Imagine!

From the Paris Olympics opening ceremony.... a showcase of a most beautiful song (by John Lennon) that wouldn't be a highlight in most countries, including the US: "Imagine there's no heaven...no hell below us...imagine all the people living for today...nothing to kill for...and no religion too"

When Credulity, Uncritical Mind, and Perverted Love are Desirable Qualities

 

It's a sad day when Biden has to put out a statement re-affirming his faith (credulity, uncritical mind, ignorance on display), because some moron (DJT) made a gibberish statement that Biden has " no religion, no anything, hurt the Bible, hurt guns, hurt God..."

So, in a village where so many people are infected with a virus of the mind, proclaiming blindness, ignorance, and love for someone whom you fear, is considered an obligatory statement and positive attribute for any politician who wants to lead.... tsk. We're still so backward and primitive.

The Myth of a Loving God...

And the faithful keep sending messages like, "Merry Christmas,"

 "May God Bless..."

Did you hear about the 7 year old who's dying of brain cancer and wants hand-made xmas cards now since he won't, most likely, survive until xmas?... His parents are asking for those cards and for donations for his funeral expenses.

If suffering matters, why do people still believe in a loving God who creates sickness, natural disasters, hunger, and evil? Where's "free will" in this? Where's the chance for a 7 year old to demonstrate his worthiness to his creator? Any decent person (even non-decent ones) wouldn't want little children suffering and dying... for any reason.

A Culture of Guns Feeds the Kind of Violence We Just Witnessed in Orlando. Which God Instructs His Children that Homosexuality is a Horrible Sin Worthy of Death?

If only there was another good person with a machine gun, or at least an assault automatic weapon to take down the Orlando shooter before he killed all those good people. Same, with all the other instances where unarmed civilians are gunned down by crazies all of our beloved country of ours. 

Now, I'll keep a moment of silence, after which I'll pronounce that my thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. All of these acts, of course, will do nothing to help the past, present, and future victims of gun violence. 

The NRA is defending the interests of the gun sellers and manufacturers not the gun owners. It gets support from knuckleheads who believe that the more guns the more freedom people have. This is a libertarian paradise where the enemy is always the government, the communists and the non-xtians. Except we had this ...paradise in the early days of our republic--where Trump wants to take us back to--and it didn't work.

Yes, a gun in the hands of a good person may stop a bad person with a gun, but there are downsides as the proliferation of guns leads to more deaths. This is a fact. I include deaths from disputes with people having access to deadly weapons, suicides, children who shoot themselves or others, etc. There's no good reason, in my mind, why civilians should have access to assault rifles and high powered guns with big ammo clips. Such weapons must be banned. And, yes, it can be done in these United States if we wanted to. We have had a violent past (and present), a history of the vast frontier, wild men and untamed nature. But, so was Australia. They banned most weapons there and they have a huge reduction in crime involving firearms. 

Now, there's another sensitive issue in relation to the mass shooting in Orlando on Sunday. Many have said that the crazy gunman may had been offended by the gay culture but, guess what, his actions had nothing to do with religion!

Really?! All three Abrahamic religions--Judaism, Christianity, and Islam--teach that homosexuality is an abomination, a sin, worthy of the most severe punishment in human societies and in hell. The Abrahamic god is not tolerant, or loving, but angry, petulant, vindictive against the children of his creation, who are designed with imperfections and are worthy of condemnation and punishment of death for exercising their right to pursuit of happiness.

If you still choose to remain silent, sorry to say, you're part of the problem and for perpetuating violence and primitive superstitions. 

Update 6/14/16: This video by Samantha Bee just came out and it nails the points I'm making here.

Good Idea, on Tax Day... (as per Bill Maher)

 Bill Maher makes a good argument: Forever 21 sells taxable t-shirts. Wealthy churches selling invisible product.....  OK, guess what Maher is suggesting...

 


Happy tax day 2016!

After the Charleston, SC, Massacre, David Hume's ..Religion Comes to Mind...*

Today, many people are bowing in prayer, especially in Charleston, SC, after the massacre, whereas a lone gunman killed nine people in church who were praying to God. Any decent person is saddened by this kind of immoral act. Innocent lives lost always emotionally traumatize individuals and societies as a whole. Decent human beings would act to prevent such injurious acts if they could.

Today, there are lots of speeches expressing sorrow but also a belief in God. I find it truly amazing that what almost any person would do as a matter of decency is not done by God, and yet God is given only the good credit, never the bad. This is the behavior that hostages or people drenched in fear (like those under brutal totalitarian regimes) exhibit.

Actually, the speeches that urged us to be even more faithful in the face of a great tragedy are offensive for they ask me to suspend reason and dictate that I must feel the ..love of God and whatever else groupthink purports. 

Being faithful--accepting even the most incredible--is being able to accept anything without evidence or reason. This is like the worst virus of the mind, and this is exactly what religion is. It has a fail safe too; challenge it and it turns the faithful into a more defensive and close-minded person!

Oh, free will, they reply. Really? First, the grand designer created humans with certain attributes, including the bad ones. Why should a defective product's actions be harmful to me? Where;s my free will?  Why don't I get godly protection? To live my life the way I see it most rewarding without harming others of course! And, how about natural disasters and diseases that regularly kill millions of humans? If anyone wants to argue about free will a short trip to the local hospital should make them wonder why children (even babies) have cancer and other deathly diseases.... But, of course, this is not about using reason to understand--instead we're being asked to use our head to bow slavishly. Using faith to numb the mind and to accept horror, immorality, death, and suffering as part of the designer's great plan, should not be the practice of thinking people nowadays.

So, please, let's mourn those who die, let's help the world be a better humane place, and let's stop this nonsense about bowing our heads to an imaginary deity, who's either incompetent or impotent and thus cannot stop evil, or who doesn't really care when evil happens. 

“Epicurus's old questions are still unanswered: Is he (God) willing to prevent evil, but not able? then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? then whence evil?”   ― David Hume

*David Hume on Religion

Wars, Genocides, Natural Disasters, Pain and Sorrow, are all Part of the Human Condition as the Creator Intented

This week, many people are commemorating the 100th anniversary of the Armenian genocide by the Ottoman Turks. Should we care? Should we do anything about when similar events take place around us? What can we do? Is sensitivity enough? How about when an intervention is not possible for a variety of factors? These are all hard questions to answer. 

The largest Armenian church in Turkey today is St. Giragos which is also a cultural center since succeeding Armenian generations in Turkey have converted to Islam, either forced or in order to blend it and survive. This is by itself a lesson on the spread of religion.

A conservative (religious, social) would point out that humans are governed by "original sin," which basically means that humans have a bad quality in them--the "bad seed" can be seen religiously or symbolically. Therefore, the individual shouldn't have unlimited choices when it comes to morality and social mores. People don't know what is in their best interests. But, the fundamental question still remains, who designed humans? If it's evolution, then human nature evolved to adapt to the environment; scarcity of resources can result in "us versus them" behavior. But, if the grand creator is the designer of humans, then he has to be given credit for what his children do while he doesn't interfere.

When the Ottoman empire had practically collapsed, the Young Turks decided to ethnically cleanse the remaining territory as a way to preserve their country. So, intentionally, even enthusiastically they proceeded to exterminate the minorities. Not surprisingly, imams (religious leaders) instructed the uneducated and god-fearing populous that it was OK to kill Armenians, and generally all Xtians. Not all Turks participated in the genocide, but the idea of creating a nationalistic Turkey was the consensus. 

The Greeks in Asia Minor would later have the same fate, though the circumstances were different after the 1919-1922  war. Kemal Attaturk's army and the nationalists cleared Asia Minor of Greeks, and solidified the current borders of Turkey. War is dehumanizing; it can turn good people into savages. Religion can do this too. Yet, there are many stories of people from both sides that sheltered their neighbors from persecution and death. Humanity also has a brave, kind, altruistic, loveable side.

This morning, a big earthquake killed thousands of people in the Nepal region. Unlike war that can be seen as man-made, natural disasters, parasites, diseases that kill millions more aren't man-made. OK, maybe the adults deserve to die, because somehow the divine has deemed death is their punishment. But, how about babies, little children, the innocent? If all of them deserved to die, perhaps because they'd grow up to be sinners, then how about free will, choice, own volition?  All religions are big on people having to demonstrate their goodness. Otherwise it'd be pointless. A defective person would only do bad things; no choice, therefore, no personal responsibility.

This kind of intellectual pondering has no place in religion. Not if ideas, positions, moral stances are to be arrived by reasoning and rationality. Religion is divinely inspired, thus it cannot possibly be the creation of men, who don't have the capacity of infinite knowledge and wisdom. A few chosen ones are given the divine message in secret. The problem with this method of divinity is that even if we accept the message how do we know its true source? The gods have chosen to give conflicting messages to different peoples over the millennia. This is a conundrum for me. Any cursory comparative review of the religions shows how different they are, especially the farther apart on this globe they began. Proximity of start-up religions have similarities because people are influenced by each other. 

When there's unbearable sorrow, it's natural to seek comfort, a gleam of hope, somewhere, anywhere. Religion and the cultural associations it entails, provides such. When you lose so much, perhaps a loved one, you may seek comfort by an imaginary deity, that in the afterlife all this suffering will be gone, if, of course, you obey divine law. It's a bargaining, an almost foolproof construct, bathed in fear and sorrow.

But, what still amazes me is that after a big tragedy, where millions of people suffer horribly and die, almost all of them deeply religious, and the deity just sits up there observing and doing nothing, well, this is perversely wicked, immoral, unkind, and evil.   

If You Realy Believe it, Is it a Lie? Or, Why a Healthy Dose of Skepticism is Necessary.

 The Flyin' Spaghetti Monster...
I've often wondered why people believe extraordinary claims without a shred of evidence, especially when they reserve no doubt and dismiss any reasonable skepticism. I think it's conditioning, a cultural chain, and a deep need to believe what makes them feel good. Affirming unexamined beliefs adds to the mountain of bad arguments and self-deception.  


We see this everywhere, in politics too. Fox News viewers don't go to this venue to be informed; I mean, truly informed. They're looking for more ammunition and supporting arguments of their preconceived notions. By the way, this audience is the least informed in the US. The PBS and NPR audience is the most informed on the other hand. Liberals tend to be more open-minded and open to revision. Of course, everyone has practiced confirmation bias--whereas you accept or remember only the items that support a particular view, dismissing contradictory evidence. Yet, the degree to which someone does this matters a lot.

An extraordinary claim is personhood survival after death. Not only that, but there's a heaven and hell, and that even you can reunite with lost pets. Oh, and that this new realm is of a particular God, religion, etc. Now, there are countless books written on the subject, ..documenting the trip to heaven and back, because, heck, those who had a NDE (near death experience) can't be wrong! Interestingly, none of those people have come back to say that God or heaven was of a different religion than theirs!  

Such claims are extraordinary, so where's the proof? How can I, a skeptic, know that this actually happens and it's not the brain hallucinating? I think it matters whether the evidence can pass the threshold of reason and scientific scrutiny, especially when now we do have lots of research that shows there are physiological conditions that can make the brain produce a NDE. Leaving the body, going towards the light, seeing and hearing stuff, etc, have all been reproduced under certain physical conditions without a NDE. If you're interested in more of this, check out this podcast of a debate "Death is Not Final" from the Intelligence Squared series. Dr. Steve Novella (from the Skeptics Guide to the Universe) nails it.

Just recently, the boy, Alex Malarkey, who claimed he died and went to heaven, where he had conversations with God and Satan, and whose "experience" was written a most popular book among believers, admitted that he lied! Just like that. Now, do you think those gullible believers would change their minds or become more skeptical? My guess is, no! We've seen that frauds like Peer Popoff, Jim Baker, Benny Hinn, who have been thoroughly discredited (big media coverage, court convictions, etc), only to re-appear peddling their old schemes and raking in the cash. All in the name of the Lord of course...

Malarkey's story made millions of dollars to some by selling to the gullible while there are indications that his handlers knew the story was a lie. The crux of the matter is, again, this extraordinary claim was offered & sold as a fact, as an argument for Xtians who want and expect to go to a Xtian heaven. No proof, no healthy skepticism, because if you want to believe something it's your right and your reality! Like George Constanza said on Seinfeld, "Jerry, if you believe it, it's not a lie."  

Religion Guides Conflict in the Middle East. Solutions are Better Achieved when Religion is Put Aside!

Why people take important actions or why they choose to believe certain myths is fascinating to me. Often it's not about evidence and reason, but it's about culture, purpose, and wishful thinking. If it were about reason and ascertainable facts, there would be lots more consensus on reality!

Recently I had a conversation with a colleague about the role of religion in the many conflicts in the Middle East. I argue that religious beliefs dictate to a great extent what's been happening there. This is not to say that there aren't other causes and factors, but if the participants were not religious, I bet they'd behave much differently. There wouldn't be a Jewish state or dreams of a caliphate or that God clearly has taken sides in the conflict and rewards his believers. 

More traditional societies are more affected by religion. Modern states, especially the ones that have adopted liberalism, have been increasingly separating church-state; not so the regimes in the Middle East, though Israel is the only state that has strong elements of a secular democracy. Unfortunately, the Israeli government caters too much to the conservative Orthodox, who are motivated by strong religious dogmas. But, the vast majority of Jews don't take their Bible too literally. Like most Xtians have already done so. It would be reprehensible, and immoral--according to our modern sensibilities--to act as the Bible prescribes, especially in the Old Testament. Apparently many Muslims are still very fundamentalists and are in favor of theocracy.

As to the latest conflict, there's no easy or agreeable timeline of responsibility. Several peoples live in small contested land for thousands of years. The Balkans used to be like this, but it was easier to form countries with fixed borders. There were wars, exchange of populations, genocides, and religious conflict. But also there was more room to move and adjust the borders. Palestinians, Jews, and Christians all lay claim to this relatively small parcel of land in the Middle East.  Hamas began to fire rockets into Israeli civilian territory a few weeks ago. We have to ask, why did Hamas do so and what did they hope to achieve?

Those rockets couldn't seriously hurt Israel but certainly did provoke a violent reaction. Hamas knew that lots of innocent Palestinians would die if Israel retaliated--which it did. Are we closer to a solution today? I wonder. I am not excusing Israel's heavy hand, before and during the war. Let's say, however, that Hamas was in charge--with a big military force--and there was a Jewish minority. I don't think it'd take much guessing as to how Hamas would deal with the problem. 


I took the trouble to pour through Hamas' Chapter (Covenant). There isn't one paragraph that doesn't mention religion. The whole point of it is to eradicate the Jewish population from Palestine and establish a strict theocracy! A few days ago, NPR had a story about a young Hamas fighter who was killed. His mother kept saying “praise God” and that her son asked her to “pray for him” (before any mission). He had saved a few thousands of dollars “to get a bride” and if he was killed before that he asked his mother to spend the money on a hadj to Mecca! Praise God. This is a motivating factor for so many people. If they’re convinced that God is on their side and they’re going to heaven, especially as martyrs, even if it means killing infidels or fellow Muslims who don't have the correct version of God….

ISIS--the fanatics from Syria who have spread in Iraq is a prime example of religious lunacy. ISIS' public executions, the practice of a barbaric understanding of religion, and the fanaticism of its fighters is so extreme that even Al Qaeda rejected them. ISIS rose because those crazies are well armed, and financed, so such people tend to do well against corrupt, inefficient states, armies, etc.  If ISIS were smarter, they should copy Hezbollah, go into territories and instead of absolute terror they would improve the lives of citizens by providing needed services the Syrian or Iraqi state hadn’t. Now the US is using air strikes to push them back.

There are stark differences between those who recognize no limits to their armed struggle--anything goes at any price--and those who have the power but recognize restraints. For me at least this is important. Furthermore, I do not like theocracies of any kind. Humanity deserves better. Like I. Kant said sometime ago, this can be an age of enlightenment.... but only if we want it, because we choose to leave our immaturity behind.

Another Case Where Religion Poisons Everything. Plus, Supreme Calculatons are in Order

So, let's be clear: The conservatives, guided by religion, do not like birth control, at least not through a medical plan for women. Men, oh sure, they can have their pills for erections and whatever. The SCOTUS just decided (5-4 conservative majority) that a "close-held" company (most Americans work for those) can discriminate on the bass of their religious idiocy. In other words, imposing their religious views [primitive, non-scientific or reality-based] on the rest of us. 

Hobby Lobby's owners are part of the conservatives who want to chip away at the ACA ("Obamacare") and claim that birth control for women violates their religious belief. This may be the case, but there are all sorts of protections and laws regarding employment, workers' rights, public health, etc. Once a business owner decides to hire a worker, the latter has (should have) unalienable rights. Oh, by the way, Hobby Lobby does business in China, abiding by Chinese law. Hey, profits may take precedent in an officially godless-atheist country.

There are lots of crazy beliefs in religion. Customs, edicts, and made-up stories that govern people's lives, but this should be in the private domain. There's that separation clause in the US constitution about church-state relationship. The Bible has bans on pork, working on Sabbath, "unnatural" fibers for clothes, crustaceans, and what have you. The Mormons ban coffee and alcohol and I hear regular underwear. Scientologists believe the only way to be purified is to be hooked up to a machine and go through church cleansing, because, heck, all your problems are from the evil spirits occupying your body. Others don't accept modern medicine, etc. Obviously, we can't have public health policy and health care based on these religious beliefs. 

Yes, it matters that we have a science-based approach to public health! Oh, those pesky ascertainable facts that shoot holes into religious doctrine. An advanced, dare say, an enlightened society should allow for individual choice, including practicing willful ignorance, but there should be a religious grounds for public policy. You don't believe in vaccinations, blood transfusions, or that homosexuals shouldn't have any rights? Go back to your cave and practice those beliefs on yourself.

Let me repeat something else for the millionth time: Elections have consequences. Presidents choose all the federal judges, including the Supremes, and the Senate confirms them. Global warming? Half of the Republican governors--the state executives--are climate change deniers! The Republican party in Congress is mainly anti-science. You think this has nothing to do with public policy?

Supreme Calculations

Right to the point: Justices Ginsberg and Breyer should retire as soon as possible. We progressives really appreciate their tenure at the Supreme Court. But, they're old and we cannot afford to have them replaced by a Republican president. Ginsberg is 81 and Breyer 75. Most Supremes hate the label "judicial activists" but they all are! Both sides have advanced particular ideologies and priorities via the bench. The constitution, the laws, actions by government and individuals are up to interpretation. It's not black & white. They all read the same texts, hear the same arguments in court, yet they often reach different conclusions, because of their different judicial philosophies. 

The Senate has become crazier, more conservative (usually it's the same thing). The Republicans have managed to put the most road blocks to presidential initiative in modern times.  GOP Senate leader M. McConnell once declared that his utmost priority was to make Obama one-term president, to make him fail at everything he tried to get through Congress. There are many scenarios that show the GOP winning the US Senate in this mid-term election. Do you think, McConnell will be more or less likely to accept a liberal nominee to the SCOTUS?

The Republicans are more disciplined and will be more arrogant if they fare well in this election. In 2010, before the GOP won the House, Elena Kagan who enjoyed "bipartisan support" (we kept hearing), got only 5 Republican votes! Three of those senators (Lugar, Snowe, Gregg) are gone now. The establishment (old wing) of the party is under attack from the tea party and even arch-conservatives, including McConnell, have been challenged from the right! Who in the Senate, or the House would commit treason by dealing with the Dems or a Muslim black socialist in the White House?

Perhaps we could reverse the conservative majority in the SCOTUS. After we strengthen the liberal side by getting the replacements for Ginsburg and Breyer, we could await the retirement of Scalia and Kennedy, both at 78.

Many of the good changes we've seen in our country have come from the legislative and the judicial routes. We have to keep this in mind, thus we should never forget to vote or be political activists. Elections have consequences! (I think I've said this before).   And, yes, there are calculations.

Speaking of calculations, I want to see a Democrat win the next presidential election even if she's a centrist corporatist, because at least there will be improvement at the margins. Otherwise, it'll be steam ahead.... er, back to the dark ages.  Look, I agree with what Bill Maher said recently, that "Hillary should go away." The fact is that she won't. There was no doubt that she'd run. I don't know of anyone who'd be told that polls show a great chance of becoming president of the US and they don't run. I hope Mrs. Clinton has a primary challenger, like Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) or Bernie Sanders (I-VT). 

I also don't think that Hillary wants to promote a particular agenda. She wants to appear presidential, win favors from all over the political spectrum. Since she was the NY Senator, Mrs. Clinton has not been ahead of any important issue, like gays in the military, same-sex marriage, legalization of marijuana, and many other issues progressives like. She has led from the rear! Hopefully, she won't appoint conservatives to the supreme court.

In my state of NY, I'm excited to see that Gov. Cuomo will most likely be challenged for the Democratic nomination in September. He's been a corporatist centrist. One of his recent choices was to pick a very conservative as his running mate. So, yeah, let's support Zephyr Teachout and Tim Wu--who were robbed of the nomination of the Working Families party recently.

PS>Some polls show that men are split on whether there should be a religious exception on birth control, but among women, there's a clear majority against restrictions. This can be a mobilizing factor in the midterm elections--which are decided by who shows up to vote. 

Informed Opinions are Based on an Understanding of the Facts But Only if You Want So!

 
Update, 6/23/14:
John Oliver has a great take on Dr. Oz selling magical cures, people's priorities, and corrupt politics. 

.........

It's still amazing--perhaps it shouldn't be give the conservative (primitive) ideology that has influenced our education--that so many Americans don't believe in science, you know, ascertainable facts! Just recently there was another poll that close to a majority of our brethren in the US believe that God designed humans in their present form, which of course means they don't believe in evolution.

I understand that many perceptions, beliefs, and even actions are not reality-based. Perhaps we should stop pretending that most people can be convinced by reason and evidence. They are not--at least not right away if at all. Otherwise, lots of our contemporary debates should have been settled long time ago.

But, people like wishful thinking. They are, at best, misinformed, or, at worst, they practice willful ignorance. Even some of my educated friends are victims to scams and faulty logic. But, there are personal needs that cannot be satisfied by reality, so the alternative is to seek remedies in an alternative universe. I do understand this human need, but I really despise the con artists, most of which are ruthless exploiters and profiteers, like the mediums, faith/crystal healers, voodoo peddlers, religious quacks (any other type, really?), and tellers of secrets, "they (special interests, government, etc) don't want you to know."

Popoff For Jesus

Although some victims do see the light, many don't, even when the scammers are exposed, on national tv nevertheless. Case in point: Peter Popoff, Benny Hinn, Kevin Troudeau, Silvia Browne, James Van Praagh, and many others.

Oprah has had her share of promoting pseudo-science. I think she probably means well but she has a responsibility since she has convincing power. She should not mix entertainment with public health issues. Remember Dr. Oz? Well she made him famous, and now this guy has been making tons of money peddling bullshit. He was admonished during his Congressional testimony a few days ago--where he admitted that his claims (for all sorts of products) had no scientific proof. In other words, they did not work!.

It's very wrong to give bad advice to patients. It's unethical to to create or support anyone's delusions. As it is wrong to tell someone that their schizophrenia is due to demonic possession. It is wrong to tell cancer patients that standard medicine is toxic and there's an easier "natural treatment" that's miraculous! I once had a close friend who went through this, and it was (still is) very painful.

There's no "alternative medicine." What works is medicine, which includes standards of measuring the effectiveness of a remedy/procedure. The so-called "alternative medicine" has no such standards, and it's mostly make-believe and anecdotal. It actually can be very dangerous. I abhor those who sell such bullshit to sick people who are desperate for a cure. 

"Both Sides?"

Finally, open-minded people may have big holes in their heads that their brains fall out. Of course, there has to be debate and examination of the evidence. Any better argument and evidence must be accepted--always, with the door open for amendment. This is the scientific method. 

However, when it comes to education, to a professional opinion, a best-judgment call, it can't be "everything goes!" Not everything has equal value. As a teacher I would be failing my professional duty to say, some people believe the earth is round, some people are flat-earthers!  Likewise for a doctor to say, this medicine is effective x% but there are those who think a voodoo doll is just as effective. Rubbish.

The willfully ignorant or those who a conservative agenda say,  "we should teach the controversy"! OK, I don't expect much more from them. Seriously though? Taught in school as what exactly? Alchemy with chemistry? Voodoo with medicine? Astrology with astronomy? This bullshit isn't appropriate, not in an advanced country that values education and science. We shouldn't be teaching ignorance! This can be a deal breaker. There's only one science: It's a tool for understanding. It employs, reason, inquiry, theory that can be amended, predicts, explains; it deals with facts as best we can ascertain them. Science is NOT dogmatic, doesn't have to satisfy gods, kings, or personal wishes..

In Politics, Non-Optimal Choices Can be Acceptable. After All, Democracy Depends on Consensus

I had an interesting conversation with colleagues during lunch today and at least one said that they won't vote for Hillary Clinton should she run for president. Some of the reasons cited was that she's openly for big business, that she didn't do anything while at the State Department, and that it's not appropriate to have an oligarchy of the Bushes and Clinton.

Well, I get all that, but in a democracy--as many times in life--we, personally, don't have the ideal choice. We may not have great choices either. We often take the "lesser of the two evils" and it makes sense, especially when one is truly evil, as I believe any serious Republican contender has been in my lifetime and will be in 2016.

Plus, elections have consequences as they can steer the country in a certain direction, elevate certain priorities, and articulate ideas. Successful policies, despite their flaws, convince people about their merits. Let's not forget, many people are conservative--can't imagine in the abstract or analyze ideology. There are many narratives out there. Sure, leadership matters, and that's why we have so many people choosing the ridiculous and want a society more fit for the Dark Ages. However, once they see that, say, Obamacare is generally good, that same-sex marriage doesn't destroy a state, etc, they accept it.

In the same light, I don't think most people readily accepted the ideas of the Enlightenment, of liberalism, or of civil rights for everyone. But, once those took hold (often imposed by elites like Jefferson, Madison, et al), people accepted them. We can see this today in our own country, from state to state--different sub-cultures with very opposing views on, say, gun control, religion, sex, political parties choice, etc. This also shows that most issues aren't decided on their merits, on evaluating the facts, because otherwise we wouldn't still be debating whether humans are responsible for global warming, evolution (and science in general), and the age of the Earth!

In yesterday's NYT, C. Blow's oped titled, "Religious Constriction," makes a similar point about the religiosity of our citizens--highest among affluent countries. You have to look to Greece, Italy, and the oil-rich Gulf countries to find higher religiosity. I maintain that--for most domains, issues, ideas, morality--if religion informs opinion then, most certainly, it's wrong, and imprudent. It is precisely because such opinions are held by so many of our citizens that we don't see the progress we could get nor do we solve many of our own problems.

***

I have to give another shout to a favorite, Paul Krugman, who he recently wrote [link] along the same lines of my argument:

"The fact that climate concerns rest on scientific consensus makes things even worse, because it plays into the anti-intellectualism that has always been a powerful force in American life, mainly on the right. It’s not really surprising that so many right-wing politicians and pundits quickly turned to conspiracy theories, to accusations that thousands of researchers around the world were colluding in a gigantic hoax whose real purpose was to justify a big-government power grab. After all, right-wingers never liked or trusted scientists in the first place.

So the real obstacle, as we try to confront global warming, is economic ideology reinforced by hostility to science. In some ways this makes the task easier: we do not, in fact, have to force people to accept large monetary losses. But we do have to overcome pride and willful ignorance, which is hard indeed." 

Ricky Gervais: Beliefs Don't Change the Facts, Facts Should Change Beliefs. Happy Festivus!

I've been caught up with lots of work as this year is coming to an end, or as some of us are looking for a new light on December 21st when the winter solstice takes place and the days begin to get longer.

New York is bracing for a big snow storm over the weekend, so we will, most likely, have white xmas. Over at Faux News they're obsessed with white Jesus and white Santa, because, hey, you've got to respect the facts and history as we like it. Megyn Kelly is another conservative ignorant puppet. When she took Hannity's slot some said she was not as rabid. Yes, amid the nonsense, the willful distortions, and cranking of the propaganda megaphone, she had acknowledged a few facts here and there. Like when she called Ohio for Obama in 2012 after everyone else had done except Karl Rove. Wow. Maybe she should be given some kind of award for this!

The documentary, The Unbelievers, opens in NYC on Friday, on a very limited schedule in a few cities. I've seen bits of the Dawkins-Krauss tour around the world promoting the scientific view and pounding ignorance & prejudice. "Beliefs don't change the facts, facts should change beliefs," as Ricky Gervais is quoted.

Of course you've heard of the newest fake holiday, Festivus, but like xmas, Santa and his elves, Kwanza, Saturnalia, etc, people should be free to celebrate, create meaningful events and ceremonies without the state (government) discriminating or favoring one over the other. In the rotunda of the Florida state capitol--where the legislature designated it as a public space--now stands a Festivus pole made out of pvc plastic and empty beer cans!  I love it. [Here's the NPR story] Oh, and there's a pending application from a Satanic cult to put up something next to the nativity scene!  The Wicka should also be represented. I think the Greeks in Florida should set up shop there too. Zeus has been so maligned and ignored. It's a shame that the god of gods who presided over the birth of western civilization not be part of every public worship display.

Why Did Typhoon Hayian Kill So Many People? Did They Deserve to Die?

Philosopher of the Enlightenment, I. Kant

After a big natural disaster that hits home, it's hard for most people--especially the ones directly affected--to ask critical questions, but while feeling sympathy for our fellow humans in the Philippines, some questions are indeed in order. It's time, as I. Kant noticed upon the dawn of the Enlightenment, that we shed our immaturity. Faith is wishful thinking, in the faithful's favor; it's believing in something so fantastical without evidence and reason. I wouldn't mind except that this kind of attitude has been an obstacle to progress for humanity.

It's this kind of mentality--or, most appropriately, a virus of the mind--that makes reasonable, educated, and well-adjusted people have a huge blind spot. And, when someone tries to shed some light into this dark spot, there are objections of all sorts.

We're told that God is benevolent, all-knowing, and all-powerful. But, it wouldn't take more than a few pages of reading from "His book" to realize that his ideas are exactly of those primitive folk--uneducated, highly superstitious, homophobic,patriarchal,  genocidal, ethnocentric, fearful, and scientifically illiterate. We're told that God is good & just no matter what he does or allows to happen. We have free choice to be moral or immoral and we don't really know how God assess us at any given moment. 

 Free will?

The free will notion is essential in Xtian doctrine. Even though God knows in advance, somehow it's necessary for people to demonstrate whether they're good or bad. But, why is this necessary? Should babies be charged with the same responsibility?


So, all right then, it was God's will that 15,000 people died in the typhoon Haiyan, undoubtedly many were little children. Their parents, undoubtedly, were religious. If they happened to be non-Xtians, they were already condemned to spend an eternity in hell. How about their children? 

Natural disasters aren't man-made. Diseases aren't either. The creator of the universe has to be credited with all, the good and the bad, including the harmful bacteria, bad diseases like cancer, and the water-borne worm that eats the eyeball from inside out and blinds thousands in Africa. Some of these poor people never been taught about the Bible--the word of the one true God--so they suffer and will go to hell due to no fault of their own.

I hear the objections to this. Oh, God is merciful and loving, and wouldn't condemn anyone simply because they're not Xtian. Really? Think again! It absolutely matters whether you worship another God, have certain types of sex, fast on certain days, and generally sins are very religion-specific! No way around it. Muslims would agree with this concept. Eat pork, charge interest, question the prophet Mohammed and you're condemned for eternity!

Image from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, US.

Every year, 9 million children under the age of 5 die in the world. That's 27,000 a day, 17 every minute. They die from diseases, accidents, or natural disasters. Yet, God watches unwilling, or unable to intervene. I fail to see the moral lesson here. If anyone among us behaved likewise, we'd think this person would be impotent or evil for not caring enough to save the children.

When children are drowned by the thousands, as in this case, we see people praying to the same God that didn't do anything. Survivors thank the deity for saving them, forgetting the others who, I guess, deserved to die in a horrible, agonizing death! This is the dark blind spot that need to be illuminated. We have to break the chains of the mind and it's about time skeptics, humanists, and rationalists speak up and challenge the prevailing immaturity of the Dark Ages.

This is the kind of mentality that allows religious people to tell us that God punished New Yorkers and New Orelaneans for being atheists, homosexuals, feminists, hedonists, ACLU supporters, and whatever! The same "reverend" crowd that has an opinion on morality matters, and worse, on scientific matters. Have you noticed that one side of the debating points on abortion, stem cell research, evolution, general science, etc, are made by people whose views are ..informed by their religion!

I say, enough of that already.


 

Life, Death, Wishful Thinking, And The Devil Incarnate. All in this Week's Post. Come Right In!

I've listened to NPR's series "What Comes Next? Conversations on Afterlife" and I found it entertaining but nothing surprised me though. The philosopher argued the most interesting points, but the rest--from all sorts of religious points--made incoherent arguments for an afterlife. No proof offered, not even good reasoning. Of course, there were divergent opinions, because, guess what, they can't agree as they don't agree on what's in the mind of God. 

Basically what they proposed was some kind of a theme based on their pre-conceived notion that select ancients had captured God's dictation--which is quite preposterous. What comes out of these arguments is wishful thinking. People need to have hope to deal with their pending total annihilation, which, I admit, is not a pleasant thing to look forward to. But, I guess it's a matter of choice whether to believe in something that makes you feel good (better) than the unpleasant reality.

Like many true skeptics, I can't be sure of what happens after we die, other than our bodies, including our brains--the seat of conscience and individualism--decompose and wither away. Survival, for the person would mean the preservation of memory and personality as a minimum. Yes, our atoms will be recycled and combine with other atoms from and into other stuff. Every atom in our body has come from an exploding star! It's novel to think that way: We're star stuff. Of course, a negative person might call us ..nuclear waste.

But, a skeptic wouldn't make up stories of a nice outcome simply it feels better than any other alternative. That's what a scared person would do. It's the job of the religious leaders to get followers by delivering enticing but empty promises. And, they do this by appealing not to reason and evidence but to credulity, fear, and ignorance.

Did you know that in the past, Xtians didn't believe that their bodies will go with then during Rapture. Actually it made more sense that way, if you wanted a better experience without an old, wrinkled, sick body that had needs, some of which were "unclean urges." In the modern age, this changed. Many Xtians today believe they'll be raptured along with their bodies and that they'll go to heaven where they'll even see their pets there!

Speaking of beliefs, most Americans (US) believe in an afterlife. Actually many believe that it's probable Jesus will return in their lifetime--in the next 30 years. That would mean the end of times, or life as we know it.  Whatever. Reality doesn't depend on majority rule, and science didn't progress by polling public opinion. 

We're far behind when it comes to scientific literacy, thanks to strong religious beliefs--which are the strongest in the western world. That's why scientific facts are controversial in the US! The age of the earth, evolution, global climate changes, or even basic human reproduction fact. Public policy and much debate in our country is "informed" by faith. 

New Jersey Allows Same-Sex Couples to Marry

The NJ Supreme Court unanimously rejected the governor's (yes, that's Republican Christie) request for a stay, not to allow these marriages to happen because he argued "irreparable damage." The high court ruled the opposite, that no one would be hurt if it happened.

The governor wanted to put this into a referendum too. Which would be fine if we had settled on the question whether it's a right or a privilege for adults to associate & marry anyone they want. If it's a right, then a simple majority (or even an occasional  supermajority) should be able to deny rights. Slavery was quite popular back when.

What's the harm by allowing same-sex marriage? I'm not gay nor black. Should I care about them? Yes, because I want a tolerant, happy, free-from-prejudice society to live in. Have you noticed that a conservative (yes, Republican too) attitude is that they care when it affects them directly! They are not for a social safety net, funding for science, etc, unless they need those services. 

Some of the loudest voices complaining about government came from Republicans after superstorm Sandy. The same people who applauded Romney's statement that FEMA (and most other public emergency response agencies) be privatized! Much like that idiot governor from Louisiana who went on national TV (responding to one of Obama's speeches) to tells it's a waste of money for government to monitor volcanoes!

Dick Cheney is in favor of same-sex marriage because he has a lesbian daughter. Sarah Palin is in favor of funding research into finding treatment for childhood diseases. You guessed it, she has a child with Down's syndrome.  By the way, why is Palin still relevant? Why did Fox News hired her as a talking head? OK. I have the answer, no need to reply. I dare you though, if you can handle it, to watch her latest interview with Megyn Kelly on Fox about the government shutdown. In true-Palin fashion, she puts some nonsensical statements together, mixing irrelevant points, confusing terms, and it's pure nonsense. 

 Conservatives Accept Judge Scalia's Views as Intellectual Fortitude

Supreme Court Justice A. Scalia proves what we progressive have been saying all along: his an intellectual midget whose moral code and "informed opinions" come from the whackiest sources.

For those who might want to read the interview Scalia gave to the New York magazine, hit the link. Some of the highlights (lowlights):

• the devil is real; actually a real person who walks among us
• the Bible is a document that talks about real history, people, and events
• the Old Testament and the Gospels reveal truths about reality, the universe, morality, and why our legal system is based on such [it's not really, but that's what we get in Scalia, who's 1 of the 9 on the highest court of the land that interprets the US constitution!]
• "we're fools for Christ" [whatever this means]
• sources of information include conservative talk radio, the Washington Times (this scientology-owned, arch-conservative rag)

New Pope, New Name, Same Old Regressive Views

My apologies to my Catholic friends, but this is the 21st century, and having views like, gays are an abomination and insult to God's plan, that abortion & birth control are evil, that women are not equal, etc, is so ..Dark Ages! Now, this guy who was just another red cardinal was elected by other men in red capes, and, voila, with his white costume he has gained papal infallibility on his side!

Speaking of infallibility, this brief period between the resignation of Pope Benedict and the election of Pope Francis was indeed a rare moment when no primate claimed to be iinfallible! I enjoyed it. Did you?

Poorly-designed mural?!?

Already we hear stories about his "humble origins and life", like Mr. Obama said, “As a champion of the poor and the most vulnerable among us, he carries forth the message of love and compassion that has inspired the world for more than 2,000 years — that in each other we see the face of God.”  Well, allow me to disagree--and I can do this, because we live in a secular liberal democracy with a godless constitution, where religious authority can only threaten me with "spiritual death" not actual physical death through torture. I can live with that!

 May I ask, what kind of "champion of the poor is he when he tells the poor that family planning should be left to God, while their starving children are the responsibility of those faithful but ignorant parents?  That a woman's place can never be on the same level as a man's. Poverty, lack of education are characteristics of women who have many children and no access to opportunity to better their own lives, thus hitching themselves to the male provider.

It's amazing that so many humans don't see this pageantry and, more importantly, this outdated doctrine as a primitive institution and activities more suited for the dust bins of history.

Did I mention that this new Pope opposed same-sex marriage and adoption as "a war against God"?  I wonder how he feels about the Catholic Church excommunicating the mother of a young girl and the doctor who performed the abortion after the child had been raped in the neighboring country of Brazil while the rapist was not excommunicated....

The huge scandals of child rape by priests and the stance of the previous Pope and the Catholic church in general have left big questions about reforming a system. And, this is the crux of the matter: the problems are systemic! So, replacing a person, including the highest official, won't be enough if the system isn't radically reformed. 

However, this selection of a very conservative cardinal to lead the Vatican and the 1+ billion Catholics isn't a good sign if you expected this crusty institution to enter the 21st century of the common era.

"God, Why?" .... Maureen Dowd Ponders. I've Got Some Thoughts on This...

“Is [God] willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent.        Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent.        Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?” 

(David Hume: Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion; 1779).

*

Maureen Dowd in her NYT op-ed [link] today, 12/26/12, ponders about God's role, and she demonstrates how reasonable, intelligent persons surrender the tools they use every day--the logical, rational approach to reality--and surrender to ignorance. With God, yes, everything is possible, accept anything, and I mean anything, without evidence or reason!

If we behaved with depraved indifference we wouldn't consider it moral, especially if we had the power to save innocents from harm. Yet, the supreme being gets a pass on this. Ah, maybe He knows something we don't, is often the reply. Really? But we are rendering judgment and praise for him when something goes well. 

Millions of children die every year before the reach the age of five. They're not old enough to understand sin or to do anything that deserves the death penalty. That God knows how they'll turn out in the future precludes free will. If we're made defective by the designer, then we have to prove ourselves to him through free choice, it doesn't make sense why children should die before they actually exercise their free will. Even babies die every day. No need to go farther than the nearest children's hospital to witness little ones dying of cancer and other horrible afflictions. Is this the morality of a God?

Most humans practice religion because they were born into it and it's a way to belong, be part of the community's norms and culture. But, to have faith it means abdication, surrender, ignorance, and fear. Fear has a paralyzing effect and can distort reality. The more fearful a person is the less likely to act calmly and to exercise reason.  Being nice to a bully in hopes that he won't hurt you. Be in terror and do it often, you may end up loving him! He beats me, but he loves me, that's why I stick around....

What's even more incredible is that societies have organized themselves on unproven, incredible stories, and they have gone to great lengths to enforce conformity by uncountable violent ways. It's Xmas as I'm writing this. By the way, the "X" is from the original Greek and it's not another attack on Xmas as some super-sensitive ignoramuses suggest. [link]   I enjoy the holidays and I don't need religion to do so. Actually, the celebrations around the winter solstice go back before Christianity, while Xmas wasn't really celebrated by the Church until it decided to co-opt this holiday from the pagans! Obviously, Jesus was not born on December 25th.


Speaking of Jesus--the light, as in the first light of the solstice--how do you explain the triadic notion? That the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost are all manifestation of the same God. Well, then God sacrificed himself [in a very gruesome way, and whose death device we hang around our necks] to himself to save humans from the sin a couple defectively-designed humans (Adam & Eve) committed long time ago! In other words, we're told that we're born with original sin, a curse really, and we have to pay for the sins of others; so in order for this curse to be lifted we have to accept God Jesus as our Savior.  Sounds like a scam to me.


Humans have been reacting to the darkness, the harsh life, the threats to the species' survival by making up stories, that there's a force who protects us, and if we pay the high price of servility, there are heavenly rewards! Any rudimentary application of logic destroys these stories but most people refuse to do it. Smart, educated, affluent people that have excelled in many endeavors choose willful ignorance when it comes to the question of God. It's fear that prevents them.  

It's fear of punishment, it's fear of missing on the afterlife, it's fear that the "designer" put in us. Yet, like when Prometheus stole the fire from the Gods, some of us have discovered another seed in us: to ask questions, to use logic, to seek the truth even if it's sometimes painful. Maybe God put in us the seed of his own destruction! 

I do not need to prove that I exist, because this would require evidence and thus will destroy faith. Without faith, I'm nothing!   God (allegedly)

Obama: "This Must End!" But, he Speaks More Like a Preacher than a Secular Leader Who Must Pass Federal Laws on Gun Ownership

Yes, it's time to politicize the Newtown massacre and change our politics and gun laws

I don't know if the president has a plan other than to reassert his Xtian credentials, because he sounded more like a preacher tonight than a leader who has to change the gun laws of this country as the public by overwhelming majority now demands. Will he, or will he ..lead from the rear as in many other issues (immigration, DOMA, DADT, etc)?

I reserve my judgment until I see what he does in the next few days regarding federal legislation to ban assault weapons, high capacity magazines, require strict controls on handguns, etc. Maybe it's his strategy to grieve his the families and through the emotional path try to bring the necessary change.

Obama: "God called those children home."

Sadly, perpetuating stupidity and superstition still the norm in the US!

However, enough with superstition and ignorance. What the hell is this supposed to mean, "God called back those children"??!!! Really, Mr. president? Then if God wanted to call those children in such horrible way--and you assume you know that--why should we blame the gunman or demand any change? If God is able and willing, he'll do whatever is necessary. Or, he won't... Why should we bother with anything really if this is the motto?

Someone has to speak up against this primitive superstitious and ignorant approach/reaction to tragedies. This should end. I'd like those who have access to megaphones and want a more critical thinking public would not bring out the voodoo dolls during times of crisis. It's the 21st century, we should be mature enough to handle reality, so references to the supernatural is a disservice and an action that further perpetuates wishful thinking, prejudice, servility, and superstition.

Federal laws must be passed as to what kind of firearms are allowed. It's a political choice of a secular regime! No hunter should get guided missiles, bombs, or machine guns to enjoy their sport. No one should get clips that hold dozens of bullets, and of course no assault weapons. The Second Amendment--written by people over 2 centuries ago whose idea of "arms" was much different than ours--has already been modified by reality: "the right to bear arms" doesn't mean today the right to have tanks, F16s, and nukes. Oh, and the argument that we need guns to protect ourselves from the government is so 18th century too. Out duty as engaged and informed citizens is to never reach that point of having to violently resist our own government, because if we do it'll be too late! The government will always have more, bigger, and powerful weapons.

There are more gun shops than grocery stores (or McDonalds, or Walmarts or gas stations) in the US!

It's absolutely ridiculous that in order to get a car you need to be tested for ability, obtain insurance, while the vehicle is registered and inspected, but getting a gun is simple matter of going to a gun show and buy one with no background check! This is totally insane. I'm fed up with going through the same motions of sadness, anger, grieving, promises of "never again", every time such a bloody event happens, but we don't do anything about it!

Children under 14 are 13 time more likely to be killed in the US (in advanced countries). Guns kill 30,000 Americans every year. The murder rate in other advanced countries is in the dozens whereas in the US is in the tens of thousands. Yes, there are complex reasons for having such a violent society--and we should start a national dialogue on this--but we certainly can do something about the means of violence.

Obama has done this kind of consoling after massacres 4 times during his tenure. Has he learned that the mass murderers used legally-obtained assault weapons? But, this is the president who signed 2 gun bills into law. One, to allow firearms into national parks and one to allow them on Amtrak! How's this for a radical president who'd confiscate all guns as the conservative nuts argued in 2008?...

Time is now for serious action and the president to lead. I understand the script, I understand that Obama has to speak a certain language, but no amount of comfort can bring back the innocent dead. However, if we change our attitudes and public policies we can prevent tragedies in the future. We'll all gain from this. We should come together when we face adversity and pain, but we should stop being masochists and fatalists now!

PS>Yes, more readily available guns lead to more violence and homicides. Here's a study among advanced countries. Yes, it's also the culture that plays a role, but even formerly violent countries (Japan, Germany) have changed due to gun control and other sensible laws! The US can too.