However, I have to say that I am so very tired of having other people’s religious beliefs shoved in my face. I do not behave in that manner about my agnostic view and think it arrogant for Christians to think I care about their belief system.

For example, I wonder what Christians would think if Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris got on television on a continual basis to make emotional pleas for money to finance the spread of their atheism?

As for those Christians who gather outside concerts to pass out tracts to get me saved, I wonder what they would think if I stood outside their churches and pass out literature on atheism to those leaving the building?

The other day I was driving in my car past a very crowded intersection when I noticed a group of young people with signs. Since it caught my attention, I looked closer and noticed the signs had pictures of mutilated foetuses – and me on the way to lunch.

One sign said, “Honk if you believe in life.” That sign caused me to wonder what those same people would think if I gathered a group and stood on that corner with signs depicting rape and poverty and signs saying, “Honk if you believe in choice.”

I get flyers in the mail every week inviting me to this church or that religious event and I have never once crossed the doors of a local place of worship, so I did not unwittingly put my name on any mailing list.

These flyers assume I am discontent with life and miserable because I am not a Christian. The truth of the matter is that I used to be a Christian and I am exponentially happier now than I ever was inside the confines of religion.

However, the question at hand is what these flier-sending people would think if I sent agnostic fliers to their homes on the presumption of their misery because they are Christians. After all, I was unhappy as a Christian, so they probably are too, right? This is the logic they use in reverse when sending out fliers to get me saved.

I do not want to be saved. In fact, I feel as if I am already saved – saved from Christianity and Christians. I am free at last.

- Stellar1

This debate carries the weight of validation for an entire segment of people. It is not as if they require the validation of society to exist, for they will exist regardless. However, if and when society finally accepts them, those who are homosexuals will finally be able to life their lives to the fullest without fear of reprisal for being who they are.

Let’s face it, society has at various points in recent history sought to restrain or rid itself of varying segments of the population that it feared would change the status quo. These offensive segments typically reflected factors such as race, gender, intellectual capability, financial status, physical health, mental health and political ideologies. This list could go on forever.

Sexual preference continues to be at the forefront of the “get rid of them because they are different” battle simply because there are so few who wish to accept the fact that a person’s sexuality is as ingrained as a person’s race or gender.

However, even if – for the sake of argument – homosexuals choose to have same sex relationships, society has no right to stand in their way. If society affords a person the right to choose what house to buy, what car to drive and what clothes to wear, then surely people should also have the right to choose the gender with whom they want to have sex.

Moreover, we all know very well that a heterosexual person can choose whom to have sex with. A heterosexual can choose to have sex with several separate people in one day if she/he so chooses and society will have nary a word to say in resistance so long as that person is being responsible by practicing safe sex.

So why must those who practice safe homosexual sex be constantly chided by society for their lifestyle? Do they not have the same right to have sex with whomever they want as the heterosexual? Oh, I know that many of those who fight against the homosexual lifestyle are religious and use their holy books to make this segment of humans feel like social outcasts.

For example, the Bible says in Leviticus 18:22 that it is an abomination for a man to lie with another man as with a woman. If a Christian wants to accept this as law, so be it, but give some thought to this. A few verses later Leviticus 19:19, the Bible also says “Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.” I need not say how many people wear clothes of varying material nowadays.

Likewise, in Exodus 35:2, the Bible says, “For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death.”

Why do I not see the letter pages of the newspapers marking a movement against working on the Sabbath? Obviously, this is so offensive to God that death is mandated for anyone who does not observe the Sabbath.

In Exodus 21:7 a man can sell his daughter. Does that mean the Bible condones the trafficking of humans? In Deuteronomy 22:9 we are informed that a crop will be defiled if two different kids of seeds are planted in the same field. Defiled? Should we be eating defiled food?

The reality is many of these ancient customs are no longer practiced. In addition, even if a Christian wanted to insist that the New Testament is the guideline for contemporary living, this thinking gives luminosity to the hypocrisy used when singling out the homosexual lifestyle.

For example, the scripture used by Christians to treat homosexuals so badly in the 21st century is 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. It says, “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

It seems to me that if Christians are going to be so publicly adamant about the homosexual lifestyle being wrong, there should also be a public outcry against all who are sexually immoral (having sex outside of marriage), adulterers, male prostitution (I guess female prostitution is okay), thieves, the greedy, drunkards (no beer?), slanderers and swindlers.

I guess that just about covers us all.

Jesus said that the person without sin should cast the first stone (I carefully lay my stone down and walk away). Who among those letter writers does not fall into one of the categories listed with “homosexual offenders”? If you have been guilty of any of the sins listed, then put your stone down and walk away.

I have a great idea. Why don’t we focus on the adulterers for a while since adultery has a direct impact on families? Or we could focus on thievery since crime is a constant nuisance to us all.

In short, homosexuality is no worse a sin (according to the Bible, not to me) than adultery or stealing, so why the war against this segment of the population? Since Christians just let the adulterers live their lives without such direct interference, homosexuals should be allowed to choose their own lifestyle as well.

Don’t worry though, I’m sure as soon as the homosexuals want to know the Christian’s opinion on how they should live their lives, they will ask. (Not!)

- Stellar1

Reference: Bible Literalism ala The West Wing

In South Korea there are many people who believe if an electric fan is left running in a closed room it will suck away all of the oxygen in the air and suffocate those in the room or that the fan slows the person’s metabolism so much that she or he dies from hypothermia. This urban legend is so strong that every electric fan in South Korea is sold with timer switch to shut it off after the person has fallen asleep.

Urban legends are funny things because this phenomenon shows how the human mind is often willing to believe something completely outrageous even in the face of fact and logic.

When the people of South Korea were told that no one outside of their country believed in death by fan, there were excuses given as to why this trend affects only the South Korean physiology. Sometimes people will believe what they want to believe regardless the validity of the facts staring them in the face.

For example, as rational and reasonable as I believe myself to be, I once believed God created humans 6,000 years ago and placed them in a garden where a talking snake, with legs, convinced Eve to disobey God. As a result, God cursed the snake to slither on the ground, eat dust, and also cursed Eve with pain in childbirth and servitude to her husband.

I once believed Methuselah lived to be 969 years old and that the average age of the antediluvian patriarchs was 912 years. This does not include Enoch who was taken up to heaven without dying at age 365.

I once believed God instructed Noah to build an ark to house two of each of the millions of land species and then proceeded to flood the earth, killing the millions of people and animals who were alive at that time. This event also resulted in God creating the rainbow as a sign of his promise to never again flood the earth.

I once believed God was threatened by humanity’s ability to build a tower to the heavens so he confused their language. Up to that that point, all of humanity spoke a common language, and because of this event we now have different languages.

I once believe that God caused the sun to stand still for a full day in order for Joshua to kill more of the enemies of Israel. Does this mean the earth stopped spinning for a day?

I once believed that Jonah spent three days in the belly of a big fish because he disobeyed God. This big fish then vomited the undigested Jonah out and he proceeded to preach the word of God.

However, in the face of believing these and other Bible stories, I still found urban legends like elves in Iceland and killer fans in South Korea to be too fantastical for my rational mind.

- StellaSays

Do we blame the men who hold to these views? Yes, of course. However, the truth is that they are only acting on what they have been socialised to consider acceptable since there are aspects of society which continues to promote the second-class position of women.

Should we blame hip-hop music, which objectifies women? Last week I heard a radio interview with a Georgetown University Professor and author, Michael Eric Dyson, who spoke on this subject. Dyson maintained that hip hop has been extremely seductive in that it promotes the idea that the only place for women, especially black women, in the political economy of sex globally is as a hoochie mama and a slut whose “role is to service the masculine, especially the heterosexual male crotch.”

Hip-hop has certainly colluded with the mentality of female objectification – much like beauty pageants, pornography and girls gone wild videos. However, this music is only a couple decades old and we all know that misogyny has been around for thousands of years.

Perhaps we should blame the legislators for not going to greater lengths to ensure women have equal rights. Certainly all of these factors play a role in the perception of women today.

However, all of these factors such as sexist hip-hop lyrics and videos, pornography, lack of proper legislation to ensure women enjoy the same rights and privileges of their male counterparts, are no more than symptoms of the larger malady that has a very strong hold in so many nations today.

Obviously, there is a greater work in play here that must be recognised for its part in misogynistic socialisation. I have known the answer for quite some time and it seems others are seeing the light as well. The author I mentioned before from an interview last week went on to talk about what he sees as the primary promoter of sexism.

Dyson said he has suggested to

“the Reverends Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton instead of in the aftermath of Imus protesting record companies, how about smashing the sermons of some of those preachers who stand up in church on Sunday mornings in Black America, 75 – 80 percent of those churches are attended by black women, the minister is not calling them the b-word or the h or a skeezer or slut, but he is reinforcing a gospel that subordinates them to the interest of men and therefore he is much more seductive, he’s got a bigger pulpit, he’s got a bigger platform, and he’s got god on his side. Snoop Dog never claimed to be Jesus in rap form, but many of the ministers claim to be god’s representatives on earth and the message from the minister is god wants you to be a second class citizen because men should run stuff.”

Amen!

I know there are times when religion helps people. For example, I have a very good friend who is going through a nasty divorce and is relying on strength from her god more than at any other time in her life to get through this difficult time. I do not discourage her faith because there have been times when I have needed a higher power in my life too.

I would rather see her stand on her own two feet and realise she has the strength to get through this on her own, but she hasn’t the resolve at this point in her life. So she turns to religion and finds comfort and strength in her faith.

What she does not realise is it is that same religion that gave her husband the right to think he could do anything he wanted to do regardless of her feelings or his responsibilities. In short, this religion to which she now clings is actually the very instigator of her problems.

Her husband maintains that men work, that’s what they do and justifies his excessive travel away from the family, which leaves all of the house duties and child rearing to the woman. If this is what the husband wants, religion teaches that it is acceptable and if the wife protests then she should be taken in hand.

The wife is reduced to nothing more than a slave, and she had better be a submissive slave or she will pay for her rebellion. God forbid that she protest anything, which is what my friend did and now finds herself in a divorce – something she never dreamed would happen to her.

The fact is that women are just as capable of working outside of the home and there are many who would rather have a career than to clean, cook and care for others their whole life. At this transitional point in history, far too many women do both – careers and home – with little help or support from their husbands.

As long as women are subordinated to the interests of men by the same higher power to whom they run for strength to deal with the intolerable situation created by that higher power, they will never find an end to their suffering. This is a never-ending circle of sexism.

It is time for women to realise they have the strength to rise above the sexist socialisation that is instilled in us from the cradle and incessantly reinforced via multiple conduits all around us for our entire lives. Could it be that this is where blame should be laid for subjection of women – at the doors of our places of worship?

- Stellar1

A Purity Ball has all the ingredients of any nicely prepared formal ball. There are flowing gowns and black tuxes, practiced dancing to lively music and white candles sparkling throughout the ballroom. This is all very lovely.

Those attending a Purity Ball are young women with their fathers as their dates, and as they swirl about on the dance floor, it is no doubt a sight that would warm even the coldest of hearts. At first glance, it would appear that this event is simply an opportunity for dads to have some quality time with their little girls and perhaps get to know them a little better.

However, it is what happens toward the end of the event that causes me to lose that warm fuzzy feeling. At a predetermined time, each one of the girls reads to her father from a printed card that was placed on the table in front of her seat, at which time she promises her father, before God, that she will remain pure by abstaining from sex until she is married. The ages of these girls range from as young as 11 all the way into their twenties.

I have no problem with teaching abstinence to our children as a way to avert them from the pressures and dangers of a sexually active life until they are ready to assume the responsibilities that accompany such a weighty decision.

However, practically speaking, we all know that young men and women will explore those feelings and urges developing at an alarming rate during puberty. It is a natural and biologically driven desire that pushes teens to want to see what their quickly developing bodies can do.

Case in point, 88 percent of those who pledge abstinence at these Purity Balls wind up breaking their pledge and having sex before marriage, according to a study by Peter Bearman, the Chair of Columbia University’s Department of Sociology, and Hannah Bruckner of Yale.

I too have quite a few issues with these Purity Balls. Firstly, why are there no such balls for the boys? It is so hypocritical and highly unrealistic to expect the young women to remain chaste if the young men are not expected to do the same. This is a perfect example of the double standard set by society for women.

Secondly, this pledge of purity further perpetuates an unhealthy relationship between parents and children concerning sex. When a young woman takes this oath of purity, but changes her mind and decides to have sex, she will feel completely reticent about speaking to her parents about her decision.

Thirdly, while young men are seldom taught sexual restraint during their formative years, young women are taught to feel guilty for their sexual explorations. A broken promise to their father adds additional guilt to a natural experience. Meanwhile, neither the girls nor the guys are being taught how to act responsibly with their sexuality.

Lastly, it seems to me that these Purity Balls, where the girl pledges her purity to her father until she is married and belongs to another man, are simply a contemporary nod to the old patriarchal system that encourages the ideology that men are somehow the ones who decide what is best for a woman.

This sends the wrong message to our daughters when we are trying to teach them to be independent, freethinkers who thrive in today’s world and who can get along fine with or without a man by her side. Every woman should be the master of her own body and the decision about whether to have sex or not should be hers alone – hopefully after her parents have educated her on the weight of such a decision and responsible sexual conduct.

Let’s talk about reality for a minute and leave aside our archaic notions of pre-marital sexual activity as outlined in the Bible. In reality, every single day thousands of teenage girls (and boys) are having sex. To expect an oath of abstinence until marriage from a young woman is as unreasonable as expecting it from a young man.

However, it is not the sexually active young man who gets tagged with unflattering labels. This is another social double standard. With whom do right-thinking parents think these young men are having sex? They are having sex with the young women, of course. The sooner we realise that our teens are having sex, and lots of it, the soon we can start acting like conscientious parents.

As such, would it not be more practical to teach these youngsters about responsible sexual conduct instead of placing unreasonable expectations on them that create feelings of failure and guilt about an action that is biologically natural?

Would it not be socially proper to create an atmosphere at home that is open for teens to talk to their parents about their sexuality instead of leaving their children to explore such an important part of their life as a trial and error experience?

We can be such prudes sometimes with our own sexuality that we shy away from the important task of educating our teens about sex. In the meantime, they are learning about it on the street – the worst place ever. The street does not teach our girls about sexually contracted diseases, what steps to take to prevent pregnancy or how to fend off an unwanted sexual advance.

We do not need a new trend that unrealistically insists on purity until marriage, we need to live in reality and teach our daughters – and our sons – about responsible sexual conduct. If we keep our heads in the clouds and believe teens will remain pure until they are married, we do them and society a terrible injustice.

- Stellar1

In fact, although we very seldom have this choice, I would rather choose leaders without any religious affiliation. Just look at what George Bush has done to the world with his brand of Christianity. Look at what Osama bin Laden has done with his version of Islam.

There are some who believe religion could help rid the world of its moral ills. However, I cannot help but wonder if religion is not what helped to usher in these moral ills in the first place.

I grew up in a very conservative Christian home in Middle America. The church I attended was so strict that women were not allowed to wear pants, makeup or jewelery. Those in my church were not allowed to go to the movies, drink any type of alcohol or dance to music. As I said, it was a very strict church.

The fear of hell was preached from the pulpit should I stray from living “right.” Of course, anyone who rejected this very narrow way of thinking would never make it to paradise. This is quite a guilt trip to put on a young woman growing up in a big city.

As the years passed, I moved further and further away from that conservative stance and that framework of morality, which was near to impossible for any human to maintain. I do not know that I ever truly believed this staunch dogma in the first place, but it was imposed on me from infancy so it was all I knew for decades.

Even as I came to the end of my religious journey because my mind rejected the logic of the existence of a god, I feared whether my moral compass would fail because I was always taught that my religion defined my morality. My fears were seriously misplaced. After stepping outside of religion, I took on far more responsibility for my actions.

Outside of the context of religion, I could not lie, cheat or steal and think that some god would forgive the deed and thus make my sin not really count. I could no longer wait for some unseen hand to supernaturally feed the poor or to help the weak.

Moreover, I could not sit idle when I see others do evil because I no longer believed they would get their due in the next life or burn in hell. If anything, my religious upbringing held me back from being a truly moral person.

I am a far more moral human today than at any point in my life when I practiced religion. As such, I do not see a decline in religious practice as the cause of a moral decline in society.

On the contrary, as I have said before, even religious people do immoral things. I have spent so much time around very religious people that I have seen them use their theology as a way to justify their evil deeds – much like how George Bush justifies his war on Iraq.

If not justification, then humans can use their religion to dismiss their immoral actions by simply asking for forgiveness or paying penance. Moreover, even apathy concerning universal issues like global warming, AIDS in Africa and genocide in Darfur can be excused by a religious person if she/he believes that an all-powerful god will one day intervene.

Although fear of hell or desire of paradise might turn an immoral person around for a short period of time, fear and desire are fleeting emotions and not proven to be a long-term remedy for morality. Therefore, I do not believe the religious state of the world has anything whatsoever to do with the mankind’s dilemmas.

Our dilemmas are human problems that can and should be handled through human intervention. I believe with everything inside me that if humans were not so distracted by things such as religion, racism, sexism, petty rivalries and power struggles that we would be capable of accomplishing miracles.

We could feed every mouth, cure every disease and rid the world of war. I believe we could end racism. I believe we could end sexism. I believe every child could receive an adequate education. I also believe we are capable of instituting a moral system outside of the framework of religion.

I believe that if humans were capable of ridding themselves of its many distractions, they could do more good than any religion humans have ever created.

- Stellar1

Related Posts:

Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior

I thought I would share what finally broke me entirely from Christianity. I was reading a book entitled, “When god was a woman,” by Merlin Stone in which the author assembles some very strong evidence to show that early humans in the near and middle east worshiped female deities, lived in matriarchal societies and used a matrilineal line for determining family descendency and inheritance.

That in itself is very interesting. However, I then found out that the northern patriarchal tribes invaded these lands they brutally wiped out all goddess worship and replaced it with their warrior god. Thus, the beginnings of Judaism.

In fact, when you read in the Old Testament about the many cities destroyed by the Israelites at the behest of their god, those cities often worshipped female deities. The Israelites were supposedly told to kill everyone in the city as they conquered the lands because they worshiped pagan gods.

The truth, however, is that these were the goddesses who were worshipped in the near and middle east for thousands of years – longer than christianity has been around today, according to the author of this book.

I struggled my entire life to be this good christian woman who submitted to her husband, but I just was not that type of person. I am a born leader and believe in equality between genders. So you can imagine how out of place I was in traditional conservative Christianity.

When I discovered that at one time there was a religion that supported my feelings, I found it quite enlightening. I was also very ticked off that I was never allowed to have a female deity to worship if I chose to do so. But more than anything, it was when I realized that long before the god of Christianity existed, there were hundreds – maybe thousands – of other gods that I realized religion was all myth and no substance.

This book might help others find the courage to finally cut that final thread that holds them to their religious upbringing. After all, when you are taught from the cradle to believe in something that you can’t see – it is very difficult to leave it all behind.

-Stellar1

I am in a new place now. I am in complete peace that when I die that is it. My life is over and nothing will happen afterwards. My new outlook prompts me to make the most of my life while I still breathe. This is a wonderful way to live.

Now I know the christians will come around and send me to hell, but the truth of the matter is that I do not believe hell exists so that game of fear no longer works on me. Sorry. - Stellar1

So from a young age I rejected the social values set for me concerning traditional feminine roles. I wouldn’t accept that I was any less intelligent or capable than the males around me. It just simply was not part of my make up. I didn’t even entertain those ideas long enough to let them flourish. Instead, I would get upset each time an outward manifestation of these expectations was displayed. It would infuriate me when I was put down so that a male could be honored – simply because he was a male and I was not.

During these times though, I never really made a big stink about my feelings. I had other things to deal with in life – as do most urban dwelling children. However, as I matured and began thinking for myself, it was obvious to me that I could never be the type of woman who would follow these traditional feminine roles. In the spirit of truthfulness though, it would be dishonest of me to not mention my many attempts to comply with Christian thought and practice. Nevertheless, each attempt left me more miserable than the one before since I could not intellectually accept my assumed role as a woman.

As I allowed my independence to bloom, I discovered there is so much beauty that comes from being a woman whose completion comes from a well-rounded life. It’s time to reject the traditional roles we watched our mothers perform so obediently. It’s time to be our own woman with our own dreams and pursuits in life. It’s time to relax and enjoy our time with our partners without all the pressure and despair of a relationship built on archaic Biblical text that requires women to be subjected to men. Independence and solid relationships are not mutually exclusive terms. In fact, they have proven to make quite a dynamic combination.

Ladies, we are beautiful in our independence and that beauty is multiplied when we share our independence with those around us. My de-conversion journey has helped me to see this even more clearly.

- Stellar1

Last week a lone shooter chained the doors of the Science and Engineering building at Virginia Tech and went from classroom to classroom killing every person he could. One doctor said there was not one surviving patient who did not have at least three shot wounds – this young man meant to kill everybody.

In light of this incident and other such brutal attacks, some of which are done in the name of religion, I cannot help but wonder about what can possibly happen to a person in life to create such killers. Or to put it more precisely, why are our young men turning into mass murderers?

Here is what Actor Chuck Norris said in a WorldNetDaily exclusive commentary:

If we are ever to restore civility in our land and our schools, we must turn back the clocks to a time when such shocking crimes didn’t even exist – when we valued life and respected one another much more then we do today. We must use the Bible (humanity’s blueprint for life and ”bluebook” for value) to retrain our youth about theirs and others’ value as children of God, made in His image. [sic]

How can a Bible that promotes genocide and violence by God himself help this situation? The God of the Bible condoned mass murder and even ordered vengeful violence on more than one occasion. I believe society would do better to find the answers outside of religion.

Although I never allowed violent video games or music in my home, I know there is plenty of this offensive material out there. In fact, one story that is not being told by the media is that the VT shooter loved to play one of the more violent computer games produced by Microsoft.

The computer game in question, which I will not name because it does not deserve to be mentioned, allows the player to shoot the images of people with several different types of guns. There is no way that this obviously unstable young man did not pick up a thing or two from Microsoft’s computer “game.”

Recently, radio shock jock Don Imus was fired for his racist and sexist statements. Yet every day our children are exposed to music – as well as religious teachings – that are so full of hate that it would even make Imus’ statement seem mild. Is it any wonder that society is producing murderers?

The next course of action – after such a brutal attack on a college campus – is for the officials at VT (and all other universities) to find ways to protect the students from another such attack. However, anyone who has ever been on a college campus knows it is near to impossible to ensure complete safety and still function normally.

Perhaps a better method of protection would be to eliminate the influences that encourage these types of attacks in the first place. The debate at hand should not be about gun control, security measures or what could have been done different. The solution is not to turn to an archaic book that promotes violence.

The necessary debate should be about the fact that modern society – heavily laden with violent scenes on the television, hate-filled lyrics in the music and video games that sear the tender consciences of our youth – is producing murderers.

If we want to protect ourselves from these killers, then it is upon us as parents and leaders of the community to protect the minds of these young men (I say young men because I cannot recall any women committing these acts) from the elements of society that feed hatred and murder.

We cannot expect our children to fill their minds with hate, violence and murder all day via the television, music and video games and then expect them to grow up to be well-balanced individuals who are ready to contribute positively to society. If we raise violent children, we will eventually live with violent adults.

It is time we took responsibility for allowing violence to permeate the lives of our children and start fighting back against this hateful culture that has overtaken society in the last few decades by eliminating these influences – including violent religious texts. Otherwise, we can only expect to see more massacres, more death and more violence.

It is time to let our children be young and innocent again.

- Stellar1