What Made Me Choose?

   I am often asked by my peers, religious folks, fellow atheists, and friends: "what made you decide to be an atheist?" Often, the question puzzles me: I really don't know if I can say what made me ultimately decide the path I would take in life. I've never been one to believe that I chose to become an atheist: I'd say I chose to no longer carry the weight of religion. Yeah, I know what you're thinking: "That's the exact same thing Sir, I'm going to find a much more respectable blog to waste my internet time on," but before you decide to ditch my page: read my odd, little story. Or... go watch videos of cats, whatever...

   I was born into Catholicism: baptized and everything. I wasn't strictly raised into the religion like many of my friends. I knew we celebrated Christmas, but I just thought it was a time where we got presents: kids don't really care what the meaning behind it is. I grew up through elementary school and sixth grade identifying myself as a Catholic because that is what was expected of me from one side of the family. This side was all Catholic: extended members and everything, it never really occurred to me that I could be anything but what I was raised until later in my life. It's not that I was forced; not at all in fact, I just wanted to make one of my parents happy. I grew up with parents who were polar opposites: one catholic, one atheist. If it wasn't for my other parent, I don't think I would have developed the secular traits that have become such a big part of my life today, but more about that later. From the beginning, religion was a stress on me. The doctrine never really made since, and I felt that if I abandoned it: the family would abandon me. Now, that would have never been the case, but being young makes you feel certain ways about leaving what has been normal in your life. It was hard for me to feel like I was a Catholic: I never understood what it meant, and God was only a thing I would pray to when I was sad or when I wanted some girl to like me (Dear lord, I'm a pathetic white boy in America: help me please.) Eventually I got confused and hurt whenever I felt like God didn't care about me, let alone the rest of the world. I figured with all the darkness in the world: there couldn't really be a good deity, so I choose to believe in a different one.
 
   In the last parts of sixth grade (yeah, I know, it's early: I was a very contemplative child) I started to read the writings of H.P Lovecraft like scripture. I loved the mythos: it was cool, and it spoke to my sense that the world was kind of a horrible place. I eventually chose to follow the Cult of Cthulhu like a religion because it made sense to me. It was unusual, different, weird, and it fostered the adolescent part of my psyche that made the whole world look depressing. When I look back on that awkward, hateful kid I was: I guess the overall lack of friends led to my hatred for human beings. I wanted something to believe in that was an antithesis of what it meant to be human: an opposite to make me feel better about not having connections with the world around me. At home, I was (to my knowledge) a somewhat normal child with some quirks, but Jr. High can be hell for a child. I loathed having t go to a place where I felt like I didn't belong. The Cult taught me to resent my humanity, and I ate it up: being as anti-social as I was. It wasn't until 8th grade, when I discovered a few more friends that I began to shift towards a secular lifestyle.

   It happened fast for me, as these things tended to result from epiphany rather than a gradual onset of ideology. I decided to be a Buddhist first as I discovered more about myself and the world. I generally believed that there was probably some deity out there controlling things, but it wasn't affecting the world. I started to live a calmer lifestyle as I became social with a small group of friends who I now consider to be the people who helped me discover what I was. I did have friends before that, but they didn't attend my school, and we normally never discussed our personal beliefs in depth. I felt comfortable around the few friends I had in 8th grade, one in particular fostered my confusion with religions. I can't really remember how it happened: one day I just decided to be done with it. Religion confused and hurt me, and I thought it was ridiculous, so I just decided that it really wasn't worth destroying my life over.

   My life hasn't been fantastic since I lost religion, nor has it been completely miserable: life has just been life. The thing that comforted me most in times of sorrow was the fact that I was living a life where I didn't rely on religion to keep me comfortable. In a way, I felt like I was stronger without it. I didn't have to lean on this religious crutch to be happy anymore, my joy came from within. It was never really strange for me to adjust to either: it felt more liberating than anything I had ever done with my life. Today, of course, I live a very comforting life without a religion: thoughts are clear, and answers are always there. I am very actively involved with my beliefs now, and I have never for a second regretted my decision. I don't think I could have had as much of an appreciation for life if I wasn't without religion. I actively live every day of my life with an appreciation of nature, and the fact that I am alive because death is so final to my belief system. I could go on forever about the merits of atheism, and how my character has been vastly improved by it, but that is a post for another time.

   With my best regards,
        ~Sir Atheist Esq.

What the actual...

For then past several months I have been observing an increasingly nasty movement take shape on social media: Heterosexual Pride pages and groups. That's right: some people really are that insecure with their homophobia. The pages are rare and far between, but I am starting to them and their symbols more frequently. I'll give you all a moment to process the ramifications and absolute idiocy that went into the formation of these groups. A bunch of pissed-off, ranting, lunatics went off to form a whole group to celebrate the fact that they have had the upper hand in America for years now. The group thinks that they (straight people) are being persecuted by the overwhelmingly massive gay population (roughly 3.8% of the U.S) and its supporters. If my description hasn't yet painted the picture of total ignorance: observe this  picture from their page..
.

Millions!!! Am I the only one who can't stand the idea of someone's brain thinking like this? Believe it or not, only some of their argument is religious based, but I figured something like this belongs on a page where I discuss morality. Of course: the Christian idea of "persecution" come into play when comments appear like: "Gays are Christianphobic" (if that is even a word.) However, I've encountered some of them that try to base their homophobic tendencies off of biological and scientific arguments.

Look, anyone with a brain and the 5th grade equivalency of a Sex Education class can figure out that men and women biologically have sex. It is the way the natural world works, but it doesn't mean that homosexuality doesn't serve an evolutionary purpose. A recent study (Andrea Camperio Ciani: University of Padova) is showing that the mothers and aunts of gay men are more fertile and have more children than the maternal relatives of straight men. The studies are showing that the same genetic traits that cause homosexuality also causes the maternal side to be more reproductively successful. Women who carried and passed this gene on were found to be calmer and healthier people, thus making them more attractive to men and resulting in more reproductive success. So you mothers of gay men out there: you're officially progress in the human evolutionary cycle, congratulations! Also, in nature homosexuality is common because of the competition for mates. If you have a tribe of apes with one Alpha male who has sex with all the females: the male apes can either kill each other, leave, or develop homosexual tendencies for the survival of their species. I'm no science expert, but I believe both reasons are valid scientific arguments.

As far as the religious aspect goes, I'll have to say the same things I normally say whenever the Christian right decides to get up in arms against the LGBTQ community. Not only does gay marriage and gay pride not effect you in the least, but you have no idea what it means to be persecuted. Heterosexual "activists" don't understand what the difference is between persecution and just being treated equally (almost) with everyone else. Just because gay people are being allowed the same rights you have: you are not being in the least persecuted. No one has ever been denied civil liberties because they are straight, nor has any straight boy been tortured and left to die on a fence because he hit on the opposite sexuality. Gay marriage will not take away the rights of straight marriages. One of the most common complaints that I hear is that Christian parents will have to explain gay couples to their children. So? Your children should be raised with an education of what some people in the world do with their lives. Of course, the Heterosexual pride idiots will probably ingrain their children with their idiotic bigotry and prejudices, but we will have to leave the solution to that for another day.

My main point is that the whole idea of heterosexual pride is a ridiculous concept. I could understand pride for equality maybe, or a pride for straight alliance (a stretch), but never pride for purely being a heterosexual. It does not mean that the LGBTQ community hates heterosexuals. Straight people don't need to be apologetic, but they can't pretend they know what it's like to be persecuted for their sexuality. Remember: straight people aren't killed for their sexuality.

Until Next Time, Fair Readers.
-Sir Atheist esq.

Intelligent? Design

Today I was introduced to the idiotic line of reasoning behind intelligent design courtesy of an ill-informed idiot with a video camera (when will we start making these people get a license to use the internet?). The link is below my article. Now, I am no professor of evolutionary science; however, I have in fact picked up a high-school level biology textbook in the last four years. 

In said video, Mr. My-god-is-correct comes right out with his first point by saying that evolution is not an observable science. He smugly states that "because evolution is not observable it is a theory: not science." The first thing that this man gets wrong is the rudimentary understanding of science. Science is defined as "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment." Science itself is the study of said principle, not a proven theory. Turtle-Neck got science confused with law. I will conceit that evolution is technically a "theory" and it is not yet defined as a law or fact; however, it is only because of philosophy that evolution is a theory. Philosophy and religion are both man-made phenomena, and were therefore created within man's existence. Plus, saying that evolution is "a mere theory" completely destroys any credibility he may have in the understanding of the scientific method. A theory is a statement that has legitimate evidence to back it up. Fossil records, carbon dating, and even today's organisms are solid proof of the evolutionary process. His god is nothing but a hypothesis: an intangible idea that has no real existence except in the ramblings of delusional people who think they know more than over 98% of the scientific community.  Evolution is definitely a science by your definition because it is being observed even today. A human born without wisdom teeth is technically the "next phase" in human evolution as they have eliminated a vestigial organ. Now that we have correctly defined science, let's move on.

Fashionista next moves on to the big-bang theory and his belief that all life originated from one cell. Yes: this has commonly been an area where scientists don't have hard evidence to explain many theories. However, many people have enough to completely gouge your argument. He claims that the big-bang was just an accident. Why does it have to be that certain what it was? What if it was remnants from a former universe? Christians are always asked by prodding fellows like me "well who created god?" And without fail the response is always "god has always been there." Yet they can't seem to grasp the concept of "what if the universe has always been there?" Time and space contains the greatest mysteries known to man because they are so ambiguous. What if our universe is really trillions of years old, and a Big Bang occurs far outside of timeframes our limited minds can't even imagine. Science doesn't have an answer for this because of the ramifications of such a question; however, they are willing to find the answer. Religion makes people feel better about not knowing the answers to big questions. It teaches people to be satisfied with their own ignorance by giving a simple answer. Maybe the universe can't be described by the small human mind. 

Later, Scratchy-Face says that all life originated from one cell on said conditions. Science may not have the answer to how microbial life was formed, but how in the heck could this man believe it was only one cell that started life? Billions of cells all around the Earth were responsible for the life we see today, not one. This reasoning makes it sound like his knowledge of the evolutionary process stems from watching a Simpsons couch-gag. 

The next thing he mentions is the law of thermodynamics (oh wow, someone knows how to use big-boy words): too bad he uses this term completely wrong. Thermodynamics applies to physics and occasionally the natural sciences, it is not some law stating that order can't come from chaos. The universe is built on chaos: the sun is a massive chemical reaction. The birth of a star comes from chaos. Hell: your own nasty, messy birth is a product of chaos. It always amuses me when an intelligent-design nut thinks they can throw out scientific terms to further their argument. He states that everything happens too perfectly for there not to be some great designer. News flash: the universe and our pitiful speck of dust we call a planet do not function perfectly. In many billions of years: our Milky Way galaxy will collide with the Andromeda. What kind of great designer would create such chaos? If we were designed perfectly, why do we still have a useless appendix? Or a tailbone? Because those are evolutionary traits we no longer use. Also, this man states that evolution and the development of traits is done by will. Flat out: no. Evolution of traits occurs for the sake of survival: if it was by will I would already have rainbow colored wings and be able to see without glasses.

Finally, I leave on a note of what annoys the hell out of me when it comes to religious Facebook whores such as this idiot claiming to be "a crier rallying the masses." He says in his video that he is against evolution being taught in schools because it is "crap." People who want to push religion into science classes really need to think about their impact on other people. I'm all for freedom of speech: right up until it starts messing with the progress of humanity. As an atheist teenager I can say that I would be disgusted by what this man thinks should be done to students in America. I find it insulting that he thinks children should be taught one line of logic and that's it. These people want to put this in schools because children will accept it as truth and hold it with them all their lives. How dare he try and ruin young minds before they can choose for themselves. The founding fathers would roll over in their graves if they knew that sadists like this want to destroy the right to freedom from religion. 

~Sir Atheist esq.

If you want to watch the sorry atrocity I mentioned in this post: click the link below.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10152481739639669&id=191900549668