It Would Be My Privilege

I'm a regular reader of The Blag Hag and generally enjoy Jen's blog.  I do however find it hard to relate when she starts talking about feminism.  I often find myself rolling my eyes and thinking that she really needs to get a life.  Harsh I know, but my opinion nonetheless.

One such occasion related to a post by The Friendly Atheist (another favourite of mine).   Hemant had written a post discussing an interview with Kari Byron from Mythbusters.  He ended the post with "This whole post was really just an excuse to post a picture of Kari."  It was an obvious tongue in cheek comment about someone that Hemant admires for her mind and views but who also happens to be a very attractive woman.  I read the comment and laughed.

Jen's response was "only appreciating a woman for her looks and not for her intelligence is not a joke - it's a negative mindset that joking helps perpetuate."

To this my response was "Enough already!" <eyes rolling>

These posts were written several months ago and I had pretty much forgotten about them until the fairly recent "Elevatorgate" scandal.  A good summary of all the craziness that ensued can be found here.  In short, Rebecca Watson (Skepchick) was propositioned by a man she didn't know while alone in an elevator with him in the middle of the night after a conference.  All of the comments surrounding this situation really got me thinking.  The one that really tipped the scales for me was Jen's response to Richard Dawkins after he pretty much blew off Rebecca Watson's point that this incident made her feel at best uncomfortable and at worst fearful.

With that background, I'll get to my point.  Jen pointed out that Richard has the privilege in this situation of being a man and therefore couldn't possibly fully understand what it feels like as a woman to be vulnerable to a man:  "You don't live in fear of rape, knowing that one wrong misinterpretation of a couple words could lead down that road."  I, as a woman, completely understand how Rebecca felt in that elevator.  It's the same reason that I don't go out alone at night.  I acknowledge that most men are probably good, but what if I happen to run into one that wants to hurt me?  How can I defend myself against someone who is most likely larger and stronger than me?


This concept of privilege in turn got me thinking about feminism.  In my fairly sheltered life I haven't really had the misfortune of having to deal with much sexism.  I have been taught all my life that women are equal to men.  I found myself in a profession where men and women are fairly equally represented.  Of the four managers in my department, two are men and two are women.  The Assistant Vice President is a man, but the Vice President is a woman.  I feel no sexual discrimination whatsoever.  It never really occurred to me, in this day and age, that this was in any way out of the ordinary.

Then I thought about the life of The Blag Hag.  Jen is a student at the University of Washington working towards her PhD in Genome Sciences.  She's a scientist.  Now how many female scientists can you think of?  Not one other than Marie Curie actually comes to my mind - not a good thing.  She is in an extremely male dominated field.  I would hazard a guess that she feels sexual discrimination first hand on a regular basis.  It's no wonder she's so much more sensitive to it. 

So in the end, I realize that my privilege has blinded me to the fact that gender discrimination is alive and well.  We women need to continue fighting for equal rights and respect.  I still strongly disagree with Jen's reaction to Hemant on the Kari Byron comment - it was after all an innocent joke from a man who consistently shows respect and admiration for women.  In taking a step back though, I can now see where Jen is coming from and why she reacts the way she does to situations that I find trivial.  Perspective is a good thing.

My Own Little Foxhole

There's an expression that there are no atheists in foxholes.  It implies that even the most militant atheist will turn to a higher power during high levels of stress or danger.  This is something I've often wondered about on a personal level.

I didn't grow up in an outwardly religious family, but I was surrounded by the idea of God through friends, television, books, movies etc.  I learned more about the concept of a personal god in high school going so far as to accept Christ into my heart during one ill thought out moment. 
Meryn Cadell sums that moment up nicely:
"And then later in the car, my hot-from-crying face against the window, shutting out the conversation around me, I thought about what I'd said .....and I already doubted it. So intangible, so surreal.
Lettin' Christ into my heart? I didn't even know the man."

After high school I really started to examine my beliefs - not just figuring out what I believed, but looking more deeply at why I believed it.  This led to the search for evidence.  I couldn't find any evidence for the existence of Jesus at all - I'm talking primary resource material which completely excludes the bible and anything written based on the bible.  This lack of evidence pretty much made the whole prophet / lunatic / son of God controversy moot. 

While I also didn't see any evidence for a personal god, I wasn't yet ready to let go of the entire concept.   As more and more time passed and my research continued, my views began to evolve.  Gradually it went from acknowledging the existence of a higher power to doubting the existence to more recently denying the existence.  I will still never confidently proclaim that there is no god just as I will never confidently proclaim that there are no pink unicorns on Jupiter.  You can only prove the non-existence of something within very specific parameters and I don't have that ability.  I will however say that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and I have yet to see any.  Until such evidence becomes available I will continue to view all religions and thoughts of gods or goddesses as primitive superstitions which have no place in today's societies (and especially in schools, governments and legislation).

This brings me to my foxhole pondering.  While I feel good about walking away from these superstitions, I have often wondered how I would react in a dangerous or traumatic situation.  Would I leap wholeheartedly back and pray for some sky fairy to save me?   I recently got my answer.

Almost a month ago I hit a patch of black ice while driving on the highway and lost control of my vehicle, swerving violently and rolling off the edge into the median.  I would imagine that others who have had similarly dangerous experiences will understand when I say it all happened so quickly, but in slow motion.  Because of the slow motion I can honestly remember everything that went through me head at the time.  First there were some expletives which were expelled from my mouth and I won't detail those here.  Then I remembered hearing or reading somewhere that many of the injuries sustained during accidents are caused by individuals bracing for impact and that you should try to relax your body against that instinct.  (I credit my lack of injuries to following this little nugget of wisdom!)  As I started to go over the edge I just accepted that I no longer had any control over the situation and had to deal with whatever outcome lay ahead.  Then I quietly waited and listened to all of the commotion around me (crunching of icy snow, the scraping of metal, the cracking of the windshield...).  When all of the motion and noise stopped I opened my eyes, started breathing again and assessed the situation (a little difficult while hanging upside down). 

I am thrilled to say that at no time during the entire ordeal did I turn to God or prayer.  This tells me that I have truly succeeded in shedding the superstitions from my past and have moved forward to claim my life and my actions as completely my own.  It's a great feeling!

On a side note, I did gain a little faith that day as well - faith in humanity.  I still find myself teary eyed thinking of all of the people who risked their own lives that day to stop on an obviously icy highway to help out a stranger in need.  A very heart-felt thank you to all of the good samaritans out there.

You Know It's Kind of Hateful

The American Atheists recently put up a billboard by the Lincoln Tunnel.

My gut reactions to this sign were
1. I can think of far better uses for $20,000
2. I agree with the message
3.  It's kind of a slap in the face to Christians

The more I thought about it though, the more I came to accept this sign - like it even.  The intentions of the group were to reach out to non-believers and let them know that they are not alone during a season when we are bombarded with Christian and Jewish songs, imagery and stories.  The message in the ad is blunt, but valid.  It's a message that even a lot of Christians would agree with.  At least in my area of North America, the majority of the the Christians I come in contact with don't believe the stories of the bible are literal, but more along the lines of symbolic allegories.

I even got over the amount of money spent on the sign since, due to the controversy surrounding it, they raised $65,000 in donations.  Pretty good return on investment.

And the controversy itself got people talking openly about beliefs which I always think is beneficial.  The more people realize that not everyone thinks the same, the more they will re-evaluate their own beliefs.  I'm always happy when people think critically, regardless of the outcome.

So, end of story, right?  Nope.

The American Atheists have put up a new billboard advertising their January meeting in Alabama.

Now, having lived in Alabama for a time, I'm really glad that an atheist group is making itself known in the area.  I wasn't actually an atheist when I lived there, but it would have been nice to know some people whose first question upon meeting me wasn't "What church do you go to?".  I'm sure many others felt the same way, but you kept those thoughts to yourself.

Alabama is very different from where I live now.  Based on the people I met while there, the bible is taken quite literally by a very large portion of the population.  Those who don't take it as 100% fact, still feel very strongly about it.  So any atheist billboard in Alabama would be controversial and that's okay - controversy opens the dialogue.

But here's what they put up:

Scams?  Really?  Seriously?  This isn't a slap in the face.  This is hitting them with a Mack truck! 

Now, over the years I have become an atheist through and through.  I don't like religious institutions, what they stand for and the untruths* they tell.  However, scam is a very strong and hateful word.  It implies that those running the churches are knowingly deceiving people - that they don't believe in what they're selling.  This is certainly true in some cases, but hardly across the board.  The implication itself could be considered libelous.  I sure hope that the American Atheists don't have to spend all of those generous donations on a court case. 

* Defined as "the condition of being false".  I use that word instead of "lies" because, while I believe that the stories told in houses of worship are untrue, to call them "lies" would be to imply that the story tellers also believe them to be untrue and would therefore be knowingly deceiving the audience.

I Love the Atheist Community

Within the atheist community recently there has been much talk about behaviour.  It seems to have all started with Phil Plait's "Don't Be A Dick" speech.

I recently read this post on PZ Myers' blog Pharyngula and it evoked such a sense of pride in me for the humanity among atheists.

Someone calling themselves "EvolutionSkeptic" posted a comment on one of PZ's posts asking for help.

"Hey, so some of you may remember me (one can hope). I found this thread that some people told me last time to find when I wanted to ask a question. Since I have one, I thought I'd check in. Hope everyone is doing well.
All right. I read "Why Evolution is True" and "The Greatest Show on Earth," as recommended by several of you. After that, I also started reading some of the stuff on Dawkins' site, because I really liked his calm approach to the subject.
After reading there and a good bit here, I'm actually getting a little afraid, and this is where my question comes in ... I can recognize the validity of evolution and that it's true. This began to make an impact on my belief in God, but I still felt like he could have set the whole thing in motion.
But the more I read there and here, the more I'm questioning that, the more I worry that my faith may be in danger. Since you guys were so helpful the first time, I thought maybe I could come to you to ask a couple of questions again ...

1. I truly don't mean this to be insulting, so please don't take it that way, but what is your motivation to live a moral, upstanding life without the guidance of the rules of God and the Bible? I know you guys do this, but I'm not sure I understand how it works without concrete guidance.
2. For those of you who were once Christians (I'm guessing there are some), how did you reconcile your atheism/agnosticism with your relationship with your Christian family/friends? How do you tell them? Do you still go to church for the fellowship but just don't pray/participate? Did you lose friends/family in your process of change?

I hope I'm not interrupting a conversation here, but any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for reading, if you actually got this far."

 PZ then moved it to its very own post with his own reply and the suggestion that "this is one probably better answered by the diverse views of the hivemind."  The hivemind did not disappoint!

I have read the first 200 of the almost 400 comments that were added.  So many people provided their own personal and honest stories as well as their theories surrounding ethics and morality.  Many others simply put in their two cents and then wished ES luck with his/her quest/journey.  It was absolutely lovely to see all of these "strangers" come together to discuss their views, philosophies and knowledge and encourage this person to grow and seek truth.  It wasn't about telling someone what to believe, but instead giving ES an outlet to discuss what he/she believes and how those beliefs are changing without encountering any guilt or embarrassment.

I also found it wonderful that despite EvolutionSkeptic's own community which appears to be against belief in evolutionary science and free thinking (I base this assumption on ES's fears about losing friends and family based on a belief in evolution), ES is still searching for answers and knowledge.  That is a true testament of courage - to go against the herd and find answers and beliefs that make sense to you.

I was particularly touched when ES, in thanking everyone for their replies, comments that he/she is unworthy of all the attention (comment #137).  This is responded to with comments like "Why are you unworthy? We are all in this together, support is what humans do best." (#157) and "Who could be more worthy than you?" (#195). 

This thread gave me such warmth and pride for the atheist community and their non-dickishness.  It was just one big warm fuzzy. 

I wish ES a wonderful journey full of knowledge and enlightenment and new friends.  I hope that he/she will remain strong, independent and forward thinking.  I hope that his/her current friends and family will respect, support and encourage ES in this quest regardless of the outcome - I certainly do. 

Agnostic vs. Atheist

Amusing, but the spelling drives me nuts!

The Friendly Atheist had a post on this topic in May.  I disagree with the post itself and found the comments to be all over the map, but it all got me thinking.


From Merriam-Webster
Agnostic - 1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
Atheism -  a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity



By its very nature the existence of some sort of god isn't knowable, unless of course said god one day decides to unequivocally show itself to the masses - maybe by calling a televised press conference (you can be sure that Fox News would be there).  My belief here falls cleanly under the definition of agnostic.

But it's not that easy.  While I don't believe anyone can say that there absolutely is no god, at the same time I've seen absolutely no evidence to lead me to believe that there is a god. I often hear the phrase "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".  That's not quite true.  A more accurate statement would be that "absence of evidence is not proof of absence" although that doesn't have near the fancy ring to it.  It is absolutely evidence of absence.  Given this evidence of absence I choose to believe that there is no god.  Here I fall under the atheist definition.

So which am I?  I have long considered myself to be agnostic, but not because it's a "safe way" of saying I don't believe in god, or because the word atheist "sounds evil and wrong and scary" as was suggested by Hemant.  It's because I think the term agnostic best defines my beliefs.

   
My type of agnosticism has changed over the years.  There was a time when I quite strongly believed that there was some sort of supreme, supernatural being that was responsible for everything, but I still didn't think it had any relation to the religions of the world or any of the holy books.  At that time I would have been considered an Agnostic Theist (also known as a Weak Theist).  I referred to myself as a deist or simply spiritual.

Gradually as I did more research in my journey for truth and knowledge, I began to lean farther away from believing in the supernatural.  Now I would consider myself to be an Agnostic Atheist (also known as a Weak Atheist).  I am fairly certain that there is no god, but I have no way of proving it, but I will live my life as if it has been proven. 

One other item from Hemant's post:  "no one says they’re agnostic about the Flying Spaghetti Monster. No one says they’re agnostic about Zeus or Thor. So why are they agnostic about “God”?"
I am atheist about the FSM because it is an admittedly made up thing.  No one actually claimed that it was real so I have no problem classifying it as fiction.  I am atheist about Roman and Greek mythology because the general consensus is that they were myths - that the people of the time made up stories to try to explain the world around them.  Anything that is acknowledged  to have been made up does not deserve to be given any credence as fact.

If you ask me about the current world religions, I would also respond that I am atheist about these.  The holy books have been sufficiently discredited for my needs in order to dismiss them as utter fiction.  But the fact that they are still believed by so many is enough to open a crack in my mind to the possibility of something supernatural that may have kick started these beliefs.  Let's be clear though that this is a minuscule crack - enough to keep me in the agnostic category but not anywhere near big enough to have any effect whatsoever on my life.

In reading the comments to Hemant's post, I'm really surprised by the negative views on this.  So many of the atheists view the agnostics as "not having balls" and so many of the agnostics view the atheists as arrogant.  I'm happy to see that some understand that it's just semantics.  It doesn't really matter what we label ourselves - we're all pretty much on the same page.

My Obsession with Religion

I am occasionally questioned on why I talk about god and religion more often than most religious people.  The short answer is because religion and other superstitious pseudo-scientific beliefs anger me.

I have been able to find no tangible evidence to support the concept of a supernatural power and even if there was, the scriptures themselves are no more factual than The DaVinci Code or The Other Boleyn Girl.  They all include names and places which were and/or are real and are based on some reality, but the stories themselves are pure fiction.  So many parts of the Bible have being proven to be incorrect that it is astonishing to me that anyone believes any of it.  Added to that, the story of Jesus was plagiarized from many, many, many old religions and myths long preceding the time period in which Jesus was supposed to have lived/died.  A running joke in the atheist community is a reference to Horus 2.0.


I used to believe that religion was fairly innocuous and wasn’t hurting anyone so to each their own.  But the more I read (and that’s something I encourage everyone to do more of), the more I find that religion is anything but harmless.  Yes there are religious people who do good things, charity work and so on, but the religion aspect is irrelevant.  Good people do good things and bad people do bad things whether they are Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu, Islamic or atheist.  But then there are those who do bad things in the name of religion (attack on abortion clinic)- you won’t find that from an atheist.  There are those who place themselves on these religious pedestals only to look foolish (at best) when they’re found to be partaking in the precise behaviour they denounce.  Then there are those who do bad things with the best of intentions - http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35088506/ns/sports-super_bowl_xliv/ (note that I include this example of a Pro-Life superbowl ad because while Tebow & Focus on the Family think they’re doing something wonderful that doesn’t appear to hurt anyone, I can think of far better uses for the $2.5 million spent for the ad – perhaps giving financial aid to the single mothers out there below the poverty line who chose not to have an abortion).

Now, on to the specifics of what angers me.

Child Abuse

It angers me that our supposedly civilized society routinely abuses our children in the name of various gods.  It comes in the physical form such as female genital mutilation and the male counterpart – circumcision. 

There is also the physical abuse not in the name of religion, but perpetrated and hidden by its most esteemed followers and leaders.  With all the hypocrisy in the Catholic church, it truly disturbs me that there are still Catholics to be found.

The abuse also takes the more psychological form of fear:
"Little child, if you go to hell there will be a devil at your side to strike you. He will go on striking you every minute for ever and ever without stopping. The first stroke will make your body as bad as the body of Job, covered, from head to foot, with sores and ulcers. The second stroke will make your body twice as bad as the body of Job. The third stroke will make your body three times as bad as the body of Job. The fourth stroke will make your body four times as bad as the body of Job. How, then, will your body be after the devil has been striking it every moment for a hundred million of years without stopping? Perhaps at this moment, seven o'clock in he evening, a child is just going into hell. To morrow evening, at seven o'clock, go and knock at the gates of hell and ask what the child is doing. The devils will go and look. They will come back again and say, the child is burning. Go in week and ask what the child is doing; you will get the same answer, it is burning; Go in a year and asks the same answer comes it is burning. Go in a million of years and ask the same question, the answer is just the same--it is burning. So, if you go for ever and ever, you will always get the same answer--it is burning in the fire.” ---The Sight of Hell (A Catholic book for children….Quoted from Christ Triumphant by Thomas Allin)

There is also the indoctrination, whereby we fill our children’s heads with these stories long before they are able to use logic and reason to work through the fallacies.

“Preoperational Stage (2 - 7 years)
"During this stage, children's thought processes are developing, although they are still considered to be far from 'logical thought', in the adult sense of the word. The vocabulary of a child is also expanded and developed during this stage, as they change from babies and toddlers into 'little people'."
'"Animism' is also a characteristic of the Pre-operational stage. This is when a person has the belief that everything that exists has some kind of consciousness. An example of this is that children often believe that a car won't start because it is tired or sick, or they punish a piece of furniture when they run into it, because it must have been naughty to hurt them. A reason for this characteristic of the stage, is that the Pre-operational child often assumes that everyone and everything is like them. Therefore since the child can feel pain, and has emotions, so must everything else.”

If adults consistently tell children in the Preoperational Stage about a big bearded man in the sky who answers prayers and punishes sinners, they’re going to believe it absolutely.  Once they reach the next stage of cognitive development (Concrete Operational), if the adults around them are still believing in god (unlike Santa Claus or the tooth fairy), then the remnants of this belief will likely remain with them into their own adulthood.

“I have to wonder if my long, difficult journey to reshape my own world view and perspective would have taken so long had I not been indoctrinated in the way I was.” - Todd's Hammer

Bigotry & Sexism

It angers me that we treat certain people as if they were second class citizens based on books written thousands of years ago.  The origins of the African Slave Trade rest with Christians and Muslims who traded goods for people.  The Bible justified this most notably via the Curse of Ham.  Even after they fought back and were given equal rights under the law, the racism and bigotry live on. 

Currently the target of choice is homosexuality and its attack on family values.  I’ll never understand how two men or two women in a loving and respectful relationship will ruin the sanctity of marriage.  The divorce rates are already very high and it’s safe to say that almost all (if not all) of those divorcing couples are heterosexual (given that gay marriage has only recently become legal and only in very few areas).
Then you’ve got people like Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich who declare that gays will ruin the traditional marriage while both being serial grooms (seven marriages between them).

What makes me even more angry is when these beliefs make their way into the laws of a country that is supposed to have separation of church and state.  In California human rights were put to a vote with Proposition 8 (an amendment which defines marriage as a union between one woman and one man).  Thank goodness it was appealed and struck down in court.  I only hope that ruling sticks.

Then there is the treatment of women. 

Christians (Southern Baptists in particular) call for wives to “submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ.  She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation."  
I’m down with equal and respect, but there will be no submitting and no serving in our household.  I’m either equal or I’m not.  Make up your mind.
As a further example of just how screwed up this is, I provide the following Christian article that practically had me in raging seizures.  It’s a long read, but in essence it tells women that if their husband tells them to do something that they feel is morally wrong, they can question him on it, but in the end must abide by his decision.

Catholics (as well as various other Christian denominations) refuse leadership roles to women.  Janine Denomme was ordained as a Catholic priest in a simulation (because the church doesn’t allow female priests) and was immediately excommunicated from the church.  She was not even allowed to have a Catholic funeral or burial when she died in her forties from cancer.

The Koran tells the followers of Islam to dress modestly.  For men this means covering everything from knee to navel while for women it has been interpreted as covering everything except for the face and hands (note that some don’t feel this is sufficient).  And ladies, even if we can’t see your eyes, they had better be lowered!

Then there’s the honour killings which appear to be mainly Islamic.  In Pakistan “Karo-kari is a tradition whereby a man can kill a woman, claiming that she brought dishonour to the family, and still expect to be pardoned by her relatives. Once such a pardon has been secured, the state has no further writ on the matter.”  The worst part is that these killings are happening in North America too. 

Health Care & Scientific Progress

It angers me when decisions about health care are decided based upon scripture. 
Reproduction and sexuality are prime examples.  The Catholic church is telling the world that birth control is a sin and trying to prevent the use of condoms in areas which are stricken with HIV and AIDS, even going so far as to say that condoms contribute to the spread of the disease.  Sure, abstinence is the only 100% effective method of preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, but it’s also highly unrealistic.  So let’s give people everything in the arsenal rather than saying “Here’s the bullets.  I’ll keep the gun.  Now get out there and win the war!”

St. Mary’s Hospital in Madison Wisconsin is trying to get a religious exemption to a new law which requires all group benefits plans which have a drug benefit to cover prescription contraceptives.  The Madison Diocese has gone one step further and threatened to fire any of their staff that use the benefit. 

How about masturbation?  The Bible tells men that it is a sin to spill their seed.  I hate to break this to you, but if this is about sperm that didn’t get a chance to fertilize an egg, that’s going to happen regardless.  A typical male will produce over 12 trillion sperm throughout his life.  The ones that don’t get expelled are reabsorbed back into the body and therefore never have the opportunity to seek out that luscious egg.

Then there’s abortion.  First of all let me say that I don’t like the thought of abortion, but I am pro-choice within reason.  If you decide in the eighth month of pregnancy that you no longer want to be pregnant, I have moral issues with that.  But if you were raped or the condom broke and you don’t feel that having a pregnancy or a child is in your (or their) best interest right now and you feel that an abortion is the right choice for you then get thee to a doctor ASAP and deal with it.  It’s a far better option than having an unwanted child or raising a child in poverty or with an abusive parent or whatever your reasons may be.
In May 2010, a nun in Phoenix was reprimanded for agreeing that a patient at the hospital needed an abortion to save her life.  Those that had her reassigned don’t deny that carrying the child would have been a death sentence for the mother, but still don’t condone the abortion.  Amazing that the life of the fetus is sacred, but not the life of the mother.

Let’s move on to stem cell research.  Embryonic stem cell research is regarded by many scientists as the wave of the future for managing or curing various ailments such as MS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, spinal cord injuries, heart disease, diabetes and much, much more.  It was discovered in 2005 that we could use adult skin cells in the research thereby removing the need for fertilized embryos.  Prior to this, the embryos were donated by women using fertility clinics who no longer needed them.  I’ve never understood why this caused such an uproar among the religious as the embryos would have been destroyed other wise.  My main question with embryonic stem cell research would be what’s more sacred? – An egg or the lives of the millions of people that could be helped or saved with the research?  To me this one is a no brainer.

Violence for God

The main cause of wars throughout the ages has been religion. 

One example being when the United States was the attacked by Islamic extremists.  Even the U.S. civil war had religious undertones as the South fought to hold on to slavery as justified in the Bible.  The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been ongoing since the 1800’s and causes emotional (and physical) outrage all over the world.  Jerusalem is a particular hot spot, with Jews, Christians and Islamists all claiming a piece of the Holy Land.  The Crusades lasted for hundreds of years as Christians attempted to control various areas and people across Europe.  Ireland even has the followers of Jesus fighting amongst themselves.  If god did exist, I’m sure he’d be so proud of his kids.  Although he shouldn’t be surprised as violence begets violence and his books are certainly full of it.  Who could read about all that smiting on their behalf and not feel it was their right to try it out themselves?

All in all I would love to see a day when all religion is gone.  It most likely won’t be in my lifetime, but I’m confident the day will come.  After all, if history tells us anything it’s that today’s religion is tomorrow’s myth.