A Critical Mass

I haven’t posted for a while, having been quite interested in the US Presidential process of late and not really having much to say, but this story made me cringe.

Apparently an eleven year old girl has died in Wisconsin, USA, after her parents neglected to call the doctor in favour of praying. The article on FOXnews.com says:

“Her mother, Leilani Neumann, told The Associated Press that she never expected her daughter, whom she called Kara, to die. The family believes in the Bible, and it says healing comes from God, but they are not crazy, religious people, she said.”

I’ll have to disagree. This is the definition of crazy, religious people. How stupid do you have to be to expect a prayer to an imaginary being that has declined to present any evidence of its existence (that would be because it’s imaginary!) to be more effective than calling a doctor? The article continues:

“The girl’s father, Dale Neumann, a former police officer, said he has friends who are doctors. He started CPR “as soon as the breath of life left” his daughter’s body, he said.Other family members called 911 to seek emergency help, Leilani Neumann said.

“We are remaining strong for our children,” she said. “Only our faith in God is giving us strength at this time.”"

So, the father finally figured out that the prayer wasn’t working and that he ought to intervene when she died but it still took other family members to call the emergency services! He then says that the same faith in his god that just allowed his daughter to die is giving him strength?? No, it’s keeping him ignorant and criminally negligent! I fear for the other children.

This BBC report describes how a British schoolteacher has been jailed for allowing her primary school pupils to name a teddy bear “Muhammad”. She has been sentenced to 15 days in prison and deportation from Sudan.

While this is bad enough, the sentence could have been much worse: up to six months in prison, 40 lashes, or a fine. 40 lashes?? Are we still living in the Dark Ages? There should be no reason to give anybody the lash - surely we as a species have moved beyond such barbaric punishment.

Of course, the “crime” for which the sentence was passed is just plain ridiculous. Does anything demonstrate more clearly the Islam tends towards intolerance? Who is harmed by this unfortunately-named teddy bear? Nobody. It’s difficult to understand why this is even considered a punishable offence, until you consider that people really do believe that they’re going to be struck by lightning, or sent to hell, or whatever crazy divine punishment is associated with this “crime”. This case just reinforces the primitive notion that entire societies might suffer divine wrath for an individual that is, in all likelihood, not even a Muslim.

But let’s think about this for a moment. Let’s assume that the schoolchildren are Muslim. Let’s also assume they do not understand the laws of their own religion or even the idea of idolatry (silly as it is). Isn’t it more likely that the children chose the name Muhammad because it means something special to them? How is that an insult to the Prophet? It is an expression of affection, nothing more. This Sudanese court should feel ashamed to be so oversensitive and to have over-reacted in such a silly way. Such cases should not even be considered in this day and age, much less punished so barbarically.

Despite being an atheist, I often hop over to David Hayward’s blog nakedpastor.com (on the blogroll) to see how the other side live, so to speak. David is a pastor in some church somewhere and bares his somewhat tormented soul to us all. He’s just turned 50 apparently, hence these few lines, a kind of blogging birthday card, if you like. It made me think why I’m here in the blogosphere.

Although we’re on different ends of the believing scale (or are we?), I find his posts insightful and occasionally inspiring. Obviously I disagree with the whole god hypothesis thing, but I’ll forgive him that and say he’s a wise man nevertheless!

His regular commenters, however, are an enigma to me. I simply do not get the theistic mindset at all, having never been indoctrinated and never felt the need to believe in any god or anything supenatural. As internally frustrating and mystifying as it is, I like to read these commenters’ opinions on the issue of the day, inevitably twisting logic and mangling facts to fit in with the various Christian beliefs they cling to. Try as I might, I can’t work out how they reconcile their religion to the real world, especially in light of David’s own, well, let’s say cynicism if not quite doubt.

Why do I do this? I think it’s useful to try to understand the malady, religion, and those caught under its spell. I often read that Christians claim to feel pity for atheists, and I’d like to return the sentiment. I genuinely wish I could help people break free of this memetic virus (as Evanescent recently called it - I just had to slip that phrase in somewhere!), but I don’t know how. The task seems impossible, especially because the religious generally don’t want to be saved, at least not in the way I mean it.

This is not so much a concern for the already religious, as I think the True Believer is already lost. I’m concerned for our future as a species. I really do think that we need to shed religion to make progress - organised religions, inherently divisive as they are, are like a cancer to the larger entity we call Humanity, in which we are all cells. Note that I’m referring to organised religion and not religious people themselves. Quite frankly, I don’t care what you believe in the privacy of your own home. Whatever consenting adults do behind closed doors is no concern of mine. I do care, however, when those same unfounded beliefs and superstitions are foisted upon our unsuspecting children. Falling back on “God did it” as an explanation is a real inhibitor to progress, and when religion and politics are mixed, the results are terrifying. Religion and theocracy leads to restrictive policies born out of fear and out-group hatred, which leads to totalitarianism. How can that be a good thing?

Anyway, back to the point of the post. I want to understand why people believe, why they want to continue to believe in the face of overwhelming evidence against, or lack of evidence for, and what drives the religious types. David gives me some hope that all is not lost, and nakedpastor.com is one small window into this alien world.

It occurred to me the other day that if my idea of Hell is to spend eternity with a bunch of theists praising their god in the clouds, which is the Christian view of Heaven, then Pascal’s Wager is rather topsy-turvy for me.

If I don’t believe in God and I’m wrong, I’m going to Hell, which is Heaven. If I convert and I’m right, I’m going to Heaven, which is Hell. If I convert and I’m still wrong, I’m going to Hell, which might be Heaven or maybe Paradise, and if I don’t believe and I’m right, I’m worm food.

Ah, to hell with it.

My attention was drawn to this story in an editorial by Terry Sanderson of the National Secular Society (of which I am proud to be a member). Let me repeat the core of the story here:

The head of the Catholic Church in Mozambique has told the BBC he believes some European-made condoms are infected with HIV deliberately.

Maputo Archbishop Francisco Chimoio claimed some anti-retroviral drugs were also infected “in order to finish quickly the African people”.

I wholeheartedly agree with Mr Sanderson that this is an extraordinarily evil and stupid thing to do. Isn’t it about time that this ridiculous policy of the Catholic Church is challenged and outlawed? How many lives must the Church be responsible for ruining with these evil lies? At the very least, the reprehensible Archbishop Chimoio should be removed, but no doubt he will be defended by the Church. If paedophile priests can be protected, then a little thing like lying and causing the early deaths of perhaps millions of uneducated Africans must be small fry.

The Catholic Church sickens me.

It’s insidious. It’s aggressive, it’s invasive, and it spreads. It’s bad for people, yet the sufferers often don’t realise they’re affected at all. The affected often exist perfectly amicably among their neighbours and show no obvious signs, and no adverse affects are evident.

Other times, the affected actively seek to spread and ensnare others in it’s insidious clutches. It’s tempting to call this practice evil, but the affected do not know any better. It makes them seek to spread it’s influence; it’s a self-replicating thing, you see, and its agents are unknowing of its tragic consequences. Young and old are at risk. It spreads and spreads, and soon affects everything in a deleterious manner. At such an advanced stage, it’s difficult or impossible to cut it out.

Often it can be cured, and invariably gives the victim a new outlook on existence. Things that were taken for granted now become a source of wonder and appreciation; things that seemed important in the past are no longer a cause for concern. There is new understanding, and everything seems lighter. The transformation is spectacular.

And yet, tragically, many do not recover. They live with it all their lives, coping as best they can and never getting past its spread. They succumb, and are lost forever. But, there is hope for future generations! We are understanding it more and more, and one day, I hope, we will eradicate it forever.

Cancer is a terrible thing. Why did you think I was talking about religion?

Atheist Revolution recently wrote about prayer as an individual’s means to soothe oneself in difficult times, and I think this viewpoint is correct and obvious.

I would like to offer the opinion that prayer is useful to governments to keep the population docile and submissive. I think it’s fair to note that all governments seek to maintain power for themselves, whether it’s a dictatorship or a democracy, and it seems to me that some governments have latched on to the idea that a credulous population is a trouble-free population. What better method to prevent the threat of revolution or an unfavourable election result than to keep the population voluntarily on it’s knees, wishing for an alternative outcome but taking no action?

Furthermore, if the head of state purports to engage in the same activity, praying to and receiving instructions from an unseen deity, all the better to reinforce the idea that Average Joe is doing the right thing by staying indoors and fervently hoping that the laws of the universe will be changed to suit this individual’s wishes, or that world events will be influenced by an inactive and unseen being (I refer to both the prayer and the prayee here - both are highly ineffective).

The believer soothes himself by believing his prayer will be answered - but not yet - and that he is doing his part in doing good, never stopping to consider that evil is allowed to prosper by good people that do nothing, and that praying is exactly equivalent to inaction, for all the results it achieves.

I’m on holiday in the US at the moment, but here’s an interesting statistic for you:

“Ninety-seven per cent of non-religious people would help if someone collapsed, compared to 91% of religious people, according to a poll commissioned by the BBC’s new religious programme, the Big Questions.”

I’m guessing that’s not the result they wanted!

A common question posed to the atheist by the believer is “so where do you get your morality from if you don’t believe in God?”

I’m quite prepared to accept that the theist that asks this question genuinely wants to know, and does not intend it to be the gross insult that it is. The answer is simple: I get my morals from the same place you do, but that place is not what you believe it to be.

Let me explain. As far as I can tell, the theist honestly believes that morality is derived from the god and the holy book to which he or she  subscribes. I can accept that belief is whole-hearted and true, insofar as truth in this context is the absence of wilful deception. This powerful belief arises because, at some point, somebody in authority has stated that this is the case. The believer believes that once upon a time, their god spoke, made the rules and dictated them to a human who wrote them down in a book.

Actually, human morality is codified in, but not derived from, the holy texts. Our morality is the product of many generations of trial and error, to discover what works best for us all to get along in the societies and civilisations that we build for ourselves. In ancient times, when education was poor and knowledge and wisdom were held by the elders, a method was required to record and enforce this received wisdom. Received, I might add, from previous generations, not from any god. How best to codify these new laws of the land to a largely uneducated and simple populace? Write a story to tell the children, and imbue it with sombre seriousness. Refer to bogeymen and father figures that will get you if you stray.

An atheist, indeed any human,  chooses to act in a moral way of his own free will, after considering the information presented. An atheist has typically thought these things through for himself and concluded, as did those past wise elders, that acting in a moral manner is the best way to live safely. It’s pretty easy to work out that it’s not a good idea for everyone to go around killing each other, because the chances are that you’ll end up a victim one day. Similarly, society has worked out that monogamy is a good strategy because it means every man has equal chance to get a wife, and therefore need not risk his life to compete for mates. Polygamy leads to a lot of angry young men.

The Golden Rule is golden because our ancestors worked it out for us and passed it down in the best way they knew how.  A natural selection, or evolution, of social behaviour, if you will. Atheists are not to be feared for this reason. We act morally because we want to, because we have reasoned it’s the best way to be, and not from fear of eternal punishment and damnation. Your morality is within you, and it will not evaporate if you choose to walk away from religion.

Today, my 15-year old cat passed away. This isn’t quite how I imagined my first post to be, but life’s unpredictable like that.

Being the lifelong atheist that I am, I don’t believe in any concept of afterlife. As much as we love our pets, family and friends, any belief that the deceased are passing to “a better place” is simply an inability to properly cope with loss or a failure to appreciate that death is a part of life. There is no better place than the wonderful world on which we find ourselves.

I take comfort from the simple fact that I gave my cat the best possible life I could, and insofar as a cat is able to be happy, I think she was. I am pleased to have enjoyed her life with her, and she brought me no end of pleasure. Now she is gone, returning to the earth from whence she came, completing the circle of life, and I am comfortable with that. I am sad, of course, and I will miss her, but I realise that all good things must come to an end.