Has it already been a year since the last Vaccine Awareness Month? A whole year has passed and people still are on their crusade to declare vaccines to be the greatest threat to human heath in like forever. Of course, they declare this in the face of the fact that general human health has vastly increased since the advent of vaccines. They scream about evil vaccines, apparently forgetting that smallpox is gone, polio is being wiped out, most people haven't even heard of whooping cough other than the outbreak last year, and that vaccine preventable diseases are slowly being diminished if not eradicated throughout the year.
To deny that vaccines work is attributable to only two things: gross and negligent ignorance of reality or a willing and somewhat impressive if frightening ability to lie to oneself. Well, technically there's the third option of sociopaths who are doing this because it's fun for them, but that's just scary. Simply put, there is no way to be anti-vaccine and be a rational person. "Too many too soon" is irrational fear not based in reality. "Vaccine preventable diseases aren't that bad" is cruel, evil, and obviously untrue. "I just want to make vaccines safe" is a lie, not even wrong, and makes me want to punch their infant children.
In short, as I don't need to be a windbag about this one, vaccines are very safe, they do what they're supposed to do quite well, and ever time you hear some asshole yelling about how dangerous vaccines are, you can now safely remember that that person is dead wrong. And if you want actual proof/citations of what I've said:
Immunize for Good.
'Nuff said.
October 18, 2011
October 14, 2011
My first Capoeira test
I've been taking Capoeira for over two years now, but until last night, I had never been tested. I'd never been tested simply because my first instructor never had tests because it was a UD club and not a formal class and my second and current instructor really could give less of a shit about structure like that. I was sort of vaguely tangentially involved with an actual school, but as I studied with those guys all of never, getting tested or going to a Batizado never happened. My current instructor got involved with another school and I got a third instructor who is actually a mestre, a master, and as I started taking classes up through the UD group I'm still involved with, I was invited with the UD group to participate in their Batizado.
What the hell is a Batizado? Well, according to Wikipedia it's a yearly event thing where students are baptized and officially recognized as students of a school. It's also, according to hearsay and my other research on the Internet, basically a Capoeira party. Also, someone is probably going to knock me down and baptize me with the floor. A, that's really entertaining and, B, after my test last night my mestre basically threw me at the floor, so at least I have experience with being baptized by the floor.
However, as I found out last week, the test isn't the Batizado. No, the test is done before the Batizado, usually with little warning. That may just be my luck, it may be a thing, I don't really know, all I know is I had been training my ass off for this test expecting it to be a lot later than it actually ended up being. So though I was fairly prepared, I could have been more prepared. Moving on.
Given that Capoeira is generally very laid back, the testing itself is actually laid back as well. I've been to many other tests in several other schools, and none were close to as laid back as this. However, don't even begin to imagine that it was easy. Crotch no.
Here's how it went down. I showed up, I was told I was testing, I warmed up a little, then me and the guy running the test went to a corner of the classroom and I got my test on. My tester said do ginga. I started to ginga. I didn't stop my ginga, other than for a few seconds at a time, for the rest of the test. I couldn't say exactly how long the test was, but try doing a ginga for five minutes and your legs will burn. The test was at least forty five minutes long, and the ginga was the easiest part.
To prep for this test, I had been given a sheet for the beginner, level one, and level two tests and as I was going to level two, yellow cord, I had been studying that sheet and was fairly confident with most of it. Unfortunately, as this was my first test, I had to do everything on all three sheets once on my left side and once on my right side. No pressure.
So the test was basically kicks, acrobatics, movements (called floreios), and combinations. Ok, there was also singing and playing music, but that was the cake walk. So for kicks I had to do all the kicks I'd learned, around fifteen of them, but not just the simple kick! No no, I had to do multiple variations of each kick. Acrobatics? A cartwheel is the main one, except that I know at least a dozen different varations. Of course the various cartwheels can be worked into the florieos of which can easily be combined into dozens, if not hundreds, of different movements. That wasn't even including the combinations! There were fortunately only like ten combos to do, but they could include all of the shit I was being tested on, so they got a little nuts. And all of this was done between ginga steps.
In terms of difficulty, I sweat so much that I had to wipe down the floor three times, and eventually, after nearly killing myself by slipping, my tester took pity on me and we found a carpeted area for the flying, spinning, jumping, flipping end of my test. I say in jest that I sweat out a gallon, but I'm not sure how much of a jest that is because my shirt was disgusting by the end of the test. Also, though I had prepared greatly, I still didn't know like five moves, so I had to figure them out during the test. No pressure.
All told, though, the test was within my bounds. It was intimidating as hell, but I stared it in the face and did my best and I passed. All that's left is the Batizado. So I go to a party and get my belt? Oh, yes, it's so easy. Except for that little minor detail thing where the Batizado is actually spread over many days, with lots of other workshops, music, and dance lessons.
I love Capoeira... but sometimes it loves me back a little too much.
What the hell is a Batizado? Well, according to Wikipedia it's a yearly event thing where students are baptized and officially recognized as students of a school. It's also, according to hearsay and my other research on the Internet, basically a Capoeira party. Also, someone is probably going to knock me down and baptize me with the floor. A, that's really entertaining and, B, after my test last night my mestre basically threw me at the floor, so at least I have experience with being baptized by the floor.
However, as I found out last week, the test isn't the Batizado. No, the test is done before the Batizado, usually with little warning. That may just be my luck, it may be a thing, I don't really know, all I know is I had been training my ass off for this test expecting it to be a lot later than it actually ended up being. So though I was fairly prepared, I could have been more prepared. Moving on.
Given that Capoeira is generally very laid back, the testing itself is actually laid back as well. I've been to many other tests in several other schools, and none were close to as laid back as this. However, don't even begin to imagine that it was easy. Crotch no.
Here's how it went down. I showed up, I was told I was testing, I warmed up a little, then me and the guy running the test went to a corner of the classroom and I got my test on. My tester said do ginga. I started to ginga. I didn't stop my ginga, other than for a few seconds at a time, for the rest of the test. I couldn't say exactly how long the test was, but try doing a ginga for five minutes and your legs will burn. The test was at least forty five minutes long, and the ginga was the easiest part.
To prep for this test, I had been given a sheet for the beginner, level one, and level two tests and as I was going to level two, yellow cord, I had been studying that sheet and was fairly confident with most of it. Unfortunately, as this was my first test, I had to do everything on all three sheets once on my left side and once on my right side. No pressure.
So the test was basically kicks, acrobatics, movements (called floreios), and combinations. Ok, there was also singing and playing music, but that was the cake walk. So for kicks I had to do all the kicks I'd learned, around fifteen of them, but not just the simple kick! No no, I had to do multiple variations of each kick. Acrobatics? A cartwheel is the main one, except that I know at least a dozen different varations. Of course the various cartwheels can be worked into the florieos of which can easily be combined into dozens, if not hundreds, of different movements. That wasn't even including the combinations! There were fortunately only like ten combos to do, but they could include all of the shit I was being tested on, so they got a little nuts. And all of this was done between ginga steps.
In terms of difficulty, I sweat so much that I had to wipe down the floor three times, and eventually, after nearly killing myself by slipping, my tester took pity on me and we found a carpeted area for the flying, spinning, jumping, flipping end of my test. I say in jest that I sweat out a gallon, but I'm not sure how much of a jest that is because my shirt was disgusting by the end of the test. Also, though I had prepared greatly, I still didn't know like five moves, so I had to figure them out during the test. No pressure.
All told, though, the test was within my bounds. It was intimidating as hell, but I stared it in the face and did my best and I passed. All that's left is the Batizado. So I go to a party and get my belt? Oh, yes, it's so easy. Except for that little minor detail thing where the Batizado is actually spread over many days, with lots of other workshops, music, and dance lessons.
I love Capoeira... but sometimes it loves me back a little too much.
September 29, 2011
I hate nutrition more today
So as I may have mentioned I take a drug that helps me sleep called Seroquel. It's hardcore, to quote Wikipedia, "an atypical antipsychotic approved for the treatment of schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder." No, I'm not psychotic or schizo, I just don't sleep well and one of the off label uses for Seroquel is sleep aid, and it's unmatched in being able to help people who can't sleep otherwise. Since being on this drug I have been able to sleep better than ever before, but it does have a downside: weight gain. Ever had a full meal and then been just as hungry after that meal as when you started and have a desperate compulsion to continue eating? Yeah, that's Seroquel. I'm hovering around 205 lbs lately, which is really bad on the BMI scale, though not actually that bad in reality. Still, I'm bigger than I want to be.
I have fought tooth and nail to bring my weight back down. I eat much less food that I really enjoy (read high flavor high calorie) and much more reasonable stuff (fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, etc). I have slowly been cutting calorie sources out of my diet, losing sugar where I can, eating healthier breads, not eating those chips with my lunch, limiting my happiest food (desert) to one small serving a day. However, I never saw much of a difference in my weight.
A couple of weeks ago recently, I decided I needed some downtime from my very restricted diet and just ate whatever the hell I felt like for two weeks. It was glorious and delicious. So much bad food. And you know what? I didn't see a difference in my weight either up or down.
After that came my return to the UD Capoeira classes, where I decided to increase my workout schedule to a ludicrous 5 days a week. Granted I've only managed four days a week so far, but that's still doubling my already challenging workout schedule. I've been at this for weeks. Net result on my weight without increasing the amount or badness of the food I eat? No change.
I was starting to think I'd gone insane. Maybe I was sleep eating? Maybe I was unconsciously eating an additional 1000 calories a day somehow? Maybe my 15 minute walk that I've been forced to skip more often due to the new job was actually burning more calories than I thought? Then I turned to the Internet.
As it turns out, people on Seroquel who have a problem with weight gain have noticed a weird phenomenon: they gain weight to a point they hate and then that weight remains constant no matter what changes to diet or exercise are made. The only people who saw any weight loss were the ones who cut back on Seroquel or transitioned to different drugs.
Apparently if I ever want to not be 205 pounds I have to cut back on my only hope of sleeping at night. I don't have to work out or eat differently, I just have to stop sleeping. This is a really, really big problem for me, as I'm not willing to go back to the land of sleep deprivation, but I really want to get some weight off. I'm doing well in Capoeira, but if I lost even ten pounds I could be doing so much better, not to mention I'd look better.
For now, at least, I'm going to stick to the status quo. I may not be happy with my weight, but at least it is stable and not disgusting. We'll see if continued increased activity over months has some long term gains or not and, come my next doctor's apt, see if there aren't any new viable sleep aid choices.
I have fought tooth and nail to bring my weight back down. I eat much less food that I really enjoy (read high flavor high calorie) and much more reasonable stuff (fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, etc). I have slowly been cutting calorie sources out of my diet, losing sugar where I can, eating healthier breads, not eating those chips with my lunch, limiting my happiest food (desert) to one small serving a day. However, I never saw much of a difference in my weight.
A couple of weeks ago recently, I decided I needed some downtime from my very restricted diet and just ate whatever the hell I felt like for two weeks. It was glorious and delicious. So much bad food. And you know what? I didn't see a difference in my weight either up or down.
After that came my return to the UD Capoeira classes, where I decided to increase my workout schedule to a ludicrous 5 days a week. Granted I've only managed four days a week so far, but that's still doubling my already challenging workout schedule. I've been at this for weeks. Net result on my weight without increasing the amount or badness of the food I eat? No change.
I was starting to think I'd gone insane. Maybe I was sleep eating? Maybe I was unconsciously eating an additional 1000 calories a day somehow? Maybe my 15 minute walk that I've been forced to skip more often due to the new job was actually burning more calories than I thought? Then I turned to the Internet.
As it turns out, people on Seroquel who have a problem with weight gain have noticed a weird phenomenon: they gain weight to a point they hate and then that weight remains constant no matter what changes to diet or exercise are made. The only people who saw any weight loss were the ones who cut back on Seroquel or transitioned to different drugs.
Apparently if I ever want to not be 205 pounds I have to cut back on my only hope of sleeping at night. I don't have to work out or eat differently, I just have to stop sleeping. This is a really, really big problem for me, as I'm not willing to go back to the land of sleep deprivation, but I really want to get some weight off. I'm doing well in Capoeira, but if I lost even ten pounds I could be doing so much better, not to mention I'd look better.
For now, at least, I'm going to stick to the status quo. I may not be happy with my weight, but at least it is stable and not disgusting. We'll see if continued increased activity over months has some long term gains or not and, come my next doctor's apt, see if there aren't any new viable sleep aid choices.
September 27, 2011
I hate nutrition
I may have bitched about this before, but one of the side effects of one of the drugs I'm on is weight gain. I work out and do my best to eat right, but it's ever a problem for me feeling like I'm carrying more weight than I should. Because of this, I'm careful to try to eat better most of the time. Recently I started eating at Moe's and became a big fan of their burritos. I didn't want to look up the caloric info on it, mostly because I was sure it was going to be bad and I was going to have to eat them less. However, when I finally looked it up, even when I included every single ingredient, the burrito was less than 450 calories. I was pleasantly surprised. Then, just because I was there, I glanced at how much the 2 ounces of queso I had was, expecting bad things. 150 calories. Really, not that bad. So overall, 600 calories, not bad. Then I looked at the tortilla chips.
600 calories? Six the fuck hundred calories? For a few chips? The burrito and the freaking cheese sauce combined equals some chips? God dammit. So now I guess I just get a burrito. I hate nutrition.
600 calories? Six the fuck hundred calories? For a few chips? The burrito and the freaking cheese sauce combined equals some chips? God dammit. So now I guess I just get a burrito. I hate nutrition.
July 29, 2011
Sexist, racist, homophobic thinking…
Despite being a privileged white male, I am not sexist, racist, or homophobic. I was raised in a color blind, gender blind, sexual preference blind house. When I was a child I made friends with white and black children without preference because I didn’t know there was supposed to be a difference. I was about as competent with girls as a child as I am with women as an adult, but I never thought of them as anything less than my equals. As a child I was brought up in a church with active and out gay members and talked to them like all the other adults because they were all just adults to me.
I never knew I was supposed to care.
As a result I grew up with the attitude of “I don’t care if you’re not white/a woman/gay” because I didn’t know that wasn’t a good thing. I thought it was. However, as learning is one of those things I just won’t stop doing, I’m coming to realize that my attitude isn’t the best one. It’s not that I don’t care that you’re different from me, it’s that it doesn’t bother me that you’re different from me.
As the best example I can think of off the top of my head, my Capoeira instructor Rasai is a dreadlocked Jamaican man with huge muscles and a larger than life personality. He was raised on a farm, really finds our concept of holidays annoying, and is a very dirty old man. None of this got in the way of me being his student or becoming his friend. Sure we bicker about how he should chill out about having his picture taken or maybe consider getting a goddamn cell phone, but we’re still friends. Do I not care that he’s black? Am I ignoring his heritage?
What I think I’m doing is outright accepting that he’s different in many ways and not letting those differences make me think less of him. I take these different experiences he’s had as just a fact of life because everyone is different. This is autopilot for me. Rather than being a point of contention, I find his very different outlook on life refreshing and interesting.
So from now on it's not, "I don't care if you're X." I don't have a simple one-liner to replace it, but maybe that's the point.
I never knew I was supposed to care.
As a result I grew up with the attitude of “I don’t care if you’re not white/a woman/gay” because I didn’t know that wasn’t a good thing. I thought it was. However, as learning is one of those things I just won’t stop doing, I’m coming to realize that my attitude isn’t the best one. It’s not that I don’t care that you’re different from me, it’s that it doesn’t bother me that you’re different from me.
As the best example I can think of off the top of my head, my Capoeira instructor Rasai is a dreadlocked Jamaican man with huge muscles and a larger than life personality. He was raised on a farm, really finds our concept of holidays annoying, and is a very dirty old man. None of this got in the way of me being his student or becoming his friend. Sure we bicker about how he should chill out about having his picture taken or maybe consider getting a goddamn cell phone, but we’re still friends. Do I not care that he’s black? Am I ignoring his heritage?
What I think I’m doing is outright accepting that he’s different in many ways and not letting those differences make me think less of him. I take these different experiences he’s had as just a fact of life because everyone is different. This is autopilot for me. Rather than being a point of contention, I find his very different outlook on life refreshing and interesting.
So from now on it's not, "I don't care if you're X." I don't have a simple one-liner to replace it, but maybe that's the point.
July 15, 2011
The Internet/atheist/skepticism/sexism shitstorm you probably don't know about
I was going to ignore this issue, mostly because it's aggravating to watch this much fail, but after reading Greta Christina's post, I came to the conclusion that talking is better, so here's a post about sexism in the skepticism / atheism world.
Here's where it started: Rebecca Watson went to some atheist shindig in Ireland, gave a speech about sexism, and later went drinking with friends. At 4 AM she headed for bed. A guy joined her in the elevator and chose that moment to say that he was impressed by her and invite her to his room for coffee. She declined and in a blog post mentioned this and said that it made her feel uncomfortable and suggested, "Guys, don't do that." That like two minutes out of the video here.
Here's where it went wrong: though some people agreed with Rebecca that the dude in the elevator (later dubbed Elevator Guy), some people, both men and women, disagreed with Rebecca. Those who disagreed were often men aggressively insisting that Rebecca was wrong, she shouldn't have been creeped out, that she was a man-hater, and other very sexist things that went all the way from slightly misogynistic to OMG WTF misogyny.
Here's where it went explode: Richard Dawkins, Dark Lord of the Atheists, posted on PZ Myers' blog some very sarcastic and dismissive comments that enraged the pro Rebecca side and fueled the fires of the misogynistic idiots. It's been an ongoing shitstorm of idiocy ever since. From "guys, don't be creepy" to massive Internet flame war spanning dozens of sites in just under a week.
Now, I think that Rebecca's comment was reasonable and, even if Elevator Guy's intentions were the purest of gold, the dude did something creepy possibly inadvertently. That's where it should have ended. Maybe some people could say, "Poor socially awkward guy." Instead, people, admittedly including women, but mostly men, made complete asses of themselves by letting both privilege and disgusting sexism flare up and out of control. And they're still going. Calmer heads have tried to calm shit down, but Mansplaining abounds.
The bad thing is a lot of guys are sexist idiots. The good thing is that as this gets SO MUCH attention, at least some guys are finally starting to actually hear what women are saying: context matters. Yes, technically guys can hit on women anytime, anywhere, under any circumstances, but sometimes that's going to be inappropriate or creepy. Picking the correct moment to hit on a woman makes a world of difference.
As an aside, my favorite part of this situation is that Richard Dawkins is a dick. Back in the "Don't be a dick" conversation Phil Plait started, Dawkins came out against not being a dick, as did a lot of other assholes. Very recently Dawkins spoke out against Phil's position again, pointing out that being a dick could be useful. Back when the conversation started I commented, "The dicks also clearly don’t care who their target is..." Well, now Dawkins has proved my point. Despite the fact that Rebecca Watson is popular, and very intelligent, and a great help to both the atheist and skeptic movements, and was in theory actually a friend to Dawkins, he chose to be a douchebag over being polite and did so publicly no less. Many of the people who advocate that being dicks is useful don't give a crap who their target is. They're too interested in getting their petty digs in to worry about offending someone, even if that person is a friend or an ally.
Before my whole figuring out out I was an atheist thing, I'd thought poorly of Dawkins, thinking him an asshole. As I was reading up on atheism, he was referred to and said some nice things enough so that I was grudgingly changing my opinion of him. Now, however, he's proved what I always thought about him: he's an asshole. He may be smart, and he may write good books, and he may even say useful and helpful things, but above all he's an asshole. I choose to listen to atheists and skeptics who understand that, yes, context matters. I have friends who are religious, and while I may completely disagree with their religious views, I'd rather have them as my friends than get in some petty digs about religion.
Priorities. I has them.
Here's where it started: Rebecca Watson went to some atheist shindig in Ireland, gave a speech about sexism, and later went drinking with friends. At 4 AM she headed for bed. A guy joined her in the elevator and chose that moment to say that he was impressed by her and invite her to his room for coffee. She declined and in a blog post mentioned this and said that it made her feel uncomfortable and suggested, "Guys, don't do that." That like two minutes out of the video here.
Here's where it went wrong: though some people agreed with Rebecca that the dude in the elevator (later dubbed Elevator Guy), some people, both men and women, disagreed with Rebecca. Those who disagreed were often men aggressively insisting that Rebecca was wrong, she shouldn't have been creeped out, that she was a man-hater, and other very sexist things that went all the way from slightly misogynistic to OMG WTF misogyny.
Here's where it went explode: Richard Dawkins, Dark Lord of the Atheists, posted on PZ Myers' blog some very sarcastic and dismissive comments that enraged the pro Rebecca side and fueled the fires of the misogynistic idiots. It's been an ongoing shitstorm of idiocy ever since. From "guys, don't be creepy" to massive Internet flame war spanning dozens of sites in just under a week.
Now, I think that Rebecca's comment was reasonable and, even if Elevator Guy's intentions were the purest of gold, the dude did something creepy possibly inadvertently. That's where it should have ended. Maybe some people could say, "Poor socially awkward guy." Instead, people, admittedly including women, but mostly men, made complete asses of themselves by letting both privilege and disgusting sexism flare up and out of control. And they're still going. Calmer heads have tried to calm shit down, but Mansplaining abounds.
The bad thing is a lot of guys are sexist idiots. The good thing is that as this gets SO MUCH attention, at least some guys are finally starting to actually hear what women are saying: context matters. Yes, technically guys can hit on women anytime, anywhere, under any circumstances, but sometimes that's going to be inappropriate or creepy. Picking the correct moment to hit on a woman makes a world of difference.
As an aside, my favorite part of this situation is that Richard Dawkins is a dick. Back in the "Don't be a dick" conversation Phil Plait started, Dawkins came out against not being a dick, as did a lot of other assholes. Very recently Dawkins spoke out against Phil's position again, pointing out that being a dick could be useful. Back when the conversation started I commented, "The dicks also clearly don’t care who their target is..." Well, now Dawkins has proved my point. Despite the fact that Rebecca Watson is popular, and very intelligent, and a great help to both the atheist and skeptic movements, and was in theory actually a friend to Dawkins, he chose to be a douchebag over being polite and did so publicly no less. Many of the people who advocate that being dicks is useful don't give a crap who their target is. They're too interested in getting their petty digs in to worry about offending someone, even if that person is a friend or an ally.
Before my whole figuring out out I was an atheist thing, I'd thought poorly of Dawkins, thinking him an asshole. As I was reading up on atheism, he was referred to and said some nice things enough so that I was grudgingly changing my opinion of him. Now, however, he's proved what I always thought about him: he's an asshole. He may be smart, and he may write good books, and he may even say useful and helpful things, but above all he's an asshole. I choose to listen to atheists and skeptics who understand that, yes, context matters. I have friends who are religious, and while I may completely disagree with their religious views, I'd rather have them as my friends than get in some petty digs about religion.
Priorities. I has them.
June 22, 2011
Sort of a retraction...
So this is sort of embarrassing, but as it turns out I am an atheist, I just didn't know it. Yeah, really. In fact I have been an atheist for a very long time, I just wasn't aware of it. How is this possible? Allow me to quote YouTube user AronRa: "Atheist does not mean that you reject the possibility of a god," and "The only thing that defines an atheist is that you are not convinced that there must be a god." I am not convinced.
What's more amusing to me is that I wrote AronRa an email to thank him for helping me figure this out and he actually responded that it was his intention to share this story at future atheist meetings and conventions. That is, I think, freaking hilarious.
In further researching this it turns out that Greta Christina had something similar to say about atheism. "For me, and for the overwhelming majority of atheists I know, our atheism is a provisional conclusion, based on careful reasoning and on the best available evidence we have. Our atheism is the conclusion that the God hypothesis is unsupported by any good evidence, and that unless we see better evidence, we're going to assume that God does not exist. If we see better evidence, we'll change our minds."
Seems that what I though atheism was isn't what atheism is. I thought that atheism is the belief that there is no god, and that is apparently the general belief. Instead atheism is the lack of a belief in god. A bit of a quibble, but it shoots the "is atheism a belief?" question right in the face. I don't believe there is no god, I lack the belief that there is a god. If you could give me indisputable evidence that god existed tomorrow, I'd change my mind. Even Richard Dawkins, Dark Lord of the Atheists, said that on a scale of 1 being an absolute certainty that there is a god and 7 being absolute certainty that there is not a god that he was at a 6.
Granted, if you did give me that evidence, you'd still have to work to make me care much, so even though my atheism might change, my apatheism probably wouldn't. And, yes, it's possible to be both. It's possible to be an agnostic and an atheist at the same time as well apparently.
So what does this change? In many ways, not much. I think the same things I thought before this revelation. But in some ways, huge changes. I used to be pissed off because the Pledge of Allegiance (yes I will not shut up about this) was an insult to a group I cared about but didn't consider myself to be a part of; now the Pledge is an insult to me. Every time I see "In God we trust" on a coin or dolla bill, it's me that's devalued. I'm as patriotic as the next guy. I'm more patriotic than the next guy. But because I lack a belief that some people have I'm looked down on, considered unelectable, and untrustworthy?
In some ways I'm the same guy. In others I now burn with an anger I didn't feel before. I may be the same shouty, opinionated, arrogant, patriotic, pro underdog guy as before, but it's different now... Now I am the underdog.
What's more amusing to me is that I wrote AronRa an email to thank him for helping me figure this out and he actually responded that it was his intention to share this story at future atheist meetings and conventions. That is, I think, freaking hilarious.
In further researching this it turns out that Greta Christina had something similar to say about atheism. "For me, and for the overwhelming majority of atheists I know, our atheism is a provisional conclusion, based on careful reasoning and on the best available evidence we have. Our atheism is the conclusion that the God hypothesis is unsupported by any good evidence, and that unless we see better evidence, we're going to assume that God does not exist. If we see better evidence, we'll change our minds."
Seems that what I though atheism was isn't what atheism is. I thought that atheism is the belief that there is no god, and that is apparently the general belief. Instead atheism is the lack of a belief in god. A bit of a quibble, but it shoots the "is atheism a belief?" question right in the face. I don't believe there is no god, I lack the belief that there is a god. If you could give me indisputable evidence that god existed tomorrow, I'd change my mind. Even Richard Dawkins, Dark Lord of the Atheists, said that on a scale of 1 being an absolute certainty that there is a god and 7 being absolute certainty that there is not a god that he was at a 6.
Granted, if you did give me that evidence, you'd still have to work to make me care much, so even though my atheism might change, my apatheism probably wouldn't. And, yes, it's possible to be both. It's possible to be an agnostic and an atheist at the same time as well apparently.
So what does this change? In many ways, not much. I think the same things I thought before this revelation. But in some ways, huge changes. I used to be pissed off because the Pledge of Allegiance (yes I will not shut up about this) was an insult to a group I cared about but didn't consider myself to be a part of; now the Pledge is an insult to me. Every time I see "In God we trust" on a coin or dolla bill, it's me that's devalued. I'm as patriotic as the next guy. I'm more patriotic than the next guy. But because I lack a belief that some people have I'm looked down on, considered unelectable, and untrustworthy?
In some ways I'm the same guy. In others I now burn with an anger I didn't feel before. I may be the same shouty, opinionated, arrogant, patriotic, pro underdog guy as before, but it's different now... Now I am the underdog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)