Technorati Profile
Author Archive for The Anonymous AtheistPage 2 of 3
Aw man! I'm PG-13 rated. F*ck (gotta be safe for the 13 year olds right?). Think of all the somewhat good movies you've seen, and said "wow that would be much better with an R rating!" Yeah, one day maybe I'll have an R rating. Apparently the word sex trips it. I think I've heard talk of sex in G rated stuff before even. Oh well, nobody ever said it was accurate.
Mingle2 - Online Dating
Aw man! I'm PG-13 rated. F*ck (gotta be safe for the 13 year olds right?). Think of all the somewhat good movies you've seen, and said "wow that would be much better with an R rating!" Yeah, one day maybe I'll have an R rating. Apparently the word sex trips it. I think I've heard talk of sex in G rated stuff before even. Oh well, nobody ever said it was accurate.
Mingle2 - Online Dating
Do we, as Atheists, discriminate on the basis of religion? I guess a better question is, are we ok with that?
I touched on this a bit in my last post, but I wanted to give this it's own post. My wife and I were discussing this over dinner a while back, and we agree that "yes we do." She said then that she wishes she didn't, but I don't really feel bad about it. But is that wrong? People could say that it's just like discriminating based on sex, race, or sexual preference, and there are some valid comparisons, but I see it as an entirely different discrimination.
You are born as a certain sex, as a certain race. You become homosexual either because of genetics, chemical reactions, or your environment. These are things entirely out of our control, and to discriminate based on these traits would be immoral. However, political affiliation, views on social issues, and religion (among other things) are in a different league.
I would never base my opinion on someone because they are a Bush supporter, or because they believe in traditional family values, or because they are anti-abortion. However, if someone said the following:
Likewise, I would never base my opinion on someone who believed something they heard without getting any evidence. People do it all the time. But when presented with evidence, we tend to be rational and accept the fact that we're wrong. Therefore, when someone tells me they believe in Christianity (or any other religion for that matter), my first thought is usually "really? I thought you were more intelligent than that."
I have read a lot about many different religions. Throughout my life I've probably read at least half of the Bible. To me, none of the religions that I have read about provide any reasonable evidence of their validity, nor do they provide any real answers. Furthermore, while evidence exists that certain events in religious texts did happen, there is no evidence of anything "otherworldly" happening at any point in history. Just look at some of the things religion gives us:
Catholicism is controlled by a government of sorts, that can decide which beliefs people should hold. One day you may be told that you don't believe in something you've believed in all your life.
Mormons believe that a man got the word of God by looking into a hat.
Scientologists (do I even need to go there) believe that there are souls of creatures called Thetans attached to everyone that must be removed before one can become enlightened.
Christians believe in a god that, while willing to send you into the depths of hell to burn for all eternity if you break any of his commandments without asking him for forgiveness, loves you very much and is interested in everything you do throughout the day.
Isn't this worth discrimination? At least as much as someone saying they have an invisible friend who follows them around during the day? As much as people who truly believe knocking on wood will prevent bad things from happening?
Don't get me wrong, if I were in a position to hire, I would never value an Atheist over a Christian. If I were renting a house, I would never value an Atheist over a Muslim. I don't discriminate against anyone in that sense, and I have no problem being friends with religious people, as long as they are ok with me. But intellectually speaking, I value Atheism above all religion, and I will always think differently about believers because of their willingness to forgo all rationality and support a superstition thousands of years old.
I've typed the word "discriminate" so much that it's starting to just look like random letters shoved together, so I think now is a good time to stop.
I touched on this a bit in my last post, but I wanted to give this it's own post. My wife and I were discussing this over dinner a while back, and we agree that "yes we do." She said then that she wishes she didn't, but I don't really feel bad about it. But is that wrong? People could say that it's just like discriminating based on sex, race, or sexual preference, and there are some valid comparisons, but I see it as an entirely different discrimination.
You are born as a certain sex, as a certain race. You become homosexual either because of genetics, chemical reactions, or your environment. These are things entirely out of our control, and to discriminate based on these traits would be immoral. However, political affiliation, views on social issues, and religion (among other things) are in a different league.
I would never base my opinion on someone because they are a Bush supporter, or because they believe in traditional family values, or because they are anti-abortion. However, if someone said the following:
Democrats are all godless anti-American heathens who are trying to take women out of their rightful place at home, taking care of their masters, and letting them kill babies willy-nilly. They should all be killed and die a slow and painful death.I would discriminate against them, gladly, and without reserve.
Likewise, I would never base my opinion on someone who believed something they heard without getting any evidence. People do it all the time. But when presented with evidence, we tend to be rational and accept the fact that we're wrong. Therefore, when someone tells me they believe in Christianity (or any other religion for that matter), my first thought is usually "really? I thought you were more intelligent than that."
I have read a lot about many different religions. Throughout my life I've probably read at least half of the Bible. To me, none of the religions that I have read about provide any reasonable evidence of their validity, nor do they provide any real answers. Furthermore, while evidence exists that certain events in religious texts did happen, there is no evidence of anything "otherworldly" happening at any point in history. Just look at some of the things religion gives us:
Catholicism is controlled by a government of sorts, that can decide which beliefs people should hold. One day you may be told that you don't believe in something you've believed in all your life.
Mormons believe that a man got the word of God by looking into a hat.
Scientologists (do I even need to go there) believe that there are souls of creatures called Thetans attached to everyone that must be removed before one can become enlightened.
Christians believe in a god that, while willing to send you into the depths of hell to burn for all eternity if you break any of his commandments without asking him for forgiveness, loves you very much and is interested in everything you do throughout the day.
Isn't this worth discrimination? At least as much as someone saying they have an invisible friend who follows them around during the day? As much as people who truly believe knocking on wood will prevent bad things from happening?
Don't get me wrong, if I were in a position to hire, I would never value an Atheist over a Christian. If I were renting a house, I would never value an Atheist over a Muslim. I don't discriminate against anyone in that sense, and I have no problem being friends with religious people, as long as they are ok with me. But intellectually speaking, I value Atheism above all religion, and I will always think differently about believers because of their willingness to forgo all rationality and support a superstition thousands of years old.
I've typed the word "discriminate" so much that it's starting to just look like random letters shoved together, so I think now is a good time to stop.
Do we, as Atheists, discriminate on the basis of religion? I guess a better question is, are we ok with that?
I touched on this a bit in my last post, but I wanted to give this it's own post. My wife and I were discussing this over dinner a while back, and we agree that "yes we do." She said then that she wishes she didn't, but I don't really feel bad about it. But is that wrong? People could say that it's just like discriminating based on sex, race, or sexual preference, and there are some valid comparisons, but I see it as an entirely different discrimination.
You are born as a certain sex, as a certain race. You become homosexual either because of genetics, chemical reactions, or your environment. These are things entirely out of our control, and to discriminate based on these traits would be immoral. However, political affiliation, views on social issues, and religion (among other things) are in a different league.
I would never base my opinion on someone because they are a Bush supporter, or because they believe in traditional family values, or because they are anti-abortion. However, if someone said the following:
Likewise, I would never base my opinion on someone who believed something they heard without getting any evidence. People do it all the time. But when presented with evidence, we tend to be rational and accept the fact that we're wrong. Therefore, when someone tells me they believe in Christianity (or any other religion for that matter), my first thought is usually "really? I thought you were more intelligent than that."
I have read a lot about many different religions. Throughout my life I've probably read at least half of the Bible. To me, none of the religions that I have read about provide any reasonable evidence of their validity, nor do they provide any real answers. Furthermore, while evidence exists that certain events in religious texts did happen, there is no evidence of anything "otherworldly" happening at any point in history. Just look at some of the things religion gives us:
Catholicism is controlled by a government of sorts, that can decide which beliefs people should hold. One day you may be told that you don't believe in something you've believed in all your life.
Mormons believe that a man got the word of God by looking into a hat.
Scientologists (do I even need to go there) believe that there are souls of creatures called Thetans attached to everyone that must be removed before one can become enlightened.
Christians believe in a god that, while willing to send you into the depths of hell to burn for all eternity if you break any of his commandments without asking him for forgiveness, loves you very much and is interested in everything you do throughout the day.
Isn't this worth discrimination? At least as much as someone saying they have an invisible friend who follows them around during the day? As much as people who truly believe knocking on wood will prevent bad things from happening?
Don't get me wrong, if I were in a position to hire, I would never value an Atheist over a Christian. If I were renting a house, I would never value an Atheist over a Muslim. I don't discriminate against anyone in that sense, and I have no problem being friends with religious people, as long as they are ok with me. But intellectually speaking, I value Atheism above all religion, and I will always think differently about believers because of their willingness to forgo all rationality and support a superstition thousands of years old.
I've typed the word "discriminate" so much that it's starting to just look like random letters shoved together, so I think now is a good time to stop.
I touched on this a bit in my last post, but I wanted to give this it's own post. My wife and I were discussing this over dinner a while back, and we agree that "yes we do." She said then that she wishes she didn't, but I don't really feel bad about it. But is that wrong? People could say that it's just like discriminating based on sex, race, or sexual preference, and there are some valid comparisons, but I see it as an entirely different discrimination.
You are born as a certain sex, as a certain race. You become homosexual either because of genetics, chemical reactions, or your environment. These are things entirely out of our control, and to discriminate based on these traits would be immoral. However, political affiliation, views on social issues, and religion (among other things) are in a different league.
I would never base my opinion on someone because they are a Bush supporter, or because they believe in traditional family values, or because they are anti-abortion. However, if someone said the following:
Democrats are all godless anti-American heathens who are trying to take women out of their rightful place at home, taking care of their masters, and letting them kill babies willy-nilly. They should all be killed and die a slow and painful death.I would discriminate against them, gladly, and without reserve.
Likewise, I would never base my opinion on someone who believed something they heard without getting any evidence. People do it all the time. But when presented with evidence, we tend to be rational and accept the fact that we're wrong. Therefore, when someone tells me they believe in Christianity (or any other religion for that matter), my first thought is usually "really? I thought you were more intelligent than that."
I have read a lot about many different religions. Throughout my life I've probably read at least half of the Bible. To me, none of the religions that I have read about provide any reasonable evidence of their validity, nor do they provide any real answers. Furthermore, while evidence exists that certain events in religious texts did happen, there is no evidence of anything "otherworldly" happening at any point in history. Just look at some of the things religion gives us:
Catholicism is controlled by a government of sorts, that can decide which beliefs people should hold. One day you may be told that you don't believe in something you've believed in all your life.
Mormons believe that a man got the word of God by looking into a hat.
Scientologists (do I even need to go there) believe that there are souls of creatures called Thetans attached to everyone that must be removed before one can become enlightened.
Christians believe in a god that, while willing to send you into the depths of hell to burn for all eternity if you break any of his commandments without asking him for forgiveness, loves you very much and is interested in everything you do throughout the day.
Isn't this worth discrimination? At least as much as someone saying they have an invisible friend who follows them around during the day? As much as people who truly believe knocking on wood will prevent bad things from happening?
Don't get me wrong, if I were in a position to hire, I would never value an Atheist over a Christian. If I were renting a house, I would never value an Atheist over a Muslim. I don't discriminate against anyone in that sense, and I have no problem being friends with religious people, as long as they are ok with me. But intellectually speaking, I value Atheism above all religion, and I will always think differently about believers because of their willingness to forgo all rationality and support a superstition thousands of years old.
I've typed the word "discriminate" so much that it's starting to just look like random letters shoved together, so I think now is a good time to stop.
As I'm sure many of you are aware, Bush is vetoing another stem cell research bill. Again, the potential of the Scientific community to better the lives of millions has been hindered.
My question is "why?" Why on earth would the President consider himself in a position to stop such a bill? His faith! That's all it is.
Look, there are so many discarded embryos that just get destroyed. Why not put them to good use? Women are going to have abortions (unless the administration can stop that too). Fertility clinics almost always freeze way more embryos than needed, which get discarded after conception. Why not use that invaluable resource for the good of humanity?
There are already some lines that we can use, but they won't go very far. Why not clone them?
The only answer I can come up with for these questions is that it is against God's wishes. This notion of the "Sanctity of Life" must stop. Is it more important to protect cells that are going to be destroyed, or to potentially end (or at least relieve) Alzheimers and Parkinson's?
Beyond the stem cell debate, you have gay marriage and abortion. Two things that, at their core, should not be a problem. But when the administration enforces Christianity-- fundamentalist Christianity-- we end up with policies that stifle the scientific process.
This is not a red vs. blue, liberal vs. conservative, or democrat vs. republican debate. It is a debate between fundamentalist Christian governing and rational governing.
People may call me unfair by suggesting that fundamentalist Christians are irrational, but ... well, they are. I'm sure they are perfectly capable of rational thought, as is every one of us, but when they choose to forgo rational thought in favor of faith in what a few people thousands of years ago claimed to hear from a higher being, they deserve to be called irrational.
And what's more, we have a Republican candidate for president right now who believes in scriptures that a man claimed to have gotten from inside a hat. Isn't there something wrong when we, as a nation, allow this completely irrational notion of faith to infect our lives?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to say that only atheists should be president. What I'm saying is that we should not allow the country to be run on faith! Granted, the majority of the country is Christian, but a very significant portion is not. When Bush goes against what the people want, in favor of his own faith, we have a problem.
So when will it stop? Will it ever? Are we really headed toward a Christian nation, or am I being paranoid?
Here are some fun links for you:
The Politics of Stem Cells
Stem Cells: Policies and Players
Laura Ingraham likens stem cell research to public executions
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer likens stem cell research to concentration camps (Godwin's law has spilled over to TV)
My question is "why?" Why on earth would the President consider himself in a position to stop such a bill? His faith! That's all it is.
Look, there are so many discarded embryos that just get destroyed. Why not put them to good use? Women are going to have abortions (unless the administration can stop that too). Fertility clinics almost always freeze way more embryos than needed, which get discarded after conception. Why not use that invaluable resource for the good of humanity?
There are already some lines that we can use, but they won't go very far. Why not clone them?
The only answer I can come up with for these questions is that it is against God's wishes. This notion of the "Sanctity of Life" must stop. Is it more important to protect cells that are going to be destroyed, or to potentially end (or at least relieve) Alzheimers and Parkinson's?
Beyond the stem cell debate, you have gay marriage and abortion. Two things that, at their core, should not be a problem. But when the administration enforces Christianity-- fundamentalist Christianity-- we end up with policies that stifle the scientific process.
This is not a red vs. blue, liberal vs. conservative, or democrat vs. republican debate. It is a debate between fundamentalist Christian governing and rational governing.
People may call me unfair by suggesting that fundamentalist Christians are irrational, but ... well, they are. I'm sure they are perfectly capable of rational thought, as is every one of us, but when they choose to forgo rational thought in favor of faith in what a few people thousands of years ago claimed to hear from a higher being, they deserve to be called irrational.
And what's more, we have a Republican candidate for president right now who believes in scriptures that a man claimed to have gotten from inside a hat. Isn't there something wrong when we, as a nation, allow this completely irrational notion of faith to infect our lives?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to say that only atheists should be president. What I'm saying is that we should not allow the country to be run on faith! Granted, the majority of the country is Christian, but a very significant portion is not. When Bush goes against what the people want, in favor of his own faith, we have a problem.
So when will it stop? Will it ever? Are we really headed toward a Christian nation, or am I being paranoid?
Here are some fun links for you:
The Politics of Stem Cells
Stem Cells: Policies and Players
Laura Ingraham likens stem cell research to public executions
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer likens stem cell research to concentration camps (Godwin's law has spilled over to TV)
As I'm sure many of you are aware, Bush is vetoing another stem cell research bill. Again, the potential of the Scientific community to better the lives of millions has been hindered.
My question is "why?" Why on earth would the President consider himself in a position to stop such a bill? His faith! That's all it is.
Look, there are so many discarded embryos that just get destroyed. Why not put them to good use? Women are going to have abortions (unless the administration can stop that too). Fertility clinics almost always freeze way more embryos than needed, which get discarded after conception. Why not use that invaluable resource for the good of humanity?
There are already some lines that we can use, but they won't go very far. Why not clone them?
The only answer I can come up with for these questions is that it is against God's wishes. This notion of the "Sanctity of Life" must stop. Is it more important to protect cells that are going to be destroyed, or to potentially end (or at least relieve) Alzheimers and Parkinson's?
Beyond the stem cell debate, you have gay marriage and abortion. Two things that, at their core, should not be a problem. But when the administration enforces Christianity-- fundamentalist Christianity-- we end up with policies that stifle the scientific process.
This is not a red vs. blue, liberal vs. conservative, or democrat vs. republican debate. It is a debate between fundamentalist Christian governing and rational governing.
People may call me unfair by suggesting that fundamentalist Christians are irrational, but ... well, they are. I'm sure they are perfectly capable of rational thought, as is every one of us, but when they choose to forgo rational thought in favor of faith in what a few people thousands of years ago claimed to hear from a higher being, they deserve to be called irrational.
And what's more, we have a Republican candidate for president right now who believes in scriptures that a man claimed to have gotten from inside a hat. Isn't there something wrong when we, as a nation, allow this completely irrational notion of faith to infect our lives?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to say that only atheists should be president. What I'm saying is that we should not allow the country to be run on faith! Granted, the majority of the country is Christian, but a very significant portion is not. When Bush goes against what the people want, in favor of his own faith, we have a problem.
So when will it stop? Will it ever? Are we really headed toward a Christian nation, or am I being paranoid?
Here are some fun links for you:
The Politics of Stem Cells
Stem Cells: Policies and Players
Laura Ingraham likens stem cell research to public executions
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer likens stem cell research to concentration camps (Godwin's law has spilled over to TV)
My question is "why?" Why on earth would the President consider himself in a position to stop such a bill? His faith! That's all it is.
Look, there are so many discarded embryos that just get destroyed. Why not put them to good use? Women are going to have abortions (unless the administration can stop that too). Fertility clinics almost always freeze way more embryos than needed, which get discarded after conception. Why not use that invaluable resource for the good of humanity?
There are already some lines that we can use, but they won't go very far. Why not clone them?
The only answer I can come up with for these questions is that it is against God's wishes. This notion of the "Sanctity of Life" must stop. Is it more important to protect cells that are going to be destroyed, or to potentially end (or at least relieve) Alzheimers and Parkinson's?
Beyond the stem cell debate, you have gay marriage and abortion. Two things that, at their core, should not be a problem. But when the administration enforces Christianity-- fundamentalist Christianity-- we end up with policies that stifle the scientific process.
This is not a red vs. blue, liberal vs. conservative, or democrat vs. republican debate. It is a debate between fundamentalist Christian governing and rational governing.
People may call me unfair by suggesting that fundamentalist Christians are irrational, but ... well, they are. I'm sure they are perfectly capable of rational thought, as is every one of us, but when they choose to forgo rational thought in favor of faith in what a few people thousands of years ago claimed to hear from a higher being, they deserve to be called irrational.
And what's more, we have a Republican candidate for president right now who believes in scriptures that a man claimed to have gotten from inside a hat. Isn't there something wrong when we, as a nation, allow this completely irrational notion of faith to infect our lives?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to say that only atheists should be president. What I'm saying is that we should not allow the country to be run on faith! Granted, the majority of the country is Christian, but a very significant portion is not. When Bush goes against what the people want, in favor of his own faith, we have a problem.
So when will it stop? Will it ever? Are we really headed toward a Christian nation, or am I being paranoid?
Here are some fun links for you:
The Politics of Stem Cells
Stem Cells: Policies and Players
Laura Ingraham likens stem cell research to public executions
Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer likens stem cell research to concentration camps (Godwin's law has spilled over to TV)
I have to say, I think my brother-in-law is more fun than most. When I was growing up, whenever I would think to the future, I always feared that if I ever got married my brother-in-law would be the typical every man. I dreaded the day that I would be forced to watch football games or NASCAR races in an attempt to bond with my then-hypothetical wife's brother.
But last night, my wife, my aforementioned brother-in-law, and I went out stargazing.
When I was younger, I did spend some nights just lying in the grass, staring up at the stars in amazement. But last night was the first time I'd ever seen anything magnified that wasn't an image on NASA's website or similar.
As you can tell, David has some experience here, so he was our tour guide to the stars. I saw the moon magnified to the point of actually seeing detail, instead of just yellowish and brownish splotches. I saw the rings of Saturn, four moons of Jupiter, a binary star (I believe it was Albireo, David will have to correct me if I'm wrong), and the Dumbbell Nebula, however faint it might have been.
Before last night, I saw the night sky as a bunch of tiny lights. I always knew that they were stars, planets, galaxies, clusters, and nebulas. But it really set in last night. In the grand scheme of things, we live on what amounts to a speck of dust, which makes us even smaller. It really puts you in your place!
As enormous as the universe is, I can't understand how anyone could possibly conceive of an entity creating it all, much less for the use of the beings on one planet. If this was true, what a waste of space the universe is!
I take comfort in knowing how insignificant we really are. That may sound depressing, but I think it's exhilarating! We can be significant to thousands, maybe even millions of people if we're important to the planet, but we can't affect the cosmos. We could blow up the Earth and the vast universe would continue on without skipping a beat.
Think of how significant our insignificance really is: the universe formed over billions of years, gradually morphing from basic elements into stars and galaxies, planets and moons. Approximately 3.8 billion years ago, the earliest life forms appear, gradually evolving until 200 million years ago, when the first mammals appeared. Then, 600,000 years ago, Homo Sapiens evolve, and over time develop culture. Countless languages are formed, enabling us to study the earth and the universe, develop mathematics and science, philosophy and religion. Over 600,000 years we've evolved, and today we have the technology that enables me to write this blog entry that you're reading right now.
That's what I call significant! It is truly significance through insignificance.
Now the question is, why would you want to ruin that glorious process of the evolution of all things by saying that someone did it?! How does your life have more meaning when you think someone created you to do his bidding? How could you find any glory in being a pawn? Perhaps this is an oversimplification, but the point still stands.
I'm rambling a bit, I'll admit. Back to the point:
I've been a walking zombie all day because of lack of sleep (but it was worth it). Still, all day I haven't been able to get the rings of Saturn out of my head. I saw that, with my own eyes. Very obviously a planet, with definite pronounced rings. After what I've seen, and taken time to appreciate, I will most definitely never be the same.
I now understand the human desire to explore the universe. I understand why people, almost since the beginning of recorded history, have mapped out the stars and tried to make sense of it all. It's the great unknown, and it's intriguing! Do religious people feel this way? Do they have that sense of the great unknown? I don't know if I would want to live without it.
The great thing is, I never have to.
But last night, my wife, my aforementioned brother-in-law, and I went out stargazing.
When I was younger, I did spend some nights just lying in the grass, staring up at the stars in amazement. But last night was the first time I'd ever seen anything magnified that wasn't an image on NASA's website or similar.
As you can tell, David has some experience here, so he was our tour guide to the stars. I saw the moon magnified to the point of actually seeing detail, instead of just yellowish and brownish splotches. I saw the rings of Saturn, four moons of Jupiter, a binary star (I believe it was Albireo, David will have to correct me if I'm wrong), and the Dumbbell Nebula, however faint it might have been.
Before last night, I saw the night sky as a bunch of tiny lights. I always knew that they were stars, planets, galaxies, clusters, and nebulas. But it really set in last night. In the grand scheme of things, we live on what amounts to a speck of dust, which makes us even smaller. It really puts you in your place!
As enormous as the universe is, I can't understand how anyone could possibly conceive of an entity creating it all, much less for the use of the beings on one planet. If this was true, what a waste of space the universe is!
I take comfort in knowing how insignificant we really are. That may sound depressing, but I think it's exhilarating! We can be significant to thousands, maybe even millions of people if we're important to the planet, but we can't affect the cosmos. We could blow up the Earth and the vast universe would continue on without skipping a beat.
Think of how significant our insignificance really is: the universe formed over billions of years, gradually morphing from basic elements into stars and galaxies, planets and moons. Approximately 3.8 billion years ago, the earliest life forms appear, gradually evolving until 200 million years ago, when the first mammals appeared. Then, 600,000 years ago, Homo Sapiens evolve, and over time develop culture. Countless languages are formed, enabling us to study the earth and the universe, develop mathematics and science, philosophy and religion. Over 600,000 years we've evolved, and today we have the technology that enables me to write this blog entry that you're reading right now.
That's what I call significant! It is truly significance through insignificance.
Now the question is, why would you want to ruin that glorious process of the evolution of all things by saying that someone did it?! How does your life have more meaning when you think someone created you to do his bidding? How could you find any glory in being a pawn? Perhaps this is an oversimplification, but the point still stands.
I'm rambling a bit, I'll admit. Back to the point:
I've been a walking zombie all day because of lack of sleep (but it was worth it). Still, all day I haven't been able to get the rings of Saturn out of my head. I saw that, with my own eyes. Very obviously a planet, with definite pronounced rings. After what I've seen, and taken time to appreciate, I will most definitely never be the same.
I now understand the human desire to explore the universe. I understand why people, almost since the beginning of recorded history, have mapped out the stars and tried to make sense of it all. It's the great unknown, and it's intriguing! Do religious people feel this way? Do they have that sense of the great unknown? I don't know if I would want to live without it.
The great thing is, I never have to.
I have to say, I think my brother-in-law is more fun than most. When I was growing up, whenever I would think to the future, I always feared that if I ever got married my brother-in-law would be the typical every man. I dreaded the day that I would be forced to watch football games or NASCAR races in an attempt to bond with my then-hypothetical wife's brother.
But last night, my wife, my aforementioned brother-in-law, and I went out stargazing.
When I was younger, I did spend some nights just lying in the grass, staring up at the stars in amazement. But last night was the first time I'd ever seen anything magnified that wasn't an image on NASA's website or similar.
As you can tell, David has some experience here, so he was our tour guide to the stars. I saw the moon magnified to the point of actually seeing detail, instead of just yellowish and brownish splotches. I saw the rings of Saturn, four moons of Jupiter, a binary star (I believe it was Albireo, David will have to correct me if I'm wrong), and the Dumbbell Nebula, however faint it might have been.
Before last night, I saw the night sky as a bunch of tiny lights. I always knew that they were stars, planets, galaxies, clusters, and nebulas. But it really set in last night. In the grand scheme of things, we live on what amounts to a speck of dust, which makes us even smaller. It really puts you in your place!
As enormous as the universe is, I can't understand how anyone could possibly conceive of an entity creating it all, much less for the use of the beings on one planet. If this was true, what a waste of space the universe is!
I take comfort in knowing how insignificant we really are. That may sound depressing, but I think it's exhilarating! We can be significant to thousands, maybe even millions of people if we're important to the planet, but we can't affect the cosmos. We could blow up the Earth and the vast universe would continue on without skipping a beat.
Think of how significant our insignificance really is: the universe formed over billions of years, gradually morphing from basic elements into stars and galaxies, planets and moons. Approximately 3.8 billion years ago, the earliest life forms appear, gradually evolving until 200 million years ago, when the first mammals appeared. Then, 600,000 years ago, Homo Sapiens evolve, and over time develop culture. Countless languages are formed, enabling us to study the earth and the universe, develop mathematics and science, philosophy and religion. Over 600,000 years we've evolved, and today we have the technology that enables me to write this blog entry that you're reading right now.
That's what I call significant! It is truly significance through insignificance.
Now the question is, why would you want to ruin that glorious process of the evolution of all things by saying that someone did it?! How does your life have more meaning when you think someone created you to do his bidding? How could you find any glory in being a pawn? Perhaps this is an oversimplification, but the point still stands.
I'm rambling a bit, I'll admit. Back to the point:
I've been a walking zombie all day because of lack of sleep (but it was worth it). Still, all day I haven't been able to get the rings of Saturn out of my head. I saw that, with my own eyes. Very obviously a planet, with definite pronounced rings. After what I've seen, and taken time to appreciate, I will most definitely never be the same.
I now understand the human desire to explore the universe. I understand why people, almost since the beginning of recorded history, have mapped out the stars and tried to make sense of it all. It's the great unknown, and it's intriguing! Do religious people feel this way? Do they have that sense of the great unknown? I don't know if I would want to live without it.
The great thing is, I never have to.
But last night, my wife, my aforementioned brother-in-law, and I went out stargazing.
When I was younger, I did spend some nights just lying in the grass, staring up at the stars in amazement. But last night was the first time I'd ever seen anything magnified that wasn't an image on NASA's website or similar.
As you can tell, David has some experience here, so he was our tour guide to the stars. I saw the moon magnified to the point of actually seeing detail, instead of just yellowish and brownish splotches. I saw the rings of Saturn, four moons of Jupiter, a binary star (I believe it was Albireo, David will have to correct me if I'm wrong), and the Dumbbell Nebula, however faint it might have been.
Before last night, I saw the night sky as a bunch of tiny lights. I always knew that they were stars, planets, galaxies, clusters, and nebulas. But it really set in last night. In the grand scheme of things, we live on what amounts to a speck of dust, which makes us even smaller. It really puts you in your place!
As enormous as the universe is, I can't understand how anyone could possibly conceive of an entity creating it all, much less for the use of the beings on one planet. If this was true, what a waste of space the universe is!
I take comfort in knowing how insignificant we really are. That may sound depressing, but I think it's exhilarating! We can be significant to thousands, maybe even millions of people if we're important to the planet, but we can't affect the cosmos. We could blow up the Earth and the vast universe would continue on without skipping a beat.
Think of how significant our insignificance really is: the universe formed over billions of years, gradually morphing from basic elements into stars and galaxies, planets and moons. Approximately 3.8 billion years ago, the earliest life forms appear, gradually evolving until 200 million years ago, when the first mammals appeared. Then, 600,000 years ago, Homo Sapiens evolve, and over time develop culture. Countless languages are formed, enabling us to study the earth and the universe, develop mathematics and science, philosophy and religion. Over 600,000 years we've evolved, and today we have the technology that enables me to write this blog entry that you're reading right now.
That's what I call significant! It is truly significance through insignificance.
Now the question is, why would you want to ruin that glorious process of the evolution of all things by saying that someone did it?! How does your life have more meaning when you think someone created you to do his bidding? How could you find any glory in being a pawn? Perhaps this is an oversimplification, but the point still stands.
I'm rambling a bit, I'll admit. Back to the point:
I've been a walking zombie all day because of lack of sleep (but it was worth it). Still, all day I haven't been able to get the rings of Saturn out of my head. I saw that, with my own eyes. Very obviously a planet, with definite pronounced rings. After what I've seen, and taken time to appreciate, I will most definitely never be the same.
I now understand the human desire to explore the universe. I understand why people, almost since the beginning of recorded history, have mapped out the stars and tried to make sense of it all. It's the great unknown, and it's intriguing! Do religious people feel this way? Do they have that sense of the great unknown? I don't know if I would want to live without it.
The great thing is, I never have to.
From Dogma:
And the definition of "belief" from dictionary.com:
I can't say that I believe in anything, really.
Take extraterrestrial life for instance. I think that, since the universe is so staggeringly large, the potential for some life somewhere other than on earth is significant. Besides that, I think it would be depressing to think that in this massive cosmos only one little fraction of a speck has life. But do I believe in it? I can't say that I do. I have never been presented with any real evidence other than the random supposed UFO sighting. One could make the point that this constitutes evidence, and yes, it does. But it is not irrefutable. It's not rigorous by any means. It is very possible that there is life elsewhere, and it is very possible that there is no life elsewhere. I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but I do hope for it. I certainly don't base anything in my life on the existence or non-existence of life outside of earth.
Now, on the other hand, take evolution. I don't believe in evolution, because the very sentiment diminishes the concept! Believe in evolution? Never! It has been rigorously tested, to the point of proof... UNLESS your mind is clouded with this notion of belief, and you can't accept the proof. Is it possible that the theory of evolution is false? Sure! It's also possible that I was just created this very second, and that every memory I have was merely planted in me upon my creation. It's possible that, at the beginning of time, God, Thor, and Zeus had a bet going to see who could get the most followers if they were to create a playing field, and that's how we were created. Many, many things are possible. But Evolution is as much fact as anything else in existence.
Beliefs cause wars. Beliefs cause the blind mistrust of anything that threatens one's world view. I say, get rid of your beliefs, and start having ideas!
DISCLAIMER: You will, undoubtedly, hear me say or see me write "I believe..." from time to time. It's part of our language, and it's hard to shake. But whenever I say that, I guess what I mean is "I'm convinced..."
Rufus: He still digs humanity, but it bothers Him to see the shit that gets carried out in His name - wars, bigotry, televangelism. But especially the factioning of all the religions. He said humanity took a good idea and, like always, built a belief structure on it.
Bethany: Having beliefs isn't good?
Rufus: I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. Life should malleable and progressive; working from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant.
And the definition of "belief" from dictionary.com:
- something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.
- confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.
- confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.
- a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.
I can't say that I believe in anything, really.
Take extraterrestrial life for instance. I think that, since the universe is so staggeringly large, the potential for some life somewhere other than on earth is significant. Besides that, I think it would be depressing to think that in this massive cosmos only one little fraction of a speck has life. But do I believe in it? I can't say that I do. I have never been presented with any real evidence other than the random supposed UFO sighting. One could make the point that this constitutes evidence, and yes, it does. But it is not irrefutable. It's not rigorous by any means. It is very possible that there is life elsewhere, and it is very possible that there is no life elsewhere. I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but I do hope for it. I certainly don't base anything in my life on the existence or non-existence of life outside of earth.
Now, on the other hand, take evolution. I don't believe in evolution, because the very sentiment diminishes the concept! Believe in evolution? Never! It has been rigorously tested, to the point of proof... UNLESS your mind is clouded with this notion of belief, and you can't accept the proof. Is it possible that the theory of evolution is false? Sure! It's also possible that I was just created this very second, and that every memory I have was merely planted in me upon my creation. It's possible that, at the beginning of time, God, Thor, and Zeus had a bet going to see who could get the most followers if they were to create a playing field, and that's how we were created. Many, many things are possible. But Evolution is as much fact as anything else in existence.
Beliefs cause wars. Beliefs cause the blind mistrust of anything that threatens one's world view. I say, get rid of your beliefs, and start having ideas!
DISCLAIMER: You will, undoubtedly, hear me say or see me write "I believe..." from time to time. It's part of our language, and it's hard to shake. But whenever I say that, I guess what I mean is "I'm convinced..."
From Dogma:
And the definition of "belief" from dictionary.com:
I can't say that I believe in anything, really.
Take extraterrestrial life for instance. I think that, since the universe is so staggeringly large, the potential for some life somewhere other than on earth is significant. Besides that, I think it would be depressing to think that in this massive cosmos only one little fraction of a speck has life. But do I believe in it? I can't say that I do. I have never been presented with any real evidence other than the random supposed UFO sighting. One could make the point that this constitutes evidence, and yes, it does. But it is not irrefutable. It's not rigorous by any means. It is very possible that there is life elsewhere, and it is very possible that there is no life elsewhere. I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but I do hope for it. I certainly don't base anything in my life on the existence or non-existence of life outside of earth.
Now, on the other hand, take evolution. I don't believe in evolution, because the very sentiment diminishes the concept! Believe in evolution? Never! It has been rigorously tested, to the point of proof... UNLESS your mind is clouded with this notion of belief, and you can't accept the proof. Is it possible that the theory of evolution is false? Sure! It's also possible that I was just created this very second, and that every memory I have was merely planted in me upon my creation. It's possible that, at the beginning of time, God, Thor, and Zeus had a bet going to see who could get the most followers if they were to create a playing field, and that's how we were created. Many, many things are possible. But Evolution is as much fact as anything else in existence.
Beliefs cause wars. Beliefs cause the blind mistrust of anything that threatens one's world view. I say, get rid of your beliefs, and start having ideas!
DISCLAIMER: You will, undoubtedly, hear me say or see me write "I believe..." from time to time. It's part of our language, and it's hard to shake. But whenever I say that, I guess what I mean is "I'm convinced..."
Rufus: He still digs humanity, but it bothers Him to see the shit that gets carried out in His name - wars, bigotry, televangelism. But especially the factioning of all the religions. He said humanity took a good idea and, like always, built a belief structure on it.
Bethany: Having beliefs isn't good?
Rufus: I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. Life should malleable and progressive; working from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant.
And the definition of "belief" from dictionary.com:
- something believed; an opinion or conviction: a belief that the earth is flat.
- confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof: a statement unworthy of belief.
- confidence; faith; trust: a child's belief in his parents.
- a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief.
I can't say that I believe in anything, really.
Take extraterrestrial life for instance. I think that, since the universe is so staggeringly large, the potential for some life somewhere other than on earth is significant. Besides that, I think it would be depressing to think that in this massive cosmos only one little fraction of a speck has life. But do I believe in it? I can't say that I do. I have never been presented with any real evidence other than the random supposed UFO sighting. One could make the point that this constitutes evidence, and yes, it does. But it is not irrefutable. It's not rigorous by any means. It is very possible that there is life elsewhere, and it is very possible that there is no life elsewhere. I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but I do hope for it. I certainly don't base anything in my life on the existence or non-existence of life outside of earth.
Now, on the other hand, take evolution. I don't believe in evolution, because the very sentiment diminishes the concept! Believe in evolution? Never! It has been rigorously tested, to the point of proof... UNLESS your mind is clouded with this notion of belief, and you can't accept the proof. Is it possible that the theory of evolution is false? Sure! It's also possible that I was just created this very second, and that every memory I have was merely planted in me upon my creation. It's possible that, at the beginning of time, God, Thor, and Zeus had a bet going to see who could get the most followers if they were to create a playing field, and that's how we were created. Many, many things are possible. But Evolution is as much fact as anything else in existence.
Beliefs cause wars. Beliefs cause the blind mistrust of anything that threatens one's world view. I say, get rid of your beliefs, and start having ideas!
DISCLAIMER: You will, undoubtedly, hear me say or see me write "I believe..." from time to time. It's part of our language, and it's hard to shake. But whenever I say that, I guess what I mean is "I'm convinced..."
I don't think my mom was ever pleased at my lack of religion, but this woman is just crazy:
I don't think my mom was ever pleased at my lack of religion, but this woman is just crazy:
I'm in! The blogroll is displayed using custom code by David W
I'm in! The blogroll is displayed using custom code by David W
Planet Atheism buttons
FAQ (includes joining info)
RSS feed
Email subscription
