A Week of Aurora

http://vimeo.com/21294655

The Aurora from Terje Sorgjerd on Vimeo.

HUAC History and Religion

"In God We Trust" nation’s official motto? - Beliefnet

The traditional but not official motto was 'E Pluribus Unum' Out of many, one. The problem with this motto was that it might have been interpreted to refer to the ethnically diverse population of the country including many that were not Christian or white. So they fixed it by adopting a motto that included the Christian God so no one would be confused in what the country stood for.

The original Pledge 'One nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all' had the same problem. The disenfranchised and the minorities might have mistakenly been included in the liberty and justice phrase so they added 'Under God' so that only those believing in God would have liberty and justice.

In those days the House Unamerican Activities Committee HUAC was synonymous with bigotry. The Hollywood Blacklist was aimed at atheists and Jews who might have had some concern for the downtrodden and celebrated them with movies and folk songs. Even then it might have been politically incorrect to pick on Jews so Communist was added to Godless that is, not believing in the Christian God, so that GodlessCommunist, or GodlessCommieAtheist became one word for political reasons.

I say those days as if they were over. They are not. Although HUAC was discredited the Christian Right simply continued where they left off.

Yeah, it worked by destroying the cultural diversity that made America Great. It worked by denying some of the nations best and brightest a living by a Christian witch hunt for "godless communists" It worked by destroying an educational system that was the envy of the world by making students and teachers no matter what their beliefs or lack thereof, pledge allegiance to God instead of "One nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" no matter what religious beliefs they held or did not hold. Instead of "E Pluribus Unum," out of many, one, we get "In God We Trust" fuck everybody else.

The entire decline of the United States can be traced to the fight against "Godless Communism." Korea, Viet Nam, the cold war, the Bamboo Curtain, a resource suck that took many of our finest men and either killed them or turned them into PTS dysfunctionals. I can justifiably add Iraq I and II to the list, as Communism was just a modifier to Godless. And you can be sure that the God in question was the Christian God.

Yeah, it worked. Maybe we can get Jesusland to secede and let the rest of us who do not trust in God try to rebuild the USA with the original E Pluribus Unum motto.

On second thought why wait for them. They are too retarded to accomplish anything so beneficial. Why not have the educated rational states secede and either join Canada which already has a functional government, or recreate that country that was based on E Pluribus Unum instead of God.

"In God We Trust"

"In God We Trust" nation’s official motto? - Beliefnet

Yeah, McCarthyism worked by destroying the cultural diversity that made America Great. It worked by denying some of the nations best and brightest a living by a Christian witch hunt for 'godless communists.' It worked by destroying an educational system that was the envy of the world by making students and teachers no matter what their beliefs or lack thereof, pledge allegiance to God instead of 'One nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all' no matter what religious beliefs they held or did not hold. Instead of 'E Pluribus Unum,' out of many, one we get 'In God We Trust' fuck everybody else.

The entire decline of the United States can be traced to the fight against 'Godless Communism.' Korea, Viet Nam, the cold war, the Bamboo Curtain, a resource suck that took many of our finest men and either killed them or turned them into PTS dysfunctionals. I can justifiably add Iraq I and II to the list, as Communism was just a modifier to Godless. And you can be sure that the God in question was the Christian God.

Yeah, it worked. Maybe we can get Jesusland to secede and let the rest of us who do not trust in God try to rebuild the USA with the original E Pluribus Unum motto.

Evolution in a Knowledge Based Society

Is Religious Misogyny Viable in a Modern economy - Beliefnet

Darwin is no more relevant to modern evolutionary theory than the Bible is to modern morality.

Evolutionary theory suggests that whatever sexual dimorphism in behavior and breeding functions that works for the species studied in the ecological niche they find themselves in will result in an evolutionary advantage. However when the niche changes a species than cannot adapt may well become extinct.

In a survival desert marauding niche, with high infant mortality and high male mortality in war a female human as a brood mare, socializer of children and society made evolutionary sense.

In a modern society with sophisticated medicine and technology the evolutionary pressure seems to be for maximizing intellectual innovation, and eliminating half of the population from that activity seems like an evolutionary dead end. Out breeding resources is another evolutionary dead end. We are seeing in countries like China and India and some parts of the USA that women are critical participants in the economy, and fit in the 2.1 replacement children as time permits. Or not at all in many cases.

Nobody is trying to turn them into men. They still are the producers of the next generation, but if men want to participate genetically in the next generation, the rules have changed considerably. It is no longer useful to fuck anything with a vagina, she probably is infertile until she finds someone that will be a good parenting partner. Which these days means recognizing her intellectual contributions to the society and the economy.

One of the reasons misogynistic religions are so down on homosexuality is that the good parenting partner may well be female, and the requirements for getting sperm into that mix can be interesting to say the least. It happens, frequently naturally, but never by accident.

Radiation dose chart link

http://www.xkcd.com/radiation/

Eat one banana 0.1 microSv about the same as living for a year within 50 mi of a nuclear plant
3 times that for a year living within 50 miles of a coal plant
400 times that flying from NYC to LA

Misogyny in Living

Hi there misogynist atheists. - Beliefnet

Out of respect for misogynist atheists and other misogynists of all faiths and lack thereof (if the shoe fits you can still refuse to wear it because it is too ugly) we will now replace misogynist with sexist.

If a poster reports that women are generally not interested in joining contests to see how far they can piss into a strong wind. Is this a sexist comment? Does the sex of the poster matter?

If a woman does not choose to participate in pissing contests about the existence of God is she being sexist?

If she points out that many women do not wish to participate in pissing contests about the existence of God should she be required to remove the atheist label from her blog? Does the language she uses to point this out matter?

If a man refuses to go to a school board meeting to protest the religious backed attempt to dumb down the science and arts curriculum can he still call himself an atheist. Is he being sexist because he thinks that is women's work. < sarcasm> Y'know Kinder, Küche, Kirche and all that?< /sarcasm> Does the fact that he is attending an atheist conference on the existence of God instead make any difference?

If a woman suggests that one of the turn offs to women is that to many, atheist are a bunch of testosterone dominated, egg heads with no emotion who like to argue.. and the response is a boobquake, one might expect that she and many others who have learned not to think with their genitals would find confirmation of at the very least insensitivity to what she was trying to say.

FYI the term "Boobquake" is a reference to a fundamentalist preacher who blamed the Haiti earthquake on women who dressed inappropriately. It has been generalized to any inappropriate reference to or misuse of especially images of women's breasts. In my opinion, the use of the photo was inappropriate in the context of the thread, hence a boobquake. It had nothing at all to do with the characteristics of the woman in the photo.

If a woman is trying to educate an argumentative, dogmatic person, frequently male, about things that are important to many women that the man seems to be ignorant of, it is not stereotyping it is information. IMO that was the intent of her main post. She was trying to inform the atheists here why this forum is generally unattractive to women. It is quite apparent that some of the atheists here were offended by her remarks and chose to attack the messenger rather than deal with the message. The comments in the link I sent to MOP were almost universally in the same attack the messengers mode, including some argumentative, dogmatic women.

The atheist movement if not atheists in general have a serious problem. Women should be the driving force in combating religious misogyny and religious anti-intellectualism including the gutting of the school system. They after all, are the ones most affected by it. Atheist men are generally more concerned with dogmatic issues as those make the best arguments. Sterile intellectualized discussion of God beliefs isn't an alternative to anything. It is in effect an admission of acquiescence to the status quo. You are welcome to it. You are ceding the fight against the misogyny and anti-intellectualism of fundamentalism to others. Your privilege certainly but I would prefer that you keep it in your Ivory Tower where intellectualized discussions of issues don't bother anyone else. Some of us are trying to make a difference, and egg head BS doesn't help. I find dogmatic issues almost trivial compared to misogyny and anti-intellectualism. Pissing and moaning about whether God exists or not resolves neither of those issues.

I have dealt with subconscious misogyny for most of my life, and am therefore hypersensitive to it. Some of it is directed at males in "female" roles. As one of the original Mr. Moms by agreement with the mother of my children who was in a very demanding, very misogynic career environment, I was frequently the target of remarks like "that is woman's work," "Where is your wife?" "Why isn't your wife taking care of that?" Hmm, lessee, "She is presenting a paper at an international conference that is critical for her personal grant funding. Is taking her kids to the park more important so that her husband should be excused from the duty?"

If you think a simple descriptive term like misogyny is an insult, please explain how it is so. Or better please explain how misogynist is an insult if it is a true description of a pattern of behavior. Am I insulting Paul by calling him a misogynist or merely describing the over all tenor of his writings concerning women? If a man is wearing a T shirt saying "Women are Property" and refers to all women as "Bitches" or worse, am I justified in calling him a misogynist or am I insulting him? If I refer to the T shirt wearer as a misogynist and he responds "Damn right!" did I insult him?

A descriptive term is an insult only if it applies to you and you wish it didn't. If a woman calls a man a misogynist and he says "That bitch just insulted me." I wonder who has the problem. Someone can call me a misogynist, and I can just laugh at them and ask what gives you that impression. Or if I wanted to be insulting I could reply "liar." At that point is simply an argument about fact. Am I or am I not a misogynist. If the accuser said you did this or said that and that indicates misogyny, I can say here is the context that makes it OK or I say I am sorry I didn't mean it that way, or in rare cases simply apologize for my remark.

On another thread (but more relevant to this thread now) I commented that it is surprising to find misogyny bubbling through atheism. JCarlin rightly corrected this to "bubbling through society in general". I completely agree; I just had higher expectations though from a group of people who after all have been independent enough to examine their commitment to a previously common belief in society and choose a different mindset. In a similar way, I have higher expectations from professionals who work in university settings and large corporations than from, for instance, a clerk at Radio Shack.

I wonder if there are 2 issues here:
1. Misogyny
vs
2. An approach to solving problems that is more feeling-based than thinking-based, separate from gender. (Attention all you thinking-type guys: this is NOT the same as logical/illogical!) Have you ever taken any of the Meyers-Briggs personality tests? Many women identify with the "feeling" category, and many men identify with the "thinking" category. I can see why religion would tend to attract the "feeling" set more so than the "thinking" set... perhaps the opposite is true for atheism.
Fangi

I suspect that if some prick told some woman that she should go shopping, care for her children, dust, iron, and talk about relationships instead of messing with the intellectual matters here it certainly would be a pejorative gender stereotype in fact full blown misogyny. Hmm. Providing information about the characteristics of a group by a member of that group may or may not be prejudice or bigotry, although the same thing said by an outsider may well be hate speech.

Like it or not, if atheism is to be an effective alternative for those disgusted by fundamentalist religion atheism is going to have to attract a lot of people who don't want to shout and argue but will quietly talk in their relationship circles that the excesses of fundamentalism are bad for women and children. If one of those people chooses to point out what atheists need to appeal to if they are not going to remain a marginal group of pricks shouting into the wind of fundamentalism, maybe the pricks should listen. So far their record is pretty dismal.

Maybe atheists should be content in their ivory towers not believing in God and ignoring the rest of the world. But the rest of the world will go right on gutting the schools and turning large parts of the US into a third world country. I find that abhorrent, and personally don't give a NoGod damn about what somebody believes or not about God. I do care about the children who are pulled out of school to worship God. I am not going to reach their mothers with intellectualized BS about whether or not somebody can prove God exists. I am going to reach their mothers with atheists some of whom paint their fingernails, and care about not only herm children but all children. The gender inclusive pronoun is significant because there are atheist dads who take their children to the park and talk to the women there about bringing up children and go to the PTA meetings demanding effective science education and who put their testosterone charged aggression to good use by challenging the fundamentalist status quo, not staring at boobs advertising intellectual arguments about God.

Not incidentally I am not chastising Freedom From Religion and other female dominated atheist groups for using all the conventional appeals to the misogynists that run things. We need a lot more of them. We are not going to get them with intellectual discussions. Thanks for showing us a path that many more of us should be taking.

Misogyny Sexism and Male Chauvinism

Further Deterioration of Language - Beliefnet

Early in the feminist movement it became clear that the language needed a word for the attitude expressed first by Paul in Corinthians and Timothy: Women should be silent and subservient. This is an expression of an underlying attitude that women are fundamentally inferior to men and are suitable only for breeding, child care and housekeeping. Since this is almost a definition of hatred the word misogyny seemed not only useful but correct in tone and inference. As noted in a different post it does not refer only to women but to men doing 'women's work.' See a male nurse in the mid 20th century. Or the movie Mr. Mom.

Sexism is a different issue that is best expressed as women as sex objects. No real implication of inferiority, just that no matter what they have accomplished or their position the comment 'check out that rack' would be acceptable in a sexist group. And the minor sensation the Million dollar challenge raises no eyebrows: Would you bet a million dollars that you could have sex with a random woman stranger by midnight? Usually referring to the women in the room at a conference or lecture.

Male chauvinism is a step up? the ladder in that women are while not simply sex objects are not as necessarily as important as men in the society and can therefore be paid less for the same work, exploited as arm candy, and in menial jobs like receptionists despite their credentials, and historically librarians and teachers which are grossly underpaid for their importance to the society.

When I use the word misogyny I am generally referring to a disrespectful attitude toward the contributions of women. But many of the insults were misogynic, in that they implied that she shouldn't be playing with the big boys here.

As I have said several times before it is the society as a whole that is misogynic, in large part because Christianity, not just fundamentalist Christianity is misogynic and Christian mores are dominant in our society. It is not surprising that atheists are affected by these mores, but of all people we should be trying to raise our consciousness of this pernicious Christian and to a lesser extent Jewish effect on the mores of the society. Theoretically atheists should be looking at all the dogma not simply the God dogma and rejecting the crap.

A World Without Religion

Is religion is a "mind rotting" disease? - Beliefnet

Atheism is not an answer for the mind rot of religion. If there were no theists there would be no atheists. Atheism is simply one solution to life without God. If the mind rotting religions of faith and salvation were somehow eliminated you would probably find much the same things you see now. People gathering in social settings for conversation, perhaps some music, many might choose something resembling a religion without the mind rot of imposed belief. As someone else pointed out a 'high' UU church has all the ritual, music, stories from the pulpit, of a traditional religion without the requirement for a specific belief. Arguing with the minister is a strong tradition in most UU churches. I suspect that many of the traditional religions to survive will adopt a similar strategy. Listen to the stories of Jesus, discuss them. What can they tell you about getting what you can from the life you know about, the one with the fancy bookends of birth and death.

Meaning and purpose must be found in this life, and traditional stories might help. But don't count on anything unusual happening at death.

Misogyny and Religion

what pray tell is sexist about stating the fact that many women prefer consensus to dominance. Is this not perhaps a reaction to millennia of dominance where they were forced to care for some rapist's kids, make and iron their clothes and otherwise do the bidding of the rapist. Might they not have sought out the company of other women to resolve issues of how to deal with their rapists. Might they not have created a more powerful entity to control their rapists. And therefore have a vested interest in God?

Misogyny bubbles through society in general. Atheism is no exception. There are islands of exceptions that are growing rapidly now that women can have control over reproduction. Men aren't stupid. But mores change very slowly. And if everything from advertising to sporting events to movies to restaurants, and most everything else promote ogling the boobs, it is hard for everybody of both sexes to realize that women are not just sex objects.

Interestingly religions are leading in some of those islands of exceptions, and also in the rearguard maintaining of women as property. Some Universities are also leaders, in both directions, generally correlated with fundamental religious influence in the area. There are no simple answers and generalizations are impossible.
If you are truly interested I would recommend this report from Blag Hag on a conference discussing the lack of women in the atheist movement. Note the panel was 5 men and one woman. In particular read through the comments. The men either attack the messengers, say "what's the problem," or blame the women.

I don't really blame the men. Thanks to Paul and the Jewish tradition, women as property is a given in most Western societies, whether they are still religious or not. Even western languages especially the gendered languages have a cruel bias against women. In a gathering to introduce a new department head from a South American country, he proudly introduced the members of his department: This is my collegue Dr. Werner, and my collegue Dr. John, and my collegue Dr. Jesus, and er, um, Dr. Mary. As I knew Dr. "Mary" very well I knew she never became a collegue. If you want an example in English, what pronoun do atheists use in referring to God?

For a long time in my life atheism was simply a position about God. I became more active mainly to combat the Christian mysogyny of Paul, which is reflected even in the atheist community, at least the vocal atheist community. Just as a minor example. Why was the London bus ad a minor blip on the radar until Dawkins was photographed with his "tongue" hanging out with the buxom instigator of the movement. Why the hell didn't he pose proudly by a bus with the ad on it? Ho, hum, no sex, no news value. She is a journalist and entertainer, so she knows what sells even to "rational" atheists.

Navigators USA alternative scouting group

uuworld.org : alternative scouting group starts to grow

As an early atheist scout and scoutmaster with a possibly gay co-scoutmaster (don't ask, don't tell) at a troop from a welfare hotel sponsored by All Souls, I have been dismayed by the Boy Scouts religious right lurch. Magnum kudos to Robin Bossert and again to All Souls for leading the way to an inclusive outdoor adventure program.

The benefits I got from scouting were incredible. Where else could an atheist go to a Pontifical High mass? (Irvine CA Jamboree) The self confidence, and self assurance from being able to build a shelter from sticks and a bit of rope and a poncho was critical to being able to get as my fortune cookie taped to my monitor says "The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

The benefit from being a Scoutmaster at All souls with the kids from the welfare hotel were more subtle, but being able to work with kids whose enthusiasm overcame their minor disability of living on welfare was a joy and an inspiration.

DNA Argument for a Creator

Post Evidence Here - Beliefnet

From data of molecular biology and from some information theories, we can now argue that an "intelligent force" is the cause of the origen of life, do to the simple analogy that exists between DNA code and any written language. There is not a clear identification from scientific data, neither we can give it a proper name to that intelligent force, and from empirical deduction the only thing we can said is, the intelligent force that produced the first spark of life , is within the cosmos, and off the earth, or perhaps beyond the cosmos as historical theism maintains. We can ponder about all this for ever and the only sure answer will be that humanity might pondered about it until the end of time.
Silverada

This is basically a more sophisticated and intelligent reworking of the Behe's irreducible complexity argument. It has many of the same flaws the main one being where did the super irreducible complex designer come from? The assumption is that some omniscient something arranged the codons in the first DNA and either let it evolve from there or tweaked it as necessary to accomplish its aim of producing the amazing supremely intelligent being in the image of God namely me.

Frankly, I am not that important. The other problem with this argument is that it is assumed that this omniscient creator had some goal in mind when Hesh created that first DNA. If it wasn't me the atheist in God's image, what was it?

It is certainly possible in spite of the difficulties mentioned, but it is far more likely that a totally undirected chemical process that can be guessed at but not defined at this point ended up as that first DNA, and the organisms built by that DNA did their best to stay alive and reproduce more DNA as best they could, but that inevitably errors crept in, some helpful some lethal and by this time a bunch of intelligent people came about that could imagine God in their own image. I think my scenario takes a lot less faith, but you may not think faith is as dysfunctional as I do.

I do think DNA language code is not a selective, random or out of necessity evolutionary happening. Molecular biologists do know now how life came to be, but they don´t know from where that first cause came from or how that language code was introduce into the molecules with the ability to store, transmit and edit information and to use that information to regulate their most fundamental metabolic process. There is nothing under biological research that have had yet an indisputable answer to that. So mysticism findings are still the only answer untill science can otherwise contradict it and make it false forever without any doubt.
Silverada

Like many creator advocates you ignore the brutal power of selection. Any change to the DNA that doesn't work is generally lethal and that change disappears. Some changes don't make any difference and are conserved until they change again and either help or more frequently kill the organism. But there are billions of organisms and even the dead ones are food, that is sources of nucleotides to make new DNA for other organisms. So the fact that most of it doesn't work means very little in the big picture. As long as one strand of DNA works and the zygote lives to reproduce whatever the change is will be conserved. And successful zygotes tend to make lots more. It works even faster for cloning organisms. One successful strand of DNA makes two more, those 2 make 4 and 4 make 8 and you can do the rest of the math till you get a whole pond full of organisms until they run out of food.

Even the simplest form of life, with the store of DNA, are characterized by specified complexity, therefore life itself is "the first evidence" that some form of intelligence was in existence at the time of its origin.
Silverada

You can keep your designer if you wish, but the designer works by trial and error just like most human designers. The designer tried RNA and it was almost good enough but the thiamine introduced too many errors in transcription. So after a bunch of ungodlike expletives the designer tried uracil and finally found the stability in transcription that was necessary to compete in the nucleotide gobbling world of early protolife. A whole lot of errors in programming later the designer finally found a sequence that could wrap a lipid membrane around itself and protect its nucleotide sources.

If this sounds like natural selection to you it does to me as well. I just can't come up with a way to create a designer smart enough to figure out in one shot, that first DNA sequence that used the lipid membrane for protection.

Maybe you are smarter than I am or have more faith that the designer could just poof out of nothing, but in any event you have to explain the origins of the designer. "I believe it, and that settles it" works, but that is not evidence simply belief.

Did I post anything that a certified chemist might find a complete ignorance of the matter? if it is so, please correct me. For sure I do not have a chemist point of view of how DNA works, I only learn about from reading a few things.
Silverada

The major difference between the chemistry of DNA and written language is that DNA chemistry is relatively inflexible. It is similar to low level computer code, in that any minor error generally causes the whole program to crash. As a low level programmer at one time I can assure you that such programming is error and trial over and over again.

Even if your creator had the ability to manipulate individual codons of DNA that is "write" a strand of DNA my guess is that the creator would use up as many combinations as evolution did to finally get a self replicating strand that could encase itself in a cell membrane to create life. The difference is that the creator thought about it, while evolution just kept trying at random until something worked.

I just can't imagine a creator intelligent enough to "write" a strand of DNA that would waste the time it would take to create life, when the creator would presumably be intelligent enough to know that evolution would do the same thing, sooner or later.

When religion dies.

Is religion is a "mind rotting" disease? - Beliefnet

Atheism is not an answer for the mind rot of religion. If there were no theists there would be no atheists. Atheism is simply one solution to life without God. If the mind rotting religions of faith and salvation were somehow eliminated you would probably find much the same things you see now. People gathering in social settings for conversation, perhaps some music, many might choose something resembling a religion without the mind rot of imposed belief. As someone else pointed out a 'high' UU church has all the ritual, music, stories from the pulpit, of a traditional religion without the requirement for a specific belief. Arguing with the minister is a strong tradition in most UU churches. I suspect that many of the traditional religions to survive will adopt a similar strategy. Listen to the stories of Jesus, discuss them. What can they tell you about getting what you can from the life you know about, the one with the fancy bookends of birth and death.

Meaning and purpose must be found in this life, and traditional stories might help. But don't count on anything unusual happening at death.

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Failed Theists

The Bright Line - Beliefnet

There is a reason that atheists are a small but rapidly growing segment of the population: It is hard intellectual work to find substitutes for the God myths of childhood that provided the security blanket that one can wrap oneself in when life spins out of control. Unfortunately many of those God myths are getting tattered and the blankie doesn't work as well as it used to without strong faith.

I know the University one failed theist attended and rational thought is not its strong suit. It is an excellent practical knowledge source, as it was designed to be. If you needed support for rational abstract thinking the University down the highway a piece might have provided more support. But I suspect that even there the support would have been insufficient.

Jesus as humanist.

Definitions - Beliefnet

The problem with Christian theology is that it has nothing at all to do with Jesus. John was closest to Jesus, but even he tried to wrap theology around Jesus. It didn't work.

Once you divorce Jesus from theology most of the objections to his historical existence as a person evaporate. The miracles become mnemonics, the eclecticism from past religious traditions only shows he was aware of them and incorporated what he thought were the best parts in his ministry. Paul's hijacking of his charisma is for me definitive proof of his existence as a popular preacher probably named Jesus in Greek. The fact that the Synoptics survived in spite of their disagreement with all Christian theology is additional proof for me of the importance and historicity of Jesus.

I find Jesus to be quite human, quite humanistic, and radically respectful of all people. No wonder they killed him.

ChooseYour Parents Well

The origin of self in relation to truth - Beliefnet

Why it is so important to pick your culture very carefully: A child will be necessarily be imprinted with the memes of his parents and their Social Support Group. It is called socialization and is critical if the child is to survive to puberty. This is in fact nature's plan. It in critical for a human to be a part of a tribe. A lone human is a dead human in the natural world. Nature has provided an escape hatch in the adolescent rebellion phase of any normally intelligent child. And if the child is exposed to other tribes as many modern children are in school, the rebellious child may find a better (or worse) tribe to associate with.

Obviously as a child this is a pipe dream, but as an adult anticipating reproducing the SSG that you will provide for you child will determine whether the child is warped into some form of aberration or becomes a useful, productive contributor to the larger society.

Religions can be acceptable SSGs but again it is important to choose, if you can, a religion that is aware of and trying to be a part of the larger society. Many are not, and treat the larger society as hostile and dangerous, even to the point of home schooling or religious schooling to keep the child warped into the aberrant group.

The Internet as SSG.

Rationally Speaking: Massimo’s Picks:

Nice article on the internet, thanks. The revolution that is being missed is the fact that until the net social groups were chosen for individuals. You belonged to a family, a church, a university, a company, a political party, a country etc. With the net your social group is whoever you want it to be. Many of the most important people in my social group I have never met and probably never will. Yet they shape my thinking and I shape theirs. In particular the ERSSG seems to be heavily dependent on the internet for its cohesion and ethos. The articles people link on facebook, the blogs they cite and write are all critical to the functioning of the ERSSG.

The group seems to expand on the net as well. Two middle aged high school buddies hooked up on facebook. No surprise there. The comments of a "friend" of one of them appealed to the other and that person requested friend status for the second degree friend. The second degree friend suggested to others that the person was a good addition to the local ERSSG.

As we are seeing around the world, a social group determined to change their world with the net has no problem doing so simply by creating a group dedicated to doing so and gathering enough like minded people into it to make it happen. I see the momentum building on the net for supporting the unions in Wisconsin. Hmm. If they can do it to Mubarak and Qaddafi how will Walker hold up?

Addendum: Listening to Finlandia on the KDFC stream, the thought occurred to me that perhaps music performed much the social grouping function as the net does now. As everyone can type, everyone can sing. The Marseilles, maybe Yankee Doodle, and a few others that provided the unifying identifier for the revolutionaries.

What is an Atheist?

Definitions - Beliefnet

Let me make it as simple as I can. If a person believes in at least one God or god that person is a theist. It doesn't really matter to an atheist what sort of a god it is or whether it is imaginary, delusional, or stands naked on mountain tops throwing lightning bolts at humans that are not liked and occasionally has sex with a human,.

They are all the same to an atheist. Not contributing anything of value to our lives. As soon as you define theist as A, Not A is an atheist. Just like there are many kinds of theists, there are many kinds of atheists. Since theists hate us all, we don't spend much time in public discussing our differences. Frankly they are of no importance to a theist.

If I don't believe in their particular God or vuvuzela it makes no difference why or how I don't believe. Fundie theists will respond with bigotry and spend as much time as I will let them trying to convince me that I am a horrible sinner that will burn in Hell forever if I don't convert to their God or vuvuzela or in any case I torture women and children and have sex with men.

Reasonable theists will try to figure out why I don't believe so that they can point out the error of my ways in not accepting their God of vuvuzela. They don't care whether I think God does not exist, whether I think God is a numinous brain fart or whether God is simply worthless. They will try to find that God hole and try to fill it.

A few don't care at all and let me go to Hell in my own way.

A minuscule subset will ask intelligent questions about how I deal with important issues of living and dying, meaning, purpose, spirituality, transcendence and wonder. But they don't care about what kind of an atheist I am. They are simply trying to find out how I cope without God or god(s) as the case may be.

Clan of the Cave Bear

Modern DNA analysis, mitochondrial vs whole genome puts a pretty dark slant on the movie Clan of the Cave Bear. No mitochondrial Neanderthal DNA in humans means that no Neanderthal women mated with Sapiens men. 3% Neanderthal DNA in the whole genome means that a lot of Sapiens women were, shall we say, used by Neanderthal men. Maybe they were incorporated into the Neanderthal clan, but it seems unlikely to me.

Neanderthals seem to have been the apex predator, with Sapiens surviving pretty well on wit and guile. But as Neanderthals were bigger, stronger and possibly more intelligent I suspect that a Sapiens man trying to mate with a Neanderthal woman would lose some valuable anatomy parts. However a foraging Sapiens woman would be helpless if encountered by a hunting party of Neanderthals or even a lone Neanderthal hunter.

Tribal Issues

king of the universe(s) - Beliefnet

The basic human social unit has been the tribe or clan. Certainly tribes and clans competed for space and resources, just as religions and nations do today. But within the tribe or clan social compliance, that is being nice to one another, was absolute. A serious social error got you expelled from the tribe, and until very recently a lone human was a dead human. Even today, disfellowshipping or shunning can be a devastating experience that frequently leads to suicide or in some cases being killed. The social contract between the individual and the social group is critical to the survival of both. Even at the nation level an individual who violates the social contract no matter how powerful can be brought down by the tribe abetted by modern communication channels. See Nixon and Mubarak. There will be more. You got to be nice to your fellow tribespeople no matter how big the guns at your back are. Those guns are operated by members of the tribe.

Social Elites

Nails in the Religious Coffin: Sex, Drugs, and Contraception - Beliefnet

We are the world's sweet chosen few.
The rest of you be damned.
There's room enough in Hell for you.
We won't have heaven crammed.

If you don't teach your children that little ditty, or at least smile when they recite it. You had better find a new Social Support Group (SSG). It is necessary for the socialization of children that they think their group is the elite group in society. When they reach the teen rebellion years a few might question that concept. They may have friends whose elite seems more attractive or better than theirs and try to change their 'colors.' Or an attractive potential mate may make changing 'colors' a part of the deal. I use 'colors' as a designator for any elite, religious or secular. It seems to be a human trait to choose colors in clothing to identify the elite group to which they belong. In fact this may be main purpose of clothing. Certainly bundling up in cold climates is necessary, but even in tropical areas a sarong or breechclout is socially necessary.

This is how societies evolve, or in the memorable words of Niven-Pournelle "Think of it as Evolution In Action."

As an additional point of fact, should my SSG decide that it was superior in an objective sense to any other SSG - to the point of endorsing the sentiments of that song - it's personal utility to me would decrease dramatically.
nieciedo

Noted and agreed. But to use the personal utility sense of superior for you and those in the SSG would you not agree that is superior to other SSGs so that at least an ironic use of the ditty might be possible. (As intended in the original, irony in print is very problematical, I probably should not attempt it but it is just too useful.)

My Educated, Rational SSG is certainly not objectively superior to the uneducated faith SSGs that do not see the irony in the ditty. Nor is it objectively superior to many other SSGs in the community. In fact in many ways it is objectively inferior to, for example, the investment banker SSG. They make a whole lot more money than we do. And one cannot consider raping the poor and middle class to be objectively bad. Nonetheless, I will do my best to indoctrinate those that are important to me into the mores of the ERSSG so that perhaps in the evolutionary sorting out of SSGs it will survive.

Pair bonding.

Nails in the Religious Coffin: Sex, Drugs, and Contraception - Beliefnet

The thing that religions generally do not recognize is that reproduction in humans is not just popping a litter out and seeing who survives. Reproduction in humans is a long term investment if the zygote is going to get to puberty. One of the main evolutionary purposes of pleasure in sex and the evolutionary reason for the hidden estrus in humans is that the pair bond is essential for reproductive success, that is getting a reproducing offspring into the world. Religions generally accept the fact that sex after the first rape will result in a pair bond, which is one of the reasons they insist on marriage prior to sex. But this pair bond is dysfunctional for the church since the loyalties of the pair will be to the family rather than to the church. Therefore the restrictions on eg contraceptive sex which might make the pair bond more important than the church.

Replacing the Church for Socialization

Nails in the Religious Coffin: Sex, Drugs, and Contraception - Beliefnet

I would agree that society has gone overboard in the nuclear family department church or no. But there are secular substitutes for the church. Have you ever walked through the student family housing area of a major university? Or gone to a popular family park in one of the good school districts in a city. I notice such things because I was the 'afternoon and Saturday parent' for two children in a large metro area. My support group was eclectic and as you might expect for an early Mr. Mom very unusual. I even found out it included the off-duty 'tourist services' ladies in a neighborhood SRO hotel. The Central Park playgrounds were our church once the ladies figured out that I had a right to be there. We all watched out for all the kids, and socialized them independent of whose kids they were.

Internet as a Social Group

Nails in the Religious Coffin: Sex, Drugs, and Contraception - Beliefnet

Let´s use this day to remind us of the importance of  friendship, brotherhood and unity.
The ciber space  has become the perfect instrument to achieve such a thing, because here distance, gender, race, nationality, beliefs, are not what is important  but the feeling of togetherness.
Silverada

It will be interesting to see if internet resources like Facebook (The intelligent old fart's friend) will be able to take up the slack in putting together social groups of like minded people. For a while it was just keeping in touch with old friends that have been scattered around the country, but recently I have been searching out and finding local like minded people. Although occasional face to face or group meetups are fun and valuable, the internet takes the place of the Post Office or mall greeting or for that matter the church socials.

As for charity, there are plenty of opportunities to make a difference in the world, and I find the resources of the net valuable for vetting them. Many of the church charity events are more about making the church participants feel good about themselves and look good to the community than actually making a difference in other people's lives. In many religious charities I find very little 'teaching them to fish' and a lot of throwing them a fish with a verse attached.

I thought about throwing the internet into the title, but it didn't have the right ring. But it is there, along with smartphone networks, that are going to change the way societies form and maintain their ethos.

Looking at the current crop of young adults one wonders. I suspect texting and twitter are just a fad, but social networks, can be quite powerful and rewarding. I have never met several "friends" from beliefnet, but most of them are more important to my mental well being than most of my casual face to face contacts even those who get hugs. I will try to get the face-to-face and will go out of my way to do so, but even that meeting is more of a reunion with an old friend rather than making a new acquaintance. The reserve and hesitancy of meeting a new even highly recommended face friend, just isn't there. I have personally done this several times once meeting a friend for the first time in the car at the start of a 2 day 1500 mile road trip to a rock concert both of us wanted to see. I knew the lead singer, but he had never met any of the people that were going to be there except for a high school classmate, who was the unifying contact for us all.

Atheists Behaving Badly.

Blag Hag: When Gender Goes Pear-Shaped

Let's continue to flog the messengers here. That will allow us to continue to avoid dealing with the real problem which has nothing to do with feminism but the fact that atheists have become so full of their Atheist BS that they can't be wrong about anything. Bad behavior? Atheists don't do that. They have the righteous Atheist TRUTH™.
J'Carlin

568 posts and counting worrying about whether a woman at panel discussion about making women welcome to Atheism© had the right to question their use of female in place of woman or women. The title of the post could have well as been Atheists behaving badly, although all the examples were men behaving as sexists as there were many other examples of inappropriate behavior by men, oh yes by women also for dressing provocatively (showing cleavage and causing men to stare at it.)

Jen actually had to delete the male half of the million dollar challenge "A $million to any man who thinks he could boff one of the attendee's by midnight." Apparently there was some controversy about whether the overall STRONGLY feminist tenor of the speech excused the challenge which would have been unacceptable at most bars. I objected to the original academic, dual sex challenge, as an inappropriate focus on a zipless fuck. In this day and age I think it would be inappropriate in any setting despite the excuse that we are genetically predisposed to fuck anything that moves. We may be, but anybody that has no control over that instinct had better find God to help. God will provide Burqas or Habits to disguise the fact that the moving thing is a woman. It might even work although available evidence says it won't.

One of the reasons I no longer identify as an atheist, is that many atheists seem to think that they have First Amendment rights to talk and behave any way they want to. The argument that fundies do it doesn't cut any ice with me. An asshole is an asshole no matter which God or NoGod is pushing out the shit.

Nails in the Religious Coffin: Sex, Drugs, and Contraception

Nails in the Religious Coffin: Sex, Drugs, and Contraception - Beliefnet

Controlling sex and drugs is certainly a huge issue for humanity. Which is the Achilles heel of religion. Religion wants the only source of extacy to be God or at least Herm humble representative on earth that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony. Having fun in bed? God will send you to hell! A little too much booze at the party? Better spend a lot of time in the confessional.

The other related nail in the religious coffin is female contraception. If you can't keep them barefoot and pregnant, why on earth would they want to go to church and listen to all that sexist garbage.

Atheism's contribution to these issues is not so much providing answers, as exposing the religious answers as BS and stinking BS at that. Atheists have a variety of social groups that they can choose to provide the moral and ethical guidance on these issues. These days governments are as useless as religion for this purpose.

It will be interesting to see if social media will ultimately provide this function. The churches certainly think so. Every church has its Web2.0 network up. Some universities are trying to fill the gap for non-believers. Music and arts groups are also providing social networks outside the churches. Atheist groups are hopeless, they can't even agree on what an atheist is let alone what moral and ethical socialization should be for an atheist. See the Blag Hag discussion of gender issues at an atheist gathering

My guess is that self selected Facebook groups will emerge as the socializing force for the non-religious.

- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Power to the People

Matt Davies courtesy Gocomics

In today's world information is power. It is essentially free on the internet. 2012 anyone? Mr Bloomberg?

Feminist men.

Blag Hag: When Gender Goes Pear-Shaped

If feminist men don't speak out on feminist issues, the only ones left to do so are those rad-fem women who object to sexist language and treatment. I can call a sexist a prick and get away with it because I have one. (I try very hard not to think with it. Long socialization in a family of very strong women.) The women have to be oh-so-careful not to be seen as 'one of them.' Hang in there, you will get flack from both sides but that is the way entrenched mores get changed.

Feminist men have much more clout because we can't be simply dismissed as one of those hysterical women. We can even be polite about it. Simply reminding another man about a poor choice of words by suggesting a better one is frequently as effective as calling him a prick. If not and some men just don't get it either willful sexism or stupidity the fallback is always available.

The Little Vuvuzela in the Fancy Dress

This phrase grew out of a comment by one of my favorite ministers who would talk about standing out on the church steps in a fuchsia dress shilling for the tinhorn in the fancy balcony. I thought the fuchsia dress was a little too specific, so changed it to fancy dress, losing the shilling in the process. One of the beliefnet members kindly pointed out that a tinhorn was obsolete so I updated it to a modern metaphor.
I have to admit that the Bb one note blare of a vuvuzela is a much better metaphor for a sermon than a tinhorn. You can actually play music(?) on a tinhorn.

Thus:

That little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony

Solving Existential Nihilism

Beliefnet

Welcome to existential nihilism. You must solve this problem for yourself or you will fall prey to the first religion that provides the response that Unitarian Universalist minister Forrest Church noted that religion is: quite simply, "our human response to the dual reality of being alive and having to die."

Hint: on the wall of my shower I have the fossil of an invertebrate fossilized ~half a billion years ago. It ingested and excreted and died. Probably reproduced but we can't know that. Once you can explain that creature's contribution to a child's sand castle you can possibly be immune to the attraction of God. Otherwise enjoy the pie in the sky after you die. It will help you get through the day.

I have found the unique solution that works for me to avoid the trap of existential nihilism. It may not work for all others, but in fact others have found my solution useful in avoiding that trap without resorting to Pascal's wager. But it is not "the solution" to how to live life. It may not even be the best solution to how to live life. But for someone with my training and background or a similar background it may help them avoid existential nihilism and Pascal's wager assuming they find neither useful to live life.

No matter, if everyone in my tribe of educated rational humans finds meaning in doing whatever they can to improve the lives of all those in their chosen tribe that they can and improve their own lives in a way that others look to them for help, comfort, love and inspiration, the world would become a much better place in spite of the nihilists and the fundamentalists total lack of contribution to the welfare of the human tribe.

How much each achieves is really irrelevant. Some will be able to do more than others, some will be in the right place at the right time to make a huge difference in someone's life that will enable that person to go on to be a major player in the community. But like the invertebrates on my shower wall, by surviving they provide the foundation for something better than they are.

Objectively it might be better for the human race if all existential nihilists chose the Glock solution to their problem and those who chose to bet on Pascal spent their entire life on their knees begging for salvation. I am convinced that neither is better for the human race, or for the universe, than some solution that avoids both. Objectively it might well be better for the universe or at least the earth if no humans existed. I don't buy that argument but I cannot prove it wrong, objectively or subjectively.

The Value of Religion

No atheist "denies" the existence of any "God" - Beliefnet

Religion has been an avocation for me ever since I found out that my next door neighbor believed in God and tried to figure out why he and his family would waste so much time in abetting this worthless (to me) activity. Then I got into choral music, and most of the good stuff was commissioned by the church to keep the parishioners on their knees praying for salvation. It works. But in order to perform it I had to know why it worked.

I also was fascinated by what the composer thought of why it was working. It did pay the bills and provided high status, but that was a different issue from the meaning written into the music. I find an amusing correlation between composition and atheism. I certainly can't prove it, but my study of religious scores suggests to me the composer was serving herm patron the church by providing the music that kept them on their knees but also provided an opportunity for those whose knees were sore to find a way out. Not all, there are many whose music even with the most cynical atheist interpretation seems to be an unadulterated celebration of their God. It is quite clear that God gets them from one day to the next, and they find a calling in helping others do so.

The most important value of religion is that it helps people deal with their mortality. I think the religious solution is valueless, but a lot of people find it useful not to have to deal with finding meaning and purpose in a finite life span. They can go from day to day doing whatever it is they do to get from one to the next without having to worry about who cares, because God cares and will take care of them in eternity if not now. Existential angst is not pleasant for most people and it is easy to let God worry about it.

Lest I seem condescending, let me be clear that for those who can assign the worries about meaning and purpose to God and find a religion that lets them contribute to the welfare of all including us Godless heathen, I have nothing but envy. I spend way too much of my life figuring out the ins and outs of meaning, purpose, spirituality, transcendence, etc. For me obviously, it is a better choice, but it cannot be defended as the only choice or even the best choice.

Ethics

Perspectivism II - Beliefnet

That is your problem. There is no absolute basis of ethics with or without God. Ethics are determined by the society which supports them. In the modern world societies are distributed and coexist with radically different ethics. Conflict is inevitable and that is how humans sort out ethics. Conflict is largely ideological these days and hopefully it will stay that way but that is a relatively modern innovation based on relatively free flow of information about which ethical systems work and which don't. Even the HRCC is finding out that absolute ethics based on God is a good way to go broke in a hurry.

Ethics are fundamentally based on the genetic imperative of the survival of the herd. This means that ultimately the survival of every member of the herd is an ethical imperative no matter what the cost to the herd. This is why hundreds of firemen and other rescue workers ran into the twin towers on 9/11. This is why ski patrol people risk their lives to save an idiot who tried to ski an avalanche slope. Even the overpowering mass of the cerebral cortex can't override the lizard brain that says the herd must survive.

Very simple, by committing the perfect crime, you are resigning from the herd of humanity. Even if your lizard brain would let you violate the imperative that every member of the herd is critical, the next time you need a loaf of bread you will not be able to fulfill the social obligations of obtaining it. That is you have self identified as a criminal, and thereby forfeited the social contract of the normal purchase of the bread. You would have to steal it, and continue stealing. There is no going back to the herd they won't have you and you won't have them.

And what do you have besides you non-existent charisma to convince the herd to ignore your antisocial behavior. You have resigned from the herd by your previous hidden antisocial act that you got away with clean, remember? Even an AK-47 doesn't last long enough to protect you with out a crowd at your back. I suspect that the baker wouldn't need much but a call to 911 to get the nut out of his bakery.

While, as you note, force has been a basis for a short lived civilization usually with God at the back of the force manipulator, although political philosophy has been a more modern adaptation of God. The vuvuzelas aren't what they used to be. But the herd is not powerless, and it is taking less and less time for the ethos of the herd to trump the despot, God or no. As noted there is no absolute ethical absolute other than the herd maintaining its integrity. The weak, the stupid, and the infirm will be culled without any action by the herd or any member of it. But the culling will be done by the blind, pitiless indifference of the universe (thanks Richard Dawkins) regardless of any action or lack thereof by any member of the herd.

The herd as far as humankind is concerned is the tribe. Practically tribes must have leaders that ultimately rely on the support of the members of the tribe. Particularly when leaders have God at their back force may appear to be a controlling factor, and historically that has been pretty accurate. But force depends on controlling the information available to members of the tribe to that which the leader disseminates. It worked for a long time as long as most of the tribe was illiterate or functionally so. Or why fundamentalists are trying to gut the school systems. But as more and more humans are becoming aware of their place in the world and their ability to affect other tribes by their actions, the game is changing. The weapons of choice are information and economics in the modern world. I doubt any individual will amass much power when all of herm power toys are made in China, herm economy is financed by China's banks, and herm computers are controlled in Bangalore.

California

Facebook (1)

Man! I went outside this morning and there is over 30 inches of sunshine on my driveway, I'd go shovel it out of my way, but the roads are all sunny over a layer of summer weather, so I am afraid I'd have trouble keeping my top up if I went anywhere. I guess I'll have to stay home and try to cover up with some sun screen and hole up till it blows over.
Andrew Latimer

Fire in Dallas

The Joke Thread - Beliefnet

News flash--A tragic fire struck the library of Dallas Theological Seminary last night. In spite of the best efforts of fire crews all three volumes were destroyed, including two that the students had not yet finished coloring.
amcolph

God Helmet Redux. Science at Work.

Michael Persinger God Helmet Questions... - Beliefnet

Electrical brainstorms busted as source of ghosts: Doubt cast on theory that magnetic fields spark religious feelings.
http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041206/full/news041206-10.html

Although I suspect that there is a God/ghost hole in many people's mind/brain I was never impressed with Persingers experiment and even less with the pop sci reports of it. My theory is that there is a genetic predisposition for some maybe a majority of people to believe uncritically in a leader, usually that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony, but perhaps a political/organizational leader. Ultimately God/ghosts come from control stories and myths parents use to socialize children again a critical function of nurturing a social animal. The God myths are typically maintained throughout life. Hopefully the ghost myths are shed with maturity but one does wonder given the popularity of astrology, psychics, etc.

Fortunately there is a genetic predisposition for some usually in adolescence to examine that God/ghost/leader belief predisposition, and figure out ways to express their disbelief. If done intelligently this can be way the societies grow and become more useful to members. If not done intelligently the rebellion is either suppressed or the person becomes a socially dysfunctional member of the society. One of the intelligent ways to express the disbelief is to become a little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony and change the belief system from within. This is not risk free, push too hard and a heretic's fate awaits. In today's society that may not be a bad thing, find a new age publisher, and see if it sticks to the wall.

Miniver Cheevy: Dr Martin Luther King, Jr

Miniver Cheevy: Dr Martin Luther King, Jr

Follow the link. Read it. We can never be reminded too often.

Religion, Misogyny, and Fecundity.

Perspectivism II - Beliefnet

In general, religions particularly Abrahamic religions and their bastard offspring are fundamentally based on the persecution of women. All of their indoctrination of girls is designed to make them believe this subjugation is the right thing to do. Famously quoting Corinthians 14:33-35 at every opportunity as if it were the word of God not that of the misogynist Paul.

The problem won't be solved politically, as the political reality is that free speech does not include criticism of religion, any religion, Christian, LDS, or Islam. However, as the Catholics and the liberal Protestants have shown us, when the propagation of the man's precious seed is a matter of negotiation and not rape, the power balance changes considerably. The issue is not decided yet but Mene, Mene, Tekel Upharsin seems to be clearly on the wall of misogyny. When Chinese and Indian women are saying one, maybe two if you ask nicely, I doubt that Muslims or Christians can fight the trend.

It will be ugly, I think we are seeing the suicide of the Christian Right. I suspect that the left will allow gridlock continue and the states that wish to will starve their schools, medicine and welfare for the less fortunate, until they find that the less fortunate are not powerless and the streets once again will become the political forum. They will try to arrest the moms who send their kids to the unstarved schools, but separate and unequal didn't fly then and it won't now.

A Naive Musical Experience

The 'existence' of gods - Beliefnet

I was, just this morning, a naive listener to the Allegri. I had never heard of it prior to Shirley's suggestion. One of the reasons I used it as a seed for the spirituality thread is that I expect few have listened to it. I had no preconceptions. The Miserere theme is common in liturgical music.

I found it to be as exquisite as Shirley promised, and while the piece lasted less than 10 minutes. I spent much more time than that thinking about it. Looking up Psalm 51, and especially thinking about the meaning of the boy treble solo. I still haven't listened to it again, although I will, as I am still savoring the experience of the music.

I have recently been introduced to the music of a traditional Chinese instrument somewhat like a zither, and am enjoying the experimentation of my wife's son who is learning to play it. He is quite talented as even a naive listener like my self can hear the music he is getting out of the instrument. The music speaks for itself. No indoctrination or prior knowledge is necessary.

Certainly being a musician helps, I do know what to listen for. So I can probably get more out of a first hearing than someone who has not studied music, but I suspect the difference in the effect of a powerful piece is much smaller than one would expect. 'I don't know anything about art but I know what I like.' is not a denigration of ignorance but a celebration of the power of art.

Mozart of God, take your pick

The 'existence' of gods - Beliefnet

I will take Mozart thanks. I can be enchanted any time I wish (and have time) just by mentally recreating that oneness with Mozart or whoever suits my mood at the time. Always fresh, influenced by my present emotional state.

I will take your word for the bliss of God being available at any time. But it sounds boring to me. One of the reasons an afterlife has no appeal for me. I suspect a few minutes in heaven would have me screaming for something interesting to do. I like the variety of Mozart one moment, and Mahler the next, with a little Messiaen thrown in when I really need a challenge. Please note the humanity of the composers. I may not have their compositional skills but I can facilitate the connection of others with Mozart, and celebrate the humanity of us all.

The human connection between the composer, the performer, and the appreciator in one of those magic performances when all are in sync is an transcendent moment, without any God needed to provide the transcendence. I don't even think of the composer as dead even though hesh usually is, the human connection and therefore immortality is still there.

Spirituality and music

The 'existence' of gods - Beliefnet

[Becoming one with the music of Mozart] is called human spirituality. It is available to all. The problem comes when a believer must put God between themselves and Mozart. It then becomes a triangle and you frequently cannot overpower the influence of God to become one with Mozart or at least his music. I will take my spirituality straight up. Uncontaminated by God and that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony. It sounds like you are missing that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony, but even God comes between you and Mozart. Your choice of course. I choose differently.

Natural Spirituality in a Christian context.

Atheists at end of life. - Beliefnet

[It was not the best Christian theology] Nor was it the best of natural spirituality I have been presented with. But when you are dealing at the McGuffey level at best, one must pick extremes to illustrate a point.

I could discuss the natural spirituality of Messiaen playing his Méditations sur le mystère de la Sainte Trinité at the National Cathedral, and explain why the Christian Theology of the composer and performer made the Christian interpretation of the experience less impressively spiritual even though God was an integral part of the natural experience. But that would be a dissertation in atheist spirituality, that neither you nor Ken would even try to understand.

I spent a good chunk of my time after the performance framing this dissertation, as I was frankly expecting a Christian spiritual experience. I didn't write it as I was the only one who would read it and I didn't need to.

What is an atheist like?

The 'existence' of gods - Beliefnet

I doubt you will find what you are looking for on beliefnet or in atheist blog-space either. The problem is with the a- of atheist. An atheist is almost by definition a reaction to theism. Those that call themselves atheists generally have a bone to pick with the dominant theism.

Away from where I call myself atheist most of my life is simply living without any thoughts of God or what God can do. I am cultivating the society of those I wish to associate with and living in the words of Forrest Church, a theist by the way, a life worth dying for. I am not worried about piling up points for infinity, I am worried about piling up points with my friends and neighbors so that all our lives will be better. Death is not really an issue for me. I have spent my whole life building a legacy for those who are meaningful to me. What they do with it is not really a problem any more. If I have lived properly there will be plenty to work with.

How am I inside? I am an intelligent, thoughtful social animal. I am sensitive to the mores of my chosen society, and comply with them. Not because I must, but because they work for me. Some of these mores originate in religious traditions. This does not influence me at all as atheism has little to do with evaluating anything. So it came from God. If it works it works for me as an atheist. I happen to have an interest in the study of religions. They have been around for a long time and there are good things to find in them.

I am a choral musician and most of the good choral music is religious music. In order to perform it one must understand it. Not believe it but understand what is believed. Therefore I know more about most religions than those who believe in them. I or at least a group I perform with can terrify you with the Dies Irae not because I believe in it but because I know what it means for believers.

Democracy.

Facebook: "Thank NoGod that somebody is running things. The governments both federal and state are totally dysfunctional. We are living in a democracy, look what it got us Fox News, Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.

OK, your elitist here. Popular democracy hasn't worked since Regan, except for the accident of the Clintons. I had hopes for Obama with his web 2.0 base, but he ignored it except for a money pump, and went back to Chicago politics. Surprise! Not.

The only hope for democracy in the US is a Web 2.0 based independent party active in all states. Please Mr. Bloomberg. A full Web 2.0 community with extensive forum feedback and discussion has the potential to take back the country, in a real democracy of the elite. Those active on the web will coerce their friends and neighbors to actually get out of their fancy cars taking them to their fancy jobs and vote. Messrs. Jefferson and Franklin would be ecstatic. They had no use for the rabble voting.

Brain/Mind Separation

The Neuroscience of Tone Deafness: Scientific American: "This conclusion is strongly supported by the results of functional and structural neuroimaging experiments. In people with congenital amusia, frontal areas are more weakly coupled to posterior auditory areas. These findings thus suggest that the brains of people with amusia can detect discordant notes just fine – the people are simply not aware of it. Their brain knows but their mind does not.

Very similar effects have been observed in neuroimaging experiments of people with prosopagnosia. Normally, the activity of a brain area in response to a specific stimulus (such as a particular face) will decrease with repeated presentations, but will increase again in response to a new example from the same category (a new face). If the brains of prosopagnosics are really unable to discriminate between different faces then the increase in response to a new face should be absent. In fact, the “face areas” of prosopagnosics are still quite sensitive to differences in facial identity. What is different is that these responses are not communicated to areas in the frontal and parietal lobes, where conscious awareness is triggered.

Tribal Issues

At Davies Symphony Hall last night sitting in the cheap seats next to a family obviously out of place in the setting. Chit-chat quickly revealed that the youngest daughter was in town for a master class with the musician on stage. The family was obviously uncomfortable with the fact that ":She really likes classical music:" but were determined to give her a chance to follow her muse. Probably putting a fair dent in the family budget to do so to provide lessons with a world class musician in the rural city. Kudos to that world class musician who was "also an attorney" for carrying the rational educated tribal values to the hinterland.

This is America

Facebook (1): "Meg Barnhouse
From Chip Roush: This is America, where a white Catholic male Republican judge was murdered on his way to greet a Democratic Jewish woman member of Congress, who was his friend. Her life was saved initially by a 20-year old Mexican-American gay college student, and eventually by a Korean-American combat surgeon, all eulogized by our African American President.' Mark Shields, PBS.

And the assassin was American as well. Fed by hate rhetoric from American politicians and the Austrian Glock purchase enabled by the American National Rifle Association.

Intelligent, Rational Tribalism

Our potential - Beliefnet

But ive changed that attitude by seeing myself as a tribalist and I think our church would be better as seeing ourselves as more Tribal. Tribal as in were all good and valuable for something and we all depend on each other to survive and everyone is on the same level nobody's better then anyone else therefore looking down your nose at others because you have a certain gift is not valid, we all depend on each other and are valued,everyone contributes.I dont have any gifts but I want to go in and do community service this year, helping clean the church and community service is important as much as serving on any committee is, showing up and being there and being loving towards others at church is valuable, paying our monthly dues is a value. Showing up to board meetings that are open to the public and offering your support is valuable.

were all valuable somehow and we contribute to the tribe and as a tribe we depend on each other to survive. [corrections for spelling only]
rideronthastorm

A beautiful synopsis of what is wrong with UU churches and how to fix it. And maybe the tribe of intelligent rational people that I like to think I am a part of as well. If we all look at ourselves as good and valuable for something and dependent on all for everything the world would be a much more livable place.

I think about the phrase "intelligent rational" and think about those who might not be immediately considered to be a part of the tribe, that can be given the opportunity to find their place in the tribe using whatever intelligence and rationality they have to offer. I was pleased to be able to help a Downs Syndrome person use the "affection magnetism" so common to the syndrome in a service position, that was within his ability level. It seems we all can be intelligent and rational enough to be important to the tribe of intelligent rational people.

Self Realization and Religion

Your Zodiac sign - Beliefnet

The essence of religion is the belief that life cannot be managed by oneself. Indoctrination begins at birth and continues to puberty and beyond if possible. At puberty a few find this indoctrination onerous and search out other paradigms.

For women especially the indoctrination that life consists of the missionary position under the husband is easily rejected, but the self management of ones life is harder, as there are fewer opportunities for most women. The insignificant self worth for women taught by most religions makes pleasing men via beauty contests, provocative dress, cosmetics, etc. one outlet. Astrology provides a gender neutral way to get guidance in life management while breaking free from that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony. I see astrology as training wheels for self-management of ones life as the choices still need to be made from the options provided. I also find the predominance of women in Wicca is another way to break the stranglehold of misogynistic religion for women without giving up the direction from other.

In atheistic communities this is less of a problem as young women as well as young men are expected to learn self-realization early in life through participation in sports, the arts, and science fairs. Sometimes the young men long for religion as the young women excel in all areas as they mature earlier than the young men.

In atheistic communities the choice for women is not the 'Turning Point' of career vs marriage, but which career to choose among several options. I know of several young women who are combining science at Eg. Harvard with music at N E Conservatory. or Music and Physics at Cal or U of Miich. (My world is music pardon the bias.) Somehow the missionary position isn't anywhere in the immediate future.

This is not to say that reproduction is out of the picture, in fact a dual career in the arts and academia/business research is seen as an ideal basis for family support. For both men and women I might add. Many atheist men view parenting as a critical part of building a legacy that they would be willing to die for. No need for pie in the sky, the echo of the meaning and purpose that has been taught from ones children and their friends and seeing them take it and grow with it makes the end of life a welcome coda. I need no heaven after I die. It is right here. Now.

Teach Your Children Well

Harris Determinism - Beliefnet

Far better than giving a child a cheeseburger or teaching them a skill is to teach the child rational and critical thinking. That way hesh will choose to pass on the cheeseburger, and choose skills that are rewarding and interesting. Therein, not determinism or God, lies success.

It seems that teaching skills even quite advanced skills is compatible with religious beliefs. It is no longer surprising that scientists, engineers, and even hack lawyers, can be believers. If they can avoid the critical thinking courses at the University or get past them by using the skill of regurgitating the thinking of the professor (or buying a creative paper on the net)it seems they can do quite well for the Church.

This does change the ring speciation outlook a bit, but skill education only for the men seems like an evolutionary dead end to me. I will still bet on critical thinking education especially for K-12 women to tip the balance, even though believers will out breed the rationalists by a large margin. I don't think they will retain control over their women.

Biology of Belief

Philosopher of Religion...Calls it Quits - Beliefnet

Andrew Newberg, M.D., et al., Why God Won't Go Away: Brain Science and the Biology of Belief. (2001, Ballantine)

Some, but not all human brains are wired to include god beliefs, leaving them susceptible to the con artists pushing religion. This wiring may even be beneficial to those unable to manage their lives without God or at least that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony telling them what to do. The afterlife belief is simply an empty promise of a reward for a wasted life.

I suspect that this wiring was important in evolutionary history when a huge portion of the population had essentially no control over the course of their lives and had no ability to affect their society or even their family in any meaningful way. They learned the trade of their father if male, were bred at puberty if female, and lived out their lives basically as their parents did from one day to the next doing what they had to to to please the lord of the community, and had the Sabbath off to please the Lord of that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony. The Sabbath was usually heavy in the psychological reward department: Inspirational stories, music, drumming, social networking, etc. and of course elaborate rituals promising a rewarding afterlife if they do what they are told to do the rest of the week.

A major paradigm shift occurred in Europe when the communities became big enough that the lord, now King, began to encourage and support secular education, art, and music for some in the court, especially the children of the high status courtiers. The connection between music and art and rational rather than belief based thinking is well established. Thus high status people began to gain control over their own lives and the god belief wiring atrophied. This self-actualization spread as education became more general and religion became relatively less important in the lives of the well educated.

The biology of belief was once critical to survival. It is now possibly an evolutionary dead end. And ring speciation of believers and rational thinkers with continue apace. I doubt that God belief will survive as they seem to be out-breeding their resource base. Time will tell.

Morality and Relition

Antitheism? - Beliefnet

I might agree that religions can cause moral behavior if you are referring to the religious context as a social framework. I am skeptical that anyone does anything good or refrains from anything bad because that little vuvuzela in the fancy dress in the over decorated balcony told them God said so. They are moral because they are intelligent social animals and Mrs. Grundy at the coffee hour will gossip about them if they break the social contract. The only advantage of a religious social framework is that it is small and tight. That is the good news and the bad news. Immoral behavior promoted by the church can be just as important to Mrs Grundy as the moral issues of an intelligent social animal.