What we CHOOSE to believe

Superman can fly high, way up in the sky
‘Cause we believe he can
So what we choose to believe can always work out fine
It’s all in the mind


shits stinks because there is not a God

It’s frustrating.  It’s like witnessing 2 people talking, but with a language barrier, which one person attempts to overcome by raising their voice. That is what it is like when people tell me that they feel badly that I do not have a relationship with God, such as they.  It’s like we are not speaking the same language.  Apparently, there has been discovered a protein that exists in chicken’s ovaries necessary for the production of eggs, therefore not present in the egg in that it precedes, thereby proving that the chicken came before the egg.  That should put the argument to rest.  For me, it was the fact that the egg would have needed to gestate and incubate, it would have needed something to care for it at birth, to protect from predators, to transport it, just like every animal and insect does.

The problem with this God figure, is that God is who people need him to be, and in the worst way.  God can be described as jealous and vengeful, notwithstanding the punishment set forth from the onset- suddenly, there was a sense of shame to gaze upon the naked body, and women would have painful menses, labor and delivery, and then the subsequent unleashing of wraths — floods, firestorms, mass deaths of male offspring, plagues and such…and despite that once one gets older and realizes, not only did it not make sense back then, but now there is more knowledge available to society at large; the individual has enough basic education and knowledge to know that Woman is not born of Adam’s rib, Man was not created in the image of a floating spirit, beyond the clouds there is outer space as opposed to heaven…

I stress and emphasize common sense, & will give the following example: shit stinks, because God does not exist.  I hate roaches.  I used to have nightmares about giant roaches.  I hate maggots and meal worms.  Even typing it made me envision it, made me almost gag.  I hate vomit. I’m actually emetophobic. I used to say that when I die, I am going to ask God why He created these disgusting things.  A person of faith will feed you the crap that we are all God’s creatures and beautiful in our own ways, but science will tell you that evolution is to blame and science will make sense.  The key to developing critical thinking skills is to transfer concepts to new scenarios.  In fact, that is the key to learning anything–the ability to transfer and apply knowledge elsewhere.  Nonetheless, this brings me to feces.  Once I had had a course or 2 in biology and chemistry (and wherever I learned about evolution), I was able to discern that, perhaps, the reason feces smells is that there was a time that people had no toilets and to come upon some feces, one needed to know, beyond a doubt, to stay away.  After knowing that bacteria gives off waste and releases odors and having a concrete understanding of digestion, I was able to deduce that this is a function of evolution.  Evolution is large scale adaptation and the function of adaptation is survival and only that which has been able to evolve i.e. adapt i.e. grow and change, persists.  This being the reason that fish, birds and mammals all know not to eat shit.  But wait! Dogs eat shit.  There’s exceptions to every rule.

The point is, that it is, without a doubt, a failed, although well orchestrated, attempt to explain the origin of the universe and all that it contains as the work of an entity called God.  What has clearly happened is that throughout history, Man has attributed what is out of his own control, to be the work of volatile, extraterrestrial characters, that are for some reason, highly invested in the daily goings-on of the inhabitants of Earth.  It is quite clear that the more that science revealed to us, the more upheaval arose in traditional societies.  New belief systems, and therefore customs by which to adhere, were being introduced all in the attempts appease the gods in exchange for favor, if not in life, then in the afterlife.  Rules about how to conduct oneself were imposed as truths.  History and geography outlay patterns in religious themes and timing.  All of these patterns are simply ignored by believers.  Patterns of huge populations being misguided, yet faithful worshipers are examples of the fog that I reference in my blog title. The Christians see the oppression of the Muslims, the Muslims see the heathenism of the Westerners, the Jews see the money (jk, just seeing if you’re playing attention). How can one subscribe to the belief that the Greeks, Romans, Hindu, Mayan, Egyptians and various other worshipping populations were wrong about their gods because the one true God allowed all these other children of His to be so literally out of touch that, unless they are fortunate to run into one of his saved children, their souls shall simply perish.

Some people are born blind or without a limb, or mentally challenged or actually unattractive.  Some people are born  with intelligence, healthy bodies and great looks. This is not the work of God.  It’s the work of the human body.  Going back to the way that evolution, adaptation and biology work, and similar to the creation of the Earth and it’s atmosphere, there are a series of processes taking place unbeknownst to Man.

what a fool believes

I use the term “fool” loosely and only to bring to mind the lyrics of the song by that title:

But what a fool believes … he sees
No wise man has the power to reason away
What seems … to be
Is always better than nothing

Here’s the thing: sometimes, and often as a coping mechanism, a person can believe what’s easier to accept; not necessarily what is true. We can lie to ourselves (or choose not to see) the affair our partner is having, the drugs our child is doing, the poor decisions that we have made for ourselves, et al.  When it comes to religion, people become sheep of unyielding, blind obedience.  I especially question those that are scholarly (Mayim Bialik) or that are well-versed in the psychology of Man and how ideas impregnate and propagate; how history is edited and “facts” are created, yet continue to worship the elusive Supreme Being.  We’ve all played the game of telephone and possibly believed that someone deliberately altered the story for it to have been so inaccurate by the time it reached the other end of the line.   When it comes to studying for the sake of worship, once experience, science or common sense have debunked even 3 of the ideologies or “facts” this doctrine perpetuates, that should offer enough reasonable doubt to stop defending what one clearly does not understand.  Allow me to enumerate some pretty basic precarious proclamations:

The Bible pretty much starts off shaming women for their menstrual cycle.  I knew a female growing up, that was not [permitted] to go to church while menstruating, as she was considered impure.  The Bible explains that the pain of childbirth and the menstrual cycle are a punishment for the misdeeds of Eve in the Garden of Eden.   So women have to blame this this pseudo-ancestor for the horrors of childbirth and menstrual cramps and, provided that Eve has been dead for 6 millennia, there’s no chance of her repenting, so this is a cross women are to bear.  Then, what happens when you go to school, take health and biology courses and learn the function of the menstrual cycle?  What happens when you find out that dogs also have periods?  What happens when you take into account that the Bible was written at a time more than a thousand years before for The Plague that took out 1/3 the population Europe–the Plague that was essentially ‘cured’ with hygiene?  What then, do you do when you take into account that not up until the late 1800’s  (in the United States) was public education available for girls.  So many years after the Bible was written, edited and, until the past 50 or so years was interpreted exclusively  by men, blind sheep pride themselves on being such avid, unwavering, faithful followers.

There is episode of Family Guy that addresses the ironic and somewhat comical and arbitrary rejection of advanced technology in the Amish community.  The purpose is to not be seduced by the luxuries and temptations of the “outside world” that may lure them away from their Amish family, community and beliefs.  This is ironic because the Amish do utilize some extent of technology, only it’s the technology that was available during the lifetime of it’s founder.  This is to suggest that what was considered too luxurious, too distracting from worship was relative to the technologies available at that time.  The question then is, if the religion was founded in Medieval times, would the Amish be allowed to ride bicycles? For the Amish, when it comes to such concepts as food storage,  in many cases (depending on how orthodox one may be) one must decide whether to get an ice box (and regular ice deliveries), pitch-in for community storage (minimized use of electricity), get a gas-powered refrigerator or break down and use electricity.  Living a simple life is commendable–they are a close-knit, private, self-sustained community.  The problem is that should one decide that they seek more out of life (such as furthering their education), they risk being shunned.  Again, a religion that teaches temperance and love of thy neighbor fails to teach tolerance and frowns upon educating oneself.  The religion is not about the individual, but sustaining a community and passing on a heritage.  Cool.  As it so happens, it doesn’t appeal to most people.

The Bible says that God plucked a rib from Adam to create Eve.  While the sentiment is sweet, a couple of biology and history courses should clear that right up.  For, we find in nature that opposite genders are an attribute of species that practice sexual (as opposed to asexual) reproduction.

We are told that all was well and all were nude in the Garden of Eden, but as part of the punishment, they became aware of their nakedness and felt a new sense of shame.  Well, when it boils right down to it, every culture treats nudity and sexuality differently.  Throughout the world, most civilizations cover, if nothing else, their genitals. This has everything with preserving your ability to procreate.  Every life form seeks to replicate itself.  Men cover these parts so that they are not vulnerable to injury, an enemy (one could cripple their opponent by rendering them unable to reproduce), to keep their testicles warm and to even the playing ground when seeking a mate (as opposed to being chosen based on size alone).  Women cover their genitals for practically the same reasons.  Additionally women cover themselves to thwart advances, not for shame.   The shame that we feel is something that we develop during adolescence.  Toddlers do not have such shame.  The shame stems from standards of beauty imposed by society that we may not live up to.  The embarrassment of being seen naked is more of a feeling of vulnerability.   When we are naked, it’s like letting the table see your hand.  We are not ashamed to be naked when it is by our choice or to our benefit.

One of the most disturbing tendencies of theists is their assumption that they are morally superior. It might even be cause for alarm, that people rely on pious rhetoric as their moral foundation. Perhaps theists simply don’t realize that many of the most revered individuals throughout history have been nonbelievers and morally upstanding citizens all at once. Religious folk tend to spend more time trying to appear holier than they are or ever will be.  These religious folk have great nerve to speak of love, all the while ridiculing the fornicators, the gays, the unwed mothers, the prostitutes, the foreigners, etc.  The Ku Klux Klan are, typically, Southern, white, God-fearing Christians.  KKK often doesn’t have to answer to local authorities because they ARE they local authorities.  Notwithstanding that killing is illegal, it’s one of the Ten (pretty simple) Commandments.  It goes to show that not even they believe the shit they preach: we are all God’s children. These people go out of their way to distance themselves from what they deem morally inferior, all the while shoving their own skeletons back into the closet. There are pastors screwing members of the congregation, priests raping or molesting boys, preachers that publicly denounce homosexuality up until the moment they’re caught bent over with their pants down. There are places in the world where a female pregnant out of wedlock is expected to kill herself, rather than bring shame on her family.  Although that expectation is based in culture, as opposed to religion, the people that uphold these traditions are worshippers.  On what moral ground does the father stand that lets his daughter kill herself for after impregnated out of wedlock, even if she was raped? Had it not been for disbelief and dissidence, civilization would be stuck in the Stone Ages.


and that is??

and that is??

This was in my newsfeed on Facebook. I wanted to ask the poster, “and who would that person be?” Certainly you do not suggest the hand of God wrote the excerpts carefully selected to be included in the Bible. And the Lord, Jesus, didn’t write any of the books in the Bible. And in fact, every chapter in the Bible is written by a different person.

the chicken and egg

Which came first: the chicken or the egg?  If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

My take:

The chicken came first.  The tree makes a sound.  These are not mysterious to me, although philosophically stimulating to many.  I say the chicken came first because something had to incubate the egg.  Adaptation and evolution would explain the disparity concerning origin, because as each generation of species adjusts or adapts to their environment, the offspring evolve.  Thus, the offspring possess traits that the predecessor does not.  This is to say that the chick that we know today is not the same as the original offspring.  Therefore, over the scope of time, whatever would have been born of the organisms that originated in the oceans, including chickens, would have to be the product or offspring of something else.  The fact is that all organisms have to go through an infancy and then a reproductive phase as a fact of life.  In order for an egg to exist, it would have to come from something that reproduced (re i.e. again and produce i.e. create) a virtual copy of itself.

As for the tree in the forest: I get it. If no one is there to receive the vibrations, is there a sound?  Similar to Schroedinger’s theory of the cat being both dead and alive, as it is neither until it is observed and declared to meet the criteria of one or the other.  The thing is, the definition of sound is independent of human observance.  I realize that even time is a human-conceived concept, but it is based on observable scientific law.  I would liken this  question to be equivalent to asking whether time passes if you aren’t looking at the clock.   There are pre-existing criteria that define both “time” and “sound” that are met whether there is a human to observe and acknowledge them.

How do the bugs get into the ceiling light?  I never looked it up, but I would imagine that since bugs are attracted to light, and heat is used to incubate eggs, and light produces heat, that insects are laying eggs in or near the lights that eventually hatch.  I could look this question up to find someone else’s answer, but that one satisfies my common sense.

My point is that it can be that simple to come to a reasonable explanation without listening to and spreading the dogma of whichever doctrine to which one subscribes as opposed to simply being true to oneself and recognizing that many of us take for granted that what we learned growing up is the truth–simply because it’s what we were taught.  We take for granted that, no matter what extent, a good amount of what we believe is what was recited to us and committed to our memory over time.  Unless you stop, question, identify and test what you have come to believe, you will continue to believe what is most familiar or comfortable but not necessarily what makes sense.




because I lived through a recent fire that consumed almost all of my possessions, many people sought to be encouraging by telling me that it was a sign that God is not through with me. Someone told me that it proves there is a God. Really? And what of the people that don’t live through fires, that get raped and murdered and dismembered, that are victims of natural disasters, congenital diseases…
Clearly a matter of perception

there is nothing to be gained from ignorance

When I read some of these theists’ posts, I feel disheartened and frustrated. It seems a lost cause.  Apparently, putting things into layman’s terms doesn’t even make a dent, and of this they are proud because it is a testament to their degree of faith. They want to believe, therefore they become deaf to contention.

Once you learn that a day- 24 hours, is a measurement of the time it takes for the Earth to complete a rotation, this should call into question your acceptance of the Earth being created in 6 days.  Days, as we understand them, are the result of the Earth’s rotation.  If the Earth was not yet created and rotating, what is the standard of measurement for the passage of time, or does time even exist?  Even if we say God finished the Earth in one day, immediately set it into rotation and therefore time had begun, this is refuted by our scientific understanding of how the Earth and the moon were set into motion.  If we refute the scientific understanding of the creation of the Earth, then we are also undermining logical, plausible, demonstrable explanations of volcanoes, salt in the oceans, thunder, storms, lightening, ozone, energy, etc…all of nature and the laws by which it so effectively functions.   To accept the Biblical telling of the creation of Earth and life is to contradict science and leaves the questions that science has already answered, unresolved.  However, by studying science and the laws of nature, medicine and monuments were created.  Everything that has come to be is a reaction from the initial burst of energy that created the universe.  That energy caused particles to move, combine, interact and react. Those reactions created elements, molecules, chemicals as well as what we have come to know as stars, black holes, comets, planets, moons and galaxies.  Within these galaxies are worlds that prevail contingent upon the conditions in which they were born.  For instance, the Earth’s live-supporting properties rely heavily upon it’s distance from the sun.  Should the distance change, so does the capacity to support various forms of life.  These deductions cannot be made from any of the ‘facts’ in the Bible no matter how many times you interpret it.

Arguing with a theist is like arguing with a toddler.  It’s senseless.  A toddler is not rational, nor does it become rational after further reasoning.  (Never argue with a fool; from a distance, you can’t tell who’s who).  To be rational, you have to start from rational.  Here’s what we are to believe  (even though we now know more about the universe’s multiple galaxies, at the time the Bible was written, they didn’t even know there was a Western Hemisphere or a round Earth):  Long long ago, but no too long ago, there was a spiritual being that decided that he was going to create mini-me’s and let them live naked and happy in paradise.   This paradise was somewhere in the Middle East.  He wanted to test these “children” so he made an arbitrary rule about not eating fruit from a specific tree in the garden (already with the games).  They didn’t listen (he should have known that they wouldn’t) so he punished them–banished them, made them suffer and then hundreds of years later, sent a son to save them…(whaaat?) And by son, it means born of God and a virgin (which translates to: Mary got knocked up and we don’t know who the father is). In order to save humanity, this son had to allow fellow man to crucify him.   He gave his creations free will. However, they are not free to use that will if they want to make it back to the Kingdom of God.  Instead, they must adhere to a book of rules and stories that was written by various hands over decades with edits and omissions.   This book will not be updated to coincide with the times but will be reinterpreted over and over and again until denominations are born.   The language will remain vague and contradictory.  When it’s all over, the son of God will come back, have a fight with the devil and the people that believed  and gave their lives to Christ will rise into the heavens (which we now know to be outer space).

God sounds more and more human based on these trust games and emotions e.g. God is a jealous God: how could God be jealous?  I thought he’d be above all those human sentiments.  Especially because part of jealousy is feeling threatened.  How can the supernatural creator feel threatened by his mortal creation–especially if the creator already knows the end to the story?  Sounds a bit immature.

I could never understand where God came from.  Everything has to start from something, right? What was God doing before he made humans?  Why the hell did he make roaches?  I hate roaches. Does he like roaches? What is God’s retirement plan, you know, after the second coming (of Christ)?

I understand that believing in God is comforting; so is sucking on a pacifier.  Incidentally, the latter is a habit that we break.  The former, people lose lives over.

And this heaven place.  How big is it?  One portion of the Bible says that you will not know your loved ones in heaven but will love everyone alike.  That would mean that when a person gets to heaven no one is familiar and there are no relationships.  Also, it’s assumed that the form one takes in heaven is the same as the form we are on Earth.  This means that we will have noses to breathe even though we don’t need to, and we will see, hear and feel without use of our brains.  Does this also mean that we will have anuses? Apparently (evidenced by those that believe they will be met by 27 virgins), we would keep our genitals, even though there’s no need to reproduce since the population growth would be pretty steady; not to mention there is a maximum occupancy.  And if it’s ok to have recreational sex in heaven, why is it a sin to fornicate while still alive? –thall shall be done on Earth as it is in Heaven

On my “about” page, I mentioned that life is a common experience made up of common experiences.  So, since the beginning of mankind, the process is that you are born into a clan.  This clan is responsible for teaching you the ways of the world. You are innocent, fresh-minded and curious.  You crave knowledge.  You imitate the behaviors you observe.  You have questions and the big people around you seem to have answers.  You believe what they tell you until you learn otherwise.  Meanwhile, as adults, the big people are only passing down what they have learned and were taught as a child–right or wrong.  In your teens, you shed the wonderment of childhood and enter the emotional, hormonal commencement of adulthood.  You question authority, including your parents; you feel enlightened from your prepubescent ignorance.  Along with the ignorance of childhood, you long ago shed the belief in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the stork. Still, because your parents or community reinforce it, you believe in God.

There is no way to justify a god that created the sun, the moon, the Earth and the stars but never introduced himself to the Mayans, Egyptians, Inca, Greeks, Romans, etc. This god does reveal himself to a select few–the chosen people that we later refer to as prophets.  Unfortunately, different religions have different prophets that made different prophecies.  There’s no way to justify a god that has a “chosen people”.  There is no way to justify a god that loves us so much that there are impoverished nations and millions of diseased and starving children.  And for those that are pro-life, there is no way to justify a god that chooses to create deformed and disabled children.  We can tell the story of Job as consolation, but the fact is that an omnipotent, omniscient and philanthropic god would not justifiably subject his creation to the horrors and atrocities of life.

Ever noticed that the educated-most people are the least religious?  Hmm…seems to be a correlation.  Seems to be that the more you know, the less willing you are to eat crow.  The more you know, the more the pieces fit together.  The more you know, the more obvious it becomes.   If there is one God then we should all be worshiping Him.  If there is one God, there would not be religions, there would be one understanding.

It’s simply more comforting (as it was meant to be) to believe in a cozy, happy, peaceful after life when trying to cope with  the harsh, miserable ills of life. So  I used to say that I prefer to believe in God.  After all, ignorance is bliss.  But after awhile, with the more knowledge that is sought and gained, the more ignorance turns into denial.  Ignorance became literally ignoring my own logic in order to believe .  I could not do this.  Prayers didn’t get answered and I didn’t get mad once I realized that I am praying to myself and that the only players involved in my destiny are myself and the laws of nature.   To pray is less useful than to take action.  And in times that no actions can be taken then it’s best to understand the laws of nature.