I write a lot of negative things, and a lot of people get really pissed off at me thinking that for some reason just because I look critically at the Poster Boys of atheism and the militant sentiments that often fly off of them I for some reason am a christian apologist. That this means I’m a closet christian. That this means I just don’t understand how much religion is hurting our world. That this means I must be clueless to the fact that people in theocratic countries suffer because of religion every day. That this means I don’t understand the pain and suffering a child unknowingly goes through because of religious indoctrination. That this means I must think abortion is okay, because I love Christians.
I do love Christians. My mom, sister, step-dad, aunt, grandmother, cousins and best friend are all Christian. And I love them all, very much. I don’t support people who cut them down intellectually, emotionally and socially because of their faith. I don’t support people who don’t want to hear their side of issues, who don’t want them to be able to practice their faith or who think that talking to them is a waste of time. I don’t support the Rational Response Squad because of the horribly intolerant attitude toward religion. I am *not* intolerant of religion. I am intolerant of religion in my legislation, I am intolerant of religion controlling my decisions on birth, I am intolerant of religion starting wars, I am intolerant of religion being pushed onto children who have no choice, I am intolerant of religion in the class room, I am intolerant of my taxpayer dollars going to religious schools, I am intolerant of my gay best friend not being allowed to get married, I am intolerant of people thinking I have no morals because I have no religion, I am intolerant of the militarism that is portrayed through religion, I am intolerant of hate crimes…
I may be nice to Christians, and I may want to hear what they have to say…and I may also not want to listen to atheists bitch and moan or listen to them talk about how stupid Christians and religion is – but this in no way translates to “I’m a scared little atheist girl who is just so scared of the big scary world! I’m just not ready to tell religions to go away, and I just want everyone to get along!” … I don’t care if everyone gets along, as long as there are capitalists there is competition and as long as there is competition there is fighting. I’m totally cool with that. I just don’t care about what religious people do in the privacy of their homes.
It’s like sex… don’t force it on me or any children to do it and don’t do it in parliament or the schools or in public and I don’t care what you do. Do it in your own home, of building that YOU pay for with consenting adults.
I feel like my history has a lot to do with why I think like this, and why people never understand where I’m coming from. I am a previous evangelical Christian. I worked at a christian camp for years, where I met practically all of my friends that I was close with. I was a member of the “Clarkson Crusade for Christ” at my high school and would go to the flag pole to pray every morning at 7am. I went to church with my mom and my step dad (a minister), and at church I was an active congregation member. I sang in the church choir, I ran the 30 hour famine with over 40 students at the church, I went to retreats to learn how to further my relationship with God and I taught Sunday school classes to younger kids. I thought abortion was wrong, I thought that gays were a little off and I was against the evil media trying to put horrible ideas of sex, alcohol, drugs and consumption into my head. I wanted to travel to Africa to be a missionary, to teach others how to love Christ. I wanted to go to the honor academy in Texas so I could devote my life a youth minister. I even went to those horrible Acquire the Fire rallies in Hamilton (they mostly happen in the states) with host Ron Luce who would convince me that I was a horrible person. With my hands in the air, tears streaming down my face, I would sob to the “Lord” to wash me clean of my sins. I would fall to my knees and beg Ron Luce, Jesus and God to forgive me for being such a horrible person.
The flip side of this is that I saw the beauty and wonder in the universe, that I also saw as God’s creation. I now see the beauty and owner in the universe in science, discovery and exploration, but that’s beside the point. I felt happy every single day, because I was important to god. It made it easier to deal with horrible things that happened in my life. It made it very easy to think I was doing good in the world by praying. I felt good.
One day someone asked me “What’s so horrible about TV? The bible is more violent than the shows I watch.” …I thought that was pretty valid. When I asked my Sunday School teacher he brushed me off, I didn’t like that. So I asked “Why is there suffering if there is a God? There must be no God.”…I got an evil glare and was asked to leave the class and go back to class. When I got home that Sunday I started reading. And within a few nights decided there was nothing wrong with being gay. Soon after I decided there was nothing wrong with abortion, TV, premarital sex, and that there was probably no God. At the time I kept a live journal and wrote that on there. It got Googled and was found by my camp, I was asked not to come back. I lost all my friends. Soon I lost all my friends at school too, because they were C4Cers. I lost my faith, family and friends in a matter of 2 weeks.
The rest is pretty much – I did radio/writing/blogging/debating about religion, I found CFI and thought it was cool, I joined and now all my friends are atheist and I work there. (Only that happened over the course of like 3 years)
So now I’m left sitting in this post-Christian life, and those of you who have never been in that religious life can honesty – never understand what I’m sitting with. I have deep internalized guilt about almost everything I do. I cry so incredibly hard sometimes because I am so guilty about my life. For some reason, I think that because I’ve left religion I am a horrible person. I have been indoctrinated with the idea of heaven and hell. I am worried that I will be in hell. I have been indoctrinated to think that the abortion I decided to have was killing something that had a path in life. I still, for some reason, cling to this idea of “a right to life” for all humans even before sentience. There is absolutely no logical reason I can think of as to why, but it brings up all kinds of sad, guilty and angry emotions.
So, why have I shared this? 1) I understand what Christians feel, see and go through. I’ve been there, and for some people, it is a great thing. They need religion to cope, live and love. That’s fine. 2) The reason I am so incredibly against religion is because of what it does to children. I am a living, breathing example of a child who was indoctrinated with this bullshit and now has to attempt to deal with it in their day to day life. It rips me apart inside.
Hopefully this little rant can give people a little more insight into how I think, and why I write what I write. I am a critical person who takes criticism poorly. I am support of religion that says in the private life, because I know how much comfort it offers people. I am against religion being pushed on, taught to and slammed into children and confused teenagers. But to those who aren’t doing it? I refuse to call them irrational, I refuse to call them stupid and I refuse to attempt to take down their support base. As Voltaire said “I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will fight to the death your right to say it.” I will also fight to the death to keep religion off of women’s bodies, out of children’s minds, out of science and out of politics. That is why I work where I work. …I spend every waking hour that I’m not at school at the Center for Inquiry promoting secularism, freedom of expression and proper political strategies.
I don’t think the poster boys are elitist. I just don’t think they understand me, religious people or what I stand for. So I don’t support them. The next person to tell me it must be “easy” for me to be an atheist in Canada… really needs to reread this. This is by far the hardest thing I’ve ever had to go through in my entire life, and I would not wish it upon my worst enemy.
Comments
RSS
Digg!
Stumble
Tweet
It’s much harder to retrain your gut than your mind. The sense of guilt will fade away with time.
Thanks for sharing, you are a brave and honest person to do so, Katie.
And I do realise I just wrote that comment a few seconds after posting the first two parts in defence of ‘militant’ atheism. Though those first two barely touch and go into our disagreements I guess
Ebonmuse has blogged on this very question in Daylight Atheism: “Extinguishing the Fear of Hell”
http://www.daylightatheism.org/2008/10/extinguishing-the-fear-of-hell.html
He proposes both trying to desensitize oneself and to consider the hells of other religions. To which I’d add the hells of other Christian sects, like Catholicism.
If the more traditionalist sort of Catholics are right, then all non-Catholic Christians will go to Hell because they have turned their backs to Jesus Christ’s earthly successor, the Pope, because they’ve denied the authority of the Church and its traditions, because they’ve shown disrespect to the Virgin Mary and the saints, etc. So if you dismiss saying Hail Maries as superstitious, you’ll be going to Hell.
If the Mormons are right, you’ll be in deep trouble in the next world for rejecting Joseph Smith as a fraud and con artist.
If some Hindus and Buddhists are right, you risk getting reincarnated as a cockroach — or worse.
If Hellenic pagans are right, you’ll be judged by King Minos of Crete. And if Egyptian pagans are right, you’ll be judged by the god Osiris.
Etc.
I’d be willing to bet most of the “atheist poster boys” would feel the same as Tauriq. Some of them came out of evangelical or fundamentalist backgrounds as well (Shermer, Brian Dunning, and others). There is no question that militant atheists can be pretty abrasive, but abrasiveness is sometimes necessary. They aren’t always like that. Everybody thinks P. Z. Myers is a real SOB because their only exposure to him is through his blog, yet his reputation is that he’s a really nice guy in person.
A lot of the abrasiveness of militant atheists probably comes as a defense against the level of personal attacks that the must endure from the “love thy neighbor” lobby. It is difficult to maintain normal civility under the circumstances that a vocal critic of theism typically encounters, and the severity of these circumstances increases the closer you get to the front lines. If you publish a book, appear in a film or write a popular blog critical of religion, you can expect some unbelievably nasty stuff to get lobbed your way (all the more so if you are a former believer). None of us would like to get Christopher Hitchens’ email.
That would harden anybody’s exterior.
Hello Katie,
It’s a shame that you have fallen away from Christianity, and not by the sounds of things, because of your own doing. Your Sunday school teacher should definitely have given you the answer for why there is suffering in the world, or at least had said that he would find out for you if he didn’t really know. Brushing you off was unacceptable.
Losing your family and friends within 2 weeks too is very worrying, and they themselves need to look at whether they truly ARE Christians, because a true Christian Katie, would have spent time with you and discussed your concerns or any worries you may have had. They should certainly have NOT cut you off. That’s completely non-Christ-like behaviour. But unfortunately, there are many ‘false convert’ Christians in the world today I’m afraid, who cause more damage than good.
If you haven’t guessed already, I am a Christian
And have many friends and family members who are NOT. Yes, I try and witness to them as much as I can without completely getting on their nerves, but if they don’t listen or are not interested, then I just pray for them. And that’s what we need to do, witness as much as possible, but don’t go for conversions like many religions (Christianity is not a religion).
I’ve just stopped by the first time to your blog as I was searching around Google, and perhaps maybe I found your entry here for a reason.
Once again, I can only apologise on behalf of those ‘Christians’ who have let you down. Please don’t just give up on the Lord though. There’s more and more evidence available nowadays to trust in the Bible and the Word of God, and in particular the Genesis account of Creation. Evolution, for example, is an unproven theory that’s unfortunately becoming the accepted norm at the moment; and to be honest with you, it’s not even a particularly good theory either when you really look into it. Visit http://www.answersingenesis.org if you’re interested in learning the problems with Evolution. And this one too http://www.creationworldview.org/articles, which has many articles on the subject. I’m NOT affiliated with either of them, but do think they’re worth a visit.
If you are still interested, Katie, in hearing the answer to why there is suffering if there is a God, then please drop me an email, and I’d be more than happy to respond as best I can.
Take care, and for what it’s worth, God Bless you.
Barry
I agree with the indoctrinating children part of religion, and this is probably (aside from getting into the political arena) my biggest grievance against it; it is sad to see people inducted into such a belief system at an age where they don’t even know fully the consequences of such a belief system. And because of the parents from there the cycle repeats itself over and over again, because who would want to send their children to (potentially) hell?
I disagree however with the notion that “religion has started all these wars”. I can guarantee you that the underlying cause of 90% of the wars that are going on right now or have happened was for resources – land, oil, water, trade commodities, political power, etc. Religion is simply exploited as a vehicle by certain belligerents as a recruiting tool and/or to maintain the morale of the troops. Even during an overtly ‘religious war’ such as the Crusades, Pope Innocent III implied that he was ‘jealous’ of the vast lands that the Muslim Empires controlled in Asia and Africa, and that Christianity should not be confined to Europe.
Katie, I never intended you to take my comment so hard, and I apologize for the way I said what I did.
I went through a similar deconversion process and yes, I maintain friendships with Christians, including within my own family.
My problem is that many people stick their necks out and face criticism for what they say, and I think that Dawkins, Harris, Dennett and Hitchens are quite inaccurately portrayed. I thought you had taken what could have been a great post on a positive person and marred it by attacking the most famous atheists.
Religion is very personal, I know, and what disturbs me is that there doesn’t seem to be any way to discuss its falseness without being seen as being hateful. The misperception that people have of Dawkins and the rest is not how they say what they say, but based on what they say. Too many people think that religion is some sort of untouchable subject, unlike politics, sports, etc, where people are expected and allowed to have passion. When it comes to the subject of religion, I see in your approach a need for everyone to close off with “Well let’s just agree to disagree” before any serious issues are resolved.
Perhaps there is no gentle way to do it, but the fact that some people are gaining notoriety for trying should not be used against them, and certainly not by atheists and skeptics. You are certainly right to disagree with them on the substance of what they say, but I think it is wrong to use name-calling against them.
I’ve been a lurker for a while, but I’m going to pop out to say…
*hug*
PZ really is a great guy in person. I’ve met him.
Hello,
Answers in Genesis does not even know what evolution is. Please read the FAQ section of http://www.talkorigins.org . I’m serious. Answers in Genesis and many other creationists do not know what evolution actually is and are arguing against something that, while it contains elements of evolution, is not evolution.
Evolution is a fact. Evolution is essentially this: one species turning into another species. That’s the basic change that we call evolution. We have seen this in the lab with e. coli changing fundamentally. This fundamental change was the new bacteria could eat a chemical that e. coli can’t eat.
Evolution is a fact because we have seen it happen.
The term “evolution” is also used to refer to the scientific theory that tries to explain the mechanisms that lead animals to change into other species. First, a theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world. It is a very well supported description of how the world works AND it can be used to make predictions. Evolution is such a theory. There is much evidence for the current mechanisms we think are behind it (DNA, fossils, seeing it happen in a lab, etc) PLUS we can make predictions based on how we think the mechanisms work and lo and behold, they get verified when we go out and see how things work. HOWEVER, evolution is still an active field of research and biologists still argue with each other about specific details of things. But, they all agree evolution has happened.
I want you to know that science never “proves” anything in the sense that you can prove something in a mathematical proof. Science works with what information we have now. The things we discover now become our facts until something else comes along that is better. This is the beauty of science, it corrects itself and improves through time. Until something comes along to show horrendous flaws in evolution, which no one has (but I’m open to the possibility), evolution is a fact and evolution is a theory that is well substantiated.
In the end, I ask you to be honest with yourself and accept evidence no matter where it is from. There is sooo much evidence for evolution it is amazing. Don’t try to disprove evolution because you want to protect your belief in Genesis. That is not intellectually honest. I’m not calling you dishonest though, because I don’t know your motives, I’m just saying to guard yourself from committing intellectual dishonesty.
So please, I beg you to read and inform yourself of the FAQ section of http://www.talkorigins.org. I hope it answers your questions, because in all honesty, when someone denies evolution, it is because they have not learned what it actually is. I will visit Answers in Genesis if you go and read http://www.talkorigins.org.
By the way, what do you mean Christianity is not a religion?
Thank you.
-Roy
Barry
“and they themselves need to look at whether they truly ARE Christians, because a true Christian Katie, would have spent time with you and discussed your concerns or any worries you may have had. ”
– please investigate “No True Scotsman” fallacy.
“it’s not even a particularly good theory either when you really look into it. ”
- Ive been studying it for a number of years and I find it THE most incredible (but hey that’s just me – dont take my word for it). I would ask what you know about it, investigate talkorigins as Roy suggests and see what you make of that “not particularly good theory”.
You sound like a nice person and I hope you are able to investigate these further. If you still dont, good, but I hope you understand evolution a bit more before you dismiss it.
I also recommend Michael Shermer’s “Why Darwin Matters”, Kenneth Miller (a Christian like you) “Finding Darwin’s God”. I hope this helps.
We both have a similar religious background but I have come to different conclusions.
I see religion as a harmful, and drastic error, which causes people to not be able to deal with life, nature, and reality as it is.
One chief example is that my whole perspective radically changed when I stopped believing in an afterlife, and I felt that my belief in the afterlife robbed me of actually making good life decisions.
I don’t see religion as something arbitrary like whether or not someone prefers one color or one kind of architecture. I see it as a massive error about the world we live in.
I love many christians as well, but my love often comes in hard questions, not just a thumbs up as I believe they blind themselves to reality.
aw
thanks!
Are you implying that religion is either only good or only bad?
Have you read Crazy for God by Frank Schaeffer? It chronicles his years not only as the son of evangelical guru Francis Schaeffer, but his foray into more issues-centric endeavors. What hurt me about the book is also what I loved: his authenticity. In a sense, he leaves his faith; but in another, he finds it.
And that’s where I camp, and why I love Jesus today. He took me through the hell life can be and brought me through. It wasn’t pretty. It wasn’t easy. But He brought me through–in a winsome, inviting, sometimes bewildering way.
Thank you for your honesty.
Katie-
I have difficulty trusting Christians…
…not all Christians, but the ones for whom “morality” is “obedience” to a familial and/or clerical hierarchy and/or scripture.
You see, morality means a lot to me, and I think of Evangelicals and Fundamentalists as being Clockwork Oranges, incapable of making a moral choice for themselves.
Bring Sarah “Pitbull” Palin into the picture and it gets worse.
That being said, I do have family who I try to love very much, and they try to love me. I was born into a very secular variant of the Jewish tradition, my Jewish immediate family is atheist to a default at this point in my life. My Christian cousins (on my mom’s side) used to be the cool cousins who I looked forward to seeing when I was a kid… until I was 16-17, and I stopped believing in God/gods. Then it became uncomfortable for me, because I could not talk to them about the things that mattered to me.
I don’t make small talk. I think small talk is for people with nothing important to say. It’s just that everything important I have to say would deeply offend my cousins, and their faith is privileged to the extent that I can hear about it from them, but when I visited them this summer, during that week of vacation, I could barely say anything to them because I am used to hanging out with nerds, geeks, freaks, punks and brainiacs with an irreverent sense of humor and thicker skin.
So it’s a matter of comfort. I’m uncomfortable around the blind and faithful because frankly, I don’t understand their basis for making moral decisions. I use reason. They go with a preacher’s interpretation of an arcane passage in a book originally written as a cultural unifying epic by elites who were pampered prisoners in Babylon, based on oral mythologies that preceded writing— as well as every significant fact we have since derived about the physical world.
I think, in private, with like-minded people, I can sound cruel and intolerant as anyone. At the end of the day, though, I’m the one making a moral choice. So I think having the moral high ground here is important, not something to lose, though I easily could lose it if I behaved like the Rational Responders in my daily life. But I still think I have a reasonable distrust of what Christians call “morality” and I call “obedience” to authority. They are not the same thing, and this confusion by the religious is legitimately frightening, and I think none of us are beyond fear.
-Barry Greenstein (not to confused with the above Creationist
)
Katie-
One question, since you brought up the indoctrination of kids. Where do you stand on homeschooling? Frankly I think it should be illegal (and private schooling a severely regulated business). I think the creed of one’s parents should have no bearing on a child’s access to quality education, and homeschooling is a way that parents can cheat this. I don’t know what the situation with homeschooling is in Canada, but here it is out of hand.
-Barry
Hello Roy,
Thanks for your reply.
Your definition of evolution is incorrect. Evolution does not involve one species turning into another. If that were all it was, then we would all be evolutionists, because we quite clearly frequently see one species turning into another. This happens by natural selection – a concept invented not by Darwin, but by the creationist, Edward Blyth (incidentally, in the first edition of the Origin of Species, Darwin plagiarised Blyth’s work without reference. It was not until the third edition, that he grudgingly acknowledged that some of his ideas were from Blyth).
Natural selection involves new species developing by the rearrangement or reduction of genetic information. For example, Darwin’s famous finches develop longer or shorter beaks, by new species developing in geographical isolation. This is not evolution. At no time did a finch change into an albatross! This would require additional genetic information, and we never see this happen. Mutations, whether favourable or unfavourable, always involve a loss of genetic information. Evolution requires an increase in genetic evolution – so evolution never happens. New species develop within certain kinds. Animals never evolve across kinds.
The subject of bacteria is an interesting question in point. It is often supposed that we are watching evolution in action, when we see the development of antibiotic resistant strains of MRSA in hospitals. The article at http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v2/n1/darwin-at-drugstore shows that actually this mutation is a retrograde step for the bacteria – yet the bacteria survive in hospitals, precisely because their usually stronger competitors are wiped out by being killed by antibiotics. The article also answers, in a technical manner, the argument that E Coli is an example of evolution. It is not. It is in fact quite the reverse!
God Bless,
Barry
How about this definition, Barry? Evolution is the differential reproduction and mortality of phenotypes and associated genotypes. That should answer all your questions, but if it doesn’t…
The process of changes in the distribution of alleles from generation to generation you refer to is called “Micro-Evolution.” However, what most Creationists and ID Theorists are unwilling to comprehend is that micro-evolution in the long run results in speciation.
Now here’s a zinger for you: species, diachronically (this means through time) is an arbitrary concept. In the transition of ape-like ancestors to modern humans, there was absolutely no point at which members of one generation could not have interbred with members of the next generation. Our original classifications of species applied to living animals, not fossil populations, and carrying those definitions and classifications back through time has only resulted in confusion. The point is, species is an arbitrary designation. What we have are populations that over time undergo so much genetic change (not just due to natural selection, which reduces variation while mutation results in new variation, but other processes other than natural selection like genetic drift, etc. which Creationists never seem to be too familiar with).
No, Darwin was not the first naturalist to speak of Natural Selection. But he was the one who described the mechanisms by which it operates. Furthermore, Darwin was off. After 150 years of continuous work, we have something called the Modern Synthesis which a quick visit to Wikipedia will tell you is not the same as “Darwinian” Evolution. It is the refined scientific theory that is the consensus of the field today, and yes it posits that all of life on Earth evolved from a common ancestor, over billions of years, through processes like micro-evolution and niche construction.
“This would require additional genetic information, and we never see this happen.”
—Well, Barry, how then do you explain the appearance of new genetic information when we trace our phylogeny back using the natural “clock” of molecular DNA sequencing? Also, are you aware that mutations can be neutral, conferring no advantage, until a change in an organism’s environment brings selective pressures to act on that mutation? Prior to this change, a neutral mutation can be preserved because it does not adversely affect fitness.
By the way,
http://www.nmsr.org/nylon.htm
here is an example of a frame shift mutation that produced new information. This particular mutation allowed a bacterium to metabolize nylon waste and thus exploit a new niche. Not a degradation of information here, but the addition of new and useful information.
As for the E. coli argument, reversals happen in evolution. Let me tell you something about the class Hirudinae in the phylum Annelida. You may know these as leeches, segmented worms known for their parasitism. As members of the class Hirudinae adapted to a parasitic lifestyle, they lost many of the characteristics their ancestors once shared with free-living annelids because a parasite does not need these things to survive. However, traits responsible for successful parasitism were preserved and propogated among populations of non-free living (parasitic) Hirudinae.
Also, please qualify your statement that “Christianity is not a religion.” Tell me why this is true, whereas if I were to say that “Leather is not an animal product” or “Parliament/Congress is not a governing body” I would be met by resounding accusations of false hood and lies.
-Barry Greenstein
This is a good question Roy.
The definition of Religion can be a shifting goal post. When you have people like Archbishop Shelby Spong basically defining christianity as just rituals and artistic psycho-drama, I can’t complain about that. The kind of definitions that we get from Bob Price are another example, Bob calls himself a religious atheist, or a Christian atheist. This kind of religion gives me no pause.
I would have to specify that I think any religion which has doctrines and dogmas which actively contradict what we know about reality or nature (especially belief in the afterlife) are always harmful.
This seems to be the kind of Christianity Katie practiced, and certainly the kind I practiced.
I believe this phenomena must pass away for humanity to ever achieve its potential.
I tend to be in the religion must be replaced cam, because it does give people so much meaning. But i have no idea what should replace it.
[...] READ THE REST OF THIS ENTRY AT “EDGER” [...]
“Kenneth Miller (a Christian like you)”
I don’t know if I’d use that phrase Tauriq
What about parents who are fully qualified teachers? Can they not choose to teach the curriculum to their own children in their own homes?
What if a parent is a fully qualified teacher and their child has severe special needs which are not properly looked after in public school (due to funding cuts perhaps), yet this parent has the time, money, and energy to teach the child him/herself?
I don’t think we can blanket ban homeschooling, but we can control it.
But to only allow fully qualified teachers to home school their kids would be discrimination.
Keep as many kids as possible in the public schools- including the children of rich parents who otherwise would be sequestered in private schools- and you won’t have to worry about those kind of budget cuts. I am not pretending the public school system is perfect as it is, just that we let alternative schools get away with murder while gutting the public schools like cannibals.
Katie:
What a brave and wonderful person you are! Thanks for such a heartfelt article, I’m sorry you’ve faced a lot of rejection. I believe as humans we have to be taught to tolerate differing opinions and be more open to dialogue.
I,m a new skeptic, questioning her faith and I find some of the hardliners of Atheism too abrasive also. But you must admit, they have better senses of humor!
katie,
I am grew up like you-a hard core fundamentalist Christian. I too, turned away in disgust of the fanatics and rallies and crusades and the lessons I was taught. however, I could never shake that the world came into existence on…accident? Knowing I could not live as an agnostic, I took upon myself to decide what the truth is from a skepital perspective, reading both cases for and against Christianity, evolution, and various philosophies and religions. What I have found is the truth. There is a God, he is not impersonal, and he does not need me to be a fanatic or culturally bound by Christians-who are just human and are, as you said, looking for reasons to cope live and love. i still believe i am a skeptic -but everyone believes something in the end.
A very interesting and thoroughly enjoyable post… While my Islamic religious upbringing wasn’t quite as fundamentalist or evangelical, it was nonetheless very strict and conservative. For the longest time, due to various reasons, leaps/errors of logic and juggling of evidence, I did believe that my religion/cult had it right and others weren’t quite there, if not outright wrong and incorrect. Like you, I arrived at a similar conclusion regarding religion and the “existence” of God, an afterlife, faith and all the dressings and accouterments that come with it, and like you, I hold no ill will towards the religious, as I count among them, my family (both the genetically and non-genetically related individuals), including my wife. While my stance on “atheist-theist relations” is similar to yours, I must say, I often do see the point of the “atheist poster-boys” in their abrasive attitude towards religion, in that, more often than not (I could totally be wrong on this, so please forgive me and correct me if I am) it appears that their rantings and ravings are either of the exasperated or self-defense nature. While calling you names or assigning you attributions like “Christian apologist” or “closet Christian” or even, “fence-sitter” or “cake-eater” are reprehensible and indefensible, calling out the faithful in their fallacies, errors, lack of perspective or blindness, on their morality, philosophy or any other issue that they claim superiority could and should be done as long as they continue to proselytize, “witness” or evangelize. While those that would pray for such things as, say, a safe journey home, or a speedy recovery for a sick loved one are not malicious in their intent, those that would “pray for you” because your beliefs don’t match theirs are only putting their snobbishness and elitism on display, because, they are absolutely conveying that you are like a child who doesn’t know any better and it is their place and job to get you there, whether it is by divine intervention or their “witnessing”. Such people should be knocked down a notch or ten and not all of us have the chutzpah, knowledge or debating skills necessary to do that; I believe therein lies the necessity and good in the poster-boys’ militant aggressiveness and abrasiveness.
I don’t know why… but I want to post a hate spam. maybe its because I only read the last part, and I’m too tired to actually care. well good night. oh and in the usa, its sometimes difficult to be a Christian, and way easy to be an atheist. its a lot easier to say you don’t believe in anything that to say you believe in something only to be forced to prove it to other people. I’m not saying we shouldn’t be able to…. screw it I’m too tired. go read a book. good night! xD
Katie,
Thanks for your thought-provoking post. I’ve had similar life experiences and used to think as you’ve described, but no more. I read about the apologists for segregation in the U.S. Southern States and it began to feel like I was following in their footsteps. They’d argue, “Negroes have the freedom to do what they want in their schools, businesses & churches – we (whites) just want the same freedom to do what we want in our schools, businesses & churches”.
Similarly, you argue, “I refuse to attempt to take down their [believer's] support base” because “They need religion to cope, live and love. ”
The problem comes in those three words, “cope, live & love.”
What if “they” [believers] can only *cope* with their hidden gayness by condemning it in others?
What if “they” think to *live* rightly is to make it legal for pharmacists to refuse to sell birth control?
What if “they”, as you found out in those 2 weeks you lost your friends, are systematically brain-washed to limit *love* only to those who are also believers?
Just a thought, and offered with no disrespect: Are you still trying to please “them”, when you would ultimately be happier and freer if you confront them?
Thanks again!
See, here’s your problem, and why I’m angry. Barry couldn’t be more wrong. Wrong, wrong wrong. He sounds like he’s smart, but he’s not making this up – he’s copying it word for word for a site that says that the earth is 6000 years old. Is the earth 6000 years old? Should you listen to ANYONE who says it is?
Now, if Barry wants to be dumb on his own, that’s fine. But Barry wants ALL of us to be dumb. The simple truth is that science and religion are enemies. They say very different things about the earth, and about humanity. One has facts, the other has faith.
Christians want all of us to be dumb. Not in the “2+2=5″ way, but in the “don’t think about anything too much,” kinda way. Faith is the opposite of thinking. If you thought about the illogical nature of faith and religion, it’s pretty obvious.
Now, you may be fine with this, but the second people start letting their faith get in the way of the logic that makes our laws and our rights, I get pissed. I don’t have time for them – we’ve got hungry and sick people in the world. You know – the people the Christians promised they’d take care of.
So if someone gets in the way of logic, I really don’t care what invisible cloud being they get off on. They are working against society, they belong to a cult, and they make the world a more dangerous place.