Look! Repackaged Arguments! By Me!

Oh where do I begin. Well first I was asked about my atheism today. By the same people at work that ask me about my atheism almost everyday. And I'm never asked anything new.

See one would hope that every time someone asks you about your belie....scratch that, non-belief, one would hope the question asked would expand on the question before. That's not too much to ask for, at least I don't think it is, wouldn't you agree? So imagine my irritability when the only thing I am asked...at least once a day... "Soooo....let me get this straight....you don't believe in the devil either?". So I answer it...again...and I wait for another question which never comes. There are three reasons, I think, for this stunning lack of curiosity; either they don't care, they don't want to argue, or they know full well that I will sit them down in the break room and meander down a linguistic corridor aimlessly and shamelessly philosophizing, over-analyzing, backtracking, qualifying, quantifying, and ultimately punching them in the head cause I spiked their coffee with a rational-rufie and I am gonna molest them with knowledge.

But then that's just it. They don't want to know. They probably don't really care they are just content with the knowledge that I am wrong, they are right, and I'll come to a different conclusion if I think about it long enough. And then I do think about it and I did this. I got asked the same question today followed by " And it's ok Miguel you just believe something different." And it hit me.
We had this argument awhile back where there were two schools of thought on this matter....
"Do atheists not believe in god or Do atheists believe there is no god."

I think we are on the losing end of the argument as long as "belief" is in our vocabulary because we are on the jungle gym of religion, playing chicken, and we are gonna get kicked in the netherballs each and every time. Why? Because you can believe whatever the hell you want; "These Crayons taste like rainbows!" Sure you could say "Because I believe they taste like rainbows!" But we know your full of shit. Even if you really believed it tasted like rainbows, it really doesn't. And the pietous know they are full of shit. They have to know. Otherwise they wouldn't say things like "Well Miguel you have your beliefs and we have ours." No. Wrong. False.
That very statement is an indictment of an inept thought process. It has taken an argument for what is more than likely true - god is not real - and dragged it down to a statment that is more than likely false - ponies can fly! - knowing full well that one is 100% less preposterous than the other.

So why do atheists get targeted the "god question" and why do we continue to answer it. Why do we get asked follow up questions like "well were did everything come from then huh huh huh Mr. Evolution pants?". Frankly I think it's time we discard arguments for evolution from our discourse because they perceive our arguments for evolution the exact same way they rely on their faith for theirs. Two competing schools of thought. One true the other fucking insane.

I think whenever the god question is asked of us, we should say "No. I will not answer your question. I have every reason not to believe in anything without sufficient evidence. You give me your reasons or "proof". You need to demonstrate why you believe in something so anciently implausible. And while you're gathering that evidence I am gonna go get guiltless oral pleasure."

This whole message is old hat. We all know this stuff. We have the same thoughts on the matter.
I just think it's hight time we start focusing exclusively on organized religion. God is, quite honestly, an easy target. A cheap shot if you will. I think getting people not to believe in god is harder that getting people not to believe in organized religion. IF we can hammer solely on the ludicrousness of religion, then and only then will the belief in god begin to fade away. OR not. This wasn't all that original I just wanted the opportunity to use netherballs in a paragraph.

The John Templeton Foundation ("supporting science -- investing in the big questions") has a great ad asking "Does science make belief in God obsolete?"

The answers are all over the place. But my favorite one is the beginning of Christopher Hitchens's answer: "No, but it should." IMHO that's the real truth!

I haven't read all the discussions. But you can find there here: http://www.templeton....
Being written by great minds, they are well-thought out, even if you disagree with some of them.

I love Michael Shermer. Only he would succumb to intellectual honesty. While other's answer
"no" or "yes" his answer to the question would be, and actually is, "it depends".

I've read pretty much every book Michael Shermer has written and I tell you he seems to have a better grasp of the science/religion dichotomy than anyone out there. So rational. So handsome. He's like the fifth Beatle to the Four Horseman. Which makes him the Batman in the Justice League of Rational Thought. No superpowers and a boomerang shaped like a mammal and yet he kicks so much ass. Superman died like a little girl. Batman had his back broken by Bain. Who's the pussy?

Superman dies? Thanks a lot asshole.

Miguel,

Would you like to speak to this at the Atheist convention in Austin when it all goes down later this year?

I remember this rant in my car going to and coming back from Austin, and I think you have it right on. Plus you just won't shut up about it...

"Don't ask me why I don't believe in your God, ask yourself why you do, and then show me the proof".

Right on brutha!

And then kick them in the "netherballs".

"I'll rochambeau you for it". Thanks Cartman.

I would love to speak in front of an audience, all eyes focused on me as my incoherent arguments spew forth like so much love from my "bad place". I'd have to write it down though and have Matt read over it to make sure that a) It makes some sort of sense, and b) I don't ruin any more gratuitous attempts at inflating comic book demand.

I haven't said it in a long time but here it is: "A Nobel Prize in Literature for Miguel" A genius among us who fails at nothing (except snowboarding)

I know I stayed on the baby slope. I look forward to a bigger slope next time.
-------------------------------------------
I told the science teacher that had been excited about there being a cross at the center of every galaxy about accretion disks and polar jets being responsible for creating that Jesus on a cross illusion and it seemed as if a little bit of magic was taken away from her life.

This same teacher had made the comment once that she does not push her religion on others. That others had to find their way on their own initiative and time. It seems like she was saying she was right and that people had to eventually discover how right she is in her religious beliefs. We need to say that eventually people will find their way and leave religion in their own time without pressure or coercion from us.
---------------------------------------------
I don't like feeling like my brain is full of holes.
goodnight.

I don't get asked about my atheism anymore at school. It is starting to feel normal at school. Once I was reading a book titled "Atheism: A short introduction". A teachers aide came up to me and asked "What are you doing? Brushing up on your Atheism?" I looked at her with a combination sinister/sincere smile because I did think it was an amusing idea. She was all smiles. I work with perverse people.

Chris Hedges who wrote Amercian Fascists has written a new book titled "I don't believe in Atheists". It is about Atheistic "Fundamentalism". Apparently we are making an idol of reason. Its a sin he wrote. I suppose according to him he is being balanced by doing christian fundamentalists in one book and now saying the same for atheists.

Well apparently I am now failing pretty bad at chess as well, but thanks anyway.