The Story Continues

So, you remember the post I did on "The Story", right? At the time I didn't embed their Flashy doohickey because I didn't want to violate their Terms and Conditions. I did, however, send them a little note. It was... let's go with "glib". It was glib.

I've decided NOT to believe things without evidence, so I'm going to continue being an atheist. But I'm delighted to embed this Story into my religion-hating blog so people can understand exactly how miserable you want 'em to feel about themselves, in order to accept the "free gift" of submission to an imaginary god. Have a great day!

(Fine then, how do you define glib?) Of course, then I saw the T&C and decided to just use a link for my commentary (found HERE.)

But I've gotten email responses to my submission. I wasn't expecting a response, and certainly not the very thorough one of the two. I've shortened these and my responses for content and length. (I'm wordy.) I got his letter first, so we'll call him Christian Guy #1. (Anonymity can be a kindness.) He gets major credit for doing his homework, and actually reading my post on the topic. (How often do theists send you off to read a million things, when they've never finished reading that one book they claim is all important? It's annoying.) Okay, Christian Guy #1.

I received your reply regarding ViewTheStory.com. And, I took the time to carefully read and consider what you wrote on your blog. I hope you find this response is fair and kind.

For what it's worth, we have absolutely no problems with people who are not Christians posting "The Story" on their website. And, we recognize people disagree with the Bible for a variety of reasons and with differing degrees of sentiment. We're not offended by those who disagree with the message of the Bible. At some point, every Christian has disagreed with the Bible in word or deed...how else do we become Christians unless at some point we were non-Christians?

In regards to our terms, you may be surprised that our desire was to dissuade those who proclaim to be Christians, yet promote a message inconsistent with the view of the bible. Good examples are those from the KKK whose message is "God hates anyone who isn't white" or those from churches who pick-and-choose what God hates the most (ie "God hates fags", "God hates Democrats", "God hates Republicans", "God hates..."). Certainly, throughout history, there have been atrocious acts (the Crusades, etc) done in the name of "Jesus", but I can find no evidence in the Bible that Jesus supported those false claims. How can some "Christian" Americans really
believe the God of the universe wants to "bless the USA" more than anywhere else on the planet? How crazy is that? But, haven't there been plenty of atrocious acts (Hitler, etc) in the name of "no religion" too? So, it would be equally unfair and untrue to say all atheists want to exterminate anyone who believes in God. Our terms were meant to protect our organization from being associated with those who would modify the bible for some sort of hate revival...all in the name of Jesus.

We think the Bible is clear that God hates sin, but God loves sinners. And, it also seems clear that God is just and cannot allow sin to go unpunished (similar to our judicial system...you break a law and you go to jail...unless Johnny Cochran is your lawyer). Most would say, "then why is there 'hell' if God is so loving?" My response is what kind of loving God would allow murder or child prostitution to go unpunished? Most agree that crimes should be punished. Few agree on the extent of the punishment. God's punishment is death. However, instead of punishing people for their sins, the God of the Bible chose to punish Himself. God, the Judge, exchanged his judicial robe for the death chair (the Cross) so that even a murderer could
be given a new life. On the one hand the bible's claim is that hell is for sinners. On the other hand, heaven is for sinners saved by God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ. That should humble Christians. And, it should change our worldview if we believe this is true.

Reading some of your other posts...I, too, share your negative view of those who use Jesus as a shield and excuse to parade around arrogantly and hatefully with signs. It's hurtful. And, it's inconsistent with how the Bible says we're to live. On the other hand, I don't think Christians own the market on hypocrisy, hate, and hurting others. As an example, no one had to teach me as a child to disobey my parents, be selfish with my toys, and be mean to my younger sister...I figured it out on my own. I didn't become a Christian until I was 15. To a lesser degree, I still wrestle with disobedience, selfishness, and being mean. It's just that as an adult, I've become better at disguising them.

After reading your post about "The Story", I disagree with your understanding of the Bible as it relates to what took place in the Garden with Adam and Eve. There is much debate over the Garden among theologians. On the other hand, there's much debate amongst those who hold to the Theory of Evolution. We've easily had 100+ theologians and pastors critique and approve the content. That's not to say they all would've chosen the same words we chose, but they all agreed we did not communicate things inconsistent with the Bible. Certainly we don't think what we've created is "perfect". Rather, we see no evidence in the Bible that necessitates a
change to what's been paraphrased in "The Story".

I know you believe there is no God. Therefore, anything I communicate about God is most likely foolishness to you. So, I realize my response is at the risk you will completely dismiss my motives, because you think I'm trying to pick a fight or haven't done my research to understand your point-of-view. I realize the Christian message is offensive to those who hold a different view. I do not apologize for our message, because I believe it's true...just as I'm sure you do not apologize for your message, because you believe it's true. Instead, I apologize for those [Christians] who feel the liberty to offend and dismiss the views who of those who disagree with them. It shows just how little we love our neighbor, and it shows just how much we need a Savior. If adding "The Story" to your site helps your cause, then I encourage you to add it with no malice or discontent on our part. I can
only hope you will agree with me that if everyone lived the way Jesus lived/commanded ("love your neighbor as yourself" as an example), the world would be different and I'd like to think better. Looking in the Bible at Philippians, Chapter 2, verses 3 thru 11, as well as Ephesians, Chapter 2, verses 8 and 9, I think these passages accurately capture a biblical view of how Christians are to posture themselves in the world.

Sincerely,
Christian Guy #1
Spread Truth

PS I offer a few books you may want to read (they disagree with your worldview, but I think they explain the Christian worldview clearer than I ever could).
"Mere Christianity" by CS Lewis (a former atheist)
"New Evidence Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell (a former atheist)
"More than a Carpenter" by Josh McDowell
"The Prodigal God" by Tim Keller

And... my response.

Thank you for your thorough and thoughtful letter. I'm going to try to reply in kind, and largely refrain from the pith and sarcasm that are hallmarks of my blog writing style. I understand that those are effective tools for conveying my message to some, but are not the best methods for a constructive conversation.

Ephesians 2 was my very favorite verse of the Bible, during my teen years as an inner city missionary. I loved going into the homes of the bedridden people we delivered hot meals to, and praying with them and reading that passage in particular, because it helped to bridge a racial divide between the volunteers and the people we served. Clearly you are the kind of Christian who values grace over the law, love above judgment, and charity over power. Those are commendable traits and I largely agree with them. In terms of our daily lives, and the morality we use in those, I'm willing to grant that we are probably quite similar.

Since you converted as a teen, I can understand a little better your question "how else do we become Christians unless at some point we were non-Christians?" Frankly, if everyone waited until their teen years or later to make their religious choices, I think there would be much less fundamentalism, and much less child abuse in the world. Unfortunately, religious parents often (usually) don't wait. There's considerable social support of certain actions which declare a child (or even infant's) affiliation with the religious beliefs of his/her parents from an extremely early age. When I was still a Christian, just a few years ago, I baptized my son as an infant. In second grade I won a state-wide Bible Bowl competition, against students from every other Christian school in Florida (which has rather a lot of them). I had zero choice about being a Christian. I was BORN a Christian. And if I'd stayed a Christian, my son wouldn't be given a choice now either. The first book I ever read, at three years old, was Deuteronomy 28. So as much as I love the message of Ephesians 2, I can't quite shake the presence of Deuteronomy 28 in the same book.

A little background: I was raised in a Christian fundamentalist faith healing cult. It's only been in the past few years I've begun to realize how different our beliefs were from mainstream Christian doctrine. However, I am extremely aware of various Christian denominational beliefs. Throughout my life I was a regular member at seven different denominations, ranging from Vineyard Christian Fellowship and Episcopal to Baptist and non-denominational charismatic. Sadly, when someone says to me, "I'm a Christian" I really have no idea what they believe, what they value, or how they live their lives. It's a word that has become so broad it is practically meaningless. I have a friend who attends church maybe three times a year, reads her Bible a little more often, smokes copious marijuana, and considers herself a Christian. My grandmother who led a cult that led to the deaths of dozens of kids, some in her presence and some not, also calls herself a Christian. The Pope recently said that anyone who is not a Roman Catholic is *not* a Christian. No one agrees on the word, but everyone behaves as if we do.

My objections with moderate, liberal Christianity are simple. (When I say "liberal" that's in opposition to fundamentalism, rather than conservatism or political party.) I think that as long as you subscribe to the same religion and book, then fundamentalism is always a risk. The book itself is hateful, vile, and misogynstic. I recognize that there is some beautiful poetry, some good common sense advice, and some cool stories, and I understand that you think this is a good guide for how to lead a moral life. But the toxic elements are there, and until you liberal Christians change your name and compile a new Bible that doesn't give rules for slavery, that doesn't tell the rapist how many shekels to pay the girl's father in order to marry her after he's raped her, then I think you're part of the problem. As long as the book says a woman is not permitted to teach a man, then it doesn't matter how many progressive churches employ female pastors - these things go in cycles. In another generation, the liberal churches of today might be totally fundamentalist. All the ingredients are in the book you call Holy.

My second objection is that you provide cover for the atrocious actions of other Christians. It's great for you to tell me you don't agree with them, and that you loathe the hatred and inhumanity spread by some Christians. But I don't hear the moderate Christians enough. Where is the loud Christian counterpoint to Jerry Falwell? There's ten highly-paid (tax free!) bigot televangelists, but where are the ten moderate reasonable guys (or women)? Until I see Christians minding their own flocks, I can't possibly let the moderates of the hook. You ARE your brothers and sisters keeper. Clearly God isn't interevening from heaven to prevent the words and actions of the 9/11 hijackers, Pat Robertson, or Fred Phelps. So if moderate Christians can accept that these things are bad and that God isn't going to stop them, then you should. (A simple start: Sign the petitions on my blog to increase children's rights to health and safe treatment.)

When liberal Christians let the extremists set the policy and the laws, we end up with situations like the death of Harrison Johnson, who died of 400 yellow jacket stings and medical neglect. His parents spent seven hours praying for him, rather than getting him medical attention. He died - he was 2. It was tragic. I used to babysit him. And his parents got away with it. You can kill your kid, if it's for a religious exemption. The CAPTA (Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1978? I believe) details what constitutes medical neglect of a child, but allows that if some form of "religious or spiritual treatment" is being offered instead, then that child isn't being neglected. Never mind that demon exorcisms don't cure cancer, and that dozens of American kids die from religious neglect every year. Christians keep these laws on the books, because they value their own rights to religious expression above the rights of children to live and not be abused and neglected. And that's inexcusable and immoral, and well meaning, kind liberal moderate Christians sat by and did nothing while my grandmother warped my mind and *killed* babies.

You made a comparison between the hypocrisy of some Christians and the misbehavior of yourself as a small child. You said, "No one taught me to" do those things. I don't think the analogy follows, because someone specifically taught you *not* to do those things. Since Christians and their churches claim a moral high ground, and many claim that God/the Bible is the author of morality and that a person *can't* be moral without these, it would be awfully nice if you would teach each other NOT to hit your sisters, or your kids, and not to disobey your parents or the law. A friend of mine runs a blog that is nothing but links and links of stories of clergy sex scandals, child rape, and other minister/clergy offenses. He has over twenty news stories a day on average. I want Christians to quit claiming that being "forgiven" makes you in any way better behaved. And when other Christians stand up and claim those things, I want moderate Christians to tell them why that's wrong or inappropriate or not Biblically sound. I don't want you to sit back and let them do all the talking. They are jerks - we both agree on that.

It sounds good to say that God loves sinners, but he hates sin. Until you start to ask yourself, "Why make us sinners from birth?" As you read in my post, I think the entire concept of the Christian creator God is immoral. The Garden of Eden was a trap. As a small theologically-inclined Christian child I used to wonder what would have happened if Adam and Even hadn't eaten the apple. If some other person did, six or seven or seventy generations later, would the Fall have just been delayed? Of course, since I think this is a story in the same vein as some of my favorite Greek mythology and Egyptian lore, my interest is more theoretical than practical. In practical terms, the story is obviously not true.

All the humans on earth today are not the direct decendents of two humans named Adam and Eve. The earth is over 4 billion years old. We got here through evolution, and you and I have the same number of ribs. But even if the whole story was true, was the set up God designed actually moral? Is an action moral because God said so, or did God declare it so because it is inherently moral on its own, without his will? You said you disagree with my understanding of the passage. Can you please elaborate on that so I can better respond? Thank you.

Regarding hell. I'm a pedophilia survivor, so I think my opinion may have slightly more weight in this. That might just be an appeal to emotion, though, I don't know. But as much as I detest the man who violated me, and as much as I think we should greatly increase the sentencing for child abuse of all kinds, I wouldn't want him to be in hell forever. He was undoubtedly mentally ill. He almost certainly didn't have the social or economic resources to get the help he needed and maybe it wasn't something he even knew how to get help for. I'm certainly not excusing it. I support chemical castration for child rapists, which isn't legal yet because it's considered cruel and unusual punishment. But even I wouldn't torture him forever in hell. It was a finite crime - it deserves a finite punishment, even if that's every day until he dies. Once he's dead, he can't hurt me or anyone else. The threat of him is removed. That's the real purpose of incarceration - to protect the public from the actions of someone who won't play by the rules. The purpose isn't to punish them because we're angry, although that's often how the media seems to cover child abuse stories. I think we should use that anger to change things here on earth - to increase sentences and increase funding for mental health services to poor and indigent people. Imagine if we helped people when they were only thinking of raping a child - got them on medication, had them in therapy, whatever. - instead of just mopping up after someone gets victimized. It's because I can think of better options, or at least have ideas that aren't so black and white that I believe I'm more moral than the God of the Bible. This man hurt *me* personally - a lot more than he hurt some deity, real or imagined. But I wouldn't want him to suffer *forever*. Therefore, I am more loving and more merciful - I have shown more grace - than the God you worship.

What's more, the Bible doesn't say hell is exclusively for pedophiles. Apostasy is the one unforgivable sin - blasphemy of the Holy Spirit! According to the book you call Holy, I'm going to hell forever. I'm getting a worse punishment for not being able to lie to myself, because no one chooses what they believe - you either do or don't, I'm getting a worse punishment from your god for not believing than I would give the man who destroyed my innocence - and you think he's GOOD?

I'll back off now. I realize that's a lot of very strong emotion. I tried to reign myself in, but frankly I'm used to writing for a sympathetic audience so that's affected my communication some. I'm also just kind of horrified about how much I didn't understand of what the Bible actually says for all the years I was a believer. I have a tendency to want to shock people out of it, because for me, knowledge led to atheism and atheism has led to a much, much, much better life.

I don't in any way think that you are trying to pick a fight :) If I have any assumption, it's that you're trying to show "the love of Christ" to me, and I can appreciate that good motive even if I disagree with where that kindness originates, within yourself or a god.

I have a different view of Jesus of Nazareth than you do, so I'll have to agree with you under some limitations. I agree that if everyone adopted an approach to society and social interaction that promoted positive outcomes for the most people, that valued fairness and justice, and provided for those in need, then the world would be a fantastically better place. I agree that if religious wars and religious persecution - of Christians, atheists, or anyone else - were stopped, the world would be better and infinitely safer. I agree that if people behaved in a civil society, and recognized that my rights end where yours begin, that I'd be happier leaving this world to my son. That's why I've adopted the secular humanist lifestyle and ethical philosophy. I think it's something that most liberal or moderate Christians can support, wholeheartedly. You don't have to be an atheist to be a secular humanist, and the ideals of secular humanism are very in-touch with the kindest messages of Jesus and the Bible.

I hope I've informed more than offended. I appreciate your permission to use The Story embedded on my blog, which I will do in the near future. I hope you and yours have a safe and happy month ahead.

Take care,
Angie Jackson

ps I've read and own Mere Christianity and Evidence. Josh McDowell is a former atheist like I'm a former Wiccan. What? I tried it out for three weeks in high school!

pps Here are some recommendations of my own. Just as there is no one Christian worldview, there is no one atheist view. But here are a few books that support my worldview :)

"God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" by Christopher Hitchens
"Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris
"Escape" by Carolyn Jessop (victim of the FLDS cult that all the mainstream Christians allow to operate illegally).

On the origin of man, check out Talk Origins
If you're feeling very brave, go check out Why Won't God Heal Amputees?

Yeah, I know - I forgot to debunk the whole "Hitler did it for his atheism" garbage, mostly because it's so obviously untrue. (Seriously people, all it takes is ten minutes on Wikipedia to be less of a dumb ass than you are right now.)

The secular humanism angle is a new thing I'm going with. Frankly, I want and need to get the moderate theists on my side, for some of the legislation I want passed and some of the structural social changes I want enacted. Reverend Barry Lynn does immensely more good than harm. His fierce efforts to protect the First Amendment have not gone unnoticed. I'd rather have a few million like him than a few million like Sarah Palin.

If we can get them to drop the name "Christian", and to quit claiming that the Bible is holy, inspired, good, moral, and perfect, then they can keep their god-belief and their happy fuzzy feelings about hippie Jesus. But until they do that - as long as they say the Bible is the Word of God and it tells us how we should live our lives, then they get to be smeared with all the filth of the Catholic church, Ted Haggard, Tim Hagee, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Ken Ham, and all the rest. You align yourselves with them - with their source of justification - and you get painted with that brush. Here's where Christian Guy #2 jumps in to claim being a follower of Jesus Christ is somehow different than being religious.

Here's Christian Guy #2

I hate religion also.:) But I am a follower of Jesus Christ. Thanks for looking at our booklet. "The Story" is a short meta narrative. It covers the basic plot line of the Bible. I know that at this point if your life you are an atheist, but I would love to have your thoughts on what you believe is the "meaning of life". I am not trying to sound like a "Bible Banger", but I do believe that the story of God to be true. I believe that it is rational and based on historical evidence. It is the only story I know that gives answers to the basic questions that all of us have. What other meta narrative provides answers and at the same time provides hope? Hope your willing to continue the discussion!

If you hate religion, why be religious? (Also, not all atheists hate religion, though I most certainly do.) Here's how I responded.

Hi Christian Guy #2,

Do you consider yourself a Christian, or an adherent to the Christian religion or faith? I was just telling someone earlier today that I think it would be swell if all the moderate, non-fundamentalist Christians would re-brand (with an edited book to exclude the atrocities) and a new name to distance themselves from the crazies. I would completely support you in that, but as long as you call yourself a Christian, sadly, you get the burden of the group as a whole. That may sound glib, but I do think there are actually several distinct religions operating under the name "Christian", and so the word has lost some of its ability to define beliefs, attitudes, and practices.

In the broadest sense, I don't think there is a "meaning of life". I don't think a divine deity plotted out the course of my existence, or that this world or our species came to be in any supernatural way. (Because there is simply not enough evidence to convince me.) In the individual sense, however, my life has tremendous meaning and purpose, to me and the people who love me. Raising my son to be a kind, thoughtful, self-sufficient, freethinker with good health and a good education is a lot of my life's meaning at this point. :) Alerting people to cults in our midst, teaching people how to use critical thinking skills and logic to provide a framework for reality, and drafting petitions to Congress to increase the protections of children in the United States also keeps me pretty busy. And, of huge importance to me right now, I'm taking on the project of writing my autobiography, about being raised in a Christian fundamentalist cult and the dangers of continuing to allow churches to self-police. Too many churches hide sexual abuse of children; too many Christians allow religious exemption laws for child medical neglect to remain on the books. Those are the things that give my life meaning. I want to make the world a better place for children today and tomorrow than it was for me.

What gives your life meaning?

I would like to know on what grounds you consider the Bible to be rational or based on historical evidence. I have done a lot of study over the past several years, and have not found this to be the case, so I'd be interested in hearing what evidence you've discovered.

I don't think that the Bible does provide all the answers - it just provides non-answers that create new questions. How can a loving God tolerate hell? Why won't God heal amputees? Why won't God stop false prophets and pedophile priests? Why did God allow the 9/11 hijacking to occur? How do you know you've picked the right god or the right religion?

Even if it did purport to have all the answers, they doesn't mean they're true. They need to be investigated before they can be believed, and the more outlandish the claim is, the more extraordinary the evidence required. I can't choose to believe the earth is flat and I can't choose to believe the Bible is true. All the evidence points otherwise.

Oh, and the Koran proposes to do all the things you claim the Bible does. As does the Book of Mormon, and I'm sure several other holy texts besides. Claiming to have all the answers is a big staple in religion :)

Best wishes,
Angie

Read more!

Create a Crisis: Get Close to God!

From my grandmother's book Born in Zion, Chapter 1 "Commitment". Here's what she has to say on choosing faith over evidence:

It's so EASY to believe what we see, rather than what God has said.. We have often seen what MIGHT cause trouble and have had the choice of either beoming upset and succumbing to fear, or of ignoring the sight realm, and by our will saying what God says about things.

And what He says is, "...Fear not - Let not your heart be troubled - The battle is not yours, but God's - Be not afraid of evil tidings - All things work together for your good - Whatever you ask in my name I will do - I am not a man that I should lie - I will give you the desires of your heart..." It's a crash course in trust.

...There was a preacher once who said something I really liked. He said that we're brought close to God, into real dependence on Him, during times of crisis. So, he said, if you're not in a crisis of some sort, not in a desperate strait, crying out to God, then create a crisis. That way you may grow. And I'm so blessed; I'm in a ministry where every few days I get to enter into another crisis situation where I'm thrown into a total dependence on God's mercy.

Don't you envy me?

There are several points I want to address.

1. The fact that it's easy to believe our senses is NOT evidence that our senses are wrong! (Like many fringey people, she regularly assumed that being in the minority was an indication you *were* right - the opposite of the bandwagon fallacy, but a fallacy all its own.)
   
2. Note the phrase "ignoring the sight realm". I was consistently, systematically taught not to believe the evidence of my senses. (No wonder I have a hard time some days determining what is reality and what isn't!)
3. The message is "Ignore the danger, trust God no matter what." This rarely turns out well.
4. The "crisis situation" she describes is someone else's home birth.
5. She's all giddy that she can use someone else's crisis to gain her own spiritual "growth".
6. The Bible does really say all those things she quotes (although most people provide citation!). This means that the Bible really does say "Anything you ask in my name." So, liberal Christians, why didn't your god mean it? What's wrong with the Word of Faith doctrine - it's proof texted and has scriptural support.
7. Knowing that she was consciously trying to create crises explains a LOT about my childhood.
8. Her ultimate goal in life was to be envied. As pathetic and evil as she is, she succeeded in her goal (which rather sucks for the rest of us).

It's helpful, really, to have her books around. Every time I start to think "My childhood wasn't that weird" I read another paragraph or two and I feel like screaming, or blogging, or picking a fight with an ignorant theist. It really was that weird. Instead of my parent figure doing all she could to help me learn and grow and become self-sufficient, she worked really hard on making me dependent. She filled my life with crises - death and unnecessary risks and child neglect - and created for herself a theology that said this counted as parenting. Putting me in a crisis was a good thing, if that's how I was to become closer to God. After all - here she was, building her life around a structure of multiple crises per week - for her own life. Surely it made sense to do the same for me.

She removed from my teachings the concept of actual (real) cause and effect and instead taught me that everything in this world we see is the effect of some spiritual dealing. It was sort of like being taught that right was left and left was right, only I was also taught that left was EVIL. So I made right-hand turns, and didn't learn anything new, and stayed tightly bound in her circular reasoning. It's so easy, looking back, to see the different left-hand decisions I made, and how they came together over the years to pull me out of my brainwashed faith - making friends with gay kids and Muslims, dating and having sex, smoking cigarettes and smoking pot. All those little rebellions were necessary. I would never have been given to opportunity to learn anything new, as long as I followed the rules. The rules were impossible to follow.

It's amazing how well she succeeded in teaching me that I'm a terrible person. I believed her and the rest of the Christian community on that one for far too long. I am a strong person - even without the knowledge necessary to explain myself, I knew that unquestioning belief was a bad thing. I picked middle schoolers to teach Sunday School to, because I liked watching them start to really question things and decide on their own morals and values, separate from what their parents told them. Middle school kids are *awesome* for all the reasons people complain about them: They stop doing exactly what they're told. It's that all important separation phase. Mine just happened to coincide with a couple of deaths my grandmother caused, which made things a little more intense at the time.

Believe or don't believe, but know why you do or don't. If you believe, what's your reason? Is it emotional, cultural, or have you had personal revelation I haven't? And if you don't believe, why not? Is it because the claims are too far-fetched for you, because there's no evidence, or do you just like sinning? I don't think there is a good enough reason to believe anymore. And if you're going to believe the Bible, why do you pick and choose which parts to follow?



* I have no idea what the image I picked is actually advertising, and I don't care. I can't read those tiny words and neither can you, without zoom. So yeah, I'm not endorsing anything but Angie the Anti-Theist (the coolest blog on the net!)

Read more!

Musical Theater and Glee

Every time you think I've confessed as much as geekishness as one person can hold, I reveal more. I weigh in on the pirates vs. ninja issue (ninjas would win, even though I think pirates are cooler); I wax poetic about all things in the Jossverse; I miss playing Dungeons and Dragons (I didn't just play: I was a Dungeon Master years before that had anything to do with BDSM.) Today I must tell you probably the most shining example of what a Massive Geek I truly am: I majored in Musical Theater - in high school. I can belt out some Stephen Sondheim and Jerome Kern. I can do jazz hands and dance like a fool in a big group number. I read plays.

And so, I love the new show Glee! Between this quasi-musical style TV show, the resurgence of actually talented talent shows like American Idol and Britain's Got Talent, and the commercial success of the High School Musical movie series, I think America is ripe for a musical revival and I'm totally stoked! (Does *anyone* else still use stoked?)

Maybe it's because I grew up on black and white movies, or because the only non-church music I ever heard as a child was in musicals, or maybe it's because they're awesome - but I've never understood the marginalization and mocking of musicals. Sure, they're campy. That's the point. Musicals are all about heightened emotion; rather than going all British miniseries and merely quirking an eyebrow now and again, actors in musicals get to go all out - big arms, big voice, big dance number. And some of the most poignant, heart breaking, and achingly beautiful songs on love and loss I've ever heard came from musicals.

(The Pride and Prejudice footage is a fan's idea. This song is from the musical "Chess".)


(Here's another, clearer version sung by a different actress that has embedding disabled.)



Interestingly enough, the earliest lessons I got in race relations were from musical movies, like West Side Story and Showboat.



Okay, you have to admit - that's an *amazing* voice! When did we start mocking talent? It's time to stop that. This man was phenomenal, and it's not like no one in my generation has the ability. So let's get all excited about musicals together - okay? I'm sure there are Christians out there who think I'm all dark and evil now, since I'm an atheist. But I'm just so campy, so silly, so geeky - I can't understand how people can find me threatening. I public admit to loving musicals (and not in a "Oh, well, if I'm in NYC I'll grab tickets" way. In a let-me-take-two-buses-each-way-to-school-and-practice-four-hours-a-night-cause-I-wanna-be-on-Broadway kind of way.)

And look, so you don't think it's just a repository of sad songs, here's one of my favorite comedic musical bits. (I love every single musical except Oklahoma! That one sucks, but even there "Poor Jud is Dead" is pretty funny in a wooden-delivery kind of way.)



(You can skip ahead to 6:01 if you want, but I love this enough to watch the whole thing.) Frank Sinatra really was swoon-worthy, wasn't he? I got a thing for short guys, what can I say? Old Blue Eyes *sigh*...


Now tell me musicals aren't freaking awesomeness cubed?! And hey, if you just wanna tell me that I'm a massive dork, that's okay too. I'm a dork with good music :)

p.s. Yes, I sing all of these at full-throated I-went-to-school-for-this volume, in my tiny thin-walled apartment. It's decent payback for my neighbors keeping the talentless Kanye turned on all night, right? (Yes, he is talentless. The difference between the videos here and the crap on MTV is that these are real voices, not mixing and computer editing. The sound you hear came out of someone's body like it is. No distortion and hiding was necessary to make it sound good - it already did.)

p.p.s. Rachel on Glee! is my favorite. She's so earnest and intense and passionate and people aren't kind to those traits in high school. She's pretty much exactly what I was like on the *inside* in high school, while on the outside I looked like I should be shooting the place up. (What, didn't the girls you knew shave their heads and start wearing trench coats in tenth grade? Oh. Huh.)

Read more!

The Story is a Lie

I love when funny religious opportunities fall into my lap. I've been wasting far too much time on Facebook games (uh-huh, I know I'm lame, and that no one but me uses the word "lame" anymore.) Over in the side banner ads, I found this: You can add "The Story" to your personal blog or your church's website for FREE! Share the Good News with your friends and your community.

Thanks, I think I will. :)

Sadly, they don't really mean it about embedding it on your personal blog, at least not if your blog "is obscene, indecent, harassing or otherwise objectionable in the sole discretion of SpreadTruth; or... disparages, or reflects negatively upon, 'SpreadTruth.com/ ViewTheStory.com'" Ah, terms and conditions, how I loathe thee.

Doesn't it say something in that they're afraid to have people who don't already agree with them look at their story? They really only want you to spread the gospel among good Christian folks and church websites. Yeah, I'm sure that'll be real effective at recruiting new converts. (Cowards and morons, all.)

So, sadly, you'll have to settle for following this link. (As much fun as it would be to start a war with fundies, I'd rather it didn't begin by me violating a rule. I'll let them do that, as they are so pernicious at it.) Go look at it and I'll do a jigsaw puzzle while I wait for you.


*whistles*



You done? It's very slick looking, I must admit. They've definitely converted some good designers over the years. And it's a little friendlier than a Jack Chick comic, but not by much. Look closely at the page on "the Fall". I guess God's off the hook for amputees, since apparently everything bad in this world (including biologically evolved viruses - stick it creationists!) is the fault of one man and one woman. But I need to point this out, because I think it's important. This is their interpretation of the serpent tempting Eve (and by extension, Adam).

"Adam and Eve, the first humans... Because God is love and love cannot fully exist without the freedom to make choices (but it can partially exist?) God gave them the freedom to make choices - but with consequences."

Okay, parent lecture time: In order for kids to get good at making decisions, they have to have a lot of opportunities to practice that skill set. But you don't actually set your kid up for punishment - you offer two acceptable options and let the child choose between them. I let my son pick which out five t-shirts he wants to wear to school that day, and which pair of shoes. When he starts acting up at the pool, I ask him "Do you want to play nicely in the pool by the rules, or do you want to go home and play with your toys there?" Neither choice leads to negative consequences or punishment; I give him two "good" choices to pick from.

As he gets older, he'll be faced with much more complex decisions, with more serious consequences than wearing a clashing outfit in his class photo. Because he's getting so much early practice now, and building confidence in his ability to choose for himself, I expect he'll be pretty good at it. But I wouldn't offer him a "choice" with dire consequences, like those that are supposedly due to the Fall. I wouldn't place a loaded gun on my coffee table and say, "You can play with any toy in the room, but not that one." The chance that he might pick it up out of curiosity (not a desire to usurp me or rebel) and seriously injure himself is far too great for him to engage in such risky behavior - because I love him. God cannot both have placed the Tree in the Garden and be "Love". What He supposedly offered wasn't a choice; it was a trap.

Let's go further into what The Story has to say about Adam and Eve and the Snake.

One day Satan... told Adam and Eve a lie. He deceived them into thinking God was not good and did not have their best interest in mind. As a result, they willfully disobeyed God and broke the only rule He had given: not to eat the fruit of a specific tree. In rebellion Adam and Eve decided that they, not God, would determine what is right and what is wrong.

Well, see, that's just not true. I know this story very, very well. (I believed it was literal truth until a year and a half ago. Shut up, I know.) What the Bible actually says is that Satan told Adam and Eve that they would not die if they ate the fruit (which God had said) and that they would gain the knowledge of good and evil. Prior to this point, Adam and Even didn't have that knowledge - they had no sense of morality, or of right and wrong. That's the whole point of the story, so it bugs the hell outta me when Christians try to paint A&Es actions as intentional "willful" sin. They did not know good and evil. God punishes them for picking up the gun off the coffee table, when they don't even know that they aren't supposed to disobey him. Or if they were supposed to unquestioningly obey him, and the second they didn't they'd suffer all the "consequences" of the Fall, then that's not real love or real choice or real freedom either. It's a set up.

Furthermore, the last sentence irks me. "In rebellion Adam and Eve decided that they, not God, would determine what is right and what is wrong." Bible reading FAIL! It had nothing to do with the decision to take from god the moral judgment of "This is right, this is wrong" (which humans have always had - god(s) are imaginary). The story is about Adam and Eve gaining the pre-existing knowledge of what is good and what is not. This is a weird attempt at painting Adam and Eve as secularists or moral relativists or something. And any good atheist who's read his/her Bible (may I recommend Brick Testament and SAB for those who don't wanna pay a mint for the dead tree version?) knows that the crap in this e-mag is not the same as the crap that's in the "Good News".

Oh well, at least I chose their "Make a decision" button. (Of course, you automatically get checked as choosing "follow Christ" - there ARE NO CHOICES.) But at least I got to tell them I was reading, and hoped to place talk about their project extensively on my blog. Of course, you can't put links in your dialogue, so I just used it as my name instead. Here's the hilarious auto reply I got back:

Thanks angietheantitheist.blogspot.com! Your decision has been sent.
We will repsond to your message as soon as we can. We will respond via e-mail to angieantitheist@ gmail.c om.

Here's a direct reading of the first three books of Genesis, by the astonishingly funny Ricky Gervais.

Read more!

I loathe lukewarm fence-sitting whiners

Since discovering that my grandmother was a cult leader, in a late-night Google session just over a year ago, I've been emailing site owners on any home birth or private blog that promotes her book, asking them to stop. A few people did so immediately; several were impossible to contact. (Some of these are early geocities pages, with old aol email addresses, but they're still out there being all toxic on the internet, like the KKK's site or GodHatesFags.com.)

But some women just don't want to offend anyone. Here's the email I sent out.

I am the granddaughter of Carol Balizet, author of two of the books you recommend on your [redacted] site. I wanted to alert you that several people have died as a result of following her extremist teachings (some during child birth, and some later on.) The reliance on faith she recommends in her books is nonsensical, requiring birth attendants and laboring mothers to ignore physical symptoms of birth complications and instead merely pray and take no steps to protect the life of the mother or the child.

Carol Balizet was a hypocrite in the end, getting a hip replacement surgery after telling her followers for years to abstain from all medical care. She has been classified as a cult leader by multiple cult experts. I've provided a set of links at the end of this email with further information about Carol, her former ministry, and just a few of the deaths that have resulted from her teachings.

I have written to you previously, to ask you to please remove your endorsement of her teachings.

I am begging you - please remove her books from your list of recommendations. "Born in Zion" in particular led to death of two young boys (one who died from medical ignorance immediately after his birth, and one who was slowly starved to death) in a group which came to be known as "the Attleboro Sect".

If you have further questions or concerns, I would be happy to answer them. Please feel free to contact me. My primary concern is with halting her message wherever I find it. I understand and respect a woman's desire to have her child in whichever way seems safest and most comfortable for her. But the advice given in "Born in Zion" is considered heretical by the majority of Christians, is medically dangerous, and has proven to be deadly. Please, please, please - take her name down. Don't recommend these books any longer, or else the blood of future children is on your hands, too.

With regards,
Angela Jackson

Further information:
http://www.rickross.com/reference/zion/zion2.html
http://www.neirr.org/AttleboroHistoryNew.htm
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b17.html
http://www.birthjunkie.com/testimony2.html
http://www.ccgm.org.au/articles/Articles/ARTICLE-0007.htm
http://www.ccgm.org.au/articles/articles/ARTICLE-0005.htm

If you would like more resources beyond these (including the several books on child death, child abuse, and heretical teachings that she appears in) I would be more than happy to provide them.

I'll give her tremendous credit for replying within the hour. I don't think I can give her reply much credit though.

Thanks for contacting me with your concerns. Yes, you wrote to me previously, and I answered you at some length. I told you that I’d consider modifying the statement, and I will, but in the process of thinking through exactly how to word it, your request was pushed to the back burner. (I am a very busy homeschooling mother of eight who is heavily involved with our church, my children’s ballet company, and a national writer’s group.)

It isn’t that I have no regard for what you’ve told me, but I loathe knee-jerk or hysterical reactions of any sort—either for or against a cause. I’ll definitely read the links you’ve provided and think some more on the subject

[Redacted]

Maybe it's different if you haven't read every story, and followed it all the way from tragic death announcement, back through the history of the family, of where things went wrong - following the story through the legal battle, and wondering who I hated the most in all of this, Gig for teaching dangerous nonsense, or the fools who unquestioningly believed her. (Worst. run-on. sentence. EVER.) I just can't put this "on the back burner" myself. What's more, I don't see how she can think that there could be some sort of fence-sitting middle ground between "teachings that kill people" and "NOT teachings that kill people". (Fallacy of the middle ground? Law of non-contradiction? I don't know. I'm tired and annoyed.)

Certainly I reject the notion of an absolute black and white world, but some things are binary. Either you believe in a god(s) or you're an atheist (sorry whiners! There is no "I neither believe nor disbelieve." As soon as you don't believe, you're one of us. Mwahahahhaha!) Either Hitler was a monster or you're screwed in the head. Either Obama was born in the US or he wasn't - (none of this "Gee, there are still questions" you lying scum GOP congressmen). (Obama was born here.) (It's sad I have to take a whole other parenthetical just to clearly state something that every retarded second grader should know.) (Sorry if I offended my retarded second grade readers, but kudos to you for exploring your atheist side at such a young age!)

Ahem. Sometimes I avoid the most difficult topics with lots of asides and stupid jokes. Something about humor being a defense mechanism. I don't know, I was really bad at counseling as a kid. Mostly I just played with the cool colored water toys that every school guidance counselor seems to have. (I finally asked one counselor if they all ordered them from a catalog. She said yes.)

My mom told me earlier today she had to stop and just reflect after she wrote the sentence, "Most of the deaths my mother caused were due to this book, which is actually the mildest but which had the widest distribution." I don't know how many of my readers out there can non-fictionally start a sentence with "Most of the deaths my grandmother caused" or "Most of the children my grandmother killed". It's rather odd that I can. You might think I'd be used to it by now, but I'm not sure that I ever will be. What would it be like to be Hitler's child, and to live on long enough to hate everything he'd stood for? I can imagine it, at least.

I compared Gig to Hitler in my own head for the first time in fifth grade, long before I'd ever heard of Godwin's Law. Heck, I wasn't even thinking of it in terms of death. I'm not sure any children had died yet at that point. I just remember sitting in the back of the classroom during social studies, watching a black-and-white video of a short, stiff man talking to a crowd of thousands. I remember my teacher saying the word "charisma" at some point, and thinking, "Oh that's what it's called."

How the hell can you be wishy-washy on Hitler? Or my grandmother? Both are monsters, but one is still alive. I won't be sorry when she goes, and yet I'm sure I'll cry. How can you love someone that you know has killed so many?



(Life cheers me up when I find binary "That's what she said!" comic strips for my blog.)

Read more!

I <3 Atheism

I just found this in the Update at the end of my grandmother's death-dealing book Born in Zion (the positive reviews on Amazon horrify me). It's a passage about the process of changing deeply held beliefs, which is a kind of funny thing to stumble across, in the writ of my old beliefs, all things considered. She quotes from Charles Colson's "Against the Night" (an unlikely source for me to agree with). He wrote

"People don't pick a vision (or make a decision) piece-meal, as they might pick a bouquet of flowers in a garden. They come to such convictions (or decisions) within the framework of a braoder set of... asumptions and ideals - more like accetping a story, with all of its internal rules and consistencies

And just as beliefs are not selected one at a time (what might be called the salad-bar theory of decision-making), longheld beliefs do not fall one at a time. In the absence of a deeper conversion of perspective... minds are rarely changed on single policy matters, no matter how persuasive our arguments."

Yeah, that rings true. I dropped belief in emergency faith healing after Harrison died. I dropped belief in faith healing for all non-emergency care as well, after three years walking with a dislocated hip (and a cane - in high school, where canes aren't exactly cool.) I dropped theism/deism in May 2008. It was a gradual stripping away of the deeper core of my mythology. But she uses this passage to "support" her insane lifestyle recommendations and stances on homebirth, prayer, and the roles of women in families. She wrote

"People usually won't decide to have a baby at home, trusting God alone, unless they have a framework - a braod base upon which their life rests - of trust in God for everything else. If they're trusting in banks for provision, in doctors for healing, in pastors for insight from God, in newspapers for their daily word, in psychology for an understanding of the principles of life, in drugs for health, in science for their beliefs about the nature of matter and the foundation of the universe, in the government for the answers to our social problems, in the "experts" for wisdom and truth, then these people are probably not ready for home birth."

Can you see why I fight so hard against blind faith and religious belief? I know the dark and desperate places faith leads to. Faith leads to death, and war, and children being starved, and abusive exorcisms, and fatal home births. True faith, of the kind my grandmother advocated in the vile paragraph above, led to the death of two young boys, life imprisonment for their father, and a slow and painful death by cancer of their cult leader, who worshiped my grandmother. She was a cult leader's cult leader. And she accounts for 1/8 of my genetic make up. We share a serotonin imbalance, and she spent all my life telling me that I was just like her. It's rather horrifying, on the days when my medicine doesn't seem to be working so well.

She quotes Charles Colson once again.

"Plato argued that this deeper conversion of perspective was almost like an awakening - like remembering something you forgot a long time ago. It is the realization: 'That fits! That is the way things should be.' It is a sense of recognition. Something responds not only in your head but in the deeper layers of your being."

He could be describing the emotional release, the pure joy I felt at deconversion. Yes, I feel betrayal from my family for lying to me for all these years. I feel annoyed with myself for not asking more question, more deeply, and more often. And yet, becoming an atheist is one of the best two things that has ever happened to me (the other being the birth and life of my son.) I love being an atheist. Being an atheist gives me such a sense of joy and purpose and peace, all the things that religion promised and instead stole from me.

How could I be joyous, "knowing" my gay and lesbian and non-Christian friends would all be tortured forever in hell? How could I have purpose if my life was mapped out for me, and there was no option but to serve one of two masters, either God or the Devil? How could I be at peace, when I was in near constant pain, hating myself for being a wretched, wicked sinner?

Now that I know there is no God (know with enough certainty for all practical purposes - there is simply no evidence), I finally feel that I can exert some control over my life. If I am sick, I can take medicine to get better, or at least reduce my symptoms. If I am hurting, I can talk to someone - I can listen to the experts, and I can find some solace. If I have needs, I can confess them with no shame. I am an ape - an ape who is responsible for my own actions and decisions, but an ape nonetheless. My failure to live up to the sinless example of Jesus makes perfect sense. My desire to touch and be touched, to love and be loved, to screw and be screwed, is not the product of a "fallen" soul. It's the delightful side effect of reproductive evolution! And now thanks to science and medicine, those experts I always heard decried, I can have that benefit - without having more children.

Religion is the single thing that did the most harm in my life, and I believe it's also the single thing that's done the most harm in the history of our species. It certainly hasn't been good for our planet, or our governments, or our mentally ill. It's not just that religion teaches people they are evil, and that their neighbors are evil, (and worse yet, that their children are evil); religion makes good people do bad things for bad reasons.

I want to live my life based on good reasons. Don't you?

* Sorry for the excessive self-referential linking to prior ATAT posts. I'm trying to figure out how to organize all this mental diarrhea into a book.

Read more!

ATAT Housekeeping

Hello, readers. I've been doing a bit of housekeeping on the blog. Since Little Man is back in school, I've discontinued (for now) the Sunday Schools posts of recommended readings and cool blogs. Instead I'm sharing things on my Facebook, via Twitter (@antitheistangie), and through my Google Reader (streamed below in the box titled "Recommended Reading".)

I've added a new petition for HR 911. Feel free to share the link: http://tinyurl.com/senate911 and ask others to sign.

I've also added a Donate button. Yeah, it's not very classy but since the unemployment office has decided to be ten freaking weeks late with my deposit (and my landlord's not too happy with me, and my phone's gonna get shut off in three days...) I figured it was time to swallow my pride and go the Christian missionary route, and start begging for cash. (Sorry.)

I've also added new links in the side bar of ATAT Favorites, including the site for the International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) and the humorous photo blog People of Wal-Mart.

There is a survey off to the side, but I'm having trouble logging in (read: remembering *either* of my passwords) so I'm disabling it until I can get in to view the results.

That's all for now. I'll try to post something entertaining later on today.

Read more!