The Secularization of Quebec

48hrsQuebecHave you ever thought it might be nice to move to a less religious part of the world? If so, you might have thought you’d have to go all the way to Scandinavia. Well, you’d be wrong.

Starting in the early 1960’s, the province of Quebec, Canada went through a Quiet Revolution – a revolution that’s resulted in an increasingly secular society. Link

Compared to the US, most of Canada is a relative haven for non-believers. A recent survey shows that one in four Canadians do not believe in god, but Quebec is leading the way with huge declines in church attendance. Things have gotten so bad there (or, good depending on how you look at it!) that churches are being sold to the lowest bidder.

And it appears that Quebec isn’t done sticking nails in the coffin of religion.

So, the next time you think it might be nice to get a change of scenery, think of Quebec …just make sure you brush up on your French.

September 4, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

20 Comments 

Let’s Talk About Evidence

Arguably the most common thing we atheists are heard saying is that there is no evidence for the existence of god. Just as commonly, we hear believers say that we must show evidence that god doesn’t exist (it’s at this point where you can usually hear an audible *sigh*).

Before getting into the backward logic of the latter demand, let’s look at some examples of evidence:

  1. Fingerprints and hair samples (DNA) are evidence for a person being placed at a crime scene.
  2. Fossils are evidence that extinct species of animals once existed.
  3. A photo of my wife and I kissing is evidence that we love one another.
  4. Observing the speed of different items falling (in a frictionless vacuum) is evidence that gravity has the same pull on items of different mass.

Sometimes, the evidence is convincing and easy to find. Other times, it is weak and difficult to come by (for Galileo’s gravity experiment, we need a frictionless environment). In science, when evidence is weak, we continue to push until we have more and more of it – until we have a degree of confidence that our theory is correct.

What all evidence has in common is that it demonstrates something about the physical properties of the world we live in (i.e. that everything is made of matter). Therefore, evidence must take physical form. It may be visual. It may be auditory. It may be something we can touch or measure in some physical way because, where there’s matter, there’s generally a way to measure it. The point is, evidence is more substantial that a thought that exists in our minds.

The claims of religion operate on two levels. At the macro level, we have the claim that God exists while, on the micro level, we have the claim that the Bible is true, and that Jesus existed.

What evidence do we have that supports those claims? Well, the Bible claims that there is a God. Outside of that, he seems to exist only in the minds of people since there has not, in our time, been any documented, verifiable, observable, physical proof that he’s around.

With respect to the Bible, where’s the evidence in support of its claims? I think to answer this question, it’s helpful to separate the claims into two areas:

  1. Its claims about the origins of the universe and life.
  2. Its claims about history – specifically, about Jesus’ existence.

With regard to claim #1, virtually everything we know about the origins of the universe (e.g. that it’s 14 billion years old) come into direct conflict with what’s said in the Bible (6000 years?). Most importantly, the knowledge we have is supported by copious amount of evidence. In contrast, the Bible’s evidence is that the Bible says so. A key concept used in the scientific method is this: When a theory is shown to have massive amounts of evidence that conflicts with a theory with no evidence, the latter theory is very likely implausible. This IS evidence for the non-existence of God – or, at least, for the god that is written about in the Bible. It’s also evidence that the Bible is deeply flawed. Given that, I think its prudent that we ask ourselves, “Why should we trust the Bible?”. I see no reason we should.

Aside: Even the claim that god loves us is bogus. Where, outside a thought in your brain can one find evidence for the love of an invisible man in the sky?

With regard to claim #2, again, the Bible runs up against a method similar to science. Historians test in specific ways when they evaluate claims about what happened in the past. Unfortunately, the Bible doesn’t do well when these tests are applied. Without getting too deeply into the historicity of the Bible, one of the best examples of this test is that Jesus is not mentioned anywhere in Roman records of the time. You’d think, someone of that importance would have been mentioned somewhere by the Romans – wouldn’t you?

Aside #2: I recommend reading anything by Bart Ehrman (you can also find some excellent videos of him debating believers on YouTube).

All this means that there is little if any reliable evidence showing the Bible to be worth the paper it is written on. And if this is so, what does it say about the claims about Jesus, or his father?

All this aside, the claim that we must prove the non-existence of god is ludicrous. It’s a claim that was adeptly brushed aside by Bertrand Russel when he conceptualized his “celestial teapot”:

“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.”

___

I really can’t put a finer point on it than that. Besides, it’s late and I’m tired.

August 27, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

3 Comments 

Doubting Your Faith For the Hundredth Time? Church Shopping Yet Again? It May Be Time To Think The Unthinkable.

I remember when I began to have doubts about my faith. The world – according to Christianity – just wasn’t adding up.

At first, I tackled the problem by exposing myself to more religion. I attended more church, met more church people, and read more of the Bible.

Still, nothing made sense.

“It must be my church”, I thought, and spent another couple of years church shopping.

Things didn’t get any clearer. Seeing that God’s churches could disagree on so much made things worse. The world, according to the Bible, just didn’t add up.

So, I withdrew from church life. But I wasn’t done with religion. I was still trying to make make God fit into the evil and suffering within the world. I watched hundreds of hours of video and read countless articles on (what seemed like) hundreds of websites.

Still, nothing made sense.

Finally, after many years of this heavy lifting, I asked the unthinkable…

“Maybe there isn’t a god?”

And then I read and watched for another two months before I finally read The God Delusion.

In between chapters, I supplemented The God Delusion with even more articles and videos – this time with a heavy focus on debates between believers and unbelievers.

And just like that, the world started making sense.

Thinking about the unthinkable was – UNDOUBTEDLY – the hardest thing I’ve ever done. Nevertheless, I finally arrived at an answer that really made sense. There was no god.

Why was it so hard?

First, because in addition to letting go of god, I let go of my ideas around immortality. I saw my mind/my consciousness/my soul as nothing more than what my brain did. When my brain died, I recognized that my life would end and there would be nothing more. This, after 40 years, was an excruciating loss. There was a very real mourning period.

Worse, not only had I let go of my own immortality, but I also recognized the mortality of my family. In a very short period of time, I had to come to terms with one day losing my parents – forever. Even harder, I began to imagine what losing my wife or one of my children would mean to me. I felt such fear. Such sadness.

I was preparing myself for future losses in a reality-based way that I’d never had to consider before.

The permanent loss of loved ones was the hardest idea I’d ever had to deal with – I’m still amazed I was able to accept all of it.

Can you accept the seemingly harsh reality atheism offers? Why would you want to go any further down this path? After all, compared to what the rest of your life has taught you, what I am saying is pretty damn bleak, isn’t it?

In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley suggested that comfort and happiness often come at the expense of freedom and truth.

Yes, sometimes religion is comfortable. Sometimes it will make you happy. But, if inter-mixed and underlying that shallow sense of comfort and happiness, you feel conflict between religion and reality, it may be because you are doubting the truthfulness of what you’ve been taught so far. Accepting faith may also be impinging on your mental freedom to explore the real nature of the universe.

Comfort and happiness versus freedom and truth. Is that the choice? Not necessarily.

Since becoming an atheist, I’ve become free to think deeper about the meaning of life, and I believe I’m closer to the truth of this world than I ever was when I held a belief in God.

But, to my surprise, I am also much happier and more comfortable than I ever was before. There is no more internal conflict because the world finally makes sense. I’ve also gotten past mourning my immortality and am probably better prepared than most for my death, and the death of my loved ones. In fact, I no longer dwell on death at all (except of course to share these experiences!).

And that’s why you owe it to yourself to push a little further – to think outside the box that religion has put you in. You are seeking a melding of comfort, happiness, truth and freedom.

Is today the day you finally allow yourself to think the unthinkable?

August 23, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

38 Comments 

How to Piss A (Friendly) Atheist Off

Us so-called “New Atheists” have gotten a bad rap in many circles. As our numbers have grown, one counter-attack from the religious is that we are not like the old atheists – that we are militantly against religion and are attacking liberal-minded believers who are not concerned with our atheism.

For my part, I am rarely anti-theistic. Generally, as long as you don’t try to impose your beliefs on me – or the government (e.g. educational system) – I think your religion is none of my business.

And then something like the attack on Hemant Mehta – the Friendly Atheist – happens (how militant can a guy who calls himself “friendly” be?).

Links: here , here , and here.

When the religious attack good people like Hemant – try to get him FIRED from his job for beliefs that are never brought up in his MATH class (it’d be pretty difficult to talk about atheism while discussing algebra), it pisses us off.

So, now I’m mad. A lot of atheists are mad. Hemant’s unfortunate experience has reminded us that we must be vigilant to protect our rights. We must band together. We must speak out against religious wing-nuts.

Congratulations to the Illinois Family Institute for getting more of us atheists up in arms.

August 22, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

6 Comments 

Lee Strobel – The Case for Faith

A Christian friend lent me Lee Strobel’s The Case for Faith saying he found it “pretty convincing”.

Well, it wasn’t.

At all.

I’ve got pages and pages of notes and will try to post something here when I’m done organizing my thoughts.

In the meantime, all I can say is that if The Case for Faith is an example of Strobel’s “investigative journalism”, I’m really glad I haven’t been subjected to his blatant one-sided approach to researching a topic.

Awful. Just awful.

While you wait on bated breath for my review, you may want to check out The Case Against Faith. I’m sure the site will be much more comprehensive than anything I have to say. I think I’ll go browse it now, myself.

August 19, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

6 Comments 

Proud Atheist Pappa

We took the kids for a treat tonight – dinner at Red Robins (one of their favorites).

Almost as soon as we sat down, my daughter (11 years) mentioned how someone in the family thinks they saw a ghost at the side of her bed. My response was an immediate and confident, “there’s no such thing as ghosts”.

It was a that point where my other half took a friendly jab at the fact that I “don’t believe in anything”.

“Not true”, I said. “I believe in a lot of things. I just need to see convincing evidence before I proclaim belief”.

Something about that really clicked with my daughter who immediately went into a litany of things she didn’t believe or that didn’t make sense to her. Guess what sorts of things don’t sit well with her?

- the idea that there’s an invisible man up there that created everything.

- the creation of a woman from a man’s rib.

- how Adam and Eve could have populated the entire earth.

- Noah’s Ark.

The subject of god and my beliefs hasn’t come up with my daughter since I became an atheist. In other words, I didn’t put these thoughts in her head. Truth be known, I was a bit worried about how she’d react to knowing my thoughts on religion because she spent five years in a Catholic school (it’s a long story) before I became an atheist.

IMGP2940.JPGBut, the conversation was exactly as I’d always hoped it would be – spontaneously initiated by her, at an age where she could formulate reasoned questions and answers. She was SO inquisitive and thoughtful. I also got the feeling she was really appreciative of the alternative viewpoint I had. I think she may have felt previously that her doubts about those things had no audience.

After she talked about what she didn’t believe, she asked how I thought the world was created. I was very excited to share what little I know about The Big Bang! Then, she surprised me even further by asking if we “came from apes”. “Wow! What a great day”, I thought, and proceeded to give her a quick run down on the theory of evolution.

She SOAKED it up …we connected in a way we never had before.

While all this was going on, my son (7 years) was going into great detail about how he was going to grow up to be a scientist and prove that zombies really do exist. I may have to work on that one a bit more!

August 18, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, family matters, religion

1 Comment 

Why Religious “Objective Morality” is a Bunch of Balogne

An oft made claim believers make is that, without god, there is no objective morality. Meaning, without a higher power, we are free to make up whatever morality suits us, or the societies we live in.

I call bullshit.

  1. Someone needs to explain how god’s morality can be so hopelessly confusing as to lead to thousands of religions – some of which are in such vehement opposition to one another other (e.g. Islam vs. Christianity). If god’s morality is objective, you’d think it would be easy for religions to agree on what is right, and what is wrong.
  2. Specifically with regard to Christianity, someone needs to explain why there are so many strains of that faith. How is it that a Catholic’s moral code can be so different from a Protestant’s? Why are Jehovah’s Witnesses and Fundamentalist Baptists so different from every other faith? Also, why are each of these varieties of faith so adamant that their particular brand of Christian morality is the superior one (in answering this question, Christians need to be reminded that each competing sect bases its claim on an interpretation of the same book)? Why isn’t the objective morality of the Bible easier to reconcile within Christian denominations?
  3. With respect to modern/moderate Christian thinking, why has your religion’s moral code changed so drastically over the centuries and decades? Why was it perfectly acceptable to own a slave a couple of years ago and not today? Why was it ok to severely punish (i.e. beat and/or stone to death) wives and children for their disobedience then, but not now? How can objective morality be claimed when it has, in fact, changed over the generations? Is it possible that your Christian morality is already evolving in the same manner you seem to fear it will if god were to be taken out of the equation?

Objective morality that comes down from the heavens seems pretty far from being true. From my perspective, it actually provides evidence that much of what we call morality is subject to change. Further thought on the three questions asked above leads me to think that so-called god-based objective morality is, in fact, relative morality created out of a combination of:

  1. What culture you live in.
  2. What religion you grow up in.
  3. What point in history you are alive in.

Those three points can be wrapped up nicely into one bullet:

  • There is no evidence for god-based objective morality. Rather, evidence seems to point to a high probability that religious moral codes are shaped by us.

Just how morality is developed is a much (much MUCH!) bigger topic for discussion.

August 16, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, finding meaning, religion

10 Comments 

The Emptiness of an Atheist’s Life

Ed is a Christian who’s chosen this place as one he’d like to do some converting in. Check my comments – you won’t have to look far for him. He’s trying quite valiantly to bring me and my readers to Christ.

One of the lines of thought that keeps creeping into Ed’s conversation is that his life was empty/without meaning and that he was searching for something until he came to Christ. Of course, he wants to share that – he wants me and other atheists to find Christ so that we can plug that hole in our hearts and become fulfilled.

To Ed and all you other Christians/Theists: I am not empty. I am not searching for something. I am quite happy and have no holes to fill.

In fact, it might surprise you to learn that, upon letting go of religion/god/faith/Jesus etc, I felt a great weight lift off my shoulders. I felt tremendous joy in being freed from religion. Not only that, but since de-converting, I have had an insatiable curiosity about the world, as well as an ever-increasing concern for our planet and the life on it.

Does this mean everything is perfect in my life? Of course not! But it does mean that I am a happy, contented, self-actualizing individual with a great deal of gratitude for having breath in my lungs, food on my plate and love in my life.

In other words, I am fulfilled and I’m sorry to tell you that your offer of fulfillment through Christ …offers me nothing.

And I suspect many other atheists are just like me.

April 17, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

10 Comments 

How I Will Raise Two Little Heathens

I became an atheist five years into my daughter’s education, and one year into my son’s. They both attend Catholic elementary school.

My wife has also largely abandoned religion (believes in “a greater force” but not a personal god) so we are, for the most part, on the same page with regard to religion.

But we also agree that moving the kids to a new school now is not the best idea. We don’t want to disrupt a stable educational situation, nor do we want them to have to make new friends (especially my daughter). So, we’re going to let them finish elementary school, and then we’ll transfer them to public junior high. This will work well since many of our kid’s classmates will also attend the public school due to there being very few Catholic schools in the area.

So, although not ideal, the whole thing provides a transition we can live with. In addition, I have a plan for systematically displacing religion’s impact on my children’s psyche.

Step one is to educate them about the thousands of religions and religious denominations. This will get them thinking about the very low probability that one religion is the right one (and the implication that the rest are all, to one degree or another, wrong). To that end, I’ve placed orders for this and this. I may add this to the list.

Step two is to introduce them to rational arguments against belief in god. To me, this step is very much like telling a child that Santa doesn’t exist. In fact, when I begin on step two, I’m going to intentionally draw parallels between the existence of Santa and God. Of course, there will be more explanation than that, but the Santa parallel will provide the bridge of showing how something you once believed in, can be absolutely false.

At first of course, the news will be disappointing to them (and probably a bit scary) but, when accompanied by strong reason (e.g analyzing the problem of suffering) and evidence-based thinking (e.g. no evidence), I am confident that it will become the only idea that makes sense. Of course, sharing our own beliefs will go a long way toward helping them see that non-belief is acceptable.

My daughter is ten and is figuring out that Santa doesn’t exist (she seems to be staying quiet about it – probably for the benefit of her brother). It’s definitely time to teach her. I’ll also start my son on step one and will proceed to step two when I think he’s ready. The last thing I want is for him to run off to school yelling, “there is no god” among a classroom full of believers.

My children will ultimately make up their own minds, but at least they’ll have access to all the options – all tempered with a good dose of rational thinking.

I’m going to follow up this post with another on my thoughts around the relationship between belief in God, Satan, ghosts and lots of other unproved stuff.

—
Oh, in case you wondered: definition of heathen

December 11, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, family matters, religion

7 Comments 

Three Crucial Things You Must Know Before Challenging An Atheist’s Unbelief

I propose that there are three categories of atheists:

  1. Natural Atheists: Those brought up by atheist parents who never experienced the conflict between religion and rationality.
  2. Apathetic Atheists: Those whose faith was not particularly strong and who, without a compelling drive to believe or not believe, defaulted to atheism – becoming an atheist involved very little internal debate and conflict.
  3. Dissonant Atheists: Those who grew up with belief but who were overwhelmingly torn up over the incompatibility between faith and rationality. These people sought one thing – to rid themselves of the terrible cognitive dissonance cat #1 and #2 atheists are spared from.

I’m here to talk about category #3 atheists because, well, I fall in that grouping.

Three Things You Must Know About Category #3 Atheists

  1. We Sometimes Wish Were Wrong (Even Though We Know We Are Not): I think one of the biggest mistakes theists make is to assume an atheist’s decision to ditch god was arrived at without deeply studying the issue. They honestly believe that all they have to do is raise a little awareness and, viola, they will have an easy conversion. This is not the case for cat #3 atheists. For us, becoming an atheist was the biggest decision of our lives. After all, becoming an atheist, not only means (for 99.9999% of us) getting rid of god, it also means abandoning the idea of immortality (ourselves and our loved ones) and that makes it a very, very big decision. Many of us go through a very real grieving process over all of this. With all this on the line, do you really think we’d only put a half-assed effort into our decision?
  2. We’ve Heard It All Before: I’m amazed how often – in my short, six months as an atheist – I’ve been challenged by someone who thinks they have the ultimate argument for religion. Trust me, you have nothing new to offer us on this discussion. Why am I so cocky (clue: see #1 above)? We’ve heard all your objections and questions before – probably many times before. Where have we heard them? We heard them inside our own heads during our de-conversion process. We’ve run the scenarios and questions many, many times – over and over – in our minds and, eventually, logic won out over these objections and we accepted reality. Most cat #3 atheists will have read multiple books on both sides of the argument, spend hundreds of hours on the web, and viewed countless Youtube debates (frankly, once you’ve seen Christopher Hitchens or Sam Harris demolish the likes of Dinesh D’Souza a few times, our own debates seem …rather lame). What you need to know is that by the time you come into the picture, your objections are not at all new to us.
  3. You are Projecting: What we’ve come to realize about your questions and objections (e.g. “What’s the purpose of life without God?” and “Why be moral?”) is that you’re projecting your thoughts, insecurities and fears onto us. Sure, we can answer your questions but, we know in doing so that our worldview troubles you, and that you ask those questions to help you imagine what it might be like to be an atheist. My advice is to keep on asking these good questions, but to also make sure you ask them of yourself. I think you’ll find that you can imagine there’s no heaven. You may even find that it’s easy if you try.

To be blunt, what all this means is that you have very little hope of converting a cat #3 atheist to your religion (you probably won’t have much luck with a cat #1 either). Seriously, your best chance probably lies in converting cat #2 atheists so you might want to start by asking a few questions before wasting time on the wrong category.

Now you have a better understanding of us. You also have a more specific target conversion market.

You’re welcome.

October 28, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

86 Comments 

The Chocolate On Top of Shit Argument for God

sundaeI once asked a friend if he’d like to go bowling with my family. He said, “No thanks. I hate bowling”.

I tried again. “It’s not just bowling – it’s neon bowling“.

My friend: “Mark, do you like eating shit?”.

“Uh, no”.

“If I put chocolate on some shit, do you think you’d eat it”?

I laughed and dropped the subject.

I’m weary of the chocolate-on-top-of-shit argument for god.

Even people with a belief in god see the ridiculousness of fundamentalist Christianity. A 6000 year old earth, hatred of homosexuals and the jealous, vengeful god of the Old Testament do not ring true in 21st century society.

Common sense leads moderate, liberal Christians to focus on the kinder, gentler aspects of the New Testament. Only problem is, in doing so, they conveniently leave out two important parts:

  1. If you reject the god of the New Testament, not only are you denied entry to heaven, but you are also condemned to eternal hell. Note: Eternity is a helluva long time.
  2. Jesus Christ endorsed the Old Testament. How do you resolve this little problem? If it was good enough for him, why isn’t it good enough for you?

So much for the kinder, gentler version of Christianity the moderates and liberals want us to believe their religion is about.

But, hold on – there’s more. The cherry-picking of moderates doesn’t end there. As each year passes, we get even kinder and gentler versions of Christianity where believers try to convince us that we are to pay attention to even less of the Bible (e.g. let’s try not to talk about eternal damnation part). Does Rick Warren ring a bell for anyone?

This, is what I will henceforth call the Chocolate on Top of Shit Argument for God – the idea that, if we ignore enough of the Bible, and put a coat of chocolate on top of the crap underneath, it will magically become palatable.

Attention new-age Christians: No matter how much chocolate you put on your religion, it’s still based on some pretty mean, awful torturous ideas. Ideas based on virtually no evidence. Ideas that don’t jive with hundreds of other religions (they don’t like the taste of your chocolate shit any more than you like the taste of theirs).

All this to say that I don’t care how much you tell me “Jesus loves you” – I just can’t buy it. I can’t buy a sales-pitch that has all these shortcomings and that ultimately ends with the threat of eternal damnation.

October 13, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

18 Comments 

One Atheist’s Perspective on Prayers

With the scare I had over my son becoming a diabetic, I had a number of friends say they were praying for Christopher and my family.

I know some atheists take a really hard line on anything to do with religion – including prayer (e.g. “I don’t want anyone praying for me”) whereas I’m softer on the whole thing. As a “Dawkins” atheist, I know all about the argument that there is a slippery slope between the average, well-meaning, good Christian, and wacky fundamentalists. However, I am not quite as militant about the former kind simply because I don’t think they are bad people. Incorrect, yes. Bad, no.

In fact, they mean well. They mean to help. I can’t fault them for that. I’m happy and grateful they have concern for me and my family.

If someone says, “I’m praying for you”, the translator in my head hears, “I am thinking about your family and hoping for the best”.

In my view, the only difference between them and me is that they believe there is someone “up there” listening to those prayers whereas, of course, I don’t.

Thinking about this makes me wonder … to those of you who do take a hard line, how do you reject a prayer?

July 28, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

8 Comments 

U.S. Doesn’t Have a Monopoly on Fundie/Creationist Crap

Much of the ridicule aimed at fundamentalists and creationists is directed at the US Bible Belt. I’m not from there. I’m Canadian.

And while many people are correct to say that Canada has much less of this garbage going on, there is one province that is the exception. That province is where I make my home – the province of Alberta.

Alberta is known as the most conservative province in Canada. There are good reasons for it being included in a recent variation of the United States of Canada and Jesusland map.

After all, we have our very own Big Valley Creation Museum. Yay Alberta.

dinosaurs among humans

July 7, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

Comment 

George Carlin Dies

Via The Atheist Blog comes word that George Carlin has died. Mr. Carlin was unquestionably my favorite comedian, and was an atheist who chose to spread the word through brilliantly crafted comedy.

George will be missed and remembered.

June 23, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

Comment 

Let’s Agree Not to Bother

I know, I know. Many of the people who read this think I am wrong. Terribly wrong. So wrong in fact, that some of you think I am going to hell.

You want to convince me to change my mind. You want to save me from eternal damnation.

While I appreciate your kindness (I really do), I want to tell you something: Your chances of convincing me are less than my convincing you. Yes, that’s how strong my dis-belief in god is – I know you cannot convince me to believe any more than you can convince me that my parents are goats.

Likewise, I know many of you hold the same conviction. You really believe in what you believe in. More than anything. It’s 100% wrapped up in who and what you are. I get that.

So, while there are other atheists out there who want to debate fundamentalists and evangelicals, I am not one of them. It’s just not my gig.

Now that we’ve agreed not to debate who’s right and who’s wrong, let’s figure out what we can talk about.

I want to talk to three kinds of people. First, I’m interested in connecting with other atheists. Being new at this, I’m hungry for knowledge so I want to meet people to help me with that.

Second, I want to talk to people who want to gain an understanding of atheism. They want to learn what makes atheists tick. In other words, they want to learn about non-religious world views.

And third, I am open to talking to religious people who have at least some doubt about religion. These are people experiencing the internal battle between religious faith, and rational thought. These are the people who have heard the voice of religion and want to hear the atheist perspective.

June 18, 2008 · Filed Under Atheism, religion

Comment