Swine flu? Kill the piggies!

Whenever you have outbreaks of mysterious, potentially deadly diseases, it’s extremely important to stay rational and not overreact. For example, you can see Egypt’s extremely logical decision to slaughter all 300,000 of its pigs.

…

Aside from the obvious point that we have human to human transmission now, so new infection from pigs isn’t exactly the problem…but how do they think actively slaughtering all of their pigs is actually going to reduce contact with pigs? Doesn’t the act of slaughtering actually increase contact with pigs? Since you kind of need to touch them in order to chop them up and all?

I feel bad that so many animals are going to die because a government decides to overreact about a situation. Yes, they would have eventually been killed for food anyway. And the government is still allowing the farmers to sell the pork meat…but is anyone going to actually buy it? Look at the economics of the issue – it’s all about supply and demand (the one thing I remember from AP Econ!). Suddenly there’s going to be insane amount of pork in the market, with very low demand. 90% of Egypt is Muslim and can’t eat pork anyway, the other 10% are probably silly enough to think you can get swine flu from eating pork or will probably just be sick of eating pork for every meal of the day. These farmers are going to have to give the stuff away. Not only is it a waste of piggie life, but it’s a waste of money to the farmers.

I wonder if the decision has any direct ties to religion. Maybe an extremely Muslim nation doesn’t care as much about killing a dirty animal they can’t eat and that’s only raised by the non-Muslim minority.

I also wonder if this means bacon will be on sale. That would be about the only perk of this whole swine flu scare. Mmmm bacon.

Christian Websites

I’m not sure what’s worse. Seizure inducing websites that look like they were made in the 90’s, or the most extreme, intense, James-Bond like Flash-happy websites.

Neither seem to make me want to convert to Christianity much.

Speaking of crappy Christian websites, I skimmed through the Westboro Baptist Church’s upcoming hate mongering sites. Apparently May 17th they’ll be in South Bend, IN protesting Obama’s commencement speech at Notre Dame:

“Notre Dame Commencment – Obama Hates you, take U 2 Hell! E Angela Blvd & N Notre Dame Ave How appropriate that the biggest pedophile mill in the whole entire world would have Beast Obama speaking at their 2009 Commencement. We will be outside with some good words on our signs. No need to try to hide from the words, little spoiled figs.”

Yes, take that you little spoiled figs!

I’m actually kind of jealous. Maybe before I graduate we can do something so scandalous that they’ll come picket us. It almost seems like a badge of honor!

Pepsi: Funding the evil Homosexual Agenda

I always knew there was a reason why I prefer Pepsi over Coke.

The American Family Association (which you know must be awesome because it has “Family” in its name and has a big Jesus fish behind its logo) is organizing a boycott of PepsiCo. Why? Because Pepsi is supporting the evil homosexual agenda! What sort of vile things has Pepsi done? From boycottpepsico.com:

  • Pepsi gave a total of $1,000,000 to the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) to promote the homosexual lifestyle in the workplace.
  • Both HRC and PFLAG supported efforts in California to defeat Proposition 8 which defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. HRC, which received $500,000 from Pepsi, gave $2.3 million to defeat Proposition 8.
  • Pepsi requires employees to attend sexual orientation and gender diversity training where the employees are taught to accept homosexuality.
  • Pepsi is a member of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce.

Oh no! The horror! How disgusting! Why, pretty soon Pepsi will be injecting its products with soy (which obviously makes you gay), and it’ll be the Gaypocalypse!

You don’t believe me? Look at these horrible, horrible commercials and shows Pepsi are supporting:

See, Pepsi turned him gay! Noooooooo!

It’s perfectly fine for three dozen women to drool over a hot guy, but once you add a single guy from Queer Eye it becomes the work of the devil!

And there’s not even any Pepsi in the next one, it’s just a show they sponsor:

Oh, heaven forbid, two guys making out, funny awkward discussion about sex. I’ve never seen that with a heterosexual couple on a tv show!

Well, I really must be doomed. I’ve drank so much Pepsi over the years that I must just be ready to burst at the seems with gayness. Sorry guys, but after I finish the 2 liter in my fridge, I’m going for the boobies only.

Breaking News: Right Wing Religious Nut Jobs believe whatever they want to believe

Shocking, I know.

So, most of you have probably seen the disturbing and stupid anti-gay marriage video released a little while ago by NOM. If not, crawl out from whatever rock you’ve been living under, explore the internet a bit, and watch it. Stephen Colbert, in his infinite genius, created a parody…er, I mean, very serious follow up video, which is hilarious and will make you feel a little better after watching the original.

The funniest part? NOM thanked Stephen Colbert for making the parody. Not only do they think he’s a conservative pretending to be a liberal pretending to be a conservative (wrap your head around that wishful thinking), but they’re glad he gave them the attention. Even though, you know, he was basically calling them all either ignoramuses or hypocritical closet cases. But it’s cool, because there’s no such thing as bad publicity, right?

Oh doublethink, you are an amazing and frightening thing.

PS: I hate all of you who want me to suffer through the Ken Ham book, but I’ll probably do it. What are friends for if they don’t encourage us to do horrible things? Maybe I’ll read a good book first to offset the nonsense.

Oh no…not another bad book

I think I’ve set up a horrible trend for myself. A biology grad student that I’m friends with gave me this book today, saying I’d probably appreciate the ridiculousness:
Noooooooooooooo, not Ken Ham!!! What do I do? Do I try to ignore it? Do I even bother reading it? Just skimming the book was fairly amusing, in a scary sort of way. It’s full of ridiculous cartoons and illustrations, which makes sense for the target audience…ahem. I actually have good books to read…but the stupidity emanating from my backpack is calling me. Gaaah! At least the Professor and the Dominatrix was just a failed work of fiction, not a book of fiction that people actually believe to be true.

Well? Should I be masochistic again, or hide this book away and forget about it?

Is "New Atheism" White Supremacist?

Apparently someone thinks so. Since my initial response of “WTF” isn’t too educated, I’m going to break down my reply.

But I’m no longer okay with atheist evangelizing. Firstly, I’m not okay with evangelizing, period. I don’t care if you’re a fundamentalist Christian, an agnostic Buddhist, or Richard Dawkins, I want you to leave me the fuck alone. You do it your way and I’ll do it mine.

You know what, once atheists start knocking on doors, trying to get schools to teach that there is no god, and threatening people with suffering and harm if they don’t convert, then I’ll agree with you. But atheist “evangelizing” in no where near the same as Christian (for example) evangelizing. What horrible things has Richard Dawkins done? Wrote a book that no one is forced to buy or read? Give talks that no one if forced to attend? I don’t think I’ve seen him on a college campus with a microphone shouting “There is no god, you bloody twits!” And you know, even if he did, he has the right to do that. Just like any other person you don’t agree with, you can just stop listening to them.

I’m happy to talk to politics with you, but my religious practice — which harms no one and in no way impinges on any other person’s rights — is really, really none of your business. I don’t care if the origin myth you’re peddling comes from science or from mythology. I don’t care how much history or evidence is on your side. I just want to be left in peace; I will do the same for you.

Again, once religious practices DO stop harming people and impinging on others rights, maybe we’ll shut up a bit. My goal as an atheist isn’t to convert people – if it doesn’t affect others and it makes them happy, so be it. But while planes are still being flown into buildings, while people are being fired at work for being atheists, while myths are being taught over science to our children, while gay marriage is having a hell of a time being legalized, your beliefs become my business because you’re not keeping them to yourself.

And as I said before, religious beliefs are no different than political beliefs. They don’t deserve any sort of special treatment, and should receive criticism like anything else.

The big reason, though, is that atheist advocates a la Dawkins and the rest are ethnocentric, colonialist cultural supremacists. When Dawkins says that sending a kid to Sunday school is child abuse, or that reasonable, tolerant, law-abiding people who happen to be religious are enablers of violent fundamentalists, he is not merely saying that religious people should stop believing in God/gods. He is saying that they should forfeit their culture.

Um, no. First of, do you know anything about Richard Dawkins? He, like many atheists, still joyfully celebrates Christmas complete with tree and religious songs and all the same traditions and culture that he had before he was an atheist. This past Easter many people commented on all the egg finding and bunny eating and family gathering that was going on. What’s the difference? We can still enjoy the culture we were raised in without cheapening it with supernatural nonsense.

The implicit claim here is that wealthy, white, Western secularism culturally neutral, the norm. And that’s bullshit. White, Western secularism is as much a subjective human culture as any other. There is no neutral. You can give up your ancestral culture, but it will be replaced. It will be replaced by white Western capitalism. This is what the atheist evangelists are advocating (or, if you prefer, advocating implicitly and spectacularly failing to disavow): assimilation.

Well, I disagree with you, but apparently since I’ve been implicitly advocating this all along, let me take a moment to disavow it: assimilation sucks. Culture and tradition are important. But, I have one caveat. Just because something is a tradition doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s good or that we have to keep doing it. For example, prayer at public high school and college graduations. If the school’s principal or President argues “tradition” for keeping it, that is a giant cop-out and unwillingness to deal with separation of church and state (and not just for the sake of nonbelievers, but for minority religions as well).

Now that that’s out of the way (probably not), I’m not quite sure how atheism = capitalism. I openly admit that I am woefully uneducated about anything economic, so if I’m off base here, let me know. But I know from our club, a good chunk of our members are socialists or anarchists, aka, Very Much So Not Capitalists. Our current treasurer has a hernia if anyone says anything remotely pro-capitalist. But really, I have no idea what rejecting supernatural belief has to do with economic practices anyway, so this just seems like a random stretch to me.

And I refuse. I refuse to replace Judaism with capitalism. I refuse to replace my traditional foods with McDonalds. I refuse to replace my history with the vulgar lie of pilgrims and pioneers sweeping across an empty continent. I refuse to believe the claim that wealthy white men are the most evolved, the most enlightened; I refuse to believe the claim that white culture is superior.

Good for you! Keeping your culture is great! My Jewish atheist friends still call themselves Jewish. I’d pick yuvetsaki or pastichio or tiropita or anything delicious food from my Greek heritage over a greasy burger. I’m pretty sure most atheists don’t advocate rewriting history with lies either, since we’re kind of concerned…um…with truth.

And pigs will fly to the moon and back before you hear Richard Dawkins say anything along the lines of wealthy white men being the most evolved. That’s just…there are so many things wrong with that statement, I don’t know where to begin. Do you know anything about evolution? The vast majority of evolutionary biologists would never make such a claim because it’s undeniably false – and when some idiot does try to insinuate something racist by using biology (Watson, I’m looking at you), they get torn apart and shunned by their fellow biologists and atheists.

And I’m still not getting where this “white culture is superior” thing is coming from. Can I get a quote of Dawkins saying that, please? Because until then, I can’t help but think of Christian slave owners making their slaves leave their tribal religions, or Christian missionaries today going to Africa and changing their culture, or our Christian-motivated government under Bush “freeing” Iraqis…and then all the atheists who have stood up and said This Is Bad.

If you think my attachment to my culture is a problem (even though I agree with you about every important political issue!), you’re a white supremacist.

Well, thankfully I don’t think your attachment to your culture is a problem. Culture can be good! But I just hope you don’t really mean that anyone who disagrees with you about the rest of your comments is a white supremacist, because that’s just silly and unproductive.

Lastly, it’s another lie that religion is the problem. Yes, religious fundamentalism (like all fundamentalism) is extremely destructive, and many innocent people have been killed in the name of religion. But secular, capitalist Western “democracy” is, today, just as destructive a force. This system is literally destroying the world as we know it — just ask a polar bear.

Me: Hey Mr. Pol
ar Bear, those shrinking ice
caps sure do suck, huh?
Mr. P. Bear: Why yes, Jennifer, they do. They make me a sad panda-I mean, polar bear.
Me: But has anyone tried to help you out?
Mr. P. Bear: Well, yes! Most of the people who are trying to help are scientists, many of which are atheists. And even non-scientist atheists realize this is a huge problem because this is the only life they have!
Me: But what about the religious people?
Mr. P. Bear: Well, a lot of them think that God gave man dominion over all the plants and animals on earth, so they feel they can do whatever they want to us. And they think any sort of catastrophic end is God’s plan through Armageddon, so they don’t want to stop it!
Me: Well golly gee! I guess it’s all the atheists faults for magically promoting capitalist democracy somehow!
Mr. P. Bear: Logically.

Ahem.

Now, does atheism have a hard time attracting and keeping minorities? Yes, I would say so. The movement is disproportionately white males. I know in our own club it’s only about 10% female, and probably 99% white. But is this because atheists are inherently racist and sexists? I’d argue no (though there are always a couple bad seeds in any sort of group). And if I had to give my best guess why this is (which is just a guess, I admit I’m not an expert) it’s that religion is such an important aspect of culture for these groups. So yes, culture is an issue to an extent…but that’s because people assume (like the person above) that atheism means abandoning your culture. No! You don’t have to. And even if you don’t want to keep your same old traditions but you need something, more and more atheist groups are forming to fill that void.

So do I think militant atheism is white supremacist? No. But of course, I guess that makes me a white supremacist. Darn.

Day of Silence

In honor of the Day of Silence tomorrow, please join me in watching this mind-numbingly stupid video made by the Illinois Family Institute and pointing out the horrible logic they employ. You know it’s going to be good, because they have “Family” in their name:

Actually, I lied. I could only get to the part where the parents are duct-taping their child’s mouth closed before closing the video in annoyance and disgust. Sigh.

Fiction for Fiction

Our club had our annual controversial event, Fiction for Fiction, yesterday and today. It was originally inspired by the Smut for Smut event, but we didn’t want to be quite so inflammatory (or lynched), so we toned it down a bit. It’s honestly the “worst” thing we do on campus, mainly to satisfy our more outspoken members. I usually have minor panic attacks about it when planning, imagining all the religious groups on campus joining together to chuck rotten fruit at us or something. It went successfully and without produce-throwing last year (which Hemant blogged about), so we decided to do it again.

While I am also a cute atheist chick, neither of these are me. I will forever remain mildly elusive! Mwahahaha!

We also handed out a small flyer with a link to our website and the following explanation of our event to people:

“Religious texts may give some moral guidance, but that does not necessarily mean what they say is true. Fictional novels can contain important morals and insight into human life. You must think critically and ask questions to learn from what you’re reading. We encourage you to come to your own conclusions about what is fact and what is fiction. If you would like to investigate inconsistencies and contradictions specifically in the Bible, Koran, and Book of Mormon, skepticsannotatedbible.com is a great place to start.”

The event went well again. We had about 15 books traded in, but tons of people said they would have if they had a religious book. The worst response we received was a couple of dirty looks, but they were far outweighed by the many smiles and thumbs ups. Atheists are definitely the minority at Purdue, but I think it’s so refreshing for people to see an event like this instead of the usual preacher telling you why you’re going to burn in hell.

I know some people poo-poo the idea of having an event that criticizes religion in any shape or form. I’ve stated before the importance of being able to criticize religion, just like any other idea. That’s a whole other issue that I don’t want to deal with right now, but it does look like we’ve already made someone angry. You know you’ve really hit a nerve when someone’s blogging about you.

Do I feel bad? Maybe a little. The intent of our event isn’t just to piss people off, though I know it’s inevitable when you’re dealing with a touchy subject. But we have a message that even many theists agree with (and told us so at the event!). Yes, “Fiction for Fiction” contains a bit of shock value, but it is an event. I don’t think “Hey, You Know, Not Everything in Religious Texts Are Necessarily True, You Should Really Think Critically About What You Read and Investigate These Outside Sources” would work quite as well. But if we were just looking to upset people, we could have stuck with Smut for Smut.

Do I feel annoyed? Yes. It’s obvious from this person’s post that he didn’t bother talking to us, taking a flyer, or even reading our signs. And you all know what I do best when I’m annoyed…that’s right! Reply in an aggravated and hopefully humorous way! My comments small and in red:

Not everyone is smart, awww, I think he’s referring to us… but everyone has a strong stance on about every topic. Whether it’s evolution, global warming, or religion; you always have a stance on these topics. Listening to people talk, I hear people voicing their opinion on evolution; accusing it to be either true or false based on what little knowledge they have about it. Everyday civilians comment on how global warming is a conspiracy, despite professionals swearing to it. The worst of these is religion.

Religion is one thing that none of us seem to agree on, but we still have to make our voice heard. Even if you don’t believe anything, that must also be vocalized. I completely agree! You’re being so understanding! …Wait… I saw a quintessential example of this at campus yesterday. Some opinionated enthusiasts were sitting at a booth outside of the “class of ‘50” with a sign that read, “Fiction for Fiction; trade your religious texts for fictional novels.” That was probably the most useless and offensive table set up that I’ve ever seen. Really? How about the Islamo-Fascism table about evils of Islam and how Evangelical Christianity is so much better? How about the various preachers saying everyone’s going to hell if they even blink funny? How about the “Obama hearts terrorist” signs? How about the anti-affirmative action cookie sale where different races had different prices? How about the “pie a terrorist” where students dressed up as Muslims? We really top the list?

What could these people’s point possibly be? Are they saying religion is fiction? Um, yes? The fact that you’re freaking out about this possibility is the whole reason why we’re having the event. Because some people have never even thought about it. I would have to dumber than them not to realize that that was their point. I’m not going to come down on them for voicing their opinion, even though you are by repeatedly calling us stupid and offensive except that the entire basis of their opinion is to oppose another. This “fiction for fiction” trade is the opposition to organized religion like, for example, pro-life opposes pro- choice. The opposing parties involved in that example believe different things, which happen to be the opposite. One party didn’t form due to an opinion they held and that being the sole cause of the other party’s formation. I’m not quite sure what he’s even trying to say here – that our whole purpose is to be cranky about religion because religion came first? First of, opposing someone does not mean you’re automatically wrong. But if he wants to make that argument, atheism was around since the dawn of the universe, and religion is just a recent blip in time. We win, neener neener.

What is this “fiction for fiction” table’s goal? Are they trying to spread the word that religion is fake? Maybe you should have taken five seconds to find out! Nah, that would have been too hard. What would people’s reaction be if equally as zealous people went exclaiming their religion to the campus? These people are now on the same arrogance level as the bible thumpers that they oppose. Ummm…this happens all the time? And yes, we want to counteract them with a bit of reason? But does telling people to think critically and come to their own conclusions equal dogmatic teaching and threats of hellfire? I think not.

I don’t know if atheists have a holy book, but if they do, I’d like to bring it to that table. And see what fiction novel they give me in return for my fiction book. No, we don’t, since atheism isn’t a religion, but if you can read the sign, we do include “Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster” as a religious book to be fair. We even accepted someone trading a fiction book for a copy of the Koran we had. We’re pretty lenient! Anything to get people reading, and that includes learning about other religions. Heck, most atheists say reading holy books is what made them atheists!

I wonder why they didn’t just set up a table that said, “don’t talk to me, you won’t like me.” It would have gotten their point across better. Because there are plenty of people who do like us for doing this.

However, I wasn’t terribly offended. Could have fooled me. If some brainless thanks college kids think that religion is a hoax, then I’m not at all surprised. College students are probably the least religious group of individuals in our nation. Think about it in this sense; these kids are enjoying their newfound freedom that comes along with leaving home and becoming an adult. They can do whatever they want, so why would they want some greater power in charge of them? Because there’s absolutely no evidence for a greater power, and some people cannot be open about their beliefs until they’re away from overbearing parents. This isn’t some rebellion against God…that would make as much sense as rebellion against the Tooth Fairy. We are, however, terrified that people with university level education can still believe in something as equally silly, or be offended at the idea that others don’t think the same way as them.

This is just how I perceive all of this in order to not get too upset about people claiming my religion is “fiction.”

So he admits that he’s just making up reasons about why he shouldn’t be upset? Maybe instead he should ask himself why he’s upset. Does he have doubts that he’s ignoring? Has he never even thought about this before? Is he too scared that he’s been believing in something that’s not true all these years? It’s natural to be annoyed and even afraid, but don’t take it out on us. In fact, getting people to question beliefs they’ve taken for granted is the main point of this event. So I guess in a way, we’ve succeeded.

Oh well, I’m honestly not that upset. I just like replying to people. And honestly, if we made some people cranky, so be it. We’ve already had a bunch of new people sign up to our mailing list, including one of the campus bus drivers. Maybe we can ask her to drive our future atheist bus!

Dealing with religion in your family

Like I’ve said before, I don’t really come from a religious family. While both of my parents went to church as children, they’re both now pretty atheistic/agnostic. Both of my half-brothers were also forced to go to church by my dad’s first wife, to the chagrin of my dad, but they’re also not very religious now. The problem started once my brother (the younger of the two) got married.

Now, I love my in-laws – they’re honestly great people. I still don’t think they’re very religious, as they never really bring anything up. I think they’re more traditional than anything. My brother and his wife got married in a chapel, had a fairly liberal wishy-washy Christian ceremony, some of the extended in-laws go to church every Sunday, my twin nephews were baptized but no one seemed to take it super seriously…etc.

However, there is religion sneaking in, and this is where I’m concerned.

Now, my sister-in-law’s Grandma is wonderfully nice, don’t get me wrong. But Great-Grandma is definitely the most religious one of the bunch. At their baptism, she got them two little stuffed lambs that said the Lord’s prayer when you poked their bellies. Christmas had some vaguely religious toy that I forget. This Easter the twins got “My First Bible,” a shiny picture book. I tried to keep my eyes from bugging out too much when I saw it. My sister-in-law’s aunt snatched it up gleefully and turned to a 4-year old girl there (daughter of a family friend):

Aunt: Ooooo, so have you heard the story of Adam and Eve?
Girl: (completely uninterested) No. (continues to play with her toy)
Aunt: …Oh (horrified look at how a four year old could not have been exposed to this by now)

While they’re not my kids, they are my nephews. I still feel mildly responsible for them, and I’d hate to see them indoctrinated into religion. I’m not sure what I can really do, though. I don’t feel comfortable outing myself as an atheist to that part of my family, especially since I’m the boy’s Godmother. I lied in a church (along with my oldest brother) that I was a good Christian and would raise the boys in a good Christian manner, because that was the better alternative than coming out (and I really didn’t have much of a choice, long story). My brother and sister-in-law would probably be fine with it, since I don’t think they’re that religious, but I’m afraid the knowledge would spread past them.

I so want to buy them “Parenting Beyond Belief” for Christmas, but I can’t without other family members seeing them opening it. Should I just be the geeky aunt who buys the boys dinosaur toys and chemistry sets and Legos? Nature documentaries and Bill Nye and stuff about the Big Bang? His Dark Materials to counteract the Chronicles of Narnia? Maybe I can try to instill scientific thinking and hope that does the trick. I don’t want to indoctrinate them into atheism or anything – I just hate to see them indoctrinated at all, because children can be so impressionable.

Maybe I should worry about all of this once they’re actually able to, you know, talk. And of course, who knows. Maybe by the time they can read, Richard Dawkins will come out with his long awaited sequel to the God Delusion:
You can tell I made this a while ago, because Hillary Duff is old news. Hannah Montana is the shiznit now. Or so I’m told.

A Community of Churches?

So during my drive to my brother’s for Easter (I wasn’t driving, so no murderous road rage, promise!) we passed by the town for South Holland, IL. As I was peering out the window, I noticed their slogan on their water tower and cursed myself for not getting a photograph. But thankfully the powers of the internet have saved me once again:
In case you can’t read that, it says “South Holland: Faith, Family Future.” The other side of the water tower, which I couldn’t find a photo of, said “A community of churches” and showed two hands clasped in prayer.

…So, separation of church and state, eh? Are towns seriously allowed to do that? Maybe the word “Faith” alone isn’t too bad – while the connotation is definitely religious, you could argue the town supports faith in their children, their neighbors, their basketball team…whatever. I’ll let it slide. But “A community of churches” with stereotypical Christian imagery is certainly promoting not just religion over nonreligion, but specifically Christianity. It doesn’t say “A community of churches, mosques, temples, mandirs, atheistic coffee houses, etc.”

Is it okay for a town to label itself like this? I’m not sure I’d feel comfortable if I lived there, being constantly reminded by a giant water tower that I’m not a part of my town’s supposed virtues. What do you think?

EDIT: Here’s a link to their website, which also uses the slogan.