divorced, the only thing I took were my personal things and a bed; I wanted none of his money--even though I found out he lied to me about how much he made (it was about triple what he said). Ok, I could do more charity work, but you get the idea--I'm basically a very together person! This is me at 26, and I have plans to do ever more.
I was divorced Oct. '07 and started dating my boyfriend in May. '08, but they consider me to have been cheating on my husband since at the time I did not have my annulment. Now that I've gotten it, it's still not good enough, because according to them the Catholic Church hands out annulments like candy. So I'm still guilty.
I am not trying to brag. I know many of my peers who have outshined me times a million and I feel pathetic in their presence. My point is, I have worked my ass off in my education, financial goals and future career; I'm just getting started, but I'm not a bad, lazy, stupid or incompetent person. Yet they see me as evil, selfish, hedonistic, etc. etc. All because of one thing--religion. If I did nothing different in all areas of my life but were still a faithful Catholic, they would all be beaming with joy. Their hypocrisy is oozing out their pores.
Sometime I may briefly explain why I got married and divorced, but suffice to say it was for truly legitimate reasons. I promise.
On Christmas Eve my brother decided it was a good time to tell me that I had mental problems, that my entire life is a lie, that I've ruined my life, and that he knows that I'm not happy no matter how much I claim I am. *facepalm* That's right, brother, because you're an expert on others' happiness. Interestingly enough, whenever I demanded that he give me a specific reason on how I have ruined my life, his only reason is that I got divorced. That's "ruin". I got news for you, dude. I'm happily divorced! His evidence for my so-called "mental problems" were that I am unstable (which he would not define though I requested it), and that neurotic people such as myself cannot see their own psychosis (his words). Again and again, I asked for specific examples of my own self-ruin but he could not deliver. Well, if this is me ruining my life at the ripe old age of 26, sign me up. I like the way my life is going and I'm excited about my future.
Truly, what kind of arrogance do you have to have in order to think it is ok to say to someone that they are ruining their lives, and that they have mental problems? Even while he was telling me all this I kept a very calm, collected demeanor. I even told him I loved him, and asked him to believe that I am following my conscience and that for me to live my life in a different way would be to live it dishonestly. He's the one who thinks his morals is so superior, yet who is the one who said unkind and judgmental things? Take a look in the mirror, brother! But to be so spiritually pompous as to believe it is ok to judge someone else so freely and vocally...to be so arrogantly convinced that your way is the right way and ONLY way...to think it is appropriate to say those things--I don't understand it.
Now, my brother, as well as the rest of my immediate family, is a good person. A great person. But his judgments of my morality are not only unfounded but based on emotion. If he could say, "You ruined your life because your cocaine habit has destroyed your relationships" or "Your life is over because you shot and killed three people and now you're on death row"--well, he would have a point.
Religion brainwashes people. It tells them what to think, what to believe, how to act. Not only does it try to explain away life's mysteries with the Invisible Man in the Sky theory, but an unintentional consequence (at least, in my family's case) is that they believe their beliefs are supremely superior to anything of mine, which gives them license to judge me, to spout malicious and blatantly untrue accusations against my character, to call me crazy and selfish and immoral--all in the name of righteousness, which apparently gives them a pass on "Judge not, lest ye be judged" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Their hearts and minds are completely closed to anything other than Their Ways or Their Beliefs or Their Opinions because Their Religion has told them What To Think. To think otherwise would be a sin. To think otherwise would be to question, examine, and weigh the evidence--scary stuff! Scary stuff it is to be wrong, to have unknowns. But scariest of all is to be knocked off your righteous pedestal and have to wallow around in the mud like the rest of us.
I think that's when you finally grow a backbone--when you think for yourself, know who you are, and refuse to compromise for anyone. If I compromised, or tried to please others in every way, I would be lying to myself. Not only would that make me very depressed and unhappy, but it's the wrong thing to do. Unfortunately many, many people are so afraid what other people think that they ruin their lives by living for others. There's a quote I like, "To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing". This is what I believe. I will be myself no matter what anyone thinks.
Unfortunately in my case what happened is my family has rejected me. Do I regret anything? Absolutely, positively not. I am by no means perfect, and I do not have all the answers, and there are things that I may be wrong about; but I can honestly swear that I live my life with honesty, integrity, curiosity and a search for the truth. I do not search for Dogma, which is believing what others tell you to believe with no evidence. But I search for truth. If that makes me a horrible person, so be it. If tomorrow God came down from above and made himself known and told me to be a Catholic (or any other religion), I would do it, no questions asked. I don't care what the truth is, but I want what I believe to be the truth. What I mean is: no matter how unpleasant the truth is, if it is the truth and it can be proved to be so, I will believe it.
But I refuse to believe anything that someone, somewhere said so, just because.
--BadSec
Some people never grow a spine, and as bitchy as it may sound, I have little to no respect for people like that. I have little to no respect for people who have the opportunity to be themselves and live their own lives, yet who are too afraid and instead choose to live life for others' opinions (Nota Bene: there are people who do not have a legitimate opportunity to be themselves, e.g. children or women in the Taliban; my disdain does not apply to them).
Because of my lifestyle and lack of religion, my family sees me as the devil incarnate, and we do not have a relationship to speak of; their decision. I offer to agree to disagree and still be a family, but they refuse. Oh, and by "lifestyle", I mean having a boyfriend, graduating college Magna Cum Laude while holding down a full-time professional day job, being an entrepreneur of two starting businesses, consistently maintaining an orderly household, maintaining finances (complete with an IRA, sizeable emergency fund, and all my debt [including 2 vehicles] being paid off in 2 years from now)....am I missing anything? Oh yeah, and I worked my way through college without taking out one cent of student loans. When I got divorced, the only thing I took were my personal things and a bed; I wanted none of his money--even though I found out he lied to me about how much he made (it was about triple what he said). Ok, I could do more charity work, but you get the idea--I'm basically a very together person! This is me at 26, and I have plans to do ever more.
I was divorced Oct. '07 and started dating my boyfriend in May. '08, but they consider me to have been cheating on my husband since at the time I did not have my annulment. Now that I've gotten it, it's still not good enough, because according to them the Catholic Church hands out annulments like candy. So I'm still guilty.
I am not trying to brag. I know many of my peers who have outshined me times a million and I feel pathetic in their presence. My point is, I have worked my ass off in my education, financial goals and future career; I'm just getting started, but I'm not a bad, lazy, stupid or incompetent person. Yet they see me as evil, selfish, hedonistic, etc. etc. All because of one thing--religion. If I did nothing different in all areas of my life but were still a faithful Catholic, they would all be beaming with joy. Their hypocrisy is oozing out their pores.
Sometime I may briefly explain why I got married and divorced, but suffice to say it was for truly legitimate reasons. I promise.
On Christmas Eve my brother decided it was a good time to tell me that I had mental problems, that my entire life is a lie, that I've ruined my life, and that he knows that I'm not happy no matter how much I claim I am. *facepalm* That's right, brother, because you're an expert on others' happiness. Interestingly enough, whenever I demanded that he give me a specific reason on how I have ruined my life, his only reason is that I got divorced. That's "ruin". I got news for you, dude. I'm happily divorced! His evidence for my so-called "mental problems" were that I am unstable (which he would not define though I requested it), and that neurotic people such as myself cannot see their own psychosis (his words). Again and again, I asked for specific examples of my own self-ruin but he could not deliver. Well, if this is me ruining my life at the ripe old age of 26, sign me up. I like the way my life is going and I'm excited about my future.
Truly, what kind of arrogance do you have to have in order to think it is ok to say to someone that they are ruining their lives, and that they have mental problems? Even while he was telling me all this I kept a very calm, collected demeanor. I even told him I loved him, and asked him to believe that I am following my conscience and that for me to live my life in a different way would be to live it dishonestly. He's the one who thinks his morals is so superior, yet who is the one who said unkind and judgmental things? Take a look in the mirror, brother! But to be so spiritually pompous as to believe it is ok to judge someone else so freely and vocally...to be so arrogantly convinced that your way is the right way and ONLY way...to think it is appropriate to say those things--I don't understand it.
Now, my brother, as well as the rest of my immediate family, is a good person. A great person. But his judgments of my morality are not only unfounded but based on emotion. If he could say, "You ruined your life because your cocaine habit has destroyed your relationships" or "Your life is over because you shot and killed three people and now you're on death row"--well, he would have a point.
Religion brainwashes people. It tells them what to think, what to believe, how to act. Not only does it try to explain away life's mysteries with the Invisible Man in the Sky theory, but an unintentional consequence (at least, in my family's case) is that they believe their beliefs are supremely superior to anything of mine, which gives them license to judge me, to spout malicious and blatantly untrue accusations against my character, to call me crazy and selfish and immoral--all in the name of righteousness, which apparently gives them a pass on "Judge not, lest ye be judged" and "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Their hearts and minds are completely closed to anything other than Their Ways or Their Beliefs or Their Opinions because Their Religion has told them What To Think. To think otherwise would be a sin. To think otherwise would be to question, examine, and weigh the evidence--scary stuff! Scary stuff it is to be wrong, to have unknowns. But scariest of all is to be knocked off your righteous pedestal and have to wallow around in the mud like the rest of us.
I think that's when you finally grow a backbone--when you think for yourself, know who you are, and refuse to compromise for anyone. If I compromised, or tried to please others in every way, I would be lying to myself. Not only would that make me very depressed and unhappy, but it's the wrong thing to do. Unfortunately many, many people are so afraid what other people think that they ruin their lives by living for others. There's a quote I like, "To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing". This is what I believe. I will be myself no matter what anyone thinks.
Unfortunately in my case what happened is my family has rejected me. Do I regret anything? Absolutely, positively not. I am by no means perfect, and I do not have all the answers, and there are things that I may be wrong about; but I can honestly swear that I live my life with honesty, integrity, curiosity and a search for the truth. I do not search for Dogma, which is believing what others tell you to believe with no evidence. But I search for truth. If that makes me a horrible person, so be it. If tomorrow God came down from above and made himself known and told me to be a Catholic (or any other religion), I would do it, no questions asked. I don't care what the truth is, but I want what I believe to be the truth. What I mean is: no matter how unpleasant the truth is, if it is the truth and it can be proved to be so, I will believe it.
But I refuse to believe anything that someone, somewhere said so, just because.
--BadSec
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Happiness Without God
It's the ultimate form of arrogance from the religious, that only those who believe in God (and their particular version of God) are happy. There are plenty of more modern religious people who are open to more than one pathway and people finding happiness suited to their personality, but there are millions more who wholeheartedly believe their way is the only way.
My mother falls into the latter category. Familial relations between her and my siblings are... strained, to put it mildly. Lately my mother and I have gotten to the point where we can exchange emails on neutral things such as funny YouTube videos, wacky news stories and the like--but we haven't seen each other or spoken on the phone in a year. This is progress. Which is why I was surprised yesterday when she invited me (by text) to lunch since she is in town visiting the good children (my religious siblings, not atheist me).
She knows that I don't believe in any religion and that I question God, but I haven't said the word "atheist" to her. The predictable thing about my relationship with my fanatically religious family is that I have never, ever, not once, done anything wrong to any of them personally, but they've ostracized me exactly as if I had. That fact is exactly what irritates me so. My offense is in questioning God and religion (and finding no substance there), not in actually causing them any harm, yet they react as if I had. As my mother once put it, and I quote, "our religion is our universe. You've chosen to leave it so we cannot have the relationship with you that you want." The 'relationship I want' was an agreement of mutual respect to agree to disagree but still be a family. That is literally all I asked for, but that is too much for them. Unfortunately, this is a very typical scenario, and truthfully my situation is better than many.
But I will not back down. She demanded that, if I wanted my family to have a relationship with me and my boyfriend, that I would have to sign and submit documentation to the local bishop proclaiming my official exodus of the Catholic Church. She also quoted Catholic Cannons to me (threw the book at me, so to speak) telling me why I should make my non-religion official. Of course I refused. It would be exactly like me submitting documents to the government of France letting them know I'm not French. Totally pointless. I need do nothing more than stop believing and stop participating for it to be official.
So probably against my better judgment, I agreed to lunch. I used to be so intimidated by her opinions and I was so convinced of her righteousness. Now as a freethinking adult, I can see her for the human being she is. A close-minded, arrogant, religious fanatic who feels she has the right to judge others because "God" disagrees with actions x and y, so she is allowed to look down on people because they do actions x and y--never noticing that it is a group of very imperfect humans who "educate" everyone as to what God likes and dislikes. But of course those humans claim that through a miraculous divine intervention known as ex cathedra, no official teaching of the Catholic Church will ever be wrong because God speaks through them at that time. Even if they are adulterous murderers who eat children and puppies, whatever they say ex cathedra is GOD'S WORD (yes, this is what I was taught and what the Catholic faithful believe).
I am looking forward to today. I have now become a humble, open-minded person who knows that she doesn't have all the answers, but is able to reason and use her brain enough to not attribute the universe to a figment of humans' imagination. As hard as it has been, I would not take any of it back. I would never, ever trade the truth for a relationship with people that is based on lies and fairy tales. My family believes I am a godless heathen (well, that's kinda true) who is perverted by hedonistic pleasures and has chosen my selfish self over obedience to God. Quite the contrary, it is my honest, sensible nature that prevents me from believing in something that doesn't make sense. I can't take seriously the idea that this invisible, inaudible, nonphysical being has total control over me and my soul. Where is the proof of such a being? In your "feelings"? In your fear of being wrong and going to hell? My sister actually explained her belief to me, that the Catholic Church is 2,000 years old so she figures it knows what it's talking about. That's what your faith is based on? Because enough idiots have been around long enough to perpetuate foolish ideas, so they must be right? That's not enough for me.
I am looking forward to showing my mother that I am a beautiful, happy, healthy person. I am honest and open, and do not live my life in fear. All my life growing up I was taught by her that you cannot be truly happy without God. After she became a Catholic 17 years ago, she more narrowly defined this idea to be you cannot be truly happy without being a good Catholic. And if you made the mistake of thinking you were happy without being Catholic, you were incomplete as a person, and lying to yourself. But if you become an ex-Catholic (*gasp*), why then you knew what you were doing was wrong and you did it anyway, which makes you evil and vile, narcissistic and selfish, and going straight to hell. I fall into this category. ;)
The truth is, I am happier than I have ever been! I am free and liberated and can just be a human without wasting my life in the purposeless shackles of religion. I am deeply, truly, and honestly happy and I'm not lying to myself.
--BadSec
My mother falls into the latter category. Familial relations between her and my siblings are... strained, to put it mildly. Lately my mother and I have gotten to the point where we can exchange emails on neutral things such as funny YouTube videos, wacky news stories and the like--but we haven't seen each other or spoken on the phone in a year. This is progress. Which is why I was surprised yesterday when she invited me (by text) to lunch since she is in town visiting the good children (my religious siblings, not atheist me).
She knows that I don't believe in any religion and that I question God, but I haven't said the word "atheist" to her. The predictable thing about my relationship with my fanatically religious family is that I have never, ever, not once, done anything wrong to any of them personally, but they've ostracized me exactly as if I had. That fact is exactly what irritates me so. My offense is in questioning God and religion (and finding no substance there), not in actually causing them any harm, yet they react as if I had. As my mother once put it, and I quote, "our religion is our universe. You've chosen to leave it so we cannot have the relationship with you that you want." The 'relationship I want' was an agreement of mutual respect to agree to disagree but still be a family. That is literally all I asked for, but that is too much for them. Unfortunately, this is a very typical scenario, and truthfully my situation is better than many.
But I will not back down. She demanded that, if I wanted my family to have a relationship with me and my boyfriend, that I would have to sign and submit documentation to the local bishop proclaiming my official exodus of the Catholic Church. She also quoted Catholic Cannons to me (threw the book at me, so to speak) telling me why I should make my non-religion official. Of course I refused. It would be exactly like me submitting documents to the government of France letting them know I'm not French. Totally pointless. I need do nothing more than stop believing and stop participating for it to be official.
So probably against my better judgment, I agreed to lunch. I used to be so intimidated by her opinions and I was so convinced of her righteousness. Now as a freethinking adult, I can see her for the human being she is. A close-minded, arrogant, religious fanatic who feels she has the right to judge others because "God" disagrees with actions x and y, so she is allowed to look down on people because they do actions x and y--never noticing that it is a group of very imperfect humans who "educate" everyone as to what God likes and dislikes. But of course those humans claim that through a miraculous divine intervention known as ex cathedra, no official teaching of the Catholic Church will ever be wrong because God speaks through them at that time. Even if they are adulterous murderers who eat children and puppies, whatever they say ex cathedra is GOD'S WORD (yes, this is what I was taught and what the Catholic faithful believe).
I am looking forward to today. I have now become a humble, open-minded person who knows that she doesn't have all the answers, but is able to reason and use her brain enough to not attribute the universe to a figment of humans' imagination. As hard as it has been, I would not take any of it back. I would never, ever trade the truth for a relationship with people that is based on lies and fairy tales. My family believes I am a godless heathen (well, that's kinda true) who is perverted by hedonistic pleasures and has chosen my selfish self over obedience to God. Quite the contrary, it is my honest, sensible nature that prevents me from believing in something that doesn't make sense. I can't take seriously the idea that this invisible, inaudible, nonphysical being has total control over me and my soul. Where is the proof of such a being? In your "feelings"? In your fear of being wrong and going to hell? My sister actually explained her belief to me, that the Catholic Church is 2,000 years old so she figures it knows what it's talking about. That's what your faith is based on? Because enough idiots have been around long enough to perpetuate foolish ideas, so they must be right? That's not enough for me.
I am looking forward to showing my mother that I am a beautiful, happy, healthy person. I am honest and open, and do not live my life in fear. All my life growing up I was taught by her that you cannot be truly happy without God. After she became a Catholic 17 years ago, she more narrowly defined this idea to be you cannot be truly happy without being a good Catholic. And if you made the mistake of thinking you were happy without being Catholic, you were incomplete as a person, and lying to yourself. But if you become an ex-Catholic (*gasp*), why then you knew what you were doing was wrong and you did it anyway, which makes you evil and vile, narcissistic and selfish, and going straight to hell. I fall into this category. ;)
The truth is, I am happier than I have ever been! I am free and liberated and can just be a human without wasting my life in the purposeless shackles of religion. I am deeply, truly, and honestly happy and I'm not lying to myself.
--BadSec
Thursday, October 28, 2010
God loves babies
Frequently I ponder the reasons why religious people typically have so many children. Coming from an uber-traditional Catholic brainwashing, I am often so relieved to be set free from the requirement of childbearing that I just can't understand how people would choose to be so controlled--not only for making babies, but for every aspect of control that religion must have. But about religion and breeding. Fundamentalists:
1. Believe all forms of birth control to be immoral
2. Believe procreation is a duty commanded by God
3. Believe they must create souls for the furthering of God's army
4. Don't give a shit (or a very little shit) about the environment
As a feminist, it saddens me greatly to think of the women's lives that have been hurt because of being spiritually coerced into a lifestyle they did not personally choose. I was almost one of those. In general it pains me to think of people who are forced into a life that is not suitable for their personality, but have no choice because "God wills it" and so they never really question it. And in the case of having many children, who would have time to question anything? You barely have time to take a shower! This lack of time is an issue that I think plays a role in many religious people's ability to think objectively about their blind faith, but maybe that's just me being an arrogant secularist.
Can atheists and secularists win in the arena of ideas? I want to say yes, because I am a positive person and I generally believe in the general goodwill of people. Atheism and secularism have more popularity and acceptance than ever before, but as atheists and secularists we are still woefully outnumbered. Atheists have no moral opposition to birth control. We're not stupid enough to believe that an invisible God expects us to breed for him because he's just so damn cuddly he wants more of us to love. We sincerely care about the environment. And if you're childfree like me, you love your life just as it is sans offspring.
Hmm. Maybe we should start breeding like crazy and take over the world!!!
So obviously we might have a problem. Atheists tend to procreate a lot less; does this mean our ideals will not be passed on to future generations? The answer is impossible to tell, but I think there is hope. As our knowledge of the world and culture and the variety of religions and lifestyles increases, as small-minded human beings we have no choice but to accept that there are Other Ways of Living Than Our Own. With acceptance can come understanding; with understanding can come conversion, and I think a good bit of that has happened. The exposure from TV, internet and radio all over the world has--for good or bad--been an eye-opening experience. Humans are naturally curious and what better to spark curiosity than cultural diversity? I think it's ample reason for people to examine their own way of life and to consider others' way. Maybe my religion isn't so right... maybe theirs isn't so wrong... or wait, maybe religion itself is the problem?
Back when the world was a lot more mysterious and small, religion served a purpose as an explanation for very many things. But that was when the Earth was flat, men or horses were gods, and abiogenesis was an accepted theory. As our knowledge increases, our reliance on the mythical decreases. There's a saying among Christians that "a baby is God's way of saying the world should go on." I happen to think it's more like "a baby is biology's way of saying you successfully put your penis in a vagina and ejaculated."
There's a short but good article on this topic at More Intelligent Life called Faith Equals Fertility. Some of the comments are enough to raise my blood pressure, like Tito Edwards:
Oh, Tito. How I used to be brainwashed just like you. You're a typical Catholic idiot, but you've made some interesting points.
I need to go relax now and get my blood pressure back down. Maybe I should do some offensive New Age Yoga.
--BadSec
1. Believe all forms of birth control to be immoral
2. Believe procreation is a duty commanded by God
3. Believe they must create souls for the furthering of God's army
4. Don't give a shit (or a very little shit) about the environment
As a feminist, it saddens me greatly to think of the women's lives that have been hurt because of being spiritually coerced into a lifestyle they did not personally choose. I was almost one of those. In general it pains me to think of people who are forced into a life that is not suitable for their personality, but have no choice because "God wills it" and so they never really question it. And in the case of having many children, who would have time to question anything? You barely have time to take a shower! This lack of time is an issue that I think plays a role in many religious people's ability to think objectively about their blind faith, but maybe that's just me being an arrogant secularist.
Can atheists and secularists win in the arena of ideas? I want to say yes, because I am a positive person and I generally believe in the general goodwill of people. Atheism and secularism have more popularity and acceptance than ever before, but as atheists and secularists we are still woefully outnumbered. Atheists have no moral opposition to birth control. We're not stupid enough to believe that an invisible God expects us to breed for him because he's just so damn cuddly he wants more of us to love. We sincerely care about the environment. And if you're childfree like me, you love your life just as it is sans offspring.
Hmm. Maybe we should start breeding like crazy and take over the world!!!
So obviously we might have a problem. Atheists tend to procreate a lot less; does this mean our ideals will not be passed on to future generations? The answer is impossible to tell, but I think there is hope. As our knowledge of the world and culture and the variety of religions and lifestyles increases, as small-minded human beings we have no choice but to accept that there are Other Ways of Living Than Our Own. With acceptance can come understanding; with understanding can come conversion, and I think a good bit of that has happened. The exposure from TV, internet and radio all over the world has--for good or bad--been an eye-opening experience. Humans are naturally curious and what better to spark curiosity than cultural diversity? I think it's ample reason for people to examine their own way of life and to consider others' way. Maybe my religion isn't so right... maybe theirs isn't so wrong... or wait, maybe religion itself is the problem?
Back when the world was a lot more mysterious and small, religion served a purpose as an explanation for very many things. But that was when the Earth was flat, men or horses were gods, and abiogenesis was an accepted theory. As our knowledge increases, our reliance on the mythical decreases. There's a saying among Christians that "a baby is God's way of saying the world should go on." I happen to think it's more like "a baby is biology's way of saying you successfully put your penis in a vagina and ejaculated."
There's a short but good article on this topic at More Intelligent Life called Faith Equals Fertility. Some of the comments are enough to raise my blood pressure, like Tito Edwards:
People of faith are more open to having children because they love God. God is life, so what better way to celebrate life than to have children. Hence the Culture of Life. Secularists, atheists, non-theists, tend to not believe in something more than themselves, so they think ONLY of themselves. High rates of narcissism are rampant amongst non-believers so hence you have higher rates of abortions. Abortions are more prevalent since non-believers are pretty selfish and since they don't believe life beyond their material existense they want evertying now. Sex without responsbility is probably the number one narcisistic value amongst non-believers. Why have children sucking away your money, when that money can be better spent on vacations, a second home, third car, misstress, etc. It's rather quite simple. But as St. Thomas Aquinas said, "those with faith, no explanation is necessary. Those without faith, no explanation is possible."
In Jesus, Mary, & Joseph,
Tito
Oh, Tito. How I used to be brainwashed just like you. You're a typical Catholic idiot, but you've made some interesting points.
People of faith are more open to having children because they love God. God is life, so what better way to celebrate life than to have children. Hence the Culture of Life.Pardon me while I facepalm for a moment. Ok, now that that's out of the way--do you have proof of God? Didn't think so. You have only a man-made religion full of rules and regulations that say you must behave in a certain way or the all-loving God will send you to hell for not obeying him. Gosh, he sounds so sweet! But that kind of belief is an excellent way of keeping the peons under control, isn't it? What you meant to say is that your religion dictates that you must have children, that birth control is evil, but they sugarcoat this rule by making you feel superior to others because you are "open to life." Did it ever occur to you that banning birth control will effectively increase the Catholic Church's membership on purpose, thereby increasing its profits and control over people's lives? Kind of like how our government and Hollywood glamorizes joining the military.
Secularists, atheists, non-theists, tend to not believe in something more than themselves, so they think ONLY of themselves. High rates of narcissism are rampant amongst non-believers so hence you have higher rates of abortions. Abortions are more prevalent since non-believers are pretty selfish and since they don't believe life beyond their material existense they want evertying now. Sex without responsbility is probably the number one narcisistic value amongst non-believers.Sorry, I must have forgotten the part where we met. You seem to think you know everything about me. For the record, retard, abortion is not always done for selfish reasons. And what's so wrong about sex without responsibility? Why is procreation a requirement? You would have sex "without responsibility" too if you could. But your religion has convinced you that you can't, so you tell yourself that you're better for being so responsible. Pompous much?
Why have children sucking away your money, when that money can be better spent on vacations, a second home, third car, misstress, etc.That's the most sense you've made! Though not a complete list, those are definitely some attractive reasons for not having kids. Except the mistresses part; I've no need for those.
But as St. Thomas Aquinas said, "those with faith, no explanation is necessary. Those without faith, no explanation is possible."Right on, right on, brother! You Christians love your blind faith. No explanation is necessary to those with faith because they are so certain they have all the answers; "God" gave them to the answers--or maybe it's just a bunch of people with a magical story.
I need to go relax now and get my blood pressure back down. Maybe I should do some offensive New Age Yoga.
--BadSec
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Letting Go of God
Julia Sweeney is an atheist who does a hilarious (and true!) skit based on her experience of religion in her life, called Letting Go of God. As an ex-Catholic, this hits home and is seriously amusing. The following is an excerpt of the skit, which can be purchased on DVD:
Sweeney has a simple, excellent point--one most religious people never consider. When you are a Catholic (or Jewish, Hindu, Islamic, etc.) articles of faith that require suspension of mental rationality are somehow favored as miracles of God, but everything else is just batshit. There is a perpetual "Us vs. Them" mentality. They're crazy, but we're not. Dogma like talking snakes, a teenage virgin impregnation, the "infallibility" of the papacy in ex cathedra, and bread and wine becoming the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus, all conveniently fall under the umbrella of "all things are possible with God."
--BadSec
But then the more I thought about it the more I had to be honest with myself. If someone came to my door and I was hearing Catholic theology and dogma for the very first time, and they said, "We believe that God impregnated a very young girl, without the use of intercourse--and the fact that she was a virgin is maniacally important to us--and she had a baby and that's the son of God." I mean, I would think that's equally ridiculous I'm just so used to that story.
Sweeney has a simple, excellent point--one most religious people never consider. When you are a Catholic (or Jewish, Hindu, Islamic, etc.) articles of faith that require suspension of mental rationality are somehow favored as miracles of God, but everything else is just batshit. There is a perpetual "Us vs. Them" mentality. They're crazy, but we're not. Dogma like talking snakes, a teenage virgin impregnation, the "infallibility" of the papacy in ex cathedra, and bread and wine becoming the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus, all conveniently fall under the umbrella of "all things are possible with God."
--BadSec
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)