Pesecution and Personal Perspective

I think I'm getting really tired of the phrase "If you're not X you just wouldn't understand." There's part of me that understands the reasoning behind it; not all experiences translate from one person to another. You really do need to sometimes be there in order to fully understand the situation, and without that personal experience it is hard to really understand the situation. In a lot of ways it is an unassailable argument.

However, as ego-based beings we tend to forget that we may not have all of the facts, and that some details may be missing from the mix. We only have access to our experience and the knowledge that we have gathered. We forget that we don't have access to the full picture, and sometimes we need to remember that. There are any number of different aspects of which we may not be aware of that if we were it would make a vast difference in how we see the situation.

Because we tend to see our experiences as the important ones, we only count as important those that have had the same experiences. We sometimes forget that others have had some sort of analogous experience, and that those experiences are just as valid, just as important, as ours. However, because they dealt with situation at the heart of the experiences differently than we did it is easy to discount those experiences as irrelevant to ours, especially when their solution was far different from ours.

You usually see this in regards to those that feel persecuted. Not everyone is persecuted in the same way, and we need to remember that not all forms of persecution are obvious. But we need to stop and realize that there is ore than enough persecution to go around, and that we all subject to some form of persecution. It's easy to point out women being treated as second-class citizens or blacks being singled out for police harassment, but it's harder to see nerds being punished by their peers for good grades or even athletes being ignored for their mental skills. It's easy to forget that we've all been persecuted for something at some time, and that creates a common bond. We should draw on that similar background in order to do something about persecution rather than finding a way to keep us divided. We just need to realize that our experiences should pull us together rather than split us apart, and until we do that we are effectively persecuting ourselves.

Take A Little Vacation Through Prayer

One thing that I think that atheists miss out on is prayer. I'm not talking about supplicating a supreme being for some special prayer, but the ability to simply give a problem to someone else for a little bit. There is a certain comfort in being able to share a problem, to give up worrying about it for at least a little bit.

I know that semantically there are a lot of flaws in that argument, don't get me wrong. There are obviously some problems that you can't give up, such as medical issues or economic issues. Obviously if I'm in constant pain it is going to be hard to give it up for a little bit, and if I'm poor it's going to be hard to be rich all of a sudden. I also know that scientifically prayer is as successful as any other placebo. This is all fine; this is not what I'm referring to.

Prayer used well gives a person a chance to regroup, to step back from a problem, and to look at it from a different perspective. It can also allow the person to take a much needed vacation of sorts from the problem; if all you do is worry about a problem you will burn yourself out so taking a break from it is necessary every so often. You can only concentrate on a problem before it gets to you and it defeats you; you need to take at least a mental break from it every so often.

All it takes is a moment of silence. Sometimes a bowed head helps, or even kneeling; these gestures are important not for some demonstration of humility but to take you out of the moment, to literally put you in a different place. As a hyperkinetic I find a deep breath and standing absolutely still puts me into that moment; it's a different state than my normal get-to-the-finish-line state. I then concentrate on the silence between beats, a different perception between my usual awareness of what is going on around me. In that moment I give, however momentarily, my problem up to God and let him deal with it a moment.

And then I make the mistake of taking it back. With a little bit of luck I get a little epiphany on how to solve the problem, or at least deal with it for a little more. Admittedly sometimes a small insight has been attached, either that the problem is entirely in my head or that the situation has a certain irony to it. I so hate deities with a sense of humor.

I think that atheists miss out on this little moment. And I think that it is a shame. 

The War on Halloween

Halloween is a contentious holiday. There has been a movement to ban its celebration in favor of a more generic harvest festival. Strangely, the people backing this movement are the religious rather than atheists.

It makes a certain degree of sense. If you are serious about your beliefs, then you should stand up for them. In this case there is a serious concern about the glamourization of witchcraft and spirits, as there are a lot of attention paid to the supernatural elements of the universe during this holiday. For a group that sees itself as defending the world from supernatural evil, it makes sense that a holiday that puts them in a favorable light would be a bad thing. Given that children's movies have taken a more monster friendly approach towards monsters, the fear that monsters have stopped being something to fear and started being something to be, this is somewhat understandable. As the holiday has been adopted by pagans as well as wannabe satanists, it has not exactly grown in popularity.

They've found some allies in the child safety crowd. Not only is this a holiday where scaring people is encouraged, but so are pranks. Where some see children going up to doors to ask for candy, they see children going up to doors of potentially dangerous strangers. Throw in the usual problems of crossing the street, costumes that have obvious safety issues, and that candy itself is not an acceptable snack, and you have a holiday that those fanatically interested in the safety of their children would not mind seeing eliminated.

While I can see the point, especially when it comes to child safety, I think Halloween has gotten far away enough from its original roots that people should just enjoy it. Although some cultures do celebrate Halloween the way it was meant to be celebrated, a celebration of death, while a number of others see it as just another reason to celebrate period. Sure, there is role-playing involved, and that is what makes the holiday special as people are able to drop their facades for one that is closer to the truth, but Halloween has long stopped being the holiday of witches and ghosts. Halloween no longer has the fangs it once had, and has been divorced from its pagan beginnings in the eyes of the world.

Halloween is no longer a holiday where we celebrate the harvest of souls for a lot of people. We celebrate who we want to be by choosing the face we present to the world. This is a holiday that has evolved, and I think it's a shame that we should fear its history, a history that no longer applies. Someone needs to relax, and let the holiday continue to evolve. It may prove interesting to see where it goes...

Fanaticism is Always A Bad Idea

"Fanatics can justify practically any atrocity to themselves. The more untenable their position becomes, the harder they hold to it, and the worse the things they are willing to do to support it.”
― Mercedes Lackey, Changes

One of those things that people forget is that The Bible itself is against fanaticism. Although zeal is okay, in that the person should be on fire for God, this is different from blind fanaticism. Fanatics bring down the entire group, and force it to deal with the fanatic before they can deal with anything else. Worse, should they become the public face of the organization, they can embarrass that organization. As such, all organizations should be on the lookout for fanatics and deal with them appropriately.

It should be noted that there is a difference between "zeal" and "fanaticism". "Zeal" is fine; being on fire for whatever the person does is almost a requirement in some cases; if you don't have a certain love for what you do you may as well be doing something else. However, fanaticism is something that can obstruct you; it is more than just being gung ho, but being willing to do anything in support of the idea he support. That is not always a behavior that should be encouraged, and should actually be discouraged.

A true fanatic is blind to all but his narrow interpretation of the religion. To him anyone that does not follow that limited interpretation is an infidel and cheapens the religion; that person is actually setting the religion back and should be stopped. In more extreme cases he is willing to sacrifice his life to the cause, regardless of whether or not it furthers the cause. His belief is that you go all the way or not at all, and he is unwilling to debate deviating from the course. That obstinance makes him a threat to the cause, as it makes him a juggernaut that cannot be stopped.

Ironically this makes him a follower of a religion of his belief rather than of the beliefs of the religion. In its own way this is idolatry, as the person follows a religion that is different from the religion he is supposed to follow. He is in many ways betraying the tenets of his religion by creating his own, whether or no he realizes it, and is likely compounding the problem by being proud of his beliefs, creating an even worse problem as the person can justify the non-standard beliefs and actually look down on any that follow the actual tenets of the religion. That stance gets even worse for non-believers.

Keep in mind that does not apply merely to believers. It can apply just as much to pagans and atheists as it does the staunchest Muslim. Anyone with a specific belief system can fall prey to fanaticism. ANYONE. And if you associate with a crowd of like-minded people, it gets even worse. This means that you need to associate with people you don't necessarily agree with every so often and actually discuss philosophy.You should not take the position that you are opposed to the person's beliefs, but that you have something in common and try to seek the common ground even as you explore the differences.

If you find yourself looking down on someone else's beliefs, you need to take a step back and decide which one of you is the fanatic. It's sometimes okay to recognize that you are the fanatic, as it helps you actually explore your own beliefs. On the other hand, if the other person is the fanatic, you may just have to avoid that person. And Heaven help you two if you are both fanatics; you may want to discuss working on finding some common ground. It might surprise you to learn just how much common ground there is when it comes down to it, and taking the edge of your fanaticism can be worth it.

Ancient Aliens and Bad Beliefs

It seems as if those that don't have a religious belief are always seeking something to believe in. This makes sense, as all humans seek patterns in the universe around them. This can lead to some interesting beliefs that are viewed just as uncritically as some religious views.

I have been forced to watched "Ancient Aliens" and was all sorts of amused. Obviously I've been watching all of the wrong shows as I can see a lot of options that have not been explored, as well as some facts that are just all sorts of wrong. Most of the facts I can pretty much ignore as a lot of them are up to debate anyway; there are enough details that we are unsure about when it comes to ancient history that I'm not going to stress over a couple of decades here and there.

However, what amuses me is the extent to which they seem to wish to deny what humans can do with the right motivation. I'm not denying that we haven't been visited aliens or that may have had some influence in our growth; it would sort of egotistical to assume we are the only ones in the universe and ridiculous to assume that they would stick to any kind of prime directive, even if they had one. However, to assume that all of our bigger accomplishments is solely because of alien, or even a good percentage, is patently ludicrous; that denies the fun of being human and discovering things on our own.

That a certain number of images seem to repeat should not be a major surprise. Snakes seem to be a favorite image on the show; that they should be represented across the globe is hardly a surprise given how common they are. There are just so many concepts that were around back then, so it makes sense that they were copied across the world. It doesn't help that they have looked for similar images, even comparing Zeus and Odin pointing out that they were both white males in charge of their respective pantheons so they had to be the same despite that they have little else in common.

But it's the megalithic structures that really amuse. Don't get me wrong; alien help would have been appreciated. Personally I think that a lot of them could be easily explained by sheer boredom; you know that way too many of them began with some variation of:

"Dude, we're out of beer. What should we do now?"
"Idunno. Move that pile of rocks from there to there?"
"Sure. Why not?"

If you have ever been a teenage boy you recognize this as pretty much part of the process before something stupid happened and it's unlikely THAT much has changed. At some point they simply decided to start getting fancy, and piles became ziggurats and they in turn became pyramids. Then they started building cities, and somewhere in there Stonehenge and the Moai happened. Seriously: Give enough guys too much time and miracles start popping up.

[Sure, I'm over-simplifying here, especially as it was mostly slave labor. However, keep in mind that being a slave didn't have the same connotation as it does in later eras, and that it would ensure that the person's family was taken care of as well; some slaves were even paid wages and given important responsibilities. Also keep in mind that it gave them a chance to escape the farms, which almost all of the population was required to work in order to make sure there was food for everyone else. From the perspective of those in charge, it meant fewer people roving the countryside doing bad things, of which there were a lot. There were a lot of parallels between pyramid-building and America's Public Works Projects in the 1930s...]

And I'm not ignoring the time issue. Some of these took hundreds of years, sure, but look how long some castles and cathedrals took to build; some of those took decades, others just under a century and a half. It's not that hard to see a large group of people taking the same amount of time for something as important.

So I see "Ancient Aliens" and it's ilk as pretty much entertainment. It's fun to watch, especially for some for great ideas for that next science fiction novel. But what sort of scares me is that there are some people that take this seriously. I guess if you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything....

But Let Them Watch The Witches!

If you want to see some interesting logic bring up the subject of what shows can be watched by a good Christian kid, specifically when it comes to any kind of magic. Different parents have different limitations on which cartoons they allow, but it's even more interesting which cartoons get the axe.

The reasoning is pretty simple. The Old Testament has admonitions against witchcraft and its related arts. The basic issue was that witches could divine the future, speak to the dead, and cast curses, all of which were forbidden activities. As mankind has advanced so have the powers of witches, adding enchantments, illusions, and even shape-shifting. As such, they have become targets of pretty much everyone, religious and otherwise.

With the return to prominence of the pagan religions, witchcraft has been given a more positive spin, and Hollywood has glommed onto the "good witch" as its "great new concept". The concept allows studios to have powerful female protagonists, making it a fun concept when they do it right. Interestingly, the liberated version, especially in terms of sex, has become popular in adult programming while the purity and female power aspects make it popular for girls.

However, none of this counts when it comes to religious right. All that matters is that the characters use magic, and magic is forbidden. As such these shows are placed on the restricted list, but the listing is arbitrary. A number of different beings make the list as well, from the obvious such as demons and sorcerers, but not others that use magic, such as fairies, unicorns, and even werewolves. The irony is that most of these creatures come from the Catholic Church's archives, from when they compiled various stories from around the globe.

However, the list of forbidden entertainments is hardly consistent. Although the general goal is to eliminate those programs that make the supernatural look good, there are a lot of shows that still make the cut. Interestingly, those shows that make the cut have supernatural powers as intrinsic to the critter, such as fairies, unicorns, and even talking animals, even though individual family may include them.

Basically, while I understand the reasons for not desiring to expose their children to the supernatural, especially a glamorized version of it, I just find it interesting that there are a number of exceptions to the rule. I find this encouraging, as it means that there is some thought going into the decision. I just wish it were more consistent, and more all or nothing.

Can We Please Elect More Atheists?

I think we need another atheist in more offices. It's been a while since atheists have held a majority of posts in Washington.

I think it would be great if politicians wouldn't feel compelled to adopt a religion as a way to bolster their ratings. I get that atheists aren't exactly popular right now, but by the same token I think it would be a refreshing change of pace to see a politician state his real religion rather than one he decided on in order to make his potential constituents happy. Although the person may lose some potential votes from outing himself this way, I think that he would actually gain a few votes; more Americans are accepting of atheism as a legitimate philosophical leaning every election year (this is not to say an atheist should feel he needs public legitimitization, I just thought it was nice to see that it was more accepted).

I just think that we need more diversity of beliefs in Washington, and that it would send a strong message to the rest of the world that we really are accepting of different faiths. I also think it would be an interesting counterpoint to religious right in the halls of power already. It would also be interesting to see what those same religious right would do, especially as they are busy trying to tear the president down. With atheists in both houses it could get interesting as they would have to necessarily split their efforts; they would need to go into attack mode in order to prove that the atheists are invading Capitol Hill. It would make for some interesting battles...especially when they claimed that the Founding Fathers would not have approved of atheists as political leaders.

And that would make things interesting. You see, a good percentage of the Founding Fathers were Deists. This means that although they followed the Christian belief system, they treated it as a philosophy rather than a religion; for the God was either dead or had left the universe to its own means. This means that, by extension, a number of the original senators and representatives were also Deists, and therefore atheists.

Like I said: It would be interesting to see more atheists elected. It's been a while since there any real numbers of atheists on The Hill. 

Religion and Politics, Oil and Water

Way too many of the current crop of politicians sort of scare me. I think I've sort of hit the point where I'm hoping that there is some sort of deep joke of which way too many people are unaware, sort of some really bad hipster joke. I mean, they can't be that insane, can they?

On the other hand, I can sort of see why these people are being elected. When it comes to times of great change, some people tend to cling to anything familiar. Others look for signs of a coming apocalypse, hoping that will clear away the changes. The rise of the conservative and doom prepping is probably the best indicator that there have been a lot of changes; between the various Springs in the Arab world, the return of mass protests, the serious repudiation of corporations, and even the acceptance of gay marriage can be seen as a reason to hope for an apocalypse for some people.

Suffice to say that some politicians have always looked for some sort of drama in order to propel themselves forwards. It's easy to ignore the politicians that have been doing actual work as they are pretty hidden from view; it's hard for the public to really get a feeling for what you do when most of it happens through e-mails and voice calls. This means that the politicians who don't really do much have a chance to steal the spotlight. This is sort of why you hear less about politicians like Dorothy Matsui of California, and more of Sarah Palin and her ilk

And hear from them you do. Especially with the voting season coming up, you are bound to here from all of those seeking re-election. I guess I could do some sort of biting sarcasm, but that would be too easy. It doesn't help that I'm feeling hopeful this year, as it seems like a lot of bad politicians have been nice enough to out themselves by voicing opinions that don't pass any kind of muster, such as those challenging Obamacare or climate change. Some have been saying things that simply don't pass any kind of fact check, while others are saying stuff that leaves others totally dumbfounded. It has made it far easier to compile a list of politicians that voters are ready for a change.

Yeah, I know it's likely to be politics as usual when all is said and done. Nonetheless, I think that the voters are just about angry enough so that there are some likely changes in the air. This November I'm sort of hoping that things will change, and I'm optimistic. Just remember to vote, and that while one vote may not mean much, a lot of them do. A single leaf isn's scary, but a lot of them are. Be a leaf in the winds of change this November.

Running From the Cross in Business

You know when you should run from a business? When the owner wears his religion on his sleeve.

Although I still hold reservations about how far the Hobby Lobby decision is going to affect American business, there are still some issues that should make you nervous about dealing with a business where the owner lets his religion decide what his policies are. It's hard to really come down on the owner for doing so; it's his business, and so he is within his rights to run it as he will. Sure, there are some limits, but as long as he is reasonably fair he can get away with a lot.

If you are worried about doing business based your morals you should do some basic research before you deal with that business. This applies whether you are just buying something from them, looking for some sort of partnership, or even potentially working for them. You need to know what kind of business you are dealing with, and that research will let you know what you can expect. This applies doubly if you are debating working for them; it can help you formulate some great questions for the person interviewing you.

Once you have done that research, remember to not make any assumptions. Not all religious owners run their businesses by a strict interpretation of their religious texts. Some owners even run their businesses well by implementing their beliefs across the board. You do need to watch out for anyone that implements any kind of belief to the detriment of the business; this can extreme political correctness to fundamentalist beliefs. I have actually seen someone that actually had an anti-religious policy, albeit an unofficial one. Extreme beliefs of any kind can be horrible for business.

It's important to make sure that any business is run by the right principals. These can be religious provided they allow for business rather than a business that has to allow for the religious principals. It's fine for any business to be run by religious principals, as long as its something that doesn't handcuff it.