While we're on the topic of girls…

Some of my friends (both male and female) were giving me a hard time because a guy has never bought me a drink in a bar/pub/anywhere. Now, even though I’m a college student, I don’t go out that often… and when I do go out, I’m not dressed (like every other girl) in a mini skirt and a shirt where my boobs are about to flop out. But they seem to think this situation is completely socially unacceptable, and that I need to try hard to flirt it up and get free drinks.

Really?

I mean, there’s a tiny part of me that would like it, I guess, for a fraction of a second. It would be nice having a guy show interest in you, assuming he’s not a total creeper. But then you realize the only reason he’s doing it is to get in your pants, and all the charm goes straight out the window. That is the only reason, right guys? Or do the noble intentions of some get ruined by the devious intentions of others?

This is post 44 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.

While we’re on the topic of girls…

Some of my friends (both male and female) were giving me a hard time because a guy has never bought me a drink in a bar/pub/anywhere. Now, even though I’m a college student, I don’t go out that often… and when I do go out, I’m not dressed (like every other girl) in a mini skirt and a shirt where my boobs are about to flop out. But they seem to think this situation is completely socially unacceptable, and that I need to try hard to flirt it up and get free drinks.

Really?

I mean, there’s a tiny part of me that would like it, I guess, for a fraction of a second. It would be nice having a guy show interest in you, assuming he’s not a total creeper. But then you realize the only reason he’s doing it is to get in your pants, and all the charm goes straight out the window. That is the only reason, right guys? Or do the noble intentions of some get ruined by the devious intentions of others?

This is post 44 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.

Evil new technology

There are plenty new forms of technology and electronics that we love or want. I’ve been secretly hoping that my 3 year old iPod will spontaneously combust so I have an excuse to blow hundreds of dollars on an iPod Touch.

But new forms of technology do you hate?

- Blue tooth headsets that make it seem like people are talking to you, or having a neurotic conversation with themselves, when really they’re talking on the phone. I’m sure these are amazing for business men, but they annoy me.

- Auto flushing toilets. I swear they were put on earth by Satan himself (or maybe God, to punish me). Most of them you move a half centimeter and it’s going off, and the water pressure is usually too high so it makes a giant mess while you’re still precariously perched. Thanks. And when you actually want them to flush, they don’t do anything. Grrr.

- Uh…thingies. That I will think of once people start commenting. Um. Yeah.

This is post 42 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.

Conservative vs Liberal morals

Here’s a wonderful TED talk by Jonathan Haidt on the difference between conservative and liberal morals. Watched it a while back in my Evolutionary Psychology class and thought it was intriguing.

This is post 41 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.

Pat Buchanan needs to learn his internet memes

Pat Buchanan wrote an article titled “Is Obamania Over?” You could go and read it, or you could just look at this:
This is a graphic Pat Buchanan made to represent the sugar-coated, wonderful hopes for the Obama administration.

Ahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Come on Pedobear, isn’t Barack a little too old for you?

This is post 40 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.

Atheism is not a religion

Hey everybody!

Post #4 from Mark!

Beer tends to make me more introspective (Being that it is Blue Moon, I’m also incredibly happy.), so I’m going to dust off an old topic that SHOULD have been laid to rest years ago; but, unfortunately, still pops up around occasionally.

Comparing Atheism to Religion:

Let’s begin with a very cliché opening statement:

re*li*gion

–noun

1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the
universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman
agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual
observances, and often containing a moral code governing the
conduct of human affairs.

2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally
agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian
religion; the Buddhist religion.

3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and
practices: a world council of religions.

4.
the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5.
the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

6.
something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter
of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

Neglecting 3, 4, and 5 because they are incidental to the argument, I want to go through and explain the rest of these. Surely you, dear reader, will agree with me that, assuming these are the only definitions of religion, if I can show Atheism does not fall into any of these categories (each statement, therefore, is conjoined by an “or”), I will have proved Atheism not a religion. Hooray Analysis classes! I wonder if I can re-write some of these definitions as actual mathematical statements.

Also, this is taken from Random House Dictionary. Credible source if I say so myself.

1. Let’s start with “a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe.”

Let X and Y be sets such that X = {x| x = a belief concerning the cause nature or purpose of the universe} and Y = {y| y = a common beliefs of Atheists regarding the nature of the universe} Then if Atheism is a religion, X ^ Y =/= emptyset

I think we can all agree that Atheism has only one actual concept associated with it: The disbelief that there exists such a thing as God. There is no universal belief as to how the universe was created, what it looks like beyond what we can see, and, especially, the purpose of said universe.

The rebuttal usually comes in the form of the following: “What about the Big Bang? It is generally assumed that if a person does not agree that a god created the universe, it began with ‘The Big Bang.’”

Certainly. This is a commonly held theorem by many people. The concept of The Big Bang Theory (which is also a REALLY awesome show, by the way) is, indeed the best we have so far. Years and years of testing, measuring, and pondering have been done and this is the only theory that has stood the test of time. Also, this theory was first hypothesized by a priest. So, the church SHOULD be with us on this one. More importantly, Atheism has nothing to do with guessing at the origins of the universe. I’m sure there is at least one Atheist somewhere who is convinced that Aliens are responsible for some reason. Atheism and scientific thought are not necessarily synonymous.

i.e. Assume that X^Y=/= empty set.

But the infinite intersection of Ya, where a is a subset of A where a is contained in A= {All the atheists in the world} (A is the spanning set of Y where A is all the atheists in the world and Ya is the set of commonly held beliefs of all atheists regarding the nature of the universe)

Ya = {empty set} Therefore, X^Y = empty set.

CONTRADICTION.

“esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of

human affairs.”

I’m sure we can leave this as an exercise.

2. “a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.”

Let X and Y be sets such that X = {x| x = a belief} and Y = {y| y = a common beliefs of Atheists} Then if Atheism is a religion X ^ Y =/= emptyset

Again, because Atheism has no particular collection of beliefs, there is no set of beliefs to agree on.

Don’t pull the kind of crap with me that says, “It takes FAITH not to believe in God.”

Pointing out that religions have no real case to prove that God exists is NOT a belief. It’s merely an observation of a logic flaw.

The proof for #2 is nearly identical to #1.

6. “Something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience.”

Let me break this up into two sections starting with the latter first.

“A point or matter of ethics or conscience”

Let X and Y be sets such that X = {x| x = a statement regarding ethics} and Y = {God does not exist} Then if Atheism is a religion X ^ Y =/= emptyset

Atheism says the following: GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

This is not, and I repeat, NOT a statement regarding ethics in any sense.

i.e. God does not exist is not contained in X. Therefore X^Y = empty set.

Part 2:

Something one believes in and follows devotedly

I have never met an Atheist who has spent their life devoted to the thought that God Does Not Exist.

Our thoughts on the existence of a god does not rule our lives. It does not even, normally, play anything more than a tangential part in who we are. I am Mark and, yes, I am indeed an Atheist. HOWEVER, more importantly, I am a teacher, a musician, I have brown hair, I was born in September and I like long walks on the beach. I am devoted only to living my life as I feel it needs to be lived. The only difference in the way my life will be lived compared to if I weren’t an atheist, is I’d be spending more time in Synagogue. Given the amount of free time I now have on Saturdays, I can live my life 3 hours more every single week.

Q.E.D.

This is post 38 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.

Where did you learn about sex?

People assume that parents or schools are going to be where you first learn about sex…but that hardly ever seems to be the case. When I was 11 I had many slightly older online friends thanks to a Pokemon forum (ha) who thoroughly corrupted me. By age 13 I was giggling at goatse, by age 14 I was the resident sex guru – before taking any official sex ed class. And I don’t mean the kid who spreads misinformation about sex – I really knew what I was talking about. It was this fascinating area to me, and I couldn’t stop reading every sex information and sex advice thing I could find online. I wanted to understand as much about it as possible in a scientific way – it didn’t even cross my mind to start trying things out on a practical level for a few more years. It was just another topic to learn, just like history or biology. I didn’t even quite understand how taboo it was in America.

I take great pride in that my Sexpert status has stayed with me – I still have people coming to me with their random questions.

Where did you first learn about sex? And how the hell is it that I somehow thoroughly educated myself using the internet, but your average American teen uses the internet just to learn stupid rumors (can’t get pregnant on your period, etc)? Kids these days. Get off my lawn, etc.

This is post 36 of 49 of Blogathon. Pledge a donation to the Secular Student Alliance here.