me is no atheist, or how i learned to lose my god and love satan

mostly written, 4th of July 2009, mostly..... i thought i'd post this instead of trying to finish it off, as the recently non-believereded might get some value... another long blog and it's not really finished, past topics have been spin-offs from this blog, as it's been in my "edit queue" for so long at nearly half a year some of the things I cover spawned whole blogs themselves, hence, this blog is very sporadic..... .

i am no atheist... or how i learned to lose christianity and love the bomb, Satan, The Force!

BAHAHAHAAHHA @ the title.... i couldn't make up my mind

i never really thought of myself as a christian, *ever*, when ever the topic came up - I was *Roman*Catholic* - but as a child none of that meant anything to me anyway, i learnt a couple of prayers but that was about it - i seem to have these prayers still memorised so that really does highlight how easily a young mind can be imprinted with such prayers as ...

"twinkle twinkle little star how i wonder what you are?" ... you know the ones.. what about this christmas prayer? "he sees you when you're sleeping" etc etc etc

but i don't consider myself an "atheist" today either, as that is just another label that someone else uses to describe me when it comes to religion or my lack thereof, so in fact, it has nothing to do with who or what I am, so it's hardly a surprise that i don't think of myself as an atheist, because being an atheist means *nothing*..

Nothing *AT*ALL* ... and *that* is what I thought the idea of being an atheist was about - no preconceptions about things that are not verifiable, in particular, god

so apart from *not* believing in a sky daddy, is there one thing that can be said about anybody that would make them an atheist? (you should consider that a CHALLENGE, because i'm stuffed if i can think of one thing, let alone a BAD THING)

I keep doing those online tests and I mostly get "atheist" but once I got "satanist" and once i got "Islam" - but the strange thing is - Roman Catholic, the religion that I was taught, apparently, was always at or near the bottom of these tests!

many people think that an atheist is supposedly the opposite of a theist... but what I don't understand is how there can be an opposite to believing?

OPPOSITES v urrr.. ahem... OPPOSITES

you see, believing requires actions on the part of the believers, right? you have to actually *do* things to be a believer, save a prayer until the morning after like Duran Duran did, go to the church of the poison mind like Culture Club did, believing in your own Personal Jesus like Depeche Mode did, you frakking know, all those believerish type of things.

but the opposite of believing requires *inaction* or abstaining from, or not doing any of those believerian type activities in the first place... eg. is doing nothing somehow the anti-particle of believing?

think about that would you? this highlights the extreme idiocy of people who get upset that their "faith" has been challenged by the non-believer. doing the literal nothing, is all it takes to oppose the beliefs that some people have.

that's like the number zero being able to be bigger than the number one.. that's like winning a fight that you know nothing about... that's like taking an exam that has no questions on it, but you still get a 100% score... any believer having a problem with the non-believer, well that's all the believers problem.

ironically - god existing or not existing - is an argument that you can not win, but you can lose it by declaring that you lack the very faith you claim to have.

so how is doing "nothing" the opposite of believing? I could go for a run, or I could do the opposite and do nothing ... but is that really the opposite??

doing *nothing* is the default position. think of a circle with the exact middle as being the default position, move to any spot inside that circle, and you can chart the opposite position by drawing a line through the exact middle and continuing on for exactly the same distance as you are from the middle of the circle. but what is the opposing position of the exact middle?

an opposite is opposed to something ... what is the opposite of running? is it running backwards, or is it running in the other direction that's the opposite?.. well what's the opposite of running? it's not standing and doing nothing, is it?

insert any random thing you do - is doing the opposite of that thing, doing nothing?

if that's the case then doing nothing is the opposite of everything you do ... and doesn't that mean that doing the opposite of nothing, is *still* nothing?

no, I think that the opposite of running, is actually *not* running. and the opposite of nothing, is *not* nothing.

doing nothing is not the fucking opposite of what ever it is that you are doing, the point here is that atheism, does NOT have an opposite - as there is nothing to oppose.

think of it this way: someone says they believe in god, but then they ask me if I believe, and I say "well I never really thought about it actually" (which actually used to be true), meaning that I haven't decided about my position about god, so is not making a choice, really the opposite of making a choice? Is my position really the opposite of the believer? What if I didn't even know there was a choice to be made?

No! my position, is akin to standing on the exact middle of the circle. If you make a choice, it's the choice you make that decides what it's opposite is but you *have* to make that choice first.

if you stood in the strong wind and did nothing you would get blown away, you have to exert the *opposite* force against it to not fall over.


THE LOTTO


let me use another analogy.

if you buy a lotto ticket, you are either a winner or a loser, if you don't buy a ticket, you are *neither* a winner, nor are you a loser. However, even if you don't play the lotto, most of you are *still* aware that people play lotto, but it just doesn't appeal to you....

Some players will think that the non-players are automatic losers for not bothering to play the game, but some of the non-players will consider the players automatic losers for playing this game every week and wasting their money, and yes you could win if you do play, but the odds are astronomically against you.

Point is, the opposite of a believer, is a non-believer, and "non-believer" doesn't exactly say what sort of person they are, does it? I could be a car driving non-believer or a Russian non-believer or a etc etc etc

for many people, they use the label "atheist" as if it's a positive, it is not a positive, it's the neutral position, so I reckon that it should not be used in that context of positive or negative, as it confuses those poor religious people and their "god did it" brains..

when somebody asks you what your religion is - if you consider yourself an atheist - you should say "no religion" or simply say "none"


GOD DENIAL? WELL, IT'S REACTIONARY, THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ALL YOURS


i believe this is the basis of the "burden of proof" argument being on the **believer**. My position as the non-believer, is the default, it's the believer that needs to bring proof to the party, because I did *nothing* to arrive at my beliefs, NOTHING AT ALL...... I didn't move off the centre of the circle, so just how is the burden of proof on me, the non-believer? Just how is the non-believer supposed to prove *nothing*? How do you prove you have not moved off the centre of the circle? Yes it obvious to you that you haven't moved, but someone else, they wouldn't know. They can't know. Because they are thicky thicky, thickety thick.

I vacated my mind of any "belief" in religion and god, and I make *no* claim that there isn't a god that wasn't in reaction to someone else saying that there was a god, so it's not like I go around trying to sell the idea that there is no god. All of my opposition to belief and the supernatural has *all* been a reactionary response to something someone has said or done to me.


i think this is the problem with the perception of atheism - some people seem to think that all atheists used to believe in god so they are NOW actively denying god as some sort of mantra to make god go away.. I also sometimes get the impression that believers think non-believers say such things just to piss them off, as if it's their believer RIGHT to bullshit about their fantasies and that we will accept what they have to say as a matter as fact. I only ever deny god about two seconds *after* some religious person tries to sell me *their* god, so it's reactionary.

It's *always* reactionary. and my reaction is often one of ... mocking .. ok then, *snickers*, be a believer!! *snickers*

I would never have thought to deny god if no-one made a speculation that there was a god, I always say "well, what makes you think there's a god?" ... and nothing i've heard is anything but lame ... basically most people believe because their mum said they should... If the religious don't want their god laughed at and mocked and denied, if they don't want what their mummies told them when they got tucked into bed to be disassembled and revealed to be a lie - then they can keep their god personal - like they are supposed to.

It's also very important to realise that it's THEIR god that is what is being denied, the god that *they* claim to "know" is what is being denied. There could be a god, but fucked if I have seen anything to make me think that anybody's *particular* god is *the* god, and the bullshit I have heard about god, is far below par of what I would expect from god anyway. "god made the universe hey? seems like making a universe was a pretty easy task for god, what else has god done?"

Obviously I'll repeat what I've said without being prompted to other people about god at times, probably after thinking about more ways about how incredibly wrong someone was with their god speculation, but even still, it was the *believer* that tipped that scale of mine in order for me to blab at them,

"WHAT?!?! BULLSHIT, there is no way that *your* god exists, your story just does not make sense, where did you get those ideas?..."

when the non-believer is given a religious scenario (aka a STORY) by the believer, and then the non-believer thinks about it for two seconds and then says "what?!?! that makes no sense, show me!" .. the believer then has no right to get upset when asked for proof.

Some of these believerish people want you to follow their religion, but just because they were stupid enough to believe what somebody told them, doesn't mean the same will happen with me. And seriously, I don't give a shit that it was a case of them being indoctrinated at a young age. Children, are truly *not* dumb, they can figure things out for themselves. I figured out religion was a heap of bullshit long ago, the bible lost me at about the flood story i think it was. I was ten or maybe a couple of years younger.

It is the irresponsible parents who do NOT teach their children about critical thinking that are the problem. If something doesn't make sense, teach the child to ask for clarification. Teach them how to find out for themselves and there is no excuse these days with Google and Wikipedia and such.

so if it wasn't for loud and outrageous claims like "THERE IS A GOD!! BECAUSE I SAID SO!!" there would be no equally loud questions asking for some proof of this "god" thing in return. And *seriously* -- these nut cases must take our silence (eg our TOLERANCE of their BULLSHIT) about these tall tales as some sort of an agreement with them, that's how arrogant some of these nutcases are... I know this for a fact as I've been told as much, and in no uncertain terms, "I am right, because I say so" .. that's what they literally say - in spite of their demanding that it's the bible that says so, because so often these fuck heads have got the bible completely wrong, it's the *person* and their twisted interpretation of how they read the bible that is saying "there must be a god"..

if you don't say shit to them, they think you are on their side - this is something I have proven many times - eg. i have had civil conversations with christians - all is sweet and nice, at first - but then the christian finds or figures out that i'm not christian - and *then* they start speaking to me like I'm a piece of shit...

go FUCK YOURSELF if you are one of those people. Religion of tolerance MY ARSE.

FREE WILL? I CAN ALSO NOT MAKE A CHOICE, RIGHT?

People who actively deny god are like the lotto non-player types who say that they refuse to play the lotto, "well.. OK... so don't play the lotto then!" .. it should be a case of not needing to say that you don't believe in god, but it's not, like I said above, people take your silence and tolerance of their bullshit as an affirmation that you are agreeing with them, probably because their arrogance is so huge they don't think that someone else could possibly think differently to them.

The way I see "atheist" - is that you wouldn't think of the concept of god in either a positive or a negative way.. This is the same as the person who isn't a "lotto denier" nor are they a "lotto player". They are aware of the lotto concept but it doesn't faze them either way. and while they are technically in the same bucket as the "lotto denier person", in that they don't play, it doesn't occur to them to play or not to play *either* way, so they are certainly unlikely to be a "lotto hater" .. the people who actively deny the lotto, probably do this as a reminder that they not waste their money, maybe they're owing some money to their bookie? or had a bad experience with god, I mean, the lotto...

It occurs to me that people might not be able to grasp or "get" the concept of not choosing a side. Why is that a problem? ARE YOU DUMB? ARE YOU STUPID?

it's like: do you go out with "Chris" or do you go out with "Saddam"? Does it really not occur to people that freedom of choice, aka "FREE WILL" (that thing "god" allegedly gave us), also means that you are free to *not* make a choice at all?

Well?

Another way of looking at it, is if the "lotto denier" walked into the newsagent, saw the lotto games, and then said "I do NOT wish to purchase a lotto ticket thanks" to the attendant, why would you say that if you weren't a mental case? or even if they said something along the same lines to themselves, "no! I won't buy a lotto ticket" in spite of seeing all the advertising. A "lotto denier" would be akin to an aggressive or militant atheist.

A true atheist is the person who doesn't care either way, and would be the person who walked into the newsagent and didn't think about any of the lotto games available, and just got on with what it was they were doing there in spite of having their senses overloaded with colourful banners enticing them to play the lotto games.

well at least that's how I see it

* * * *

i've described three perspectives above but really there are *four* sides of the argument, if you want to be really technical.

{{those that are believers}} /
{{those that are non-believers}} /
{{those who don't care}} /
{{those who are unaware of the whole thing in the first place}}


((i came up with a fifth one too - which could have been those who don't know what to believe, the "I want to believe" group, i guess there's a sixth one too, those who "do believe, but don't want to", which is probably a transitional and temporary state of mind heading away from belief, the "I want to believe" might be transitional towards belief... but i'm making shit up again ))

i've no idea which group would be the biggest as a lot of people outright lie, they say one thing, but mean another, or don't want to seem weak-mind by taking a position of doubt, but some of that lying is actually unintentional, because of their indoctrinating/brainwashing. The truth is, not making a decision about god would be the most prudent and sensible thing to do, and saying "I don't know", is the beginning of wisdom to paraphrase Lt Commander Data.

i would put myself into the "I don't care bucket", or at least I'm working towards that. you might point out that i *do* seem to care a fair bit about religion, but - it's entertainment - christianity is like a great big murder mystery horror drama movie where you gotta figure out who the bad guy is, because thus far no-one has said anything that makes any inkling of sense just yet, so the punch line of the whole movie is still yet to come, if it EVER comes at all, that is.

I'll be very annoyed if the BUTLER DID IT.

actually what I *do* care about is religion staying away from science, as the two don't belong together.

religion == train wreck, morbidly fascinating ... or maybe like masturbating with a cheese grater, slightly amusing, but mostly painful.

* * * *

(((
((this bit doesn't fit in, but i've left it))

but anyway: having the priest explain the bible when you don't understand keeps the majority in-line with the same ideas. It wasn't until the 1600s when the bible first became available for the regular person to read. Until then, only the clergy would be able to read the Latin or whatever it was written in that the common man couldn't read. I'd imagine that's why people went to church, they weren't able to read the bible themselves and who could afford a book in those days anyway?

Which is why Catholicism outnumbers all the other christian cults put together i would imagine. The church tells them how to interpret the bible, this way people don't go off getting their own ideas, and if they do have questions, then they are to confer with their Padre! That's what I was taught.

This may sound weird coming from someone who is anti-religion, but if you're going to have religion, then everyone needs to be believing the same thing, otherwise your religion is a joke, and that's all it is. The way I see this is that basically, these born again christian types each have their *own* version of christianity..

so in fact there isn't something like 30,000 different sects of christianity, not from what I've seen. I would suspect that there is actually closer to millions of versions of christianity, seeing how every "christian" i've encountered on myspaz (about fifty or so) seems to be on a different path, be it a slightly different path, or a massively wrong path. The point is if fifty people seem to have their christianity all over the place, then what does that say for the rest of them? It probably means they don't know what to think, but still say they are christians anyway ...

Gandhi said something along the lines of "In reality there are as many religions as there are individuals." .. i tend to agree with that assessment, although Gandhi was talking about the Hindu religion at the time, but it also applies to other religions.

)))

I AM THE EYE IN THE SKY

so yeah...

Religion was just another one of those things that I grew out of that wasn't really given a serious look at in the first place, strange that it is so normal to *not* be indoctrinated into stupidity...

Imagine if I was raised as if Star Wars was a fact, how would I be received as an adult in the "real" world? Would I not be ridiculed for believing that I am a "Jedi", regardless of how many good things I got out of this fiction, it's still fiction, it doesn't become *real* when I "just" believe in it. Telling other people they "just" need to believe in The Force, doesn't cut it either.

"Oh you just need to believe in Star Wars before you watch it" ... This is no diff to "You need to believe in Jesus before you read the bible" .. at least the Jedi don't condemn you to hell for not wanting to believe in The Force.

If George Lucas is considered the Messiah in two thousand years from now, the stories he told, would still be stories. The same with other "scripture" - they are stories - which may be based in truth, but they are still stories. You can still like those stories, you can still learn from those stories, but the universe is pretty big, it seems a bit silly to draw your universal view from a small set of people, when there are millions of people who have something useful to say who can give you a broader universal view, world views are too small these days.

although, I must admit, that even with a limited "knowledge" of god, I did spend quite a few years worrying about what god would think of what I was doing... but that was never an "at the time" thought, so fear of god didn't stop me being a little shit, god just made me feel bad about being myself, just by existing... but this doesn't imply that I believed *in* god, believing *in* something is supposed to be a good thing, thoughts of god were never a good thing to me.

I had no fear of hell, because I knew I wasn't doing anything *that* wrong, i just was never *good* enough for this god... and now that I'm typing this out, this "god" being, making me feel bad about myself could have certainly contributed to the depression I suffer now, yeah so on that front... Fuck you god!!

I am the eye in the sky,
looking at you,
I can read your mind,
I am the maker of rules,
dealing with fools,
I can cheat you blind.
And I don't need to see any more to know that,
I can read your mind.
--[Alan Parsons Project]

Mainly because I was convinced that god hated me, so I hated him back, I always thought if I met god, he'd better explain why I was given such a crappy hand, i used to be sooo selfish...

but that faded too...

then one day whilst in my teens i was asked if I believed in god.. I said that I didn't really believe in god and the reply to my statement was "oh.. so you're an atheist?" ... so I said "atheist? what's that?" ... as I was an un-christian, or a non-practicing catholic .. but I always happily admitted to being a Rooooman Catholic, because it sounds so much more... hmmm, Roman? Bloody Romans!

A true atheist probably wouldn't even realise that they were an atheist, just like a christian should never tell you that they are christian, their actions should speak for themselves.

HAIL SATAN

Oh of course, because I don't believe in your god that makes me an agent of Satan...

of course it does... *rolls*eyes*

since I don't believe in one of your gods, you expect me to believe in the other god you flap your mouth about, Satan? If it wasn't for Satan there'd be no evil, right? And if there was no evil, there wouldn't be any good, so god would be out of a job, right? ... christians must love SATAN so much.... right? gotta keep that evil around, just so we can have good.... right??? that's why god won't kill Satan, he'd be out of a job, and who's going to hire god after that?

"Oh, yeah Mr God, I'm afraid, that you are over qualified for this job, it says here you made the universe, well, we just want you to flip burgers and fry chips, I'm afraid you will be rather frustrated in the limited scope of the position we have on offer.."

Right about the same time as first hearing the term "atheist" at least in reference to me - i was into heavy metal and with my fading hate for god, I really got into the likes of Slayer and lots of others that escape my brain at the moment.

oh and I *still* think it's fucking hilarious that the term "atheist" even *exists* - the default position is complete ignorance of god. think about it, if somehow you were cut off from every person who had heard of god and you grew up not knowing about this god thing *at*all* - how would you know about god? I mean you could suspect that there might be some sort of super being, but you wouldn't have the mental image of an old-man-in-the-sky-daddy-christian-Michelangelo's-painting-in-the-Cistern-Chapel god who loves you but at one stage killed everyone on earth and that we are all inbred seeing how we came from one man and one woman, now would you? hmmm?

So Satan was my buddy, because all the music i listened to was evil, it was great... but nobody really cared, they were disturbed sure, but no more so than for any other strange thing kids do to act out, in fact my mother liked a lot of the heavy mental music i liked....

but if anything, my time as a heavy mental fan, ahem, heavy *metal* fan, taught me that the children of the beast in the seasons of whither, should stand and deliver, and be strong, and laugh, and Shout at the Devil...