You’re Wrong by NOFX

I’ve been meaning to post this song for some time now, but I just don’t know what’s stopped me. Perhaps it had something to do with the explicit lyrics, especially the part referring to that religious right-wing bitch, Ann Coulter who believes that people are sinful and need to be redeemed, and she’s the self-appointed redeemer.

Anyway, my disgust with self-appointed redeemers is not the reason for finally posting this marvellous NOFX song. It has more to do with our government’s pig-headed intention, in the face of overwhelming opposition, to pass the Protection of Information Bill (POIB), which would effectively give them free rein to do pretty much whatever they pleased.

It’s not like they’re not doing that already; it’s just that this ridiculous Bill would not only legitimize their constant illegal actions, it would render any information pertaining to it, hidden from public view, under the guise of state secrecy. Listen out for the words that always puts a smile on my dial: And you’re wrong if you don’t question your government

You’re Wrong

You’re wrong about virtues of Christianity
And you’re wrong if you agree with Sean Hannity
If you think that pride is about nationality, you’re wrong

You’re wrong when you imprison people turning tricks
And you’re wrong about trickle down economics
If you think that punk rock doesn’t mix with politics, you’re wrong

You’re wrong for hating queers and eating steers
If you kill for the thrill of the hunt
You’re wrong ’bout wearing fur and not hating Ann Coulter
Cause she’s a cunted cunt

You’re wrong if you celebrate Columbus Day
And You’re wrong if you think there will be a Judgement Day
If you’re a charter member of the NRA, you’re wrong

You’re wrong if you support capital punishment
And you’re wrong if you don’t question your government
If you think her reproductive rights are inconsequent, you’re wrong

You’re wrong fighting Jihad, your blind faith in God
Your religions are all flawed,
You’re wrong about drug use, when it’s not abuse
I hope you never reproduce

You’re getting high on the downlow
A victim of Cointelpro
You’re wrong and will probably never know

Great non-debates – faith and willful ignorance gets it in the teeth

I’m truly amazed at how my (religious) detractors on this blog can engage me in debate, with some of the most asinine and dogmatic ideas, and arguments that have long since been consigned to the scrap-heap. In fact many of these arguments have been flagged by pro-religious organizations like Answers in Genesis (AIG) as being debunked or outdated and recommend that they not be used.

Yet, my on-line tormentors persist in using them. I have observed that the religious latch onto the first thing they hear about or read somewhere (invariably a pseudo-scientific resource), that somehow, even in the most miniscule way, seems to confirm a particular religious belief they hold, and then they hold on for dear life. No amount of logic or reasoning will sway them. Faced with unrelenting rational discourse, they, in dogged defense, are prone to come up with even more absurd arguments or stray from the topic altogether, usually onto another bizarre tangent. Most times they never return after becoming frustrated with trying to convince me of their irrational beliefs. I really hope this failure to win someone over to the Cause, doesn’t count against them when they face the Big Cahuna in Heavensville.

Some recent examples (out of sequence) from one person in particular, but many have gone before him using the same non-arguments:

Josiah:

4. Evolution has been SCIENTIFICALLY dis-proven it has been shown by thousands of scientists, Logic, and hundreds of discoveries in archaeology.

So not including the massive amounts of evidence for God in human nature and other “non-sciences” there are all the evidence in science.
so before you attack something try to learn about.

Lenny:

4. Evolution can never be SCIENTIFICALLY dis-proven through the study of, or discoveries made in archaeology, no matter how many thousands of “scientists” try to. Archaeology is the study of “human cultures through the recovery, documentation, analysis, and interpretation of material culture and environmental data, including architecture, artifacts, biofacts, and landscapes. Archaeology aims to understand humankind through these humanistic endeavors.” [wikipaedia definition, but you can google definitions from other sources and they will tell you basically the same thing]. Evolution is the study of much more than simple humans. Not only have you got your sciences all mixed up, you obviously haven’t the slightest clue what evolution is all about. Never mind, it was to be expected. There is no evidence for god in human nature whatsoever; there is evidence for human nature in human nature. There is no evidence for a god in any science or non-science, and you can shout out loud as many times as you like that there is; it won’t change a thing.

Josiah:

…another problem with evolution is that it assumes that life can come from non-life – spontaneous generation – which is an aristotelian theory which has been exploded.

Lenny:

Evolution does not “assume that life can come from non-life.” In fact evolution does not postulate anything about the start of life; that field of study is known as abiogenesis. Evolution can be defined “a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations.” [The TalkOrigins Archive]. Evolution does not explain how life started. More proof that you know nothing about evolution.

Josiah:

4. It may not postulate anything about the origins of life, it’s basic assumption of evolution, here is the definition: “premise: a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn” spontaneous generation is assumed to be true because that is what makes the theory of evolution possible.

Lenny:

“spontaneous generation is assumed to be true because that is what makes the theory of evolution possible” No it does not!!! Anyone who understands evolution, which once again, I must repeat, you absolutley do not, would shudder to even think about such antiquated beliefs. Although I don’t like Wikipaedia definitions of anything, I’ll give you the Wiki definition anyway; you can Google other resources which will tell you basically the same thing: “Spontaneous generation or Equivocal generation is an obsolete theory regarding the origin of life from inanimate matter, which held that this process was a commonplace and everyday occurrence, as distinguished from univocal generation, or reproduction from parent(s). The theory was synthesized by Aristotle[1], who compiled and expanded the work of prior natural philosophers and the various ancient explanations of the appearance of organisms; it held sway for two millennia. It is generally accepted to have been ultimately disproven in the 19th Century by the experiments of Louis Pasteur, expanding upon the experiments of other scientists before him (such as Francesco Redi who had performed similar experiments in the 17th century). Ultimately, it was succeeded by germ theory and cell theory.”

Josiah:

…the universe is an effect and it is a scientific law that all effects must have a cause so there must be something higher than the universe, someone or something, but it is deluding yourself to believe there is no god when you wouldn’t be here without one.

Lenny:

Ah yes, that old nugget again – the infinite regress or Cosmological Argument. Call me delusional, but if all effects must have a cause, then that higher cause you speak of (god?) must also have a cause. I take it you’re expecting me to accept without question that your god is the only uncaused cause? Really?

Josiah:

No my God respects the right of people to believe what they want, why else do you think he gave them free will? it’s just that if they do not believe the truth they will have to suffer the consequences. It’s called responsibility.

Lenny [At which point Josiah failed to return]: 

You’re really not thinking things through. If god knows everything you are going to do before you do, and everything that is going to happen before you do, how is it possible for you to have free will. The omniscient property of god would mean that your will would be bent to what god already had in store for you. Don’t you think that it would be a really cruel trick for a god to play on someone. Do you understand this conundrum?

This lazy approach by the faithful to seeking knowledge, this reluctance to dig deeper, find more information, this wilful ignorance, is sometimes extremely annoying for me, but in truth, highly amusing as well. However, the things that bugs me the most is the penchant for believers to project their love-affair with faith onto both myself and the scientific community; they go to great lengths to remind us how we also rely on faith, because they have this reprehensible inability to comprehend how we can accept scientific truths without faith.

I confess though, that sometimes, in my quest to dispel the myths, slay the dragons of irrational belief, and inspire critical thought, I get carried away, and may come across as arrogant and a know-it-all. I try really hard to temper my responses; I try to be kind, but wilful ignorance always gets to me.

And thus I wrote this blog, as a warning and an apology…

Did divine intervention gun down Liverpool?

Fifty minutes into the EPL (English Premier League) match between Liverpool and Arsenal yesterday, right-back Glen Johnson must have been a pretty happy chappy with his side leading 1-0. Then came that fateful moment when he scored an own goal while trying to clear a cross from Arsenal into the goal area.

His expression immediately afterwards as he looked questioningly towards the sky, was almost exactly what I have witnessed countless number of times on players faces (religiously inclined, at any rate) when they are the cause of things going wrong in sports contests. One could translate that skyward search into many phrases, but the simplest would be “why me, what did I do to deserve this?” It could also be used as an attempt by the player to seek absolution; a gesture to the crowd as if to say “hey it’s not my fault, the big guy up there does not like us today for some reason.”

Why do even, professional sportsmen and women in the modern world, still believe that their performance is either guided or influenced by a supernatural or divine entity? Bewilderingly, common superstition also seems to have a hand in sportspeople’s on and off-field behaviour. It’s kind of hard to not notice some of the antics of the players as they get onto the field, or on the field itself. Most popular seems to be to cross oneself (signum Crucis). Picking up and throwing some grass into the air is also popular, but so is fingering some charm worn around the neck, usually cross-shaped. How about just touching the grass on the field of play? Gathering in a circle and praying openly is always charming, especially when both teams are doing it at the same time. The cynical are left wondering if they came to witness some sports action or which team can impress the big guy the most with some spectacular grovelling in a circle.

Superstitious sports persons tend to favor a certain piece of sporting equipment. It provides great fodder for the commentators who revel in telling us how lovingly that piece of equipment has been looked after. The strapping and worn-off tape keeping it together is always quite evident. These guys and gals also seem to favor items of clothing and stinky shoes which they believe brings them luck or that added edge. Or how about standing on one leg when the score gets to a certain unlucky figure? Is all of this sport? Or a comedy festival?

Has it ever occurred to sportspeople that if a divine presence were actually in existence somewhere, he or she would be too busy drumming up a tsunami somewhere else in the world, or causing a volcano to erupt violently, or derailing a train somewhere or even creating that fog that leads to a 50-car pile-up?  Do these guys think that the Divine Demolisher would have time to indulge in some insignificant sporting activity while he or she has his or her hands full trying to keep Mercury, Venus and the Earth from crashing into the sun, while at the same time hanging onto Pluto so that it doesn’t drift off into space? Where would this entity find the time to intervene in a sports match while it is busy ensuring that the vines catch the sunlight and the bees eat pollen rather than moss? Really, the arrogance of these sports types!!!

Perhaps it’s all just an elaborate ruse to get us to think that someone else is at fault when teams perform badly; someone the manager can’t readily sack from the team. Maybe they just want to draw attention away from their own piss-poor performance by making us think that the result of a game of sport is really determined by some supernatural guy-in-the-sky who has great fun making a team invincible one week and crappy another.  And that’s why the praying-in-a-circle comes in handy after a loss. Makes one want to join in with some flailing rather than wailing.

You know, as a fan of Arsenal, I’m really glad that they eventually went on to win 2-1. But I’ll be dammed if I’m told that it was because of a hand-out from the guy-in-the-sky, because the truth is they won through putting in a good peformance. The only way for a team to lose is either through a bad performance by themselves or the referee or both.

Ignorance about ignorance

I have just started reading Richard Dawkins’ The Greatest Show On Earth – The Evidence for Evolution and was discussing it (evolution) with a work colleague the other morning. He mentioned that he was not aware of the validity of evolution as his religious upbringing had steered his thinking about the concept in a negative direction.

This is nothing new. It is quite common for those with a religious bent to assert that evolution is just a theory, as if it was merely a silly proposition or conjecture. It’s not their fault that they were led into thinking so by their parents and religious instructors. I am convinced that these people usually find no need to question the authority of  elders, as it would be construed as disrespectful. Invariably there would be no need to seek out substitutes or alternatives. I mentioned to my colleague that ignorance, although regularly referred to as not being a virtue, would in this instance not be a major transgression.

Ignorance merely points to a lack of knowledge, even though most people use the word to imply something more sinister. However, wilful ignorance is another matter entirely. When one actively disengages one’s mind from searching for, or educating himself or herself about the alternatives, when a dogmatically held belief is shown to be wanting, then that constitutes wilful ignorance.

I remember my colleague responding that “new-found knowledge invariably upsets one’s lifestyle, routine, beliefs, even relationships and thus caused more problems,” when we were interrupted and I could not finish my argument. I sincerely believe that he is open-minded and willing to embrace new knowledge, so for his benefit, my response follows:

Knowledge can never be regarded as harmful by itself. There is no harm in finding things out; you are not obligated to accept what you find. What could be harmful, is the manner in which you choose to use that knowledge. You could use it for good or bad purposes. The key is to evaluate new knowledge critically before accepting or rejecting it. Any other treatment of new knowledge has more chances of causing negative changes in your life. The simple truth is that the truth is not always pretty or palatable.

Truth is good; actively seek it. Change is good; embrace it.

A nice change from the usual religious hate e-mail I get

Normally I receive religious e-mail that threatens me with all sorts of horrible punishments for not believing in god or Jesus.  Or, they are extremely condescending sales pitches for a religion, and appear disguised as motivational prose or clever anecdotes, usually accompanied by breathtaking pictures. Yes, you’ve seen them too!

The threatening and pseudo-motivational ones are invariably from Christians, even Muslims, but the e-mails from Hindu’s are revoltingly superstitious in nature and suggest that your luck will take a turn for the worse, if you either don’t do something such as pray or fast; or more absurdly, refuse to forward the mail to x-number of persons within a certain time period. For some reason I don’t receive any religious e-mails from Jews or Buddhists (to their credit); perhaps because the former are part of an exclusive club, and the latter are not really religious.

I was therefore pleasantly surprized, when I received the following piece of poetry which is clearly from a Christian source, but which does not threaten or insult my atheist status. As a matter of fact, it seems to chide Christians, but could apply equally well to persons of all religions; even atheists. ***Note: I personally don’t think it’s the best poem in the world; it’s just titled that way in the e-mail***

Best Poem in the World

                           I was shocked, confused, bewildered
                           As I entered Heaven’s door,
                          Not by the beauty of it all,
                          Nor the lights or its decor.

                         But it was the folks in Heaven
                         Who made me sputter and gasp–
                      The thieves, the liars, the sinners,
                          The alcoholics and the trash.

                     There stood the kid from seventh grade
                        Who swiped my lunch money twice.
                         Next to him was my old neighbor
                          Who never said anything nice.

                           Herb, who I always thought
                            Was rotting away in hell,
                        Was sitting pretty on cloud nine,
                            Looking incredibly well.

                        I nudged Jesus, ‘What’s the deal?
                         I would love to hear Your take.
                      How’d all these sinners get up here?
                           God must’ve made a mistake.

                          ‘And why’s everyone so quiet,
                          So sombre – give me a clue.’
                 ‘Hush, child,’ He said, ‘they’re all in shock.
                      No one thought they’d be seeing you.’

                                   JUDGE NOT.

          Remember…Just going to church doesn’t make you a Christian
             any more than standing in your garage makes you a car .

                           Every saint has a PAST….
                           Every sinner has a FUTURE!

 And, while the conclusion is “cute,” I prefer to think of myself as neither a saint nor sinner, but just a human being; and more importantly, I care not for the past nor the future, but the present, which I have control over.