Problem Solved

Amrerica is facing a wide range of issues at the moment. Perhaps not more issues than at any time before, but it certainly seems like it thanks to the 24 hour news cycle. In no particular order we're facing the Fiscal Cliff, Gun Control, the Debt Ceiling, Unemployment, Medicare solvency, Tax Reform, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Judiciary Appointments, so on and so forth. Washington, or at least the people we send there, are unable or unwilling to actually solve any of these issues.

There exists a wide variety of why inaction is better than action on the part of our elected officials. Some stand to personally profit from circumstances they create. Many are effectively pressured by groups that lobby for certain industries or interests. Some are seeking to fulfill personal vendettas, I'm looking at you John McCain. Many claim to be answering to the will of the American people. I suspect if that were true Congress would have higher than an 11% approval rating. What is really happening here is easy to fix, but sadly would rely on those people who are the problem to fix it.

There once was a time when we the people would elect representatives who would go to Washington and they would vote on stuff we didn't care to pay attention to and then in a few years they would come back to us, lie about what they had done and we would elect them again, or not. Now though, the campaign season begins as soon as the previous election is over. As we speak, buzz exists of the 2016 race between Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton, a month before the inaguaration of Obama's 2^nd term. Every action, every vote, is part of the effort to get reelected because we do not have term limits for Congress. This means that opposition to the other side is a feat in and of itself, no matter what you're opposing.

Take the case of taxes. Both sides openly agree about extending the Bush tax cuts for 98% of Americans. One side says 98%, the other 100%. In a rational world, the 100% side would take 98% of what they want and would then fight for that last 2% if they really thought it was important. Compromise in any other context is not a fight over one side getting 98% of what it wants comparted to 100%. But, we live in an era of opposition politics, not compromise.

Gun contraol is similarly and needlessly confused. Even 75% of NRA members believe that if you're on the Terrorist Watch List, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. More than 60% of them believe that limitations on assault rifles and high capacity magazines are reasonable. But, in a case where both side can reach many points of agreement, one side is saying things like "We need more guns in schools, not less!" because it panders to the opposition.

The Fiscal Cliff and Debt Ceiling are classic examples of opposition until the last possible second on ideas that both side clearly agree on. The Cliff will be dealt with. The Ceiling will be raised. Before that happens there will be weeks of public speeches and whining and whimpering and rumors and implication because that is the process now.

If we want to solve all these problems and all those that will come in the future we need leadership that is concerned only with doing the right thing for the people that sent them to do that thing. We need severe term limits on Congress and the Senate. Senators serve for 6 years per term now. Being a Senator brings a lot of power and perks and frankly, it is time to flush the entire system that allows people to serve 50 years in that legislative body. One term. One six-year term. Senators have too much power to be allowed to use it for reelection. For the House, two 2-year terms, then you're out.

I believe that if we remove the need for constant grandstanding, obstruction, manipulation and pandering, we can accomplish quite a lot more. Our founders expected terms of service from our representatives that would be temporary. They were quite correct on that point. Limited terms are the first step toward a broader solution to the issues at hand.

Peace Revisited

Not terribly long ago I started a post about the conflict between Israel and Palestine. It was a serious mess. Posting about such a complex issue is impossible to do casually without exceptional mistakes being made. So, here I go again. But I think I have a point to make that I so rarely see expressed elsewhere.

All too often I see the conflict being traced back to the roots of the state of Israel and even beyond. As though there will be some original document or claim that will bring peace to an area that has known conflict for thousands of years. No such silver bullet will be found in the past. There may be one found in the present, but it will take moral courage and honesty that I seriously believe the people involved are unable to express. Also, we should agree on some points up front.

1: Neither side is innocent. This is a war. A slow, long-term war where each side uses the weapons it has. Just because one side has a more organized military does not mean its actions are not equally as reprehensible as the side that does not. Mutual guilt.

2: Neither side can remain true to being a religion of peace by violently cleansing the other from it's "Holy Land".

3: Neither side will accept the claims of the other on the area as a whole.

4: The international community in general desires peace between the two countries.

5: In the end, yes, they are two countries.

I contend that it doesn't matter now who started the conflict. Peace will only be achieved through non-violence. The first side willing to stop will be the side that wins public support and will be granted the security that each side claims they want. All eyes are on the middle east. As we saw today, most of the world supports Palestine in their bid for statehood.

If there were a massive, non-violent movement of civil disobedience, like the civil rights movement of America's 1960s, Israel would have to fold to pressure from around the world, even U.S. pressure. The challenge as I see it is that the radical elements of each force will not put down their arms and seek peace.

Ah well. What are you to make of the holiest land on Earth, where bloodshed is a daily occurrence.

Lines in the Sand

Well, thanks to the unparallelled brilliance of the Bush administration, the doctrine of preemptive war has been unleashed on the world. That's right. The logic goes: We better start a war or else there might be a war.

I know a ridiculous number of 'Merica-loving rednecks thought that was an awesome idea; as did those who would profit from endless war as part of the military-industrial complex. Today though, I really came to realize the dangers of making war-to-prevent-war a worldwide norm.

The US is actively involved in drone strikes against terrorists cells in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Think about that for a minute. US aircraft are actively committing lethal attacks in sovereign nations that we are not at war with. In the case of 3 US citizens in Yemen, drones were used to kill them without due process for what they said, not did. The war on terror apparently trumps international law and our own Constitution as well.

But a further danger arises. How can we now tell another nation that it cannot invade another country, or cannot establish a no-fly zone, or perform ground attack missions against whomever they want? In 2008 we saw the conflict of this when Russia performed an incursion into Georgia to combat what they called terrorism. The US objected, but with what right?

Now that Israel is demanding, yes demanding, that the US plan to attack Iran, we see the logical conclusion of our own irresponsibility. President Obama has said that the US will not attack Iran, or assist Israel in an attack, without a clear danger to US interests. Israel has continued saber-rattling and now says that the US has no right to prevent or discourage an Israeli attack on Iran. And you know, they have a point. We introduced the concept. We're still using it to justify our own attacks. How can we tell somebody else to stop?

There is one thing to be examined though: I am not a fan of Israel. I believe that a state built on religious segregation is, in and of itself, a bad thing. I do understand the "need" for it, as it were though. So, like it or not, Israel has the right to exist. Through formidable military strength, Israel has claimed it's spot among a landscape of countries that want it destroyed. However, it has always been on the defensive. Defending itself has been part of its moral justification for existence.

We are seeing the transition from clear defense to offense-as-defense and that makes the moral high ground less clear. I believe that in the long term Israel will be putting itself at more risk if it can be seen as the aggressor. Just as the US did not have a coalition for the invasion of Iraq, Israel will alienate itself from the allies it traditionally had. It is not a wise course of action.

Peace is not accomplished through killing the other guy first.

Entitlement Culture

I read the news of the consulate attacks in Benghazi and immediately felt a low-key outrage, if such a thing exists. I felt a superior frustration with the ignorance that would motivate such an act against people who are innocent of causing offense.

What we seem to know is that a guy in California made some YouTube video that was offensive to Muslims. In retaliation, Libyan hardliners attacked the US consulate and killed or injured a number of people who were definitely not YouTubers from California. My initial thought was: What a short memory they have. Didn't the U.S. and many countries in Europe just drop millions of dollars to topple their oppressive regime and assist in their happy little rebellion?

But, I stopped myself from getting all too high and mighty. What if these "activists" have a good point? What if we evil Americans are really doing long-term psychological damage to them by drawing cartoons or mocking their pedophile prophet? I bet you Allah's ability to smite the wicked is diminished every time I snicker at a funny post on r/atheism.

I don't have a problem with people taking offense. I'm offended by things all the time. People have that right. What you don't have is the right to rectify your offense through violence. That is not something you are entitled to, no matter what your sheep-herder-written book might say.

We are not, none of us, as entitled as we think we are. People will do things that we don't like. When we don't differentiate between those things that offend us and those things that actually harm us, we are making the world a less-safe place. Don't expect me to have respect for your "religion of peace" when you're acting like the bronze-age tribesmen you idolize.

Bad Medicine

So I've been watching the GOP convention...if watching is the appropriate term for it. It's all I can do to sit through speeches full of lies and CNN's coverage that is devoid of any fact checking. I look at the faces, almost all white, on the convention floor and I see the same glassy-eyed devotion to a lie that I see in churches. It got me really thinking about what it is that bothers me so much about "them".

It's the disingenuous facade of it all. It's people voting against their own financial interests just to oust the black guy from office. It's people cheering policies that make us less safe so they can feel more safe. It's the false choice offered every year between D and R. It's the same reason I dislike the "faithful" who are no different from me in their flaws, faults and follies and yet hold themselves up on a pedestal of smoke and mirrors.

Honesty is the most important quality I can seek in a person. Honesty to others and honesty to yourself. It's why I dislike almost all politicians. It's why I'm so disappointed in the religious. It's why those who can't even be honest with themselves garner my disdain.

I would have a much higher respect for the GOP if their convention were all about making corporations stronger, making it harder for minorities to vote, lowering Mitt's taxes, endless war and the inevitable black-lung we will all die from once pollution regulations are eliminated. I mean, I wouldn't vote for them, but I could respect them.

I also find my personal relationships strongly influenced by this. I can switch gears from adoration to aversion in a matter of minutes when I see that somebody is unable or unwilling to be honest. In the end, being true to yourself, knowing who you are and loving that person, is hard to swallow but it isn't going to change. Afterward though, comes a liberation that few will realize because they're not just afraid of the big bad world, but of themselves.

All About Mormons

Not really...but that is an awesome South Park episode.

The other day I was the very pleased recipient of two Mormon missionaries who came to my door. I was overjoyed to have the opportunity to speak with them. I mentally clapped my hands...at least I hope it was only in my mind.

As an atheist, and a rather proud one at that, I love when people try and convert me. But more importantly, I love when people of a faith I know nothing about try and convert me. I'm always open to the option that I might be wrong, so this was another learning experience. The doorbell rang and I was pleased to converse with two nice young women about their faith and my lack thereof.

The conversation went so well that we had another meeting a week later at the house of one of their members. I learned a lot about what they believed and I can see why a lot of Christians don't consider LDS to be a Christian faith at all. I also experienced their conversion tactics and I have to say, they're good.

Apparently, Mormons rely very heavily on the Book of Mormon. And I mean..for a lot. Almost daily scripture study, Sunday services that last 3+ hours. They immerse themselves in their Book like Christians claim to. When talking to somebody new, they do their best to get them to read passages from the Book as frequently as possible (I declined). They hold an opening and closing prayer, of course inviting the new person to participate and even offer their own words (I also declined). It isn't exactly cult-indoctrination behavior, but it is an excellent example of social pressure. I hope I wasn't smiling all too much.

You see, there was a time when I would have bowed my head, said the words, faked my way through it and in the end, maybe even gone along with a conversion experience in the long run. I was not as strong in my non-faith as I am today. Their suggestion that I pray to a being I don't believe in and listen for an answer (thereby assuming there might be a being to provide an answer) was a suggestion that might have had some power before. I hope I was not actually as "aloof" as one of them suggested I was.

I can't say that I didn't understand the appeal of what they had though. They were quite happy in the shackles of their faith. They accepted circumstance as God's will and trials as a passing moment of suffering before an Eternity in Heavenly bliss. As nice as they were, the doe-eyed expressions were ones that haunt me more than any imagined Hell. They had found peace. They found a peace in not having choices, in not having responsibility for their actions, in servitude. I hope my life is one of constant chaos by comparison.

Proper Alignment

We all know how important it is to keep your car's alignment in order. There's all the benefits of improved tire life and gas mileage, but I'm especially focused on improved control. I like to know exactly what my car will do when I tell it to do it. It struck me that while I'm an absolute nazi about my car's performance and expectations, I hardly give a shit about my own.

There is something fundamentally wrong with one's soul if they aren't able to do what they are passionate about. There is an even bigger problem when they are able to do it, but choose not to. That's the position I've been in now for...however long I can remember. I can sit down any time I want and write, but I don't. Nearly every weekend there's a racing event to attend, and I haven't been going. I haven't been doing the  things I really want to do. Not terribly smart of me.

So, it's time to rearrange some priorities and get some more mileage out of myself before it's too late. I've had this story idea in my head since high school. Time to write it out. I need to stick to the straight and narrow path that brings me happiness. And next year... back to the track.

Endless Cycle

I have a smartass line that won't leave my head. "The best thing about life is that it will be over soon" I know, I know, it's so emo that it's cliche. But let's face it, something has to change or tomorrow will be as useless as yesterday is.

The core of my frustration comes in the pattern that continuously pops its head up again and again. This has been going on for years and is the only evidence I have for the existence of God. And let me tell you, he's a dick.

From time to time, months or years apart, there is a glimmer of hope that something amazing is about to happen. It could be a lucrative job, a wonderful girl, that dream vacation or just a lucky break that lets me pocket a couple hundred bucks. Every time, things go wrong...and every time I'm left holding the very empty bag.

I would think I have bad luck, if I believed in luck. I can't tell you what it is, other than exhausting. It has come to the point recently where I don't want to put effort into anything because in the end, it will just be another miserable failure. I don't even have terribly high hopes that this blog post will make any sense.

I feel like all effort is wasted. Why care about the world's big meta problems when no individual can change them? Why express my opinion when nobody even listens? Why get up out of bed? To be fair, I have a super comfy bed.

-

PS: I just noticed what a difference this was from my last post. Amazing what two months of constant bullshit will do to a guy, huh?

The End is Near

Life is short. Short like a blink of an eye. In something like 5 billion years the sun will expand into a red giant and consume the entire planet. Think about how long that is. At the other end of the spectrum is our life. Any time in the next 60 seconds to the next 60 years, I'll be dead. 100 years after that, anybody who ever knew me or knew of me will similarly be dead. We are nothing and will soon be even less than that.
Hence, we have no choice but to make the most of it. Now, I'm not going to dedicate my immediate future to whoring and drinking. I can't afford it. But we should all strive to do more than we currently are. Why? Why should we pour sweat and blood and tears into hard work that will almost immediately be forgotten? Each person must eventually answer that on their own, but here's my take.

We are unique. Each and every one of us is unlike everybody else who ever was or will be. We get to make the smallest scratch on the surface of time, but it is our scratch. Small things in great numbers can do amazing things. Ask ants or bees. For us, making that mark might lead to wondrous things we can't possibly imagine. you might choose to make your mark with your children, or art, or politics. Unfortunately most of us choose to make our marks by wasting our lives as product consumers and drama queens.

Another way I see us wasting our lives is through religion. I don't mean that religion is inherently a waste. What I mean is that the belief in an afterlife, by definition, belittles this life. This small time we have is merely the conductor tapping on his music stand before the symphony starts. If you believe there is an eternal life coming up then what is this life except for practice? A warm up? A mistake?

Religion means we have more coming. I don't believe we do. Every moment we have here is absolutely precious because we don't know how many more moments we have in store. Speaking of...I'm going to go do something productive.

Demanding Evidence isn't Demanding at All

In a recent discussion I was told that some atheists stand in the corner and demand evidence with folded arms. I was told that we were afraid to really open our minds to the possibility of God because we were afraid of what we might find. I was led to believe that the person I was speaking with thought that my position of not being convinced had a deeper meaning to it than simply....not being convinced.

If only it were that simple. But the atheists desire for extraordinary claims to be backed up by proof is not outrageous, nor is it emotional. When I was a devout Christian, I believed that what I had been told was true. The fact remains that only a few questions needed to be asked in order for me to discover that the claims being made were entirely without evidence to back them up. On the other hand, if I asked a science teacher why evolution was true (something I did not believe at the time), I was provided with almost literal mountains of this thing called “proof”.

What do I mean by mountains? According to JSTOR, an online archive of over 1500 academic journals, there are over 795,000 papers on evolution on record. I've read a small number of these, after all, I'm only human. That's a lot of data. There are 31,000 pages of search results. Wow. Check out these titles:

Convergent Evolution of Perenniality in Rice and Sorghum

A Hierarchical Approach to Protein Molecular Evolution

Simulating Pseudogene Evolution in vitro: Determining the True Number of Mutations in a Lineage

Not that those are the most convincing papers, but they are papers. Part of almost 800,000 mutually supporting research pieces that fit one another to a T.

On the other side, provided by the creationist Center for Science and Culture, there are 50 peer-reviewed papers about Intelligent Design. I didn't read all 50, but the site offers a fantastic summary of each paper. (Honestly it's a great site.) What did I learn from these? That really really smart men don't understand things about evolution and published papers saying so. There isn't a presentation of evidence. There is a crossed-arm challenge that the evidence for evolution is lacking. Where have we heard this before? Here's an example of the 50:

• A.C. McIntosh, “Evidence of design in bird feathers and avian respiration,” International Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics, Vol. 4(2):154–169 (2009).
  

“In this peer-reviewed paper, Leeds University professor Andy McIntosh argues that two systems vital to bird flight -- feathers and the avian respiratory system -- exhibit “irreducible complexity.” The paper describes these systems using the exact sort of definitions that Michael Behe uses to describe irreducible complexity.”

So basically they could have just replaced their paper with a picture of themselves shrugging.

But, this isn't about Evolution vs ID. This is about God vs no god. The one-sided debate between Evolution and ID is just a surrogate, but a good example.

Why do atheists want evidence? Because believers make some impressive claims. There is a God. He loves you. He can forgive your sins. He can provide everlasting life. He is in control. He created the universe. Those are claims that stake out a position and leave little wiggle room. The claim that God exists is a yes or no proposition. There isn't a grey area there. The claim that God created the universe is similarly true or false with nothing in between.

When presented with a claim like that in any other context, the natural reaction is to desire proof. If I told you I had found an abandoned treasure chest full of gold coins, and that I would share it with you...at some point you're going to want some of that gold in your own hands. Why? Because I made an extraordinary claim that you stand to directly benefit from. It's good news, in monetary form.

Well, we atheists want some of that evidence. So tell me why you think God is real. So tell me why he created the universe. Tell me how you know his son died for our sins, and while you're at it...explain how that actually makes sense. The problem that I come across is that believers can't do any of those things.

When I speak to Christian and Muslim friends of mine I always ask for proof. I hunger for proof. Evidence is my drug of choice. What do I get instead? Personal experience and sometimes some amazingly well-thought-out philosophy. But no evidence. Of course my arms are folded and I sound snubbed. You promised me Good News and can't back it up.

Invariably a Holy Book is brought up as evidence. Well, a clever meme I saw the other day pointed out accurately that the Holy Book in question is the Claim, not the Evidence. To put this in another light: Darwin's Origin of Species is not evidence. It is his claim about what he believed about the natural world. Those 795,000 peer-reviewed papers are about evidence, Origin is not.

And Holy Books are notoriously inaccurate. The Bible has too many versions and endless contradictions. The Documentary Hypothesis blows away the Old Testament and Dr. Bart Ehrman's research destroys the New Testament. Don't get me started on the Koran and it's documented 200 year oral history before somebody wrote it down... These are not historical documents.

To my theist friends: I love you. I appreciate your concern for my eternal soul. I am even grateful that you feel the need to pray for me. Please understand that my stance is not related to emotional trauma, a bad experience, a misunderstanding, denial or fear. I am unconvinced and will remain so until the theistic world has more to offer me about the greatest claims ever made by mankind.

The Hammer Falls

I'm writing in a slightly different format tonight. I'm sorry if this post appears harder to read than others in the past.

I am in a rather pleasant situation. I disagree with people who are smarter than I am. It could be arrogance that keeps me opposed to their viewpoints, but I certainly hope it is something more substantive than that. After all, I also happen to agree with many people who are smarter than me. In this case though, I am talking about my personal relationships and how much I enjoy them.

Two faithful intellectuals whom I respect read my last post and both agreed with the "majority" of it. Obviously we are on different sides of the fence as to the underlying issue, but we have drawn similar conclusions about some topics. I was immensely proud of myself over this. It is healthy to judge one's self by those whom you respect. But this brought up an unavoidable question. If we agree on A, B and C and right down the alphabet...why do we disagree on Z when we get to it?

I have no doubt that someday I will awaken to a message on my phone and after blinking my eyes clear enough to read it, I will experience the blow of a logical hammer. Of the men whom I mentioned in my previous post I know any of them could do such a thing. Having met one of their wives, and read the work of another, I know their spouses could deliver as well. It is my guilty admission that I await such a message.

Why? Because I desire evidence and logic and reason above all else. I thrive on intellectual challenge and the struggle of seeing things differently. We all should. The world would be a different, and perhaps better, place. Just a few thoughts. G'night.

Your Meaningless Faith

     I know of exactly three men whom I consider to be true believers. Matthew, Mark and John. I know, I'm one "Luke" away from a set of the Gospels. These men practice what they preach. They do their best, harm no one else and seek forgiveness if they do wrong. If there were three billion of them instead of just three, I would have no reason to write what follows. If you are one of these people, this is not directed at you. If you're not one of the aforementioned, grab a snack cause we're going on a long ride.

     Your faith is meaningless. In every possible way, your faith is empty, useless, vapid and hollow. This is not my opinion or assertion, it is yours. Don't blame me for being the messenger of news you desperately need to hear. That you don't know it already is not my fault. After all, you're the ones who told me that your faith was pathetic and stupid.

     In the months and years I have spent being a non-believer I have frequently had to defend my non-faith. For years, I did this with ease. No person of faith has ever presented an argument to me that I have needed more than twelve seconds to overcome to a point where I am comfortable. This might speak of my arrogance. It definitely speaks volumes to the absurdity of religious arguments.

     One of the more frequent ones is this: "Well yes, the Crusades and Inquisition and Taliban and suicide bombings and the murder of abortion doctors and witch hunts and human sacrifice and rape in the name of ethnic cleansing were all bad... But look at Stalin and Mao and Hitler! They did bad things too and they weren't religious. "

     Even if we include Hitler, who was a Catholic and had very close ties to the church throughout his regime, the base of this argument is that religious people have acted no worse than non-religious people. As a humanist, I'm not terribly surprised. Evil people do evil things, no matter their belief in an afterlife. But for the faithful to use this as some kind of defense is laughable. The religious put themselves on even footing with the monsters of history as though that cancels anything out. It makes their faith meaningless.

     But I hear it now: "Well, I'm not like that at all. I go to church every Sunday and I sing in the choir and I hate atheists and I have awesome morals because I'm one of God's children." Well you know something, no you're not. You're a twisted, selfish, self-centered, arrogant asshole, just like the rest of us. You aren't following the example of Christ to love your neighbors. If any of you fundie freaks did that, there wouldn't be a Republican party in this country.

     GAP, McDonalds, Ford, Exxon, Bank of America, Apple....these are the gods we worship with our actions. We love fattening food, fast cars, sexy clothes modeled on girls just barely able to be called adults, energy that is destroying the planet we live on and technology that makes it easier for us to be alone together. You vote with your wallet and your attention span. Both are getting smaller by the day and you don't even notice.

     Football players thank God for a great play. You thank God when a skilled team of doctors performs a difficult procedure they have trained their whole lives to do. Survivors thank God when they don't die in a car accident that would have killed them twenty years ago before advanced safety equipment was mandatory on vehicles. You defend God when non-believers question his existence or when you feel "oppressed" by not being able to freely spout your shit without challenge. When backed into a corner you threaten violence either through direct action or the divine retribution of your made-up sky fairy.

     You are hypocrites. You are aimless, spiteful, vengeful people who are wasting your limited existence wrapped up in a materialistic world and thinking that you have an ace to play at the end where you will be rewarded with paradise eternal.

     Your faith means nothing to you. At best it is an excuse for you to be who you truly are while you act on the hate you hold for others. You use your faith to draw lines in the sand and to seperate your brother humans into groups you can pretend you are better than. While your faith is clearly just a label to you, it means a lot to me as a humanist.

     The humanist knows better. We know that we are all related through a family tree that is more vast than we can grasp. We are all of one species making up a single tribe that should be able to love one another in the way your god has commanded you to. Those lines separating us, we didn't put them there. The humanist is trying to erase them. My label is all-inclusive. My "god" doesn't exclude you for having different thoughts. You are my brother or sister no matter what you believe because that is the fact of biological science, like it or not. As your brother, I'm asking you to please stop believing all the bullshit.