Kiss Hank's Ass.

Obama: "Doubt Causes Faith!"

Obama spoke at the Notre Dame commencement yesterday, and despite predictions from some "pro-lifers," was not struck by lightning. By most accounts he gave an excellent speech. I'll leave the abortion topic for others to deconstruct, but I want to touch on another topic he covered.

"In this world of competing claims about what is right and what is true, have confidence in the values with which you’ve been raised and educated. Be unafraid to speak your mind when those values are at stake. Hold firm to your faith and allow it to guide you on your journey. Stand as a lighthouse.

But remember too that the ultimate irony of faith is that it necessarily admits doubt. It is the belief in things not seen. It is beyond our capacity as human beings to know with certainty what God has planned for us or what He asks of us, and those of us who believe must trust that His wisdom is greater than our own.

This doubt should not push us away from our faith. But it should humble us. It should temper our passions, and cause us to be wary of self-righteousness. It should compel us to remain open, and curious, and eager to continue the moral and spiritual debate that began for so many of you within the walls of Notre Dame. And within our vast democracy, this doubt should remind us to persuade through reason, through an appeal whenever we can to universal rather than parochial principles, and most of all through an abiding example of good works, charity, kindness, and service that moves hearts and minds."

ARRRRRGHHHHH! This is so frustrating. Here is one of the most intelligent people on earth, in front of a crowd of future leaders, taking a few minutes to encourage belief in things that can't be observed or proven! Is this responsible behavior?

Does this work in any realm other than religion. If I'm lucky enough to one day give a commencement address, is it acceptable for me to spend time talking about holding true to belief in resquartervantites? After all, there is no proof for the existence of resquartervantites, you can't see them, they don't actually communicate with you, but if you just close your eyes, click your heels three times, and believe hard enough they can help you to do all kinds of good things. Forget acceptable, would it even be responsible?

Come on Mr. President, doubt shouldn't push us away from faith?! People doubt because there is no evidence supporting claims of faith. I certainly hope you don't use this kind of logic in making foreign policy decisions.

"I kind of doubt that the Iranians have done away with that nuclear weapons program. But you know what, doubt really shouldn't interfere with my faith that they have. No further action required."

I hope he doesn't actually believe this hoooey, and it's all just a show for the believer electorate. While I'm not normally comforted by politicians lying, that scenario just seems more palatable than the idea that the leader of the most powerful country on earth believes in an imaginary sky friend.

More Creationism Schtick.

Ricky Gervais shares his take on creationism.

Storm

I came across this Tim Minchin gem a few weeks ago on another site. Thus far I've resisted the urge to repost it here, but my resistance has worn down.

Enjoy.



(Via)

Back In Black

Lewis Black shares his thoughts on creationism in that special sensitive way only he can.

Happy Easter!

The Four Horsemen Talk Tone

Here are four of the leading "New Athiests" discussing a topic I blogged about a while back. The tone in which atheists criticize religion and how believers take offense.



Richard Dawkins, Dan Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens are very smart men and great spokesmen for the New Atheist movement. I admit a certain soft spot for Hitchens' style, but all of them are top shelf.

What Is An Open Mind?

(Via)

Imagine No Religion

It appears that the in the midst of declining attendance and tough economic times, the Catholic Church is closing parishes across the eastern and midwestern US.

According to CNN, the reduction has to do with the declining number of Catholics out there. Take this tidbit for instance:

"There are reportedly 67.1 million Catholics in the U.S., according to The Official Catholic Directory 2008. Compared to the 2007 number of 67.5, that's about a 400,000 decrease in one year. And the Pew Forum found that approximately a third of its survey respondents who were raised in the Roman Catholic Church no longer attend the church."

That's still a lot of Catholics, but that's also a huge decline in a single year.

Those types of numbers aren't just limited to the Catholic Church though. According to a recent USA Today poll, the third largest "religious affiliation" in the United States is "no religion," which comes in at 15% of those polled. (Up from 8% in 1990) By comparison, the second largest group behind Catholics was Baptists at 15.8%. (Down from 19.3% in 1990)

Of course the "no religion" group can, and probably does, include a lot of believers who have simply rejected any form of organized religion. The "spiritual but not religious" types. Even though that doesn't go far enough in my opinion, the increasing rejection of organized religion is on the whole a move in the right direction.

In the case of the Catholic Church, it's not hard to see why the numbers are declining. It's an organization that opposes many mainstream American values like equal rights for women and gays, birth control, choice on abortion and embryonic stem cell research. It's an organization allegedly dedicated to ending poverty, yet it has amassed wealth comparable to a fortune 500 company. (Back when such companies had wealth.) It's an organization allegedly dedicated to the protection of the weak, that allowed pedophiles access to children.

Eventually even the most ardent believer is going to look at that kind of track record and question whether the morals of the church are in line with basic human values. And that's without looking at the fact that it's whole belief structure lacks evidence.

Maybe the worm has started to turn on religion in the US. Still - we have a long way to go.

The Inquisition.

This one's for my kid.

Nobody expects The Spanish Inquisition!

Watch Your Tone!

I'm in danger of becoming all religion all the time this week, but I want to drop another post on the topic.

I had an interesting exchange with a friend today about the tone (among other things) of my criticisms of faith here. She feels that my tone is too harsh in addressing difficult issues like faith. Naturally I disagree.

I've come across this issue before, and I think the last thing we need in the debate over faith vs. atheism is more deference to faith. (Here's an interesting discussion of this issue.)

I don't understand why opinions about the existence of god should be treated with any more respect than opinions about - say - politics. We regularly see public exchanges about political ideals that border on fist fights, and while you occasionally hear about changing the "tone in Washington", I've never heard anyone say that one side or the other of the political spectrum is entitled to deference and respect just because.

Yet I hear that argument all the time when it comes to "faith." Why is that? What is it about believing in god that entitles the believer to more respect or deference than any other opinion? It makes very little sense. If the believer can back up his beliefs, and wants to engage in a debate about it, he should welcome my challenge even if it comes in strong terms.

The "watch your tone" argument is particularly annoying in light of the tone that so many believers take with atheists. I'm not suggesting they should tone down their rhetoric, I can take it, but when a former president of the US has said atheists shouldn't be considered citizens; and when states still have laws on the books (although unenforceable) keeping atheists from holding office, maybe believers should take as good as they give.

Hey - I'm not really that harsh anyway. Now George knew how to be harsh.

What If God Disappeared!

Would we even recognize the world anymore?

The Elf Delusion.

Here's a odd little story. Apparently the people of Iceland have a longstanding, folklore based, belief in elves. Icelandic people actually believe elves are real. In fact, when Alcoa wanted to build a plant there it had to allow a government inspector in to certify that the site was elf free.

Now I suspect that most Americans consider belief in elves ridiculous, and they would be right. After all, there is no empirical evidence for the existence of elves. But America has it's own "folklore." Religion.

Without any emperical evidence millions of Americans believe in an all knowing, all powerful, god who watches over all they do. Plus he's ready to punish them for all eternity of they don't act just so. Believers get preferential government treatment in the form of tax breaks, and I suspect that if the right people thought angels inhabited a plant site we'd spend some tax money investigating.

Belief in elves is ridiculous, but so is belief in Jesus.

Left Behind for Socialism.

Ok the crazy ass revelations reading fundamentalists are at it again. Take a few minutes to watch this interview with Tim Lahaye, author of the crazy ass Left Behind apocolyptic revelations loving book series. Turns out Obama's a socialist!



Set aside the crazy ass - no evidence havin - the world is going to end with jesus on a white horse smiting the non-believers stuff. (We can have some fun with that in another post) Enough with this Obama is a socialist stuff! He isn't. Unless he has just been lying about his positions, Obama is a Clinton style, down the middle new Democrat.

A socialist probably would support single payer government run health care. A socialist might consider nationalizing failing banks and insurance companies instead of handing them wads of tax payer money. A socialist - and get ready for this one because it's going to blow your mind - might stand up and honestly tell people that their taxes have to go up to pay for the mess we are in right now. A socialist would actually raise taxes to pay for programs. A socialist could - you know maybe - raise the federal minimum wage to a level where people can live on it. A socialist might strongly support unions, or government funded day care for working families.

There's all kinds of things a socialist would do, but Obama isn't promising to do these things.

If he was a socialist, I would have voted for him. I didn't.

Lego Your Doubt!

This is awesome! The fairly recent trend of converting stories and movies in to Legos is tremendous, but a Lego Bible is just fantastic. Take a few minutes and kick around in here. The above depiction of Job is just one of the highly entertaining things you will find.

Shout out to Unreasonable Faith for tipping me off to this one

How About Reality Based Instead?

This week Obama fulfilled another campaign promise, when he signed an order establishing the White House Office of Faith Based Initiatives. This was a bad idea when W. did it, and Obama's version isn't any better.

This kind of mixing between government and religion brings a host of problems. Will these "faith based" programs evangelize while handing out soup, effectively using tax dollars to preach? Will faith based programs discriminate in hiring, effectively causing government subsidized discrimination? Why do we need the "faith based" aspect of these programs at all?

I'm all for government helping those in need. As a matter of fact, I wish government would do a lot more in this area. I would gladly pay higher taxes to know that a minimum standard of living existed for all Americans. Why we need religion involved in this escapes me though. Unless the purpose is to draw people toward faith (an exercise government should not be involved in at all), why is there a need for "faith based" anything?

Instead of using my tax dollars to fund religion, I propose we establish a secular Office of Need. (Or something to that effect) It could do all the "good" things these faith based programs are suppose to do, without blurring the church-state line. I don't tithe on Sundays, I'd like it if my government didn't force me to through my tax bill.

Besides, it's just silly that smart people think "faith" is a virtue. It worries me that two consecutive administrations seem to think it is.

Jesus Hates the Eagles!

Well we are just days away from Super Bowl Sunday. Some people might consider it a sign of the apocalypse that the Arizona Cardinals are going - but not Kurt Warner.



In what has now become standard post game interview drivel, Kurt told us after the NFC championship game that Jesus was the reason he was standing on the winner's podium. Does Kurt even think about what he says? If Jesus propelled the Cardinals to victory, doesn't that mean he also made the Eagles lose? How does Kurt explain that? Are there no good Christians in Philly? Is Donovan McNabb a heathen? (He always seemed so nice in the soup commercials with his Mom.)

But the real test is coming up. What happens if the Steelers win the Super Bowl? Will we hear Kurt bemoan the fact that Jesus loved Pittsburgh more than Arizona? Better yet will we hear something like this: "Every thing was going great until my lord and savior made me throw a pick six in the fourth quarter?"

Somehow I doubt it.