An eloquent defense

I don't know who this Stephanie Z chick is but her comment is a very clear and calm explanation why atheists can seem aggressive.

It’s worth remembering where this debate came from. Atheists, only recently starting to stand up and be counted in any number, are seeing the people who have been saying the same things that atheists have been saying for centuries (as noted in comment 5, then largely ignored) being told to hush up because they’re being noticed for once and that’s making trouble. These are frequently also the people who gave your rank-and-file atheist the courage to come out and who provide sympathy when coming out results in the crap it always results in. But hush, because what these other people are doing is really important.

Of course, it is important. But so is being supported and encouraged as an out atheist. So is being able to tell people how religion hurt you or those you love without having to put bows on it. So is being able to tell other people that they have a real choice to get out of abusive religions. So is being able to run for public office. So is being able to keep your job. So is being able to keep your kids.

But hush. And be really nice to the people who are telling you to hush. Be nice to the people who are telling you that you matter less than what they’re doing. Be nice to the people who are doing good work but only talk about why people like you are bad. Be nice to the people who might, someday let you eat at the grown-up table if you stay quiet enough at the children’s table first (and when there are no more grown-up problems you might interfere with). Hush and trust them, despite the fact that they’re calling you the problem.

Yeah, no. Atheists are being aggressive, in part, because they’re being told to go back to being passive. They’re being argumentative because there’s a constant onslaught of messages leveled at them and everyone they have to deal with that becomes the unquestioned social background if they don’t. They’re being rude because everybody is rude sometimes, and they’re not going to be left out if you’re not. They’re being condescending because you’ve been told this before in some form, but you can’t seem to move past the fact that someone insulted you in order to hear it.

Damn straight.

Oh, the sprain!

So my instructor sprained my ankle two weeks ago today. What, I didn't do it? No, it's legitimately his fault. I was doing a leg kick, he caught my leg with both of his legs and twisted, and with a resounding pop my ankle was sprained. Now, I've had sprains before, and they've been usually painful and annoying but short lived. This situation was quite different as there was no pain. That's right, sprained ankle, no pain whatsoever. It led me to wonder if it was actually sprained, but as it swelled up like a wee balloon, yes I'm now sure it was sprained. However, the lack of pain really confused me. Anyway, the usual response to a sprain is RICE:

Rest
Ice
Compression
Elevation

So did I rest it? No. It didn't hurt, so I kept working out on it, not just immediately following but in the past two weeks as well. Did I ice it? Not initially, but when the swelling didn't go down I iced it some to no avail. Elevation I tried, but again lack of results. Eventually I decided to try compression, and that seems to have worked to some degree, as my ankle now actually hurts sometimes. However, the swelling is still there, so I'm going back to mostly apathy.

I'll ice it and compress it some more tonight, but I doubt it will make a difference. Besides, since I'll only be working on the ankle after Capoeira tonight I'll be at a disadvantage anyway. You'd think my trip to FL this weekend might force me to rest it, but as I'm already hunting down a Capoeira school to play at while I'm out of town, I don't see that happening.

If my foot rots off or something equally horrifying, I give you full rights to call me an idiot.

Attempt eight...

Religion, the lack, and everything else, is a difficult subject to tackle. The problem here is that I have friends on all sides of this argument. I have atheist friends. I have friends who range from casually to devoutly held faith. What's important to me is that I keep these friends. Unfortunately it's also important that I speak my mind. This is a post I've been unable to finish several times, but I'm having another stab at it. I may even post this one.

What I am is apathetic, an apatheist to be precise. Basically I don't care if there is or isn't a god. God or not god has had no meaningful or relevant affect on my life other than to be something to argue about, so fuck it. I have better things to do with my time, like stare at walls, chew gum, or get in pointless arguments on the Internet. I don't agree with atheists or theists, so once again I'm in a tiny corner where few others bother to tread. So what do I think about everyone else?

Atheists first. The following is why I'm not an atheist courtesy of Carl Sagan: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." I actually agree with atheists for the most part. However, there are New Atheists, or Gnu Atheists, who basically called open season on religion and are attacking religion at every step. They are rational thinkers and back up their assertions on typically good evidence, but they don't care who they offend at the end of the day calling the religious deluded and worse. While I appreciate the sentiment, being dicks about it isn't really helping as I see it, so I find them annoying even as I agree with much of what they say. But there are plenty of atheists with a live and let live attitude, so fine.

Now religion. Religion is based on faith; that means that you can't prove what you believe but you believe it nonethless. I do not discount that it takes strength to have this faith; I respect that it's difficult. However, what I don't respect is when the faithful viciously attack atheists for daring to dissent or even just for asking questions. Still, there are plenty of religious people with a live and let live attitude, so also fine.

Then we get to politics. Who are the people who hold political offices? Christians. Sure there's the occasional Jewish or Muslim person, but 99% of the time Christians. Most people wouldn't vote for an atheist no matter his qualifications. That attitude is so un-American it makes me want to punch babies. When politicians start bitching about being persecuted by the atheists, secularists, or anything else like that, I want to punch their infant children. That's like republicans AND democrats complaining about being persecuted by libertarians! Like atheists, we libertarians aren't even invited to the party. However, I've never heard anyone say they wouldn't consider voting for a libertarian based on his party alone (just because we're crazy). I can say that I've heard, many times, that people wouldn't vote for an atheist entirely because that person was an atheist. That, in a nutshell, is why I'm so aggressively pro-atheist. If you hate blacks you're a racist and that's not ok; if you hate jewish people you're anti-Semitic and that's not ok; if you hate gay people, you're a homophobe and that's increasingly not ok; if you hate fat people, you're an asshole and that's not ok; if you hate atheists, well, that's just fine? Fucking no.

We are guaranteed religious freedom by the Constitution, all of us, every single American. Choosing to not follow a religion, while unpopular, is something that, as Americans, we should be defending. Unpopular views, even those we find extremely distasteful, are the right of all Americans. I may hate what the Westboro Baptist Church is and says, but they have a right to say it, just as I have the right to revile their existence.

So what's my point? Whatever you believe, so long as you accept the glaring flaws of your belief and don't force it upon others, is fine by me. Whatever you believe, so long as you agree that people who completely disagree with you have the right to believe what they want, then we're good. Fortunately, I think this includes nearly everyone I count as a friend. I am a lucky man.

I hate my fucking job

I have been asking for programming work for now no less than nine months. Last week I was finally given a programming project which I got quite far into on Friday. Then today, I come into work and my computer is hosed. Can't work! I put in the request to get it fixed, but how fast do they get here? They don't. So the only programming work I've had in forever is immediately passed on to another programmer. And it turns out that the information I was given to complete this task was actually wrong. So even if I had finished the stupid programming job, it wouldn't have been right and I would have taken shit for that, despite the fact that I would have been doing what I was told in the first fucking place. Fuck my life.

Breaking up is hard to do

I just ended a relationship with a young lady I had met on the Internet. The attraction was there and while I did like her, I knew that long term potential wasn't there, so I broke it off with her. I did the best I could, I was honest and clear, tried to blunt the hurt as much as possible. She really liked me and she didn't take the news too well, and I hate giving good people bad news. I don't know if it speaks well of me or makes me a wuss, but I really feel like a jerk right now. I made the right choice, that I'm sure of, and I made it very clear to her that she did nothing wrong, but she was shocked and hurt and I hate that I had to make her feel that way.

In a way it's almost better when relationships explode in a fiery conflagration that makes everyone involved angry and screamy. That kind of pain is easy to deal with, or it is for me. This quiet, sad, and drama-free breakup just sucks. I wish there had been something I could have done differently to make it better, but short of staying in the relationship till something better came along which is a most dick of dick moves, there was no way to avoid this.

Stupid emotions. I should, like, be a robot. Or something.

Admitting weakness...

Pull ups, chin ups, you name it, I couldn't do them. I've taken many martial arts, but the ability to pull oneself up was never really called upon. As such I never actually did any pull ups or chin ups. So when my Capoeira instructor brought in a chin up bar, I expected to have a poor showing. Well, worse than that, I couldn't do a single chin up, much less a pull up. I felt appropriately shamed. Though Capoeira is lotsa legs, having appropriate upper body strength is also important, so resolved to start training towards pull ups. I suppose it's worth mentioning that if I cheat, that is I don't start and end at a dead hang, I can muddle out a few chin ups, but do it right or don't do it at all, so my goal was a full pull: from a dead hang all the way up and all the way back down to a dead hang.

After a few weeks of being a cheap bastard and not buying the really expensive bars you hang in a doorway, I eventually found one for a reasonable price and started trying to do what I call L ups because the part of the bar I'm holding are parallel bits that stick out, a nice in between setting of chin up and pull up. Since I couldn't even do one up I decided the best was was to start with dead drops, that is to hop up into position and then very slowly lower all the way down to a dead hang. I found out the next day, with screamingly painful arms, that this kind of workout, while effective, is the most painful way to start. OUCH. So I looked at the other options for people who can't do any ups and found that if I put my feet behind me on a box or something that I could do slightly assisted L ups, so there I started.

It's been a few weeks and I was showing small amounts of improvement but I still couldn't do a single anything up. I had been concentrating on chin ups as my unassisted attempts as they are the easiest to do, but no luck. It was like I was pulling, and could get my shoulders to move a bit, but nothing after that. I was missing an entire muscle group or something. It was depressing, but I soldiered on as I usually do. Then, yesterday, before my full workout, I successfully struggled through a single chin up! I was totally psyched. I tried for a second one, failed, and went back to my normal workout, but I managed it!

With one down now it's just a matter of time before I get to my goal. It may be a long time, but patience is a virtue I have when it comes to strength training. My goal is going to be hard to get to but it is as follows: ten chin ups, ten L ups, and then twenty pull ups alternating pulling up to chest and up to back. From one chin up to forty assorted ups. This ain't gonna be easy, but it will definitely be worth it.

The Pledge...

The Pledge of Allegiance was, originally:

I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

In 1923 the pledge was changed so that new immigrants wouldn't confuse loyalties with their country of origin. It was:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

In 1954, after years of pressure from religious influences, the words "under god" were added, bringing the Pledge to the wording we have today.

Why is this not ok? Because "under god" is an insult to every American who doesn't believe in this nebulous "god". Atheists, obviously, are the first people that pop to mind for who's being insulted, but let's not forget Apatheists, Secularists, Humanists, Wiccans, and anyone else who isn't Christian. Oh, yes, the non-specific "god" is supposedly intended to include other religions, but the words were added by Christians for Christians. This is where the bullshit of "we are a Christian nation" began, and here it must end.

We are not a Christian nation. That's what the freedom of religion and the separation of church and state are all about. We are a nation of all religions and none, or at least we're supposed to be. So every time someone posts their little "say the pledge like we always did" bullshit on Facebook or sends on a forwarded email chain of the same crap I get pissed. This isn't a little deal. It's a big deal. I thought the "under god" line should be removed when I was active at my parents church, I thought the same when I flirted with atheism, the same when I went Buddhist, and the same now that I'm an apatheist. It has nothing to do with my religion and everything to do with believing in liberty and justice for all, because there are no exceptions listed after "for all", and until 1954 there weren't any exceptions in the Pledge either.

To put it in terms that might resonate with you more, imagine if instead of "one nation under god" the pledge read "one white nation". Would that be just as ok? No! It would be unimaginably racist and wouldn't even be considered to be added to the pledge. So how is "under god" any better? It isn't. If you'd like to see this horrible and apt comparison thoroughly examined, read this. It gets the point across more eloquently than I could.

Ultimately, it comes down to this: If the pledge is to be spoken in schools, in government buildings, or in the public square, it must be representative of ALL Americans. Excise two inappropriate words, and no one in the country would ever complain about the Pledge again. That way we truly could get back to being, "one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Why I'm pro-atheist.

I still haven't yet figured out how to write my religion/atheism/etc post, but I do have a number of examples as to why I am very pro-atheist when it comes to politics. This probably won't surprise you, but these examples come from republicans.

Newt Gingrich:
"I have two grandchildren: Maggie is 11; Robert is 9. I am convinced that if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America, by the time they're my age they will be in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American."

Me:
This horrifying secular atheist country will be dominated by radical Islamists? What?

Mitt Romney:
"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone....[I]n recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning....It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong."

Me:
Separation of church and state is pretty clear just from the name itself. Stating that religion is a prerequisite for freedom is mind-bogglingly stupid, only beaten by calling secularism a religion.

Sarah Palin:
"...hearing any leader declare that America isn't a Christian nation and poking an ally like Israel in the eye, it's mind-boggling...."

Me:
America isn't a Christian nation. Fish in a barrel. Moving on.

Mike Huckabee:
"If integrity and character are divorced from God, they don't make sense."
"I almost wish that there would be, like, a simultaneous telecast, and all Americans would be forced — forced at gunpoint no less — to listen to every David Barton message, and I think our country would be better for it. I wish it’d happen."

Me:
I know people of integrity and character who don't need a God to tell them that rape, slavery, and murder are wrong. I bet you do too.
Forcing people at gunpoint to listen to David Barton is in what possible way acceptable in your mind?

Tim Pawlenty:
"We need to be a country that turns toward God. Not a country that turns away from God."
"We have, as a country, a founding perspective that we’re founded under God; our founding documents reference and acknowledge God, and acknowledge that our rights and privileges come from our Creator."

Me:
We do? Why?
No, actually, that's a bold faced lie, as God isn't mentioned in the Constitution. It's like the founders, men I might add, were deliberately separating church and state. Shocking.

This is the kind of shit that gets me so angry I can't think straight. How are these people supposed to lead a country when they're busy denying and vilifying an estimated 10% of the population based on a bigoted belief that is expressly forbidden by our founding documents? If we did have a leader who was saying things about atheists, I wish it would be something more like this:

"For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and nonbelievers."

Oh, wait, that one was President Obama. Looks like someone might get it! And he's not a republican. Shocking.