What the heck is god anyway?

I still don't understand what people are talking about when they talk about god. And, in many ways, I'm not exactly convinced they do either. And when I talk about god in this case, I am talking about the god of the Abrahamic faiths.

When people say they believe in god, what exactly are they believing in? Often, they say this god is the creator. Okay, well, what the heck does that mean, exactly? Are they talking about a physical being that builds things...like a construction worker? Or, is this a creator that dreams things into existence? Where did he get his materials from? Is there a stockpile of various bits and pieces that he assembles everything from? How exactly does this work? And why? Why has this entity built the things it has? What is the point of it all? The purpose? Why would an entity build all of this? Was it all just to have beings that can worship him?

Many argue that god is like a watchmaker...that if you look at a watch, it has a creator, and therefore we must as well. That for a watch to work, it has to be perfect, and can only been created by an intelligent, skilled being. So, does this god assemble us, as if we are watches? Are we individually handcrafted? Does this god have hands? Is god an actual physical being? And if so, was god born from someone or something? Where did god come from to start with? How does he create all of this stuff he is credited with making? Beyond saying that god is a creator, there seems to be few answers to explain his involvement in it all.

They say god is love. Well, what the heck does that even mean? Does this love create things? They say god is all around us. Well, what exactly does that mean? Where? In what form? How? Is god some kind of gas? Is he in the air? I just don't get it.

And then, there are those that seem to argue that this god is watching us at all times. He knows when we are sleeping, knows when we are awake, knows when we've been bad or good...and when we die, he gets to decide if we will live for an eternity in heaven or hell. Did god create heaven and hell? What are these things? Are they actual places? Are we going to be actual beings there? Or floating ideas? What will we be? Where will we be? What will we see....other than other dead relatives, apparently?

Many see god as the answer to everything. He is the creator. He has made everything around us. Everything we see is proof of god. But, to me, the god explanation raises far more questions than answers. And no one seems to have these answers. They insist that god made it all, but offer no explanation beyond that. What the heck is this god? No answer. No clarity. Nothing. 

Why Do Some Western Liberals Spit In The Face Of Muslim Liberals?

So, I'm on twitter as I tend to do and am currently looking at tweets by one CJ Werleman who is a "Columnist for Middle East Eye. Host of 'Foreign Object' on iTunes. Author of The New Atheist Threat." Apparently, people who speak out against religion are a threat. Who knew? And what is a "new" atheist? It's the same as an old atheist...but they haven't been jailed or killed thanks to secularization. Unfortunately, if you look a 13 Muslim countries in the world, atheists can be sentenced to death by the state. But, hey, who is to judge, right? That would get you labelled as a neocon Islamophobe in CJ's circles.

He also seems to have an absolute disdain for those Muslims pushing for reform within Islam. He seems to particular have a hate on for Maajid Nawaz of the anti-extremist Quillium Foundation. Meanwhile, he does seem to have a thing for ultra-conservative Muslim organzations like CAGE UK. That's pretty twisted and makes a mockery of the whole concept of being a liberal. A liberal supporting ultra-conservatives over true liberals? Absurd.

Proof: The "Muslim reformers" are just paid Western government propagandists. That's all. Hi, @MaajidNawaz https://t.co/IiWtTll7tj

— CJ Werleman (@cjwerleman) May 3, 2016

As far as I can tell, CJ Werleman sees himself as some kind of progressive while selling out any progressive who doesn't happen to be in the West. Apparently, to him, the Muslim world is one giant, homogeneous land where everyone wishes to adhere to conservative religious belief without question and completely shuns seemingly all Muslims in the Muslim world who would like to live in a secular, liberal, free society. How dare people want to live like that. No, these are brown Muslims. Their culture is different. They shouldn't have liberal ideas pushed on them...or even mentioned to them. They don't deserve anything better than what they have. All their desire for a better life, for change in their countries, their wish to have a society where they are more free to express themselves is just them being brainwashed by Western imperialists who are using concepts like freedom and secularism to control the minds of a few to overthrow the much better ultra conservative regimes that he seems to feel shouldn't be challenged...or something.

In this case, it seems that CJ Werleman and his devotees have abandoned liberal ideas and aspirations. They have forsaken their liberal brothers and sisters in Muslim countries in what almost seems like a ridiculous form of racism where brown people in certain places on earth who wish for change aren't deserving of the same support from liberals that liberals in the West give each other, or at least should. Apparently, CJ Werleman's hate of "New Atheists" is far stronger than his desire to support non-white non-Western liberals. He is more obsessed with hating one group than he is helping another who is deserving of support and help.

With "liberals" like CJ Werleman, who needs conservative enemies?

Atheist Ramblings: People Love To Hate Richard Dawkins

Ya, ya, ya, I know. You hate Richard Dawkins. Unless you are one of those people that love Richard Dawkins. Then you love Richard Dawkins. I can't think of many other figures who people either wildly love or people wildly hate aside from, say, Hitler. 

Where do I stand when it comes to Richard Dawkins? I like him. I just can't help but like him. To me, he is a likeable character. Others don't see that, but I do. I just like him, his style, his ideas, his intelligence and his cool accent. I do see him as a smart guy who says a whole lot of spot on things. Perfect? Of course now. I don't worship him as a messiah. I see him as a guy with ideas that I tend to agree with and like. 

Is he cantankerous? Yes, in a soft, gentle voiced kind of way. Is he more cantankerous than anyone he is challenging? Nine times out of ten (a number I am pulling out of my butt) the answer is no. 

Hey, there is nothing wrong with stirring stuff up at times, especially when it needs to be stirred up. And Dawkins is not afraid to do just that, no matter how much it pisses people off. And, frankly, sometimes the people that he pisses off deserve to have someone piss them off. And, more often than not, they are going to be pissed off about something anyway. 

Case in point: The most recent controversy that Richard Dawkins is part of where he was supposed to be a speaker at the Northeast Conference on Science and Scepticism (NECSS), however, he tweeted a video that has been deemed highly offensive (which, it is and it isn't. I thought it made some good points) and now he is no longer going to be speaking at said event. I wrote about the whole incident here at Reverb Press. 

Man, do I feel that NECSS made a bad move. Why? I felt that Dawkins actually handled the entire situation around the video quite reasonably. I see what he saw in the video and the message it sent. I get it. I understand. It counters extremist ideas and hypocrisy. It does so in a crude, yet rather humourous fashion, quite frankly. But, someone at NECSS didn't like it. And, as a result, Dawkins has been turfed as a speaker, which seems to be the way it is these days. It really doesn't seem to take much to get ditched as a speaker. One misguided tweet here or there, and bam, everyone hates you. And it seems that those getting turfed the most are people on the left being pissed off at other people on the left. What's the deal with that?? The left doesn't seem interested in actually talking and discussing things amongst one another. It just seems to have this script that all on the left are supposed to go by and if you don't, gawd forbid, you are in deep trouble, man. You are cut out of the pack, vilified, demonized, left for dead. It's a left eat left world out there, people. 

Now, I feel that I am pretty far on the left. But, come on my fellow lefties, you guys are sticks in the mud! You get pissed off and offended way too easy these days. People are condemning Dawkins saying he is his own worst enemy. No. He isn't. The left is it's own worst enemy and I feel like it's crashing in around me, going all bonkers. In fact, in many ways, I think people like Richard Dawkins are the only SANE ones left on the left.   

So, ya, fine, you don't like Richard Dawkins. You are entitled to not like him. Just, chill out a bit, okay. Not everyone is going to say everything you want them to say exactly how you want them to say it all the time. Getting pissed off and cutting fellow leftists out because they tweeted a video you don't like just doesn't seem like the mature and reasonable way of dealing with it. Let's chat, let's talk, discuss openly, debate, but this whole shutting people down and pushing them out? Really? Do we need to be doing that?

Atheist Ramblings V.3: Blasphemy and Apostate Laws

There are 13 countries in the world where atheists face the death penalty, all 13 are Muslim majority countries. There are many other countries, both Christian and Muslim that have blasphemy laws and will throw atheists in jail.

Where are religious leaders when it comes to speaking out against this brutality? Where is the church? Where are the mosques? Why are they not denouncing this horrid treatment of atheists? Why the silence?

We have people screaming about persecution of Christians. We have people screaming about Islamophobia. We have people upset, feeling their religions are under attack. But when it comes to death to apostates, blasphemers and atheists, there is absolute silence.

And then, then, the religious dare to scream about how angry and rude atheists are. A little rich, if you ask me. This is further demonizing atheists and feeding the problem. Good work, religious folks. Good work. Thanks for that. Thanks for all the help. Instead of speaking out against blasphemy laws or laws that put atheists to death, you get pissed off at atheists for speaking out against religion.

Atheist Ramblings V.2: Are Atheists Angry?

Another day, another day of being an atheist. How about that atheism, eh?

Today's topic? Are atheists angry?

Well, that's like saying "Are Muslims terrorists"?

The answer is, no, not all atheists are angry. In fact, there are no shortage of atheists out there who don't even talk about their atheism. There seems to be this view by some that atheists are just loud mouth trouble makers out to ruin everyone's fantasies. Atheists are just mean, angry people that hate god.

Well, whatever.

I would say that over the past several thousand years of heretics and non believers being burnt at the stake or killed in other torturous ways, and the fact that at the moment there are 13 countries in the world (all Muslim majority countries) where atheists face the death penalty, I would say that if atheists are angry, they have a darn good reason to be. 

Everyone is Going to Hell

To Christians, Muslims and Jews are going to hell. To Muslims, Christians and Jews are going to hell. To Jews, Christians and Muslims are going to hell. And all of these people follow the same frickin' god! So, basically, it appears that everyone is going to hell....while they all think they are going to heaven! Hell is going to be darn full of people who expected to go to heaven, lemme tell ya. 

Forget Islamophobia, Let's Look at Atheophobia

Came across this fascinating Facebook status update the other day that I thought was telling on so many levels:

I hear people talk constantly about how atheists are so rude in their hatred of religion. And I hear constantly about things like "Islamophobia" (there isn't a Christian equivalent like Christianphobia) and I cringe.

This, clearly, is atheophobia, ladies and gentlemen. And it is atheophobia that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. How does atheism create discrimination and disorder in any state?? HOW? How is the simple act of understanding there is no god or gods discriminatory or disorderly in any way, shape or form? And when atheists question religious beliefs, how does that cause discrimination and disorder? HOW? The answer is that it doesn't.

This is a completely irrational dislike of atheism based on absolutely no facts. It isn't destructive in itself. This isn't a persecution of atheists as a statement. This is just a really dumb thing to say and frankly to believe. I mean, in the end, it doesn't matter what this dude thinks. Mind you, if he was in a position of power this would be far more worrisome. And sadly, this idea does coincide with the fact that there are thirteen countries in the world where an atheist can be sentenced to DEATH. I don't know of any country on the planet where someone can be sentenced to death by a state for practising a religion.

Furthermore, this guy, who is a Muslim, follows a book that completely demonizes non-believers and explains in detail all the various ways we will exist in brutal, firey pain for eternity. Yet, to him, this isn't a problem, isn't discriminatory or disorderly. And then, on top of that, I came across this dude arguing against same sex marriage in a terribly homophobic way....you know, in a truly discriminatory and disorderly way. Ahhhh, the hypocrisy. Don't talk to me about Islamophobia when you got guys like this representing your religion, and holding a belief that isn't uncommon at all.

Now, as someone who believes that thoroughly skewering religion is perfectly fine, I am not going to completely dismiss this guys statements. Just as any religion is open to criticism, dislike, scrutiny, debate and even outright dislike, so is atheism. It's okay. You don't have to like atheism. It's up to you. And yes, statements like this are perfectly fine. But given the fact that there really isn't any evidence that I can think of that makes this statement accurate, and he hasn't provided any, I will freely say that his opinion is ridiculous. This free speech stuff is so much fun!

There is NO Atheist Movement.

Am I an atheist? Ya. It appears that I am. I cannot escape from the idea that I am. Face it, I am. It's not the easiest thing to admit in this religion obsessed world, when so many people you know and love are believers. But, face it, I'm an atheist.

Today, I read, for the first time, about the "atheist movement" and I shuddered. Atheist movement??? What is this! Atheism is NOT a movement. It's not as if it is a religion. There are no popes, priests, imams, or anything of that nature. There is no central spokesperson. It doesn't need a spokesperson of any sort. It is not a movement. It is what it is. It is a natural state of being before indoctrination. It is not an organized belief. The vast majority of atheists prefer the logic of science over the dogma of religion, however, that doesn't define atheism. Atheism is what it is. It is not having a religious belief or affiliation. Organized movement? No way.

There is no need to proselytize atheism. It is not something that needs to be proven to anyone. The proof for atheism lies in the complete absence of proof of any kind of god or gods. It speaks for itself. No atheist speaks for any other atheist. Some people would like to put Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens or other famed atheists on top of the heap, as some kinds of leaders. They aren't. They are not leaders. They are atheists. They have their views which are open to like, dislike, challenges, praise or what have you. They don't speak for me. They don't speak for anyone but themselves. They are who they are. We all are who we are. That's it. No leaders. No followers. No churches. No dogma.

So, when I hear someone say "atheist movement", I sort of feel like they are missing the boat and not understanding what atheism is. Mind you, this is my opinion and my opinion only. Like I said, I do not speak for other atheists. I challenge strongly this notion of a movement. I don't see atheism as being a movement nor needing a movement.  It does not need leaders or spokespeople. It is not that kind of -ism. It is not a religion. It is not a system of governance or finance. It is not a cohesive belief system. It is not even a belief system, period. So, how can their be a movement?

Some are arguing that because of years of persecution, there is a need to band together to fight religion. Not really. No. I mean, you can stand up against religious superiority and persecution without a cohesive movement. We know persecution is wrong, right? Therefore, we fight persecution because we are humans who know that it is wrong. One does not need to be an atheist to fight against persecution.

Is disagreeing persecution? No. Can people hate, criticize, mock, dislike or laugh at atheism? Of course. Who cares. Go for it. It doesn't change facts that exist that make atheism a logical conclusion. It is not something that has to be fought for. There is no jealous god or hyper sensitive prophet needing defending. Dawkins and Hitch don't need defending. They are grown men who can stand on their own two feet (well, unfortunately, Hitch can't anymore...RIP). They don't need defending. They defend themselves quite nicely, and good on them. They take tons of criticism and they deal with it (must stop using present tense for Hitch) in their own way. So, no, atheism is not some movement. It isn't meant to be on the same plane as religion. There should be no grand fight for followers like the other religions have. We don't have to claim that we are the "fastest growing religion in the world!" because it doesn't matter. You either accept it or don't. There is no number count. You are either with logic, or with a religious belief system. Your choice. Up to you.

To sum up, as if I haven't already....atheism is not and should not be seen as a movement. Again, my opinion. My view. I speak for no other atheists. That's the point. Atheists are atheists. They think for themselves. They represent themselves. They view the world in their own way. Period. Each is responsible for their own beliefs. This is mine.