Je Suis Charlie

charlie-hebdo-magazine-shootingI think almost all of us have read about the despicable attack in Paris against those who work for a French magazine called Charlie Hebdo. A bunch of religious nut-jobs decided they could further their cause by killing some people who posted cartoons of their prophet.

I’m not going to waste time denouncing these murderous scum. There are plenty of people already doing that. What I want to do today is try to explain, rationally and calmly, why such actions harm their cause greatly.

The thinking of the terrorist is that if they frighten people they can get them to do what they want. It’s a behavior that works in certain instances and thus those who promulgate its use are encouraged. The long term reality is far different. The embracing of terror as a weapon to achieve political gain is destroying the entire Muslim religion and laying waste to hundreds of thousands, nay, millions of young lives. While twelve innocent Frenchmen and women were killed, there is no doubt that the actions will result in the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent young Muslims.

Not just from retribution attacks but simply from the setback in relationship between nations. Countless young Muslim boys will look to this as an achievement and spend their own lives in the fruitless and eventually deadly pursuit of similar activity.

Young Arab men are dying everywhere in this world. Killing each other and trying to kill others. It’s a terrible waste of their lives.

This attack also inestimably set back any attempt to get people to respect Muslims, the Islamic world, or Arabic people in general.

If the terrorists hoped to have the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo splattered over every blog, every newspaper, every media outlet, papered onto every mosque in every western country, and generally shoved down the throats of Muslims everywhere, well, their actions were well-thought out.

If the murdering terrorists wanted to make enemies of rational people the world over then they have succeeded.

If they wanted Arabs who are trying to live in peace in Western countries to be beaten, ridiculed, or even killed by those seeking revenge, well, then their actions were certainly well-planned and carried out.

If, on the other hand, they hoped to gain respect from other people then they have failed. If the goal is to have people respect your prophet then the solution isn’t to murder those who don’t. That only generates hate. The result of the actions of these murderous scum will be felt by peace-loving Muslims all over the Western world. And not in a good way. If their goal was to gain respect, admiration, and acceptance of their religion … they have failed and failed tragically with horrific consequences for so many, mostly for those whom they think they represent.

So terribly sad. Twelve people dead and the exact opposite of the goal of the killers achieved. Everything they hoped to gain by their attack is destroyed instead. Stupidity. Useless rage.

The Muslim world better get their act together soon because enough attacks like this are eventually going to result in such terror and horror a million times over and not against cartoonists. Wake up Muslim world. Save yourself before it’s too late.

Je Suis Charlie
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition

We were Blindsided – Misleading Headline

School District Bans HolidaysI just read an interesting article and was “blindsided” by the blatant and disgusting misleading blurb that accompanied the headline.

The story  comes from Yahoo news and involves a Maryland school district that decided to remove all religious holiday references from their calendar rather than include references to Muslim holidays.

The headline itself is accurate: School district strikes Christmas from calendar. It’s the blurb that is an example of the vile reporting that causes stories to enter into my Misleading Headline posts. “We were blindsided,” it states authoritatively.

I want you to think for a moment about the intent of that quote in this blurb. It’s an absolutely accurate quote. One of the parties involved in the situation said those exact words.

Ready?

It was the Muslim organization’s representative. They are dismayed that the other religions had to have their holidays stricken from the calendar. They simply wanted Muslim holidays mentioned on the calendar. That’s it. Mentioned. Instead of mentioning a Muslim holiday the school district decided to strike all references. The reason is, of course, because they are not comfortable listing Muslim holidays but are keenly aware that they cannot exclude one religion while including others. Their solution is to remove all such references.

That’s certainly the choice of the school district and as an Atheist I’ve got not problem with such a decision. Good riddance, I say. If they wanted to include the Muslim holidays along with Jewish and Christian I wouldn’t have a problem with that either. Frankly, I don’t care either way.

My problem is with the blurb on the headline. Completely and totally misleading. It’s clearly designed to make people think the school board was somehow blindsided by the request from the Muslim organization. It’s not even misleading. It’s really just a flat-out lie.

Congratulations Yahoo News. You win Misleading Headline of the Week!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Edge
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
The Black Sphere Coming Soon!

 

666 is not the same as 6 – 6 – 6

Monster Energy DrinkI’m rather ashamed I’m even posting this. The great Monster Energy Drink is Satan debate bores me to tears. Honestly. It’s so stupid that even talking about it makes me feel dumber. Just a quick fact and I’ll let you go on your way.

The Hebrew numeric system was not like the Arabic Numeral system we use. I’m going to go with a Roman Numeral equivalent just so it’s a little easier to understand. Hebrew numbers were like Roman numbers. They didn’t go by base ten. So the number eleven was not the same as two number ones next to each other.

Let’s examine the number six expressed three times in Roman Numerals.

VI – VI – VI

Now let’s examine the number six-hundred and sixty-six in Roman Numerals.

DCLXVI

There you have it. Not the same.

Does the number six-hundred and sixty-six have any meaning? No.

Is Monster Energy Drink a sign of Satan? No.

Are we all dumber for having discussed this? No. Hey, at least we learned something about numbers!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Edge
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

How I Feel Talking to a True Believer

uzz_Aldrin_Describes_His_UFOI’m an atheist. I’m not a what I would call a fundamentalist atheist in that I’m not out there trying to convince every Christian, Jew, and Muslim that atheism is the only right thing to believe but I do get into conversations with religious people on occasion. I think religious freedom is extremely important to the survival of the United States and people have every right to believe what they want and every expectation that the government cannot try to influence those beliefs.

I just read an interesting article from Yahoo Finance, of all places, about Buzz Aldrin‘s supposed experience with an alien space-ship during the Apollo 11 moon landing. It was during this mission that Aldrin saw a light apparently moving in tandem with his own craft. His words on the experience have long fueled those who believe aliens are among us.

So what’s the connection between Aldrin’s supposed alien experience and my atheism? If you scroll down and read the comments on the Aldrin story you will encounter what I frequently see when discussing the existence of God with the faithful. In the article Aldrin states specifically that when debriefed by NASA after the mission both he and fellow astronauts were of the opinion the light was sunshine reflecting off just released panels. He was interviewed about the matter years later and during that interview said the same thing but the producers of the show left that out of what was later aired.

While reading the comments below the article I was struck by how often those who truly believe in aliens were willing discount Aldrin’s explanation. They believed the original quotes without their attendant explanation were his true opinion and that he was hiding something now by giving a new explanation. This, of course, defies the fact that Aldrin’s original explanation is the one that makes the most sense and is a story he has told from the beginning although it wasn’t always published.

I’m not here to discuss the merits of aliens or religion but simply the idea that it is all but impossible to convince someone that the thing they believe is false. I can present all the evidence I want for the lack of a divine being in the universe. I can trot out all the Flying Spaghetti Monster arguments that illustrate the bad logic of many religious claims. I can point out the huge gaps in logic in the Bible and other religious texts. I’m not getting anywhere with the True Believers. They have faith and you can’t argue logically with faith.

So what’s the point of my little blog? I’m speaking to those of religious faith who think the idea of aliens visiting the earth is a rather silly notion. Have you ever tried to convince a True Believer that their pet alien theory is nonsense? If you have, you know exactly what experience I have had trying to talk to people about the notion of God. I know this comes across as insulting, even demeaning but I hope that it will give those of faith some insight into what the atheists among you feel when discussing such topics.

Believe what you want, that’s not only your business but a Constitutionally guaranteed right. I’m not here to convince you you’re wrong. I’m here to tell you that I know you’re wrong. There’s a difference, however subtle.

Care to tell me that you know I’m wrong? The comment section awaits.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

Tim Lambesis – The Murdering Christian/Atheist

Tim-LambesisThere’s apparently been a big story roiling the Christian Rock world for the last year or so although until I spotted a headline I was completely unaware of the turmoil. It seems the death-metal band As I Lay Dying’s lead singer, Tim Lambesis, was arrested for trying to hire someone to kill his estranged wife. Happily the person he tried to hire was an undercover police officer.

Good job San Diego Sheriff’s department!

The arrest and accusation apparently sent deep shock waves through the Christian Rock community. Now Lambesis is saying that he actually was no longer a Christian but had forsaken his religion for Atheism.

So why am I talking about this? Because I’m an Atheist and in reading the comments about the story I found what I think is a common theme among many Atheists and Christians. The Christians were all blaming his Atheism for his “turn” in behavior while the Atheists were all blaming his Christian underpinnings. I see this quite a bit in the Atheist community and the religious community. Both sides blaming a person’s religion or lack thereof for that person’s lack of ethics and criminal behavior.

An Atheist will argue that religious fervor has been responsible for an incredible amount of violence throughout the history of the world. A religious person will argue that an Atheist has no moral compass at all because there is not the carrot of heaven or the stick of hell to keep them ethical.

I have a different take.

Some people are without morals or ethics. Some people will hire someone to kill their estranged wife because they lack the ability to control their emotions. It has nothing to do with their religious beliefs. There are wonderful religious people in the world who are kind, caring, considerate, and would never hire anyone to kill their spouse no matter the provocation. Many Atheists fit that profile exactly as well.

We are quick to lump people into classifications these days. Christian? You must hate homosexuals. Atheist? You must hate Christians. I drive a Prius. On at least a dozen occasions since I’ve been driving my 2006 Prius I’ve parked near a large vehicle as the owner of said vehicle was emerging or going into it. They’ve rather sheepishly asked me if I hate them. I don’t. I think people should drive the car they want to drive but that’s not the point I’m trying to make.

It’s this general lumping of people together that gets us into a lot of trouble in life. The car a person drives, the religion or non-religion a person practices, the suit he wears, the beard on his face, the tattoos on his body; where he lives, who he votes for; these things mean nothing. What is important are a person’s actions. Is he kind to his wife? Does she help co-workers when they ask her? Does she help her friends when they need something? Does he call his mother when she’s not feeling well? (Get better soon, mom).

Lambesis, murderous scum. Why? Because he tried to hire someone to kill his wife. That’s all I need to know.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery Fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Purchase The Broken Throne today!
See All my Books

My Friends’ Children and My Atheism

atheistsThere was an interesting question in Dr. Abby this morning and it made me think about my own situation in regards to Atheism and my friends’ children. In the column an atheist couple had been asked by their parents to refrain from telling nieces and nephews about their lack of religious belief.

I’ve been asked by children of my friends on a number of occasions about my religious beliefs and I don’t hesitate to tell them I’m an atheist. I like to think I’m not a jerk about it. I tell them that I think everyone should believe what they want to believe and that I don’t think any differently of them for believing in god or not. That I like them just the way they are.

The thing that I wonder about is that by doing so am I alienating my friends. Do they cringe when I tell their children that I’m an atheist. When I explain that I don’t find the evidence for the existence of god to be convincing. Do they perhaps not invite me over because they are afraid I will expound on my atheism to their children. Are they concerned that my arguments will turn their own children into atheists.

One of my friends has a son who has become an atheist himself and I wonder if there is some resentment that I perhaps my own lack of faith was instrumental in his turning away from their religion.

These are not lighthearted concerns. If a person is of a deeply religious nature and their child becomes an atheist it is their belief system that this child will be forever torn from them in the, admittedly non-existent, eternal afterlife. While I’m absolutely certain that no such afterlife exists, my friends feel differently and the idea that their children will not be with them in this fantasy realm is emotionally and likely physically disturbing.

None of my friends has asked me to refrain from talking about atheism and the only time I do so is when I’m directly asked about my religious beliefs. However during everyday conversation I often speak about scientific topics that contradict biblical inerrancy; including things like continental drift, evolution, and space-time. For example I occasionally talk to children about how North and South America fit together like puzzle pieces with Europe and Africa and how this relates to plate-tectonics. These are topics that I worry about.

I do think the grand-parents in the case of the Dr. Abby column are making a mistake by hiding the fact that atheism is even a possibility and this is clearly demonstrated by the fact that their children have become atheists. I don’t think lying to children, or anyone for that matter, is a good or effective policy. The truth almost always makes itself known in the end. I think the grand-parents would be better off explaining that some people don’t believe the same thing as they do. That being said, I’m not a parent.

Any other atheists out there have any thoughts? Any religious parents with atheist friends?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Broken Throne
Next Release: The Black Sphere

My Friends' Children and My Atheism

atheistsThere was an interesting question in Dr. Abby this morning and it made me think about my own situation in regards to Atheism and my friends’ children. In the column an atheist couple had been asked by their parents to refrain from telling nieces and nephews about their lack of religious belief.

I’ve been asked by children of my friends on a number of occasions about my religious beliefs and I don’t hesitate to tell them I’m an atheist. I like to think I’m not a jerk about it. I tell them that I think everyone should believe what they want to believe and that I don’t think any differently of them for believing in god or not. That I like them just the way they are.

The thing that I wonder about is that by doing so am I alienating my friends. Do they cringe when I tell their children that I’m an atheist. When I explain that I don’t find the evidence for the existence of god to be convincing. Do they perhaps not invite me over because they are afraid I will expound on my atheism to their children. Are they concerned that my arguments will turn their own children into atheists.

One of my friends has a son who has become an atheist himself and I wonder if there is some resentment that I perhaps my own lack of faith was instrumental in his turning away from their religion.

These are not lighthearted concerns. If a person is of a deeply religious nature and their child becomes an atheist it is their belief system that this child will be forever torn from them in the, admittedly non-existent, eternal afterlife. While I’m absolutely certain that no such afterlife exists, my friends feel differently and the idea that their children will not be with them in this fantasy realm is emotionally and likely physically disturbing.

None of my friends has asked me to refrain from talking about atheism and the only time I do so is when I’m directly asked about my religious beliefs. However during everyday conversation I often speak about scientific topics that contradict biblical inerrancy; including things like continental drift, evolution, and space-time. For example I occasionally talk to children about how North and South America fit together like puzzle pieces with Europe and Africa and how this relates to plate-tectonics. These are topics that I worry about.

I do think the grand-parents in the case of the Dr. Abby column are making a mistake by hiding the fact that atheism is even a possibility and this is clearly demonstrated by the fact that their children have become atheists. I don’t think lying to children, or anyone for that matter, is a good or effective policy. The truth almost always makes itself known in the end. I think the grand-parents would be better off explaining that some people don’t believe the same thing as they do. That being said, I’m not a parent.

Any other atheists out there have any thoughts? Any religious parents with atheist friends?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Broken Throne
Next Release: The Black Sphere

Prayers to Satan – Religion and Government

ConstitutionI wrote a post about a misleading headline last week but now I’d like to talk about the article to which the satiric story was really about.

There was a Supreme Court decision last week which allowed a municipality to open their meeting with a prayer as long as that prayer is not intended to convert listeners or denigrate other religions. The community, Greece, NY, has opened their town meetings since 1999 with a prayer. In all that time it has always been a Christian denomination giving the prayer except a brief period when the lawsuit was filed after which four of the twelve prayers were non-Christian. Since then all prayers have been Christian in nature.

So the Supreme Court says that municipalities can open their meetings with a prayer. Christian groups think they’ve won. They haven’t and I’ll tell you why.

Now that government agencies are allowed to open meetings with a prayer to a specific religious deity, everyone wants to open the meeting with a prayer to their non-existent god. Yes, Satan. And that’s only the beginning. When religious groups “win” the right to display religious monuments on city property guess who immediately starts to submit requests to start having their own monuments?

Satanist, Pastafarians, Muslims, Jews, Wiccans, Buddhists, and all sorts of non-Christian organizations. If those organizations are banned from presenting their prayers or their monuments then the state is clearly violating the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Basically this has come to mean that no political organization should be in the business of endorsing any one religion over another. Belief is a private matter for the free citizens of the United States. When the state says only Christians or only Muslims or only Jews or only Atheists are allowed to present then they are establishing that this is the religion of choice. This is bad for anyone of any faith.

When Communist Russia banned most religions and enforced Atheism this imposed belief from the state. When Religious Oligarchies like Saudi Arabia impose Sharia Law upon their population this is religion sponsored by the state.

What I think most Christians struggle with is the idea that there are people of other faiths out there and that when Christians politicians are allowed to sponsor their religion the door is opened to anyone, Satanists or not, to sponsor their own religion from the state house.

Christians think they’ve won when they get the right to sponsor their religion in a local municipality but in reality they have opened the door to their, and my, ultimate destruction.

I don’t want Christians preaching to me at state sponsored events but I don’t want Muslims or Atheists or Wiccans doing it either. I want to have my private beliefs separate from what the state sponsors. I’m in the Atheist minority while Christians are in the majority. It seems as though having the state sponsor your religion is a good idea when you are in the majority but time moves on and suddenly there is a town where the majority of people are from a different religion or no religion at all. Then this state sponsored religion that they fought to promote doesn’t seem like such a good idea.

The solution seems so simple to me. People of a particular religion persuasion should simply meet in a private chamber somewhere and have their prayer or invocation or whatever. At Rams football games the players who are Christian meet at the center of the field and have a prayer after the game. Not during the game. Not before the game when the audience is waiting for them to start playing.

This insistence on the right to say a religious prayer before an event doesn’t seem to me to be a position of faith but actually a lack thereof. Those with true faith shouldn’t need, or even desire, the state to say a prayer in any form.

The Founding Fathers didn’t feel the need to put religious slogans on our coinage. They didn’t feel the need to put the words “Under God” in their oaths. They didn’t feel the need to Pledge Allegiance to anything. They were confident men who believed in themselves and the ideas they promulgated, the ideas of freedom. Were that they were around today.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Broken Throne
Next Release: The Black Sphere

Money Grubbing Jews are the new Poster Child for Christianity

Pat Robertson and Daniel LapinThere’s an interesting story hitting the news sites these days in which evangelist Pat Robertson started talking about money-grubbing Jews. It’s not what you think.

Robertson was speaking with a wealthy Rabbi about money issues when he wondered what it was that made Jewish people prone to wealth (I’ll tell you why, they value education. End of story). Why they polish diamonds rather than fix their cars or mow their lawns. The Rabbi immediately recognized it was a compliment and began preening away about how he pays someone else to mow the lawn and fix the car.

What I find fascinating is that a thousand years ago, a hundred years ago, even fifty years ago such a statement would have been made as an insult. The predominate feeling was that Jewish people were more concerned with making money than with doing the right thing. That money was more important than leading a good life. That Jews put the pursuit of money before all else.

The new Christian paradigm is that greed is good. Pat Robertson was unequivocally complimenting Jewish people. He wanted his own flock to emulate their wealthy ways.

This is largely not what religious Christians believed until fairly recently. There are a number of factors driving this change in attitude, not in the least is the very close relationship between Evangelical Christians and the Republican Party. I don’t want to get overly involved in why attitudes are changing. It’s just an interesting phenomenon.

I do want to say that greed is not good. I’m a fan of Ayn Rand and it pains me when I see people equating greed with her central message of Objectivism.

I absolutely believe people should be rewarded for achievements. That by rewarding people for doing well we encourage more people to do well. But I think the Republican Party, and their allies, have it in reverse. We should do great things because it makes us feel good. We should achieve because when we achieve we help ourselves and everyone around us. If rewards come to us from these achievements that is natural and good. But we don’t set out for the rewards.

I write my books because it makes me feel great. I love the sense of accomplishment when I finish a new book. I love hearing that people get enjoyment from reading my books. I haven’t yet gotten any financial reward for writing my books. Would I love to make millions? Yes. Will I keep writing even if no one ever buys my novels? Yes.

Why? Because doing what you love will make you happy, regardless of the reward. Life is long and if you don’t spend it doing things you love, longer yet.

If I wrote books with an eye to making money I might succeed. Perhaps I should have written a moody vampire novel and maybe I’d have made millions. I’m not sure. But I know the books wouldn’t have been any good. I wouldn’t have poured my passion into them, my love. Books like that wouldn’t have made me happy, no matter the financial gain they gave me.

In the end you have happiness. Are you enjoying your life? Will chasing money bring enjoyment or will doing the things you love bring it?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Spear of the Hunt
Coming very, very soon: The Broken Throne

Camels, the Bible, and Belief

Domesticated CamelsThere’s an article making the rounds about how domesticated camels are mentioned in biblical books all the way from Genesis forward.

Here’s the problem. According to archeological, scientific, and written records; the beasts weren’t domesticated at that time. The first evidence of camels being used in a domesticated fashion comes in the 10th century BCE. This invalidates all biblical accounts which mention domesticated camels before that time.

The biblical scholars who admit this anachronism say that just because camels were interjected incorrectly into early biblical stories doesn’t mean that anything else in the stories is inaccurate. Really? This seems to fly in the face of logic. If the people who wrote the bible decided to add contemporary facts to an existing account doesn’t that mean the entire account is likely fiction? Sure, there could be parts that are accurate but it is clear that whoever wrote the books of the bible in question wrote them hundreds and possibly thousands of years after the events they depict. How can that be considered accurate?

Normally the fact that the bible is filled with inaccuracies is not something that I’d blog about. It’s evident to me that the thing is largely fiction. I’m also not bothered by religious fanatics who claim that the overwhelming evidence of camel domestication is incorrect because the stories in the bible overrule any scientific or archaeological findings. Those people are insane. I can’t reason with them nor will I try.

My problem is with those who want to believe the bible tells true stories but admit that the camel business is a mistake. It’s not one mistake. Domesticated camels are mentioned more than twenty times in early biblical stories at a time before they were actually domesticated. This means that whoever wrote those stories had no idea what they were talking about.

If I wrote a story about the Roman Empire that mentioned combustion engine driven trucks transporting goods across the Empire would you take the rest of my accounts seriously? No, of course not. Everything I wrote about would be immediately cast in doubt, and rightly so.

I see this brain trick more and more these days. Perhaps I’m just getting old and it’s been around for as long as the domesticated camel, or longer. It just seems to me that people are more willing to ignore facts so that they can believe what they want to be true. The old Is-Ought fallacy. I suppose the fact that David Hume came up with this idea some 300 years ago would suggest we are, perhaps, not living in unusual times. Maybe people have always used this little trick of the mind.

Even so, it is something my brain can’t understand. When someone brings facts forward that I had not considered; I adjust my position accordingly. To do otherwise would be to lie to myself. It would be to base my logical conclusions on my beliefs, not the other way around.

Anyway, I realize I’m not going to convince anyone today. Have a great Valentine’s Day!

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Spear of the Hunt
Next Release: The Broken Throne

 

Garden of Eden, to Stay or Leave?

Garden of EdenI wrote a post about the nature of Satanists not long ago and in it I discussed their belief that Satan offered humans a real life outside the Garden of Eden when he suggested that Adam and Eve eat of the Tree of Knowledge. I wanted to explore the idea of Garden of Eden as it is understood from a religious perspective.

In the spirit of full disclosure: I am an Atheist. I don’t believe the Garden of Eden existed. I don’t believe God exists. I don’t believe Satan exists. I don’t believe that mankind started with Adam and Eve or that they had to make a decision about eating of the Tree of Knowledge. However, there are a lot of people who do believe that particularly story and this is what I want to discuss.

If you believe the story of Adam and Eve is true, then, facing a similar circumstance what choice would you make?

In the Garden of Eden man was created and tends the garden. For this duty man is granted a life of eternal ease, free of both good and evil. Man has everything provided for him. He is immortal. Adam and Eve frolic throughout the Garden of Eden in what those of a religious mind will tell is a Utopia.

God forbids Adam and Eve to eat of the Tree of Knowledge telling them that if they do so, they are doomed to die. He does not also tell them that all their children will be bathed in this sin and forever tainted and evil unless they ask forgiveness from God, Original Sin.

So, that’s the scene. You are living in a beautiful and fertile garden. Everything you want is there and you are not troubled by danger, death, disease, or wild animal. You are immortal. You will live forever and your one duty is to tend the garden. There are no books to read because knowledge is evil. You are a pet.

Satan comes along and tells you that the Tree of Knowledge, which has been forbidden to you by the master of the house, will free your mind to experience life but that this experience is not all good. There are many bad things outside the garden. That in order to experience the good in life beyond the garden you must be willing to accept the bad as well.

If you eat of the Tree of Knowledge you will know good and be able to enjoy it fully but also know evil and feel its pain.

What would you choose?

Herein rests one of my major problems with Judeo-Christian-Islamic philosophy. Not only has God created a couple of mindless pets so that he can enjoy watching them but he has placed the ability to become much more in their midst and forbid them from partaking in it. Any parent who place a toy in a room and tells their child not to play with that toy knows the result of such foolish behavior.

Even worse, because Adam and Eve make the right choice, they choose to live life fully rather than as pets of God, he punishes all of their children for eternity. This is not a God I would want to worship even if I thought for a moment he existed. This is a vindictive god who little understands his creation and merely wants slavering love with no actual thought behind it.

This is a vile creature. This is the thing that so many religious people worship. Not only do I not believe in your God but if he were to come forward and show me his existence I would tell him to go crawl back into his hole. I will eat of the Tree of Knowledge. I will suffer pain. I will lead my life on my terms, fully and completely. I reject your Garden. I reject your damnation. I reject your philosophy.

Tom Liberman

Was the Biblical Satan a Libertarian?

Ten Commandments StatueI came across an article about how a group of Satanists want to put up a monument outside the Capitol Grounds in Oklahoma City. The Oklahoma legislature placed a Ten Commandments statue on the grounds in 2012 and now the Satanists want equal representation.

This comes as no surprise to me. It’s only natural that when one religious group gets to build a monument on public grounds that everyone else will want to join in on the party. The article did lead me into an investigation of Satanism as a whole and I was particularly struck by the beliefs of what are called Theistic Satanists.

There are other forms of Satanism but Theistic is the commonly associated ideology.

They believe that Satan is an actual entity to be worshiped. This is somewhat in lines with Christianity where Satan is certainly a real figure although to be loathed rather than loved.

A Theistic Satanist believes strongly in the power of self and the pursuit of knowledge. The biblical story of Satan has him exhorting Adam and Eve to eat of the Fruit of Knowledge so that they can fully understand and pursue their lives rather than live sheltered half-lives in the Garden of Eden. Very Libertarian indeed. They do not know evil and therefore cannot truly understand the nature of their lives.

They also tend to think that Satan encourages self-improvement. That Good and Evil are defined as ideas that benefit or harm mankind. This contrasts with the more biblical view in which Good and Evil are defined by submission or rebellion from God’s will. This also is line with ideals promulgated by Ayn Rand who wants us to do our best in everything and that by achieving we make life better for our society and those around us. They argue devotion to God’s will is meaningless to the true definition of Good or Evil. That defining Good as being submissive to God undermines individuality and a person’s best interests.

The Bible often equates evil that happens to people as being inflicted by Satan and Satanists view these as tests which make them stronger. That overcoming adversity is the fire that makes us strong and these challenges are brought on by Satan.

Many Satanists believe in magic and some in animal sacrifice although I see no particular connection with a Libertarian in either regards.

Of course, I think it’s all nonsense. I’m an Atheist. God is not real nor is Satan. Our lives are what we make them. Tests in life come through the natural course of events. Our parents will die, our friends and family will face illness and misfortune. Adversity is the price of life and not brought on by any outside agency.

As to the monument? I suppose if you allow one religion to mount something you’ve got to allow the rest.

I suppose this is what I get for reading so many news stories.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Spear of the Hunt
Next Release: The Broken Throne

Your Freedom is my Freedom – Child Forced to Participate in Pledge of Allegiance

Your Freedom is My FreedomThere’s a great story in the news today. A teacher from the Sunshine state of Florida forced her Jehovah’s Witness fourth grade student to place his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. When the student resisted the teacher told him “You are an American, and you are supposed to salute the flag.

Why is it a great story? Because the teacher was suspended for five days without pay and the comment section is filled with people who absolutely agree that the teacher was in the wrong.

It’s not about patriotism, it’s not about loving your country, it’s not about being a free-thinker; it’s about your constitutional rights, it’s about my constitutional rights. I’ve got a buddy who doesn’t stand during the national anthem and we get looks, angry looks. The constitution isn’t about uniformity. The constitution isn’t about conformity. The constitution doesn’t make for a pretty country. The constitution doesn’t make for a nation in lockstep formation.

The constitution guarantees me rights. It guarantees you rights. It guarantees members of the Ku Klux Klan the right to assemble and say vile things. The constitution guarantees the right of members of the Westboro Baptist Church to protest the funerals of service members.

The constitution guarantees you the right to say nasty things about President Obama. To make fun of his name. It guarantees you the right to say vile things about members of the Tea Party. It guarantees all these things but most importantly it guarantees me the right to say and do as I please with some limits.

Don’t like it? Tough.

If someone wants to look at my buddy with hate because he doesn’t stand for the anthem that’s their absolute right. If someone wants to tell him they don’t like it, well, I’ll tell them right back to mind their own damn business. This is the United States of America, bub.

His Freedom is my Freedom. Your Freedom is my Freedom.

Those who spew hate? Their Freedom is my Freedom.

A Flag Burner’s Freedom is my Freedom.

You want to take my freedom? Here I am.

Tom Liberman

Pat Tillman – Atheist in the Foxhole

Pat TillmanThere is a relatively innocuous story in the news about a Marine Corps memo that indicates lack of faith is a potential risk indicator. It’s not a big deal but as I read the comments I saw something I’ve seen often in the past when it comes to atheists in the military.

There are no atheists in foxholes.”

I’ve got one for you and he’s a braver man than anyone reading this post. A more patriotic man than anyone reading this post. A better man than anyone reading this post. His name was Pat Tillman and he died when one of his friends shot him three times in the face at point-blank range.

Then the army covered it up. They ordered soldiers to lie to his family. The doctor who examined him hours after the incident called it murder. The army continues to deny it and we’ll probably never know the name of man who murdered this great hero.

There is another rifle, with better long-range accuracy, that uses the same rounds that killed Tillman and a soldier with that rifle was in the general vicinity when it happened. Therefore the Army says they don’t know if Tillman was shot by his friends or not.

Lies. Filthy lies. Vile lies. Sick lies. Lies to the mother, father, brother, wife, and friends of Pat Tillman. You can bet he had a lot of friends because he was a great man.

I want to be clear, Tillman was not a hero because he was an atheist. It had nothing to do with it. Judging by the comments I read on stories like this the military is slowly moving towards accepting atheists in their ranks. I trust the military to do the right thing in the long run, sometimes it just takes time. I’m not mad at the Marine Corps for this silly little memo. I’m proud of the soldiers who serve this great country of ours regardless of their religion or lack thereof.

I’m proud of the Marines, the Navy, the Army, and the Air Force but I’m not proud of every single member of the service. Those who covered up Tillman’s murder are scum.

I guess I’m just saying to all those people who wrote there are no atheists in foxholes; you’re wrong. I’m asking everyone else to do the same thing the next time you hear that lie.

Are there atheists in foxholes? You bet. Pat Tillman, a far better man than I’ll ever be.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Twist
Current Release: The Sword of Water
Upcoming Release: The Spear of the Hunt

Lies in the Search for Stem Cells

Stem CellsBy now most people have heard of stem cells. These are cells with tremendous medical potential but also ethical concerns. There was a recent case in which it appears fraudulent claims were made because of these ethical concerns. Lies told in an effort to sway popular opinion.

If you’ve followed this debate then you’ve probably heard the fraudulent claims touted as amazing advances. This is an extremely dangerous event, dangerous to scientific progress, dangerous to public understanding of science, and dangerous on a personal level because of its potential to change the course of research and cures.

First a quick understanding of stem cells. I’m going to explain them at an extremely basic level; for a greater and deeper understanding I would highly recommend the Wiki article.

Every part of the human body is made up of cells. Your heart, lungs, liver, and other body parts are made up of cells which divide again and again to eventually perform a particular function.

Stem cells come in two flavors; embryonic and adult.

Embryonic cells can turn into any other type of cell and regenerate themselves. This has obvious medical potential. The ethical problem is that harvesting these sorts of cells means destroying (killing) embryos. These embryos are generally created during in vitro fertilization designed to eventually implant in a woman wishing a child. The process generates excess embryos which are either destroyed or used for scientific purposes to harvest stem cells.

I do not exaggerate when I say that embryonic stem cells have the potential to make people immortal. They can potentially regenerate any and all of your aging organs and body parts. One injection of stem cells into your heart and it is young and strong again. We’re certainly not at this point yet but astounding progress is being made.

On the other hand adult stem cells are useful in medicine but apparently did not offer the same potential. That is until November of 2011 when at a scientific gathering sponsored by the Vatican, a fellow by the name of Mariusz Z. Ratajczak announced he had found something called VSELS; cells which essentially acted like embryonic stem cells but were found in adults!

That’s a huge win. All the legitimate ethical concerns don’t matter anymore because these cells are harvested from the person seeking medical care. No embryos are destroyed.

This very much excited those who oppose embryonic stem cell research and much money, church money, was poured into a company called Neostem which was to repeat the findings of Dr. Ratajczak and further develop it. The church sponsored a number of efforts to promote the idea of these VSELS both from a scientific perspective and a publicity platform. That’s probably where you’ve heard of these adult stem cells that have the power of embryonic stem cells.

Here’s the reality. They’ve done four independent studies now and not only cannot find evidence of the regenerative power of VSELS but they cannot find the cells themselves. Their very existence was a lie, or if you’re in a charitable mood which I am not, wishful thinking.

This lie meant that money was spent by research agencies trying to duplicate the results of Dr. Ratajczak instead of finding ways to use stem cells to cure horrible diseases. Time was wasted, lives were lost.

Essentially, in order to save the lives of embryos, people lied. They lied and promulgated supposed scientific evidence to rational people who then passed those lies along to others. This creates an illusion of reality where it does not exist. When public perception trumps reality there is real danger.

When the goal is to sway opinions rather than present evidence we venture into the realm of propaganda. If we tell a lie often enough, loudly enough, and with enough conviction people believe it. People take actions based upon it. In the end the lie is revealed and people are hurt, badly hurt.

Just ask Aaron Rodgers.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Twist
Current release: The Sword of Water ($2.99 for a full length eBook)
Upcoming Release: The Spear of the Hunt

Prayer in School – a New Twist

Prayer on School StepsThere’s an interesting situation happening in Concord, New Hampshire wherein a woman has been going to the steps of her local high school and praying, quoting the bible, and expressing her religious views out loud every morning as the students enter the school.

Two of her children attend the school and she was prompted to begin the vigil in February when there was a report that some cartridges were found in a school bathroom.

For the sake of clarity a cartridge is made up of a projectile (bullet), the case, the propellant, the rim, and the primer. People often say bullet when they mean cartridge.

There were complaints from students almost immediately and a local atheist group filed a request seeking to see if the woman was granted permission to do what she was doing. The school eventually asked her to stop speaking but continued to allow her to stand on the stairs. With the coming school year they’ve decided to ask her not to return and she has said she will not, although will continue to pray from across the street or at home.

It’s a reasonable resolution as far as I’m concerned but I’m a little interested in what my readers think. When I answered the poll at the site it indicated 68% thought she should be allowed to continue essentially proselytizing on the school steps. A quick perusal of the comments indicated perhaps the opposite, most people thought she should not be allowed to continue. The religious community in Concord is apparently split as well.

From my perspective her behavior is extremely rude and quite possibly a sign of mental illness. People who insist on shouting out their beliefs in a public setting should just shut up and are not infrequently insane. I don’t like blaring musicians after a Cardinals game where I’m forced to walk past them. I don’t like fanatics at the park yelling whatever they want when I’m trying to enjoy a lunch. I don’t like activists chanting on the sidewalk as I drive to work.

The question here isn’t rudeness or sanity though, it is legality. Should anyone, of any religion, or an atheist for that matter, be allowed onto school property to verbally or even non-verbally express their opinions to what is essentially a captive audience? What about a private school? What about your place of business? What about a restaurant?

The First Amendment guarantees us that the government shall not establish a religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof. Is the woman freely practicing her religion? Does the fact that it is being done on school grounds, which money from our taxes purchased, mean that it is government sponsored? People have the guaranteed right to religious freedom in this country and this means I shouldn’t be forced to listen to your religion when I’m essentially trapped in a public place. At your home, at my home, quietly over dinner at a restaurant, even in a classroom where open debate is allowed and all sides are given equal time, your right to speak outweighs my right to not have to listen. I can largely leave those situations as I desire.

Noise interrupts my privacy and my constitutional rights. When one person is shouting or even talking loudly in a public place it intrudes on a lot of people. The argument that I don’t have to listen is false. If I want to attend that school, I’ve got to walk past  her or go out of my way to another door. She invades my rights, she invades everyone’s rights who has to walk past and I think that outweighs her own rights no matter if a school, sidewalk, restaurant, or any similar public place.

I think it’s an interesting question because both sides have guaranteed rights in this case. It’s a matter of deciding whose take precedent. I think mine do, but that’s probably not a surprise to anyone who reads my blog regularly.

What do you think?

Tom Liberman Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Twist
Current Release: The Sword of Water
Upcoming Release: The Spear of the Hunt

Good and Evil

Good and EvilI wrote a series of posts in March of 2012 about stupid platitudes and one of them passingly referenced prayer. The post wasn’t really about prayer at all but about the stupid platitude. Nevertheless I did suggest that prayer was rather silly. I went further into that concept in another post much later.

In any case, a reader stumbled upon the platitude post and began a dialog with me expounding on why I was wrong about prayer. I replied and so on. Eventually the person began to wander far afield from the original premise and posted the following:

… if you personally know that there is no God, what do you believe about things like little girls in the Congo being raped to death? Is that bad? If so, why? Who decided it was bad? I believe rape and murder are EVIL and horrific, and my worldview has an explanation for the concept of evil. A gap in the godless explanation of the universe is that there I have found no convincing evidence as to why we should view anything as bad or good.

I read this to mean that in a world without god there is no differentiating between raping and murdering little girls and serving them tea and cookies. I was physically upset by this argument. My stomach churned, I felt like vomiting. That the lack of belief in god meant lack of belief in evil, or good for that matter. Not even just the belief of evil but that evil and good do not exist without god.

I suppose one could argue that without god the world would not exist and good and evil are part of the world but I don’t think that is what is meant here. I think what is meant here is that if the world exists, but wasn’t created and governed by god, that there is no difference between good and evil.

I was so horrified, so outraged, that I decided to wait a few days before posting anything.

“Who decided it was bad?” How about every single human culture that has ever existed, regardless of their religious view. Long before you, long before Jesus, long before the Jews, people knew it was bad.

Rape, by the way, is mentioned in a number of place in the bible. My favorite is Deuteronomy 22:28-29 in which the rapists is punished by having to give the father of the rape victim fifty bucks and has to marry the woman he just raped.

After I settled down I began to wonder if the person commenting actually had a christian view of evil or if they were misinterpreting the concept. I did some research.

I went around and read articles about evil and articles about divine law. From everything that I can find, the christian view of evil is not that god defines it. There are broad parameters of wrong but by in large god decided to allow evil to exist because otherwise people would not know good. Nowhere could I find a clear definition. In a number of places christians try to explain why in the old testament god orders his people to murder, to rape, to enslave their enemies but in no place is evil defined. Rape is largely explained as wrong because it is fornication, sex outside of wedlock, not because you are forcing yourself on a woman who doesn’t want to have sex with you.

There are many restrictions in the bible, in particular the Book of Leviticus; adultery, eating four-legged insects (used to be birds but got changed on reinterpretation), offering grain without yeast, eating blood or fat, giving birth to a boy, skin disease, moldy clothes, well I could go on and on. The point is evil is not defined. Behavior, certainly. Evil simply exists.

So, in the end I can’t get too upset. Either the person making the comment didn’t explain what she meant very well or she is confused as to the biblical interpretation of evil.

The concept is interesting though because I’m often asked by religious people when they find out I’m an atheist, “Why are you good? What keeps you from doing bad things?”

The answer of course is everything Rand. I do good because it’s in my best interest to do good. If I raped little girls I’d be thrown into prison, murdered by outraged parents, beaten to a pulp by brothers and friends.

Even if I was a soldier, invading an enemy land, and could rape a girl without consequence I would not do it because I respect her as a human being, I respect myself as a human being. Because I know if someone raped one of my sisters I’d want to kill that person. As would anyone, regardless of their religious beliefs, since the beginning of humanity.

Why do I think rape is evil? Because I decided it is.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Twist
Current Release: The Sword of Water ($2.99 is a bargain for 300+ pages of great reading)
Next Release: The Spear of the Hunt

Throw me the ball – god

Prayer and the Big GameA recent poll suggests that 27% of US citizens believe that god plays a role in the outcome of a sporting event.

Another poll suggests that 77% of people believe prayer works in general.

The question I am going to ask about these statistics might not be the one you think.

So, here’s my question for the apparent 50% of people who believe prayer works but don’t believe that god helps win or lose a football game. Why not? If you believe that praying to god will cause god to change one thing, then why not believe god would change a sporting event’s outcome?

For the record, I want to be clear here, if you believe prayer works then you believe that god is fallible. That the master plan for your life changes as you pray. That the original plan of god got changed. If you believe god is infallible then prayer must be useless. The plan is at it was and cannot change. No amount of prayer can alter the course of the plan. But, getting away from logic for a moment I want to examine the psychology of those 50%.

I think the reason for the disparity in those who believe prayer works and those who believe prayer works for sporting events is quite simple. If god is willing to alter something as simple as a sporting event then god is capricious. God is willing to cause someone to lose a largely meaningless game because the other side prayed more earnestly. This makes god petty. That’s why most people who believe in the power of prayer don’t believe that it changes sporting events. Does god changes the outcome of the kickball game at recess? Where does it end? Those who believe in the power of prayer at some point realize it’s a ridiculous proposition and bail.

I believe in prayer they say, but not for silly things. God is above that.

If god is watching and making countless changes to the master plan at all times, saving a life here, ending a life there, picking which children in Sandy Hook to live, then god is a capricious prick. I want no part of such a god. If that god were to come to me right now and say, ‘I am God, worship me’. I would say no, never.

There is one other possibility and the most rational of my religious friends argue it. That god doesn’t alter the master plan for a prayer. That people pray to make themselves and others feel better about the troubles they are suffering. Prayer is merely a conduit of hope. To that I say, dispense with the prayer and get on with the hope. Don’t pray for my sister to fully recover from breast cancer, tell me that you hope she does, that you are thinking of her, that you care for me as a friend, and for her by extension.

I’m not militant about this. When friends tell me they are praying for a loved one I say, ‘thank you. That’s kind of you’. I know they are praying because they think it will help. That’s their business. Go on praying, just be aware of the logic behind your prayer. If you believe prayer works on any level you must believe it works at every level, even sporting events.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Twist
Current Release: The Sword of Water
Next Release: The Spear of the Hunt

Paul Broun – Evolution is Lies

Religious FreedomThere’s an interesting political/religious article making the rounds, at least interesting from the perspective of an atheist.

The issue is that Georgia representative Paul Broun made some statements in a speech declaring evolution and the Big Bang theory satanic lies designed to keep people from understanding that they need a savior. I’m not at all surprised that people believe this sort of thing nor am I shocked that a member of our House of Representatives would say it. Polling of United States citizens suggests that in 2007 31% of them believed in biblical inerrancy. I’m not even surprised that Representative Broun is the Chairman of the House Science Committee’s panel on investigations and oversight.

The question that comes to mind is if Representative Broun is using his religious beliefs to drive his legislative decisions. In 2010 he introduced a doomed resolution to make it the Year of the Bible. Certainly his votes are going to be driven by his belief system in the same way an atheist’s votes or any other person’s votes would be. One of the most important tenants of the First Amendment is that our government cannot tell us how to believe and that entails that we must accept the beliefs of those of different religions.

If Representative Broun isn’t using his position in Congress to install Christianity on me then I really don’t have any problem at all with his beliefs. I think he’s wrong. I think he’s blind to the clear inaccuracies in the Bible. By the way for my Democrat friends, Broun was a Democrat for the early part of his political career but switched parties in the 1980s.

His legislative legacy includes a proposed ban on pornographic material at military installations, trying to define who can marry as a constitutional amendment, consistent votes against climate change legislation, and votes against TARP.

His speeches are littered with anti-President Obama rhetoric questioning his birthplace, his religion, and declaring him a socialist who wants to raise a private army to take over the United States in the same way Adolph Hitler created the SA and then the SS to take over Germany.

He’s a politician, a self-deluded fool, but I see nothing except the Constitutional Amendment to legislate who can marry who and who cannot as evidence he’s trying to push his religion on me. In other words, I don’t really have a problem with him if his constituents don’t. I would never vote for him but if the people want him; then that’s the way a Republic works.

When he tries to violate the Constitution and push his religion on me, then I’ll stand up and fight for the country that I love. As it is, I respect the Constitution and his right to his ridiculous beliefs.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Twist
Current Book: The Hammer of Fire
Upcoming Release: The Sword of Water

Hubble eXtreme Deep Field – Religion and Science

Deep Field HubbleNASA released another deep field image of the night sky and it makes me ponder the difference between the religious view of an image like this and the scientific view. The picture shows a small section of the night sky, smaller than the size of the moon, and over five thousand galaxies. Each galaxy has potentially billions of stars although they vary greatly in size.

My thinking today is about how a deeply religious person looks at this compared to the way I look at this and all the middle ground in between. When I see this picture, I see such vastness that it confirms my atheism. No one entity could simply create this amount of material at the snap of a finger or wave of a noodly appendage. I like to think of a field of grass and all the geology, biology, chemistry, and other elements involved in it. To engineer such a thing would be a massive undertaking. Then to extend that to an entire planet, solar system, galaxy, and billions of galaxies that make up the universe. This is beyond any one creator no matter how powerful.

I can’t speak for religious thinking with any certainty but having spoken with religious people over the years they would likely take the opposite view. That such magnificence can’t be some coincidence. They would see a guiding hand that imagined, designed, and created this beauty.

I’m not really trying to come to any conclusions today just thinking about things. The way our minds shape our view of the world around us. Two people can look at exactly the same thing and come to very different conclusions. I’m of the opinion that my brain is somehow, certainly not fundamentally, different from a religious person’s brain. We see the world and interact with the world in different ways.

For me it’s not a matter of choosing to believe or not believe in god, it’s that I don’t, and I never will. I’ve been told that someday I’ll “see the light” and become profoundly religious. Honestly, I can’t imagine that ever happening. It requires a faith that my brain doesn’t understand. I see that picture and the thought that one creator entity made it all, every hydrogen atom, every chemical reaction, and I laugh. It’s impossible.

My religious friends might say that people thought flying was impossible but we do it now. It’s a bad argument because we’ve seen birds and insects fly from long before we could, but the concept is relatively sound. Things that seem impossible yesterday are completely possible today.

I just wonder if there is some genetic predisposition to religious thinking. Some gene-code sequence that makes a person more likely to be a faith-based thinker. I have no answers.

When I speak with most of atheist friends we all generally agree that there is something different going on. I’ll give one example and then call it a blog.

There are things in the bible, torah, quran that are ridiculous concepts. Noah’s Arc for example. It’s not physically possible to get that many animals and that much food in such a small space for a year. Anyway, I mentioned to my friend that at some point a religious person has to look at something like this, admit it’s ridiculous, and then say ‘I believe it anyway’. At some level of their thinking they have to do this. My atheist friend replies, “How do they do that?”

I have no answer. I don’t understand how you could look at something that is clearly false and choose to believe it anyway. I do think there are people more in the middle who don’t believe the bible, torah, quran tells literally true stories but they do believe in a higher power, noodly or not.

I find it interesting. What do you think?

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Twist
Current Release: The Hammer of Fire
Upcoming Release: The Sword of Water