More on Being a Non-believer

MORE ON BEING AN UNBELIEVER
Sometimes someone says to an atheist, "You are always talking about what you don't believe. I never hear just what it is that you do believe."

First, a comment. Everyone is an unbeliever (atheist). Some don't believe in Ra, Isis or Zeus; some don't believe in Krishna; some don't believe in Buddha; some don't believe in Allah; some don't believe in Jesus or God. Those who are willing to be known as non-believers (atheists) simply don't believe in any of the above.
Here are some things I do believe:
(1) There is much that we don't know, e.g. the origin of the universe and of life. Time itself may be an illusion.
(2) We are all in this (our existence) together. What affects one affects all. My morality and ethical standards are based on this understanding.
(3) Life is difficult and challenging in many ways, and we live happier when we can feel that we are a part of a community of kindred hearts and when we can find a place of love and respect.
Read more »

The Importance of Being a Non-believer

The Importance of Being a Non-believer
I ask myself why being non-religious is so important to me, why do I want other non-believers to come out of the closet, and why do I think it would be a good thing if those who are presently believers were to become non-believers. My reasoning is this:
I value liberty as much as life itself. By liberty I mean the freedom to speak and act in any manner I so choose so long as my words or action do not infringe on the rights of all others to do the same. It seems obvious that many of the threats to liberty originate in religious dogma, e.g. (a) our right to freedom of and from religion (you can’t have one without the other), as guaranteed under article VI and Amendments I and XIV of our constitution, is violated whenever prayers are conducted in schools or at meetings of governmental bodies;
Read more »

The Dangers of Religious Dogma

The Dangers of Religious Dogma
It is impossible to prove that something does not exist when the description of such is too vague to be testable. Thus the human mind is free to have fantasies and make claims about the existence of a creator and a life hereafter, and no one can prove them wrong. So, what difference does it make in the affairs of man whether anyone has such beliefs?
Recorded history and archeology have demonstrated that man has held such beliefs and has added the concepts of worship, sacrificial offerings, prayer, obedience, original sin and the need for redemption, all to support the God-concept and thereby ease the anxiety of our unexplainable existence. Such beliefs require all sorts of dogma, e.g. a virgin birth, a triune God, an omnipotent and omniscient God, God-inspired scriptures, a church, priests and prophets, resurrection from the dead, in order to maintain the religious organizations which come to power. Without such dogma, these organizations would lose their influence and religious ideas would soon dissipate.
Read more »

Freedom From Religion

Our Declaration of Independence asserts that all men are endowed with the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Most people will agree that the exercise of these rights must be limited to the extent that they deny or infringe on the rights of others. You are free to do as you please as long as it is not at the expense of someone else. At least this is what most of us profess. But is it what we practice?
Some would make a woman and her doctor criminals for aborting a pregnancy. Some think it is right that we have laws making a criminal of a woman for selling sexual favors, or of anyone who (1) plays cards for money, (2) smokes pot, or (3) uses cocaine. Some would have our public schools, school boards, county councils and Congress to conduct public prayer. Some would deny civil rights to gays and lesbians. Do any of these activities infringe on the rights of anyone else? If the motives for the above come from religious faith, then maybe Sam Harris is right. It is time for "the end of faith".
The imposition of a reference to "God" on our coins, currency and in the Pledge of Allegiance is a further indication of our unwillingness to see that any expression of religion made by government encroaches on the liberty of some, in violation of the Constitution. De we really think that believers have rights that non-believers do not have?

Campaign financing

Re: Campaign financing March 21, 2008
Much has been said about the need for reform in how political campaigns are financed. The legislation which requires a candidate to choose between using public funding and private funding was an attempt to deal with the problem, but, in my opinion, has accomplished nothing useful. Most political candidates can raise lots more money from contributions from the big money interests than would be allocated to them if they accept public (taxpayer) funding under the present system. Thus, the advantage goes to the monied interests, i.e. wealthy candidates and big corporations. The less wealthy, particularly challengers, have less money for campaigning than do the more wealthy and the incumbents. Few careerist politicians want to change this system, because they like the advantage it gives them.
What if the rules were changed to allow only public money to be used for campaigning---no personal or
Read more »