The Skeptic Parent

The Walking Dead: Cold Hard Truths I Learned About Myself

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:05:00 +0000

My wife and I finished watching the first two seasons of "The Walking Dead", on netflix. While watching this show I learned a few cold hard truths about myself if I were ever to be involved in a Zombie Apocalypse...

1. I most definitely would be among the first turned into a zombie.
2. I would not make a bad ass zombie.
3. I would be among the first zombies to die.
4. I suck at being alive and being dead and being the undead.

However, I think I would make one kick ass vampire.

I'm Sorry I Am Just Now Speaking Up

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Fri, 14 Dec 2012 22:38:00 +0000

I normally don’t say anything when shootings happen. I keep to myself. I’d rather not be involved in any battles over second amendment rights. I do have an opinion and that opinion is; there should be gun and ammunition control.

I want to apologize to the victims and their families in Connecticut and Portland, Oregon and Aurora, Colorado and…well to everyone that has lost a loved one in a shooting.

I’m sorry.
I’m sorry I haven’t spoken up before now.
I’m sorry I allowed myself to be intimidated by the NRA. I’m sorry I have allowed myself to be intimidated by gun toting second amendment fanatics. I have to be honest that it scares me when I hear them say, “Go ahead and try to take my guns. I’ve been itching for an excuse to use my second amendment rights”.

I hear that and I read that every time a shooting happens and I back off because I believe them. I have met some of these people before. I am even related to some of these people and I believe them when they say they will use their guns.

I know they’re confused about the second amendment. The second amendment gives them the right to bear arms, but the second amendment does not give them the right to shoot and murder people at their discretion. There is a disconnect between what the second amendment actually says and what these people think it means.

Civilized people do not want to get caught up in an argument with one of these crazies. And this is why, we the silent ones, at least partially, are to blame for the continued gun violence in America.

I also hear these people use this argument against gun control, “If someone really wants a gun, they’ll find a way to get one”. That’s true. People will find a way.

So under that rational and logical thinking let’s do away with the drinking and driving laws. Because, hell if someone really wants to drink and drive they will find a way.

Let’s get rid of these awful ‘don’t text and drive’ laws. People will be people and they will text and drive if they want to.

While we’re at it, let’s forget about speed limits. People speed all the time and they have never killed anyone before. Stupid law.

Why do we even have a law against murdering one another? Apparently, if you really, really want to fucking kill someone you will find a fucking way.

Here‘s what I think of your illogical excuse against gun control; it is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard.

There are reasons we have these laws….because it deters people from doing these things. Lives have been saved because of these laws. Lives can be saved with stricter gun control. It is true that people break these laws and inevitably someone will loose their life due to gross negligence. However, there is not a good enough excuse not to have these laws in place. I enjoy living in a civilized society. A five year old should feel safe and be safe attending a kindergarten class and not worry about fucking getting killed.

Fuck you and your second amendment rights. You want your guns? Fine, they’re safe under your fucking precious second amendment, but your ammunition is not.

A stricter gun and or ammunition regulation is the smart and right thing to do. I’m not saying a person can not own a firearm. What I am saying is; it should be harder to obtain them.

I have stayed out of this fight for far too long. And I am sorry I have not made my voice heard until now. We’re coming, and we’re coming today!

Notable Skeptic #7 Charles Schulz

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 20:27:00 +0000

Charles Schulz

This time of year we can not escape Charles Schulz. Starting in October for Halloween there is “It’s The Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown”. If it happens to be election year the Peanuts gang is back in “You’re Not Elected, Charlie Brown”. Then there is the Thanksgiving special, “A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving” and then there are two Peanuts Christmas specials, “A Charlie Brown Christmas” and “It’s Christmastime Again, Charlie Brown”. Let’s not forget we bring in the new year with Charlie and the gang with, “Happy New Year, Charlie Brown” and why stop there? Let’s keep going right through February with “A Charlie Brown Valentine” and yes a second valentine special called “Be My Valentine, Charlie Brown”.

For at least five straight months we celebrate the holidays with Charles Schulz and depending on when Easter falls, March or April, we may have six straight months of Peanuts specials ending with “It’s the Easter Beagle, Charlie Brown”.

When I think of Christmas, Charlie Brown pops into my head. And I have to admit, I get excited with anticipation of the holiday specials with Charlie, Snoopy, Lucy, Linus and the rest of the gang. I love them. I love the music. I love that damn dog and his bird.

In an interview with David Templeton, for the December 30, 1999 - January 5, 2000 issue of Sonoma County Independent, Schulz said, “The term that best describes me now is secular humanist” he went on to explain, “his characters continued to quote biblical passages, occasionally musing about the darker inconsistencies of religion.” Templeton writes.

In the same interview Charles had this to say about other comic strips, "I despise those shallow religious comics," Schulz said. "Dennis the Menace, for instance, is the most shallow. When they show him praying--I just can't stand that sort of thing, talking to God about some cutesy thing that he'd done during the day. I don't think Hank Ketcham [Dennis' creator] has any deep knowledge of things like that."

Then he had something to say about Family Circus.

Read the interview here

The Notable Skeptics series will range from celebrities, scientists, authors, etc. Some will be known on a smaller scale for the work they do for charities and their communities. All quotes or implications of skepticism will be referenced with a link. I use the word "skeptic" to imply one or more of these terms; atheist, agnostic, humanist, secularist or non-religious.

White Wine In The Sun

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:48:00 +0000

During the month of December, Tim Minchin is giving all proceeds from the download of his song, White Wine In The Sun, to the National Autistic Society.

Get it on itunes and Amazon

Here is a live version of this wonderful and sentimental song.

Lyrics:

I really like Christmas
It’s sentimental, I know, but I just really like it
I am hardly religious
I’d rather break bread with Dawkins than Desmond Tutu, to be honest
And yes, I have all of the usual objections
To consumerism, the commercialization of an ancient religion
To the westernization of a dead Palestinian
Press-ganged into selling Playstations and beer
But I still really like it
I’m looking forward to Christmas
Though I’m not expecting a visit from Jesus
I’ll be seeing my dad
My brother and sisters, my gran and my mum
They’ll be drinking white wine in the sun
I’ll be seeing my dad
My brother and sisters, my gran and my mum
They’ll be drinking white wine in the sun
I don’t go in for ancient wisdom
I don’t believe just ‘cos ideas are tenacious it means they are worthy
I get freaked out by churches
Some of the hymns that they sing have nice chords but the lyrics are dodgy
And yes I have all of the usual objections
To the miseducation of children who, in tax-exempt institutions,
Are taught to externalize blame
And to feel ashamed and to judge things as plain right and wrong
But I quite like the songs
I’m not expecting big presents
The old combination of socks, jocks and chocolate is just fine by me
Cos I’ll be seeing my dad
My brother and sisters, my gran and my mum
They’ll be drinking white wine in the sun
I’ll be seeing my dad
My brother and sisters, my gran and my mum
They’ll be drinking white wine in the sun
And you, my baby girl
My jetlagged infant daughter
You’ll be handed round the room
Like a puppy at a primary school
And you won’t understand
But you will learn someday
That wherever you are and whatever you face
These are the people who’ll make you feel safe in this world
My sweet blue-eyed girl
And if, my baby girl
When you’re twenty-one or thirty-one
And Christmas comes around
And you find yourself nine thousand miles from home
You’ll know what ever comes
Your brother and sisters and me and your Mum
Will be waiting for you in the sun
Whenever you come
Your brothers and sisters, your aunts and your uncles
Your grandparents, cousins and me and your mum
We’ll be waiting for you in the sun
Drinking white wine in the sun
Darling, when Christmas comes
We’ll be waiting for you in the sun
Drinking white wine in the sun
Waiting for you in the sun
Waiting for you…
Waiting…
I really like Christmas
It’s sentimental, I know…

An Epitaph: G. P. Spencer

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:39:00 +0000

Science has never killed or persecuted a single person for doubting or denying its teaching, and most of these teaching have been true; but religion has murdered millions for doubting or denying her dogmas and most of these dogmas have been false.

All stories about gods and devils, of heavens and hells, as they do not conform to nature, and are not apparent to sense, should be rejected without consideration.

Beyond the universe there is nothing and within the universe the supernatural does not and cannot exist.

Of all deceivers who have plagued mankind, none are so deeply ruinous to human happiness as those imposters who pretend to lead by a light above nature.

The lips of the dead are closed forever. There comes no voice from the tomb. Christianity is responsible for having cast the fable of eternal fire over almost every grave.

G. P. Spencer 1908 epitaph

The above is engraved on the entombment for G.P Spencer and his wife Annett M. Caswell Spencer at Lyndon Center Cemetery in Lyndon, VT.

I always do my own research before I post here. According to the burial and genealogy records I have found, the person buried here is named Gratis P. Spencer. His wife Annett died in 1916 and is buried beside him.

I noticed in my research that many others have posted this epitaph to their blogs/sites and most have it attributed to George P. Spencer, as did the blogger I first saw post this. Either way, this gravesite does exist and the above is engraved on it.

The story is, Spencer was a stonecutter and engraved this himself before he died.

*pictures taken by KimPS (genealogy nut)

To Xmas And Beyond (Video)

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:17:00 +0000

This is a fantastic video on the origin of Xmas by Seth Andrews.

Parenting Without Religion

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 22:50:00 +0000

*We’ve got these chains that hang around our necks,

people want to strangle us with them before we take our first breath.*

I wore around my neck, for years, a gold chain with a gold cross hanging from it. I was hoping it would bring me closer to feeling the divine. I wanted to believe. I wanted to be like everyone around me and I hoped and I prayed that the cross hanging from my neck would act as a guide and lead me away from the evil that was haunting my mind. That’s what I was taught as a child; any act or thought against god is an act of evil - of Satan. There was a time when I didn’t want to take that chain off, not even to shower or sleep.

Metaphorically, a chain was placed around my neck, most of our necks, at birth. The moment we enter this world the religious ceremonies and rituals begin; circumcision, baptism, christening, baby blessing ceremonies and religious baby naming ceremonies. Infants are already being forcibly entrenched into a doctrine.

Nurseries are adorned with crosses hanging above the cribs. Porcelain angels that look like toddlers with wings are on bended knees praying on the nightstand next to where the baby sleeps. Carefully crafted spiritual sayings engraved on wooden plaques hang above the threshold to the nursery. There is no free will in the little person’s life. Their religion, belief structure and their spirituality has been chosen for them. And if they decide to stray from this predetermined path, they will burn in hell forever. And of course the little angel on the nightstand will weep, and as well, all the angels will weep for your soul.

There are a lot of things that I feel are wrong about religion being taught to children. I understand why the church is so keen to get the little ones into church. Examining religion on a macro-level, it’s easier to normalize religion to a child than to an adult that has had little exposure to it. It’s also beneficial to get children into church to establish social processes, relationships, cultural rituals and to establish taboos within society that does not follow the teachings of the church. In other words - Get ’em while they’re young.

It is this normalization of religious practice that I’m avoiding having my children exposed to. It’s easy to do when we’re home, but when we go and visit extended family it becomes harder. I want my children to respect people regardless of religion, gender, sexual orientation, political views and so on. The one I’m having difficulty with is religion.

I’m not having difficulty teaching my children to respect religion and the religious, it’s having that respect reciprocated.

It’s hard when you tell your children that they have to respect someone praying while at the same time being disrespected yourself and forced or expected to participate in the prayer ritual. It’s hard to tell my children to respect others and not to talk about “god is fake” to your religious cousins when that respect is not shown to you and what you believe. It’s hard to maintain a level of respect for people whom exhibit little respect or courtesy to you, your family or anyone that may be within ear shot.

How to parent in a non-religious family living in a religious society? I’m not sure. It’s going to take some practice. It’s going to take patience and understanding from everyone. It’s going to involve confrontations.

These are the things I’m going to talk about. How I handle certain situations. The outcome of those. The pros and cons. This is going to be a learning process for all of us. I hope I can be of encouragement for those of you in similar situations.

In the end though, my greatest desire is to keep those chains from around my children’s necks.

*Song lyrics written by Steven Page & Ed Robertson “What A Good Boy”

Notable Skeptic #6 Lisa Randall

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 08:00:00 +0000

Lisa Randall

Professor Lisa Randall studies theoretical particle physics and cosmology at Harvard University. Randal’s books include, Warped Passages: Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universe’s Hidden Dimensions and Knocking on Heaven’s Door: How Physics and Scientific Thinking Illuminate the Universe and the Modern World. They both appeared on New York Times’ list of 100 Notable Books of the Year. During summer of 2012 Lisa released the Kindle Single Higgs Discovery: The Power of Empty Space. Read more of Lisa’s bio here.

“If such external influences are intrinsic to religion, then logic and scientific thought dictate that the must be a mechanism by which this influence is transmitted. A religious or spiritual belief that involves an invisible undetectable force that nonetheless influences human actions and behavior or that of the world itself produces a situation in which a believer has no choice but to have faith and abandon logic--or simply not care” --from Randall's book Knocking on Heaven's Door: How Physics and Scientific Thinking Illuminate the Universe and the Modern World

July 2006 interview in Discover Magazine
DM: So does your science leave space for untestable faith? Do you believe in God?

Lisa: There’s room there, and it could go either way. Faith just doesn’t have anything to do with what I’m doing as a scientist. It’s nice if you can believe in God, because then you see more of a purpose in things. Even if you don’t, though, it doesn’t mean that there’s no purpose. It doesn’t mean that there’s no goodness. I think that there’s a virtue in being good in of itself. I think that one can work with the world we have. So I probably don’t believe in God. I think it’s a problem that people are considered immoral if they’re not religious. That’s just not true. This might earn me some enemies, but in some ways they may be even more moral. If you do something for a religious reason, you do it because you’ll be rewarded in an afterlife or in this world. That’s not quite as good as something you do for purely generous reasons.”

The Notable Skeptics series will range from celebrities, scientists, authors, etc. Some will be known on a smaller scale for the work they do for charities and their communities. All quotes or implications of skepticism will be referenced with a link. I will not claim anyone as a notable skeptic unless I have 100% verified facts. Some will be easier than others. I use the word "skeptic" to imply one or more of these terms; atheist, agnostic, humanist, secularist or non-religious.

Notable Skeptic #5 Hypatia

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 07:00:00 +0000

I’ve wanted to write about Hypatia for awhile. Writing about her is not the easiest task as information on Hypatia is mostly incomplete. We know she was a mathematician and astronomer. We know she was killed by a group of Christians and her life’s work was destroyed. Her faith is questioned. She was raised within the Pagan religion. It is thought that Hypatia was non-religious or a Neo-Platonist. The latter makes sense because she was a devote follower of Plato. There are some who believe she was an atheist. Whatever her true religious standing, I believe it is safe to say she was at the very least a skeptic.

I’m going to leave it to Carl Sagan to help summarize Hypatia.

The last scientist who worked in the Library (of Alexandria) was a mathematician, astronomer, physicist and the head of the Neoplatonic school of philosophy – an extraordinary range of accomplishments for any individual in any age. Her name was Hypatia. Cyril, the Archbishop of Alexandria, despised her because of her close friendship with the Roman governor, and because she was a symbol of learning and science, which were largely identified by the early Church with paganism. On her way to work she was set upon by a fanatical mob of Cyril’s parishioners. They dragged her from her chariot, and flayed her flesh from her bones. Her remains were burned, her works obliterated, her name forgotten. Cyril was made a saint. The glory of the Alexandrian Library is a dim memory. Its last remnants were destroyed soon after Hypatia’s death. It was as if the entire civilization had undergone some self-inflicted brain surgery, and most of its memories, discoveries, ideas and passions were extinguished irrevocably. ~from Carl Sagan’s book Cosmos

Notable Skeptic #4 Alan Alda

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:49:00 +0000

Alan Alda is an American actor, writer and director. He is best known for his role on the hit T.V. show M*A*S*H. He played the role of funny and flirtatious Korean war doctor Captain Peirce. Alda also hosted Scientific American Frontiers for PBS. Alan is a New York Times bestselling author, Never Have Your Dog Stuffed, and Other Things I’ve Learned and Things I Overheard While Talking to Myself.

"For a while in my teens, I was sure I had it. It was about getting to heaven. If heaven existed and lasted forever, then a mere lifetime spent scrupulously following orders was a small investment for an infinite payoff. One day, though, I realized I was no longer a believer, and realizing that, I couldn’t go back. Not that I lost the urge to pray. Occasionally, even after I stopped believing, I might send off a quick memo to the Master of the Universe, usually on a matter needing urgent attention, like Oh, God, don’t let us crash. These were automatic expulsions of words, brief SOS messages from the base of my brain. They were similar to the short prayers that were admired by the church in my Catholic boyhood, which they called “ejaculations.” I always liked the idea that you could shorten your time in purgatory with each ejaculation; what boy wouldn’t find that a comforting idea? But my effort to keep the plane in the air by talking to God didn’t mean I suddenly was overcome with belief, only that I was scared. Whether I’d wake up in heaven someday or not, whatever meaning I found would have to occur first on this end of eternity." -- From Alda’s memoir Things I Overheard While Talking to Myself

In 2008 Alan wrote for the Edge Foundation
“I still don't like the word agnostic. It's too fancy. I'm simply not a believer. But, as simple as this notion is, it confuses some people. Someone wrote a Wikipedia entry about me, identifying me as an atheist because I'd said in a book I wrote that I wasn't a believer. I guess in a world uncomfortable with uncertainty, an unbeliever must be an atheist, and possibly an infidel. This gets us back to that most pressing of human questions: why do people worry so much about other people's holding beliefs other than their own? This is the question that makes the subject over which I changed my mind something of global importance, and not just a personal, semantic dalliance.”

The Notable Skeptics series will range from celebrities, scientists, authors, etc. Some will be known on a smaller scale for the work they do for charities and their communities. All quotes or implications of skepticism will be referenced with a link. I will not claim anyone as a notable skeptic unless I have 100% verified facts. Some will be easier than others. I use the word "skeptic" to imply one or more of these terms; atheist, agnostic, humanist, secularist or non-religious.

A Christmas CD For Atheists

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 19:36:00 +0000

You have to be able to laugh at yourself...

with that in mind I present you with this comedy skit from CBC - This Hour Has 22 Minutes with Gavin Crawford as Rufus Wainwright; "Rufus Wainwright's Christmas for Atheists CD".

By the way, I am a Rufus Wainwright fan.

Here is the real Rufus Wainwright covering Leonard Cohen's "Hallelujah"

Notable Skeptic #3 Katharine Hepburn

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 14 Oct 2012 17:21:00 +0000

Katharine Hepburn was an American actress of stage and screen. She was in the Broadway play The Philadelphia Story. Katharine purchased the screen rights to The Philadelphia Story and in 1940 reprised her role in the screen adaptation earning her a third Oscar nomination.

In 1981 she stared in On Golden Pond with Henry Fonda. Her performance in this film brought her total Oscar nominations to twelve and total Oscar wins to four.

Katharine remained an active actress through the early 1990’s until her health started to fade.

In an interview, billed as her “most candid”, that appeared in the October 1991 issue of Ladies’ Home Journal, Hepburn said, “I’m an atheist, and that’s it. I believe there’s nothing we can know except that we should be kind to each other and do what we can for each other.” pg. 215

She passed away June 29, 2003 at the age of 93.

The Notable Skeptics series will range from celebrities, scientists, authors, etc. Some will be known on a smaller scale for the work they do for charities and their communities. All quotes or implications of skepticism will be referenced with a link. I will not claim anyone as a notable skeptic unless I have 100% verified facts. Some will be easier than others. I use the word "skeptic" to imply one or more of these terms; atheist, agnostic, humanist, secularist or non-religious.

Confronting Death As An Atheist

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 20:31:00 +0000

“What will you do with me when I die?”

I was asked this by my, then four year old, daughter at lunch one day. I quickly discovered why adults hold onto the lie of heaven. As adults get older they let go of other lies told to them as children; Santa Clause, Eater Bunny, the tooth fairy and a lot of adults even let go of the idea of a personal god but still cling to heaven. Heaven…that’s what I wanted to say to my daughter, because it sounded a lot nicer than what I actually told her.

I sat there trying to craft a response when it occurred to me that she wasn’t asking an existential question. She was asking a literal question about what will become of her body. I wanted to make sure. I asked her what she meant. She said, “Where do you put me when I die?”

I told her the truth. That she will be put into a coffin and then buried underground.

“Forever?” she asked as she stuffed her mouth with macaroni and cheese.

“Yes. Forever, honey”, I said through gritted teeth as memories came rushing back of nearly having to do exactly that to her just two short years prior.

She said, “Okay”, in a nonchalant tone.

I realized that adults don’t give kids enough credit. Heaven is not an innate idea in children. They are taught it, just as they are taught religion. Children are not born religious. Children are not born with a god. They are, perhaps, born into a family that has a religion and god, but are not born with either.

It was this conversation with my daughter that finally helped me let go of my own hang-ups. It was this conversation in which I learned; children are born atheist.

I have always had an idea of how my funeral should go. I do not want a preacher, priest, and no clergy of any kind to speak at or officiate my funeral. I want friends and family to take turns telling stories, while some of my favorite music plays in the background. Open bar is a must.

I understand that a story about that one time when I was drunk may not help the religious family and friends that are grieving. I get that. I want to offer an alternative to having some preacher there claiming to know where people go when they die.

I found an atheist eulogy idea. It is written by Aaron Freeman and you can read the entire post here.

Here are a few excerpts from it.

“You want a physicist to speak at your funeral. You want the physicist to talk to your grieving family about the conservation of energy, so they will understand that your energy has not died.”

“And at one point you'd hope that the physicist would step down from the pulpit and walk to your brokenhearted spouse there in the pew and tell him that all the photons that ever bounced off your face, all the particles whose paths were interrupted by your smile, by the touch of your hair, hundreds of trillions of particles, have raced off like children, their ways forever changed by you.”

“And you'll want the physicist to explain to those who loved you that they need not have faith; indeed, they should not have faith. Let them know that they can measure, that scientists have measured precisely the conservation of energy and found it accurate, verifiable and consistent across space and time. You can hope your family will examine the evidence and satisfy themselves that the science is sound and that they'll be comforted to know your energy's still around. According to the law of the conservation of energy, not a bit of you is gone; you're just less orderly. Amen.”

Listen to it here

God's Law Is Not A Moral Law

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Thu, 11 Oct 2012 03:30:00 +0000

As an atheist I am asked where my morals and ethics come from since I don’t have a God to hold me accountable. I am told that without the bible’s guidance I can not know how to live a moral and ethical life. I am told that my existence is sinful. I am told that I am a lost soul.

I say to this; my morals and ethics are at a higher standard than what you will find in the bible. I refer to these passages.

18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. Deut 21:18-21

Anyone who attacks their father or mother is to be put to death. Exodus 21:15

Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death. Exodus 21:17

I live my life with greater morals than this. I find it highly immoral to kill your child for any reason.

If you are a Christian parent and have never had your rebellious child stoned to death, then you have found a set of morals without the bible, without and in defiance of your god. How dare you question me and accuse me of being anything other than a moral person, when you, yourself choose to adhere to your own set of morals that have been founded outside of your archaic religion.

Republican Charlie Fuqua

Now, let’s shift out attention to Arkansas. This is where we will find former Republican legislator Charlie Fuqua, running again for legislature. He has a new book out, "God's Law: The Only Political Solution". Here is an excerpt that I’d like to share.

“The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:”

“This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children.” -Charlie Fuqua "God's Law: The Only Political Solution"

Religion and politics should not go together, if for no other reason than to keep the insane from making laws based on their religious books.

These people have screamed and cried that President Obama is going to establish sharia law in America. Take a look at what the Christian politicians are trying to do. Take a look at the bills these Christians are introducing and at times have passed into law. Tell me again, who is it that is trying to make a religious law in America?

I will not accept the token response of the religious right in America that Christianity is somehow better than Islam. The only difference I see between Christianity and Islam is that there are more extreme Islam literalists than extreme Christian literalists. The reason there are not more extreme Christian literalists in America is because America’s laws are established for the good of society, they are secular laws that everyone benefits from. When laws are based solely on religious texts only a few will benefit. Religious laws are not for the betterment of society, they are implemented for a sect to control the populace through excessive force and manipulation.

People such as Charlie Fuqua should scare us. Imagine if Fuqua had instead said, “Rebellious children should be killed”. He would have been taken into custody for inciting violence against minors.

As it turns out Charlie Fuqua is able to get away with what he did say because he used god’s name and religion as the backdrop to his proposal of murdering children. There is this crazy concession we allow people in America; as it turns out you can incite violence on minors if you in invoke God while doing it. You are allowed to bully people as long as you do it for religious reasons. Why do we allow such accommodations to a group of people that only have their better interests at heart?

Notable Skeptic #2 Daniel Radcliffe

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 30 Sep 2012 13:58:00 +0000

Daniel Radcliffe is an English stage and film actor. He made his acting debut in BBC One’s David Copperfield. At age eleven Radcliffe was cast as Harry Potter. In 2007 he began to branch out to the stage where he performed in Equus in London and New York City. In 2011 he was cast in the Broadway revival of How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying.

During an interview with Esquire, while promoting the film Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, he said, “I’m an atheist, but I’m very relaxed about it. I don’t preach my atheism, but I have a huge amount of respect for people like Richard Dawkins who do…There we go, Dan, that’s half of America that’s not going to see the next Harry Potter film on the back of that comment.” ~ Telegraph

He told Attitude magazine, “I’m not religious, I’m an atheist, and a militant atheist when religion starts impacting on legislation.”

The Notable Skeptics series will range from celebrities, scientists, authors, etc. Some will be known on a smaller scale for the work they do for charities and their communities. All quotes or implications of skepticism will be referenced with a link. I will not claim anyone as a notable skeptic unless I have 100% verified facts. Some will be easier than others. I use the word "skeptic" to imply one or more of these terms; atheist, agnostic, humanist, secularist or non-religious.

Salman Rushdie on Bill Maher Discussing 9/11 Liberals

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 14:14:00 +0000

This post is an ongoing conversation on my personal facebook page. I have decided to post the conversation on this blog, with the permission of my friend that is part of this conversation.

It started when I posted this video of Salman Rushdie on Bill Maher...

The conversation...
Mitchell: Some interesting stuff in there as well as some REALLY broad generalizations and simple symptom identification. The most interesting part, I think, is thinking about how many of these same comments (especially during the second half) could be coming out of Middle Eastern/Islamic pundits on "the other side". Except, of course, when Rana said "acrossT". In the end, there are no sides. This choosing sides shit is what got all of us where we are today.

Kevin: Ha! The first time I watched this was on my phone. I didn't catch she said that (phone has poor sound quality).

Mitchell, I was wondering if you'd be willing to elaborate on the broad generalizations you thought they had. I'm just curious. And also, what sides do you think there are, or recognize as sides, concerning this topic.

I'm fascinated with this subject and other people's thoughts and reactions. And I do respect your particular thoughts because you are a thoughtful person. I know you take great care with what you say and how you say it and I'd love to hear what else you have to say concerning this topic.

Mitchell:I think I may have typed too fast - what I should have said was oversimplifications rather than generalizations, that would have been clearer, although both are true to me. As Rushdie says "Islam has changed", I think this is a very wide brushstroke with which to paint here. They are going back and forth over why this recent level of anger has surfaced and discussing essentially how violent Islam is (in relation to other religions). All while I think a very valid argument can be made that this stupid little film has just served as the spark that ignited an already smoldering fire, and only then in certain pockets. I feel like I am watching a lot of smart people kind of missing the big picture. And broadly saying Islam is different in that way than the other religions might be argued with by abortion clinic doctors, perhaps.

As for the sides, Matthews speaks to it most clearly when he says "the question is what do we do about it?" I see a hardening of the West vs. East mentality and that to me doesn't bode well for the future of peace and conscious evolution. They talk of how there is this "industry of outrage" and how this is politically manufactured. No shit. To speak of it as being manipulated by "their" leaders and not "ours" is staggering. Both this us vs. them thing and Kate Middleton's tits are put in front of us to keep us distracted. I submit that there is no "them". We are 7 billion humans with 7 billion perspectives and one aim. Love. Period.

That's my $.02. Like I said before, among the problems I see in there, there are some interesting ideas, and perhaps some useful ones. If the discussion was more about the usefulness of any organized religion, my comments would take a different tone. What do you think? Good to be hearing from you, my friend.

Also, Rana used the word "proactive" which, next to "utilize" is the worst word in the English language. So, maybe my bias is showing. :)

My Response

Shows like Bill Maher have to simplify what they’re saying to fit into a timeslot. These shows are used for talking points, to get others talking. You and I are case in point. We’re talking. It is up to us to expand on what they said.

I think we should be talking about this; ‘this’ being Islam. We extend Islam a courtesy, a political correctness, that we don’t extend to other religions. We have made it taboo to criticize Islam. We’ve made it look almost racist to say anything against Islam. Islam is a religion in very much the same way Christianity, Scientology are religions and should be mocked and criticized for their ideology.

There are those that interchange the words ‘Islam’, ‘Muslim’ and ‘Middle East‘. Islam is a religion, Muslim is a group of people and the Middle East is a geographical location. Not all Muslims live in the Middle East. Not all Muslims are Islamists. In fact some Muslims are Christians. Now, if one would say slanderous remarks about Muslims or Middle Easterners then that would be racist. But to criticize a religion; Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Paganism, Scientology, etc is not racist. It is simply being critical of an ideology. I hold all religions with the same amount of disdain.

I’m not suggesting we should go to war with Islamists. No, that is not the answer. The answer is; we, as in the USA, need to remind Islamists that we are free to say whatever we want about their religion, (even in the form of a despicable film). We need to say, “No you are not going to get to silence us.” In the same way we need to remind Christians that we are a free people. We are free from their religious confines. All citizens of this country are free to marry, make decisions away from religion, we will not allow them to use their religion to restrict civil rights of groups of people in the USA, we are governed by a higher morality, ethics and love than what is found in their ancient texts. The texts of the bible are no less violent to people and no less controlling of people than that of Islam and the texts of the Quran.

Women have been stoned to death in the name of Islam this year. I know not all Islamists are like this, but people are being killed, murdered, in the name of this religion. I think that justifies taking a side, just as much as taking a stand against slavery, taking a stand for civil rights in America, taking a stand against bullying, against allowing the religious right in America to pass laws exempting themselves from other laws based on being religious.

People having a religion should not and does not mean we as a society need to walk on eggshells for them. It does not mean they get special rights because they talk to a man they think lives in the clouds and has given them special rules to follow. We need to uphold our governing laws against these laws of religion. The laws of religion are make believe and should not be given special courtesy just on the basis that the religious powers think that it should be that way. If someone tells me they are religious, I am automatically suspicious of them. Why would they tell me that? If for no other reason than wanting preferential treatment.

Yes, sides are drawn and sides have to be taken. I use to stand on the sidelines and say stuff like, “There are good and bad Republicans just like there are good and bad Democrats.”, “There are bad Christians, but there are some really nice, decent Christians that do a lot of good.”, “There’s good and bad everywhere. We shouldn’t paint one group ’bad’ just because of a few bad apples”.

A couple years ago I woke up and realized that type of passiveness wasn’t getting anyone anywhere. While I’m sticking up for, let’s say, Christians as a group, the ‘bad apples’ were sneaking behind our backs and changing text book curriculum to accommodate religious views, they were proposing bills limiting civil rights to groups of people they want to restrict in the name of their god. They’re also making sure the anti-bullying laws have out clauses for the religious, making it not just okay but legal for Christians to bully someone on the pretense the bullying is done for religious reasons. They’re starting wars in the name of their god. And everybody is standing around shrugging their shoulders saying, “Well, we can’t stand up to them because they’re doing these things because they’re religious and we’ll look like heartless heathens if we point out what they are doing is wrong and stupid”. So, we liberals put our hands in our pockets and look the other way. We don’t want to get caught up in religious arguments with the religious for the sake of looking like the bigger and smarter group. As it turns out we’ve been the stupid ones for allowing this to happen as we watch on.

I’m going to use something you wrote not too long ago. It stuck with me because I agreed with you 100% on your point.

“But there is at least one big difference that I can see. One side has made it very clear that a vote for them is a vote against women. That side is standing proudly and proclaiming women’s bodies are not entirely their own and something to be legislated against. They find logic in a debate over degrees of violence against women and just how much is tolerable. They find acceptable slanderous and hateful speech against half of humanity.

Theirs is not a world to which I would choose to subject my daughters. Their platform is not one that includes equality, liberty and security for the women of this country. Period.

I have lost faith in our leaders – all of them – when it comes to fighting for justice and freedom for all Americans and all members of the human race. I will continue to try to be the change that I seek rather than hold out hope that such change will come from above.” http://thoughtfulpop.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/casting-my-vote/

One could argue that this is a broad generalization of that political party. A generalization that I agree with by the way. It is true that not all politicians and constituents of that political party are trying or want to take away women’s rights. Not all of them are bad people. Although, there are enough of them that want to do this that requires us to take a stand against them. Requires us to choose sides. Because standing on the sidelines and recognizing that they’re not all bad and then allowing them to do this is just as wrong as being apart of the group that are trying to take away the rights of women and stifling the rights of others.

I believe what you said about the political part can be applied to this situation as well. I’m not sure what the answer is in how to deal with any of it. Violence is not the answer; it’s just the go to answer for most. I do fear that it all will end in violence, and that is such a shame because morality and ethics are being dictated by an ideology instead of the higher standards we find within ourselves.

I would not have said most of this two years ago, maybe even a year ago I wouldn‘t have. I’m done riding the fence on most things.

Notable Skeptic #1 Keira Knightley

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 23 Sep 2012 19:05:00 +0000

Keira Knightley is the first notable skeptic.

Keira is an English actor starring in films such as Love Actually, Bend It Like Beckham and Pirates of the Caribbean.

Keira came out as an atheist in the April 2012 issue of Interview Magazine where she was interviewed by, fellow atheist, David Cronenberg.

Keira Knightley quote from Interview Magazine

The Dali Lama's Epiphany About Religion

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Mon, 10 Sep 2012 18:43:00 +0000

The Dali Lama said today:

“All the world’s major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether.” - Dali Lama 9/10/2012 https://www.facebook.com/DalaiLama/posts/10151052842097616

I’m not going to speak on the first half of this statement, only the last; “This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether”.

This is not a new thought. There have been people saying this, in certain ways or another, for a very long time. People like David Hume, John Locke, Jeremy Bentham, Einstein, Galileo, Da Vinci, Thomas Jefferson and Hypatia to name a few. Hypatia was killed by a group of christians for what she thought.

“Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all.” - Hypatia

“Fables should be taught as fables, myths as myths, and miracles as poetic fantasies. To teach superstitions as truths is a most terrible thing. The child mind accepts and believes them, and only through great pain and perhaps tragedy can he be in after years relieved of them.” - Hypatia

Today we have the likes of Neil Degrasse Tyson, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Nye, American Humanist Association, there are freethought organizations, Atheist groups, 99.9999% of the world's scientists saying things like this and then the late Christopher Hitchens and Madalyn Murray O'Hair, but the Dali Lama says it and a hundred thousand people piss themselves with excitement.

“The lifestance of Humanism—guided by reason, inspired by compassion, and informed by experience—encourages us to live life well and fully. It evolved through the ages and continues to develop through the efforts of thoughtful people who recognize that values and ideals, however carefully wrought, are subject to change as our knowledge and understandings advance.” http://www.americanhumanist.org/Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_III

Don’t get me wrong. I’m glad this idea is possibly reaching people. I’m glad that what he said may have caused some minds to open and think.

“Life is an unfoldment, and the further we travel the more truth we can comprehend. To understand the things that are at our door is the best preparation for understanding those that lie beyond.” - Hypatia

“All formal dogmatic religions are fallacious and must never be accepted by self-respecting persons as final.” -Hypatia

We’d be happy to welcome you, Dali Lama. This is not an exclusive club. Truly, the more the merrier. We’re not even a club. We are a group of people that have set our morals higher than any morals set forth by any sky captain. We are a group of people, Humanists, Atheists, Secularists, Skeptics and anyone that lives their lives doing good without the promise of reward or fear of punishment for their behavior. Self accountability.

The Road From Damascus: The Jesus Portrait

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Sun, 09 Sep 2012 00:47:00 +0000

The Road From Damascus

The Jesus Portrait

I remember walking up the green, carpeted stairs to get to the Sunday school room. On the wall facing the end of the stairway was an oversized painting of Jesus sitting on a boulder surrounded by little children and small lambs. Jesus dressed in a robe of white and baby blue while holding a gnarly, Sheppard’s cane. Clear blue skies and perfect greenery finished the idyllic setting in which Jesus sat ministering to the little children.

I was five or six years old when I first felt an uneasy feeling about that portrait. I couldn’t quite grasp what it was, but for some reason it just didn’t seem right. Every time I looked at that painting of Jesus, and eventually all Christian imagery, it left an unsettling feeling in the pit of my stomach. I didn’t believe any of it. I didn’t believe in Jesus, god, Noah or anything that I was being taught. Something didn’t add up.

It's been nearly 20 years since I've seen that old painting.
This painting is similar to the one of my childhood.

I grew up sheltered and naive. I didn’t know there were other religions of the world. I didn’t know there were people that didn’t look like me, that didn’t speak the same language as I did. I went to a Lutheran church. I thought Lutheran was a religion. I thought Baptist, Catholic, Pentecostal, so on and so forth, were all different religions. I didn’t know they were all under the umbrella of Christianity. I was eight or nine years old before I figured that out. And of course I did not know that a person had the free will not to believe in god. It never occurred to me that 'not believing in god' was allowed. This explains why I thought there was something wrong with me.

I felt awful about myself. I felt different than everybody else. I was too ashamed to talk about not believing in god and Jesus and the whole religion thing. I knew for sure, in my adolescent mind, that I needed help because I didn’t believe in god, but I was afraid I’d get in trouble if I said anything. I remember walking past the Jesus painting with a Sunday school classmate. He was going on about how great Jesus was and I for reasons unknown to me said, “I don’t believe in Jesus.” He quickly replied, “Don’t tell your mom and dad. You’ll get in trouble and they will send you to the devil.” And here I was thinking the worst my parents would do to me if they found out was to spank me.

My parents stopped going to church. I have no idea why. Honestly, I didn’t care why. I was just happy I did not have to go to that building again. Except for on rare occasions when my Grandma wanted us to attend with her and Grandpa. I went with a smile on my face because I just couldn’t resist either one of my Grandmothers. Really, how do you tell your Grandmother, “No”? You can’t. This is the reason I eventually attended catechism.

Somehow and someway I was able to squirm my way out of going to catechism when I first turned of age to go. However, it wasn’t meant to be that I would never attend this class. A few of life’s circumstances lined up at the same time that somehow formed a hole in my plans in never having to be a participant in this brainwashing scheme.

To Be Continued in “The Road From Damascus: Catechism Class” - coming soon.

This I Believe

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin Westerman) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:28:00 +0000

Today is my birthday. My birthday is my New Years. This is when I make resolutions. I have made resolutions with friends on January 1st before, but the ones that are personal, the resolutions that I give more consideration to are the ones I make every year on February 8th. Of course, just as most resolutions made on January 1st, not all of my February 8th resolutions have been followed through.

My resolutions have varied from being more mindful of what I say to others to quit smoking, which next month I will be a non-smoker for two years. This year’s resolution is more on a personal level. It is more an existential resolution. I want to be more open and honest about how I feel and who I am.

I guess in a way this is my coming out as an Atheist. I do not believe coming out is something that I necessarily need, or should have to do. However, here I am doing just that. I am not doing this to be in anyone’s face, “Hey, look at me. I’m an Atheist”. Nothing such as that. I’m not like a religious zealot about Atheism. I only want to be fair, not just to myself, but to be fair to my family and friends.

I have always been an Atheist. I just haven’t been an open Atheist. My journey of being honest and open with myself about being an Atheist spans my life up to today. I have always feared how my family and friends would react. I never want to lose anyone I love because of this.

I have always bowed my head for prayer. I have made my children bow their heads for prayer. I have never retaliated over smartass facebook cartoons and quotes belittling other religions and non-believers. I have stood by and respected other’s religion and beliefs. The problem I have been dealing with, internally, for a couple years is that I am starting to resent loved ones. I am resenting them for not respecting me the same way I do them.

However, the true problem is, I have never given them the opportunity to respect me. My resentment and anger has been groundless. Now that I realize this, I know I have to be open with people. I am sure I’ll be met with a battle due to some of the things I want changed. I am prepared.

I have talked with my wife about all of this and she is extremely supportive. A couple of years ago I told my wife that I believed all children are born Atheist. I do not believe we are born with an innate idea of religion, gods, good, evil, black and white. Our religion heavily depends on our parents and extended family’s religion. Our religion depends on our geographical location of our birth. By being born in the United States, I had a very good chance of being born to a self-professed Christian family. And of course the denomination of my Christianity was solely based upon my family‘s denomination. I did not choose to be baptized. I did not choose to be a part of the Lutheran church. I was not born that way. I was not born Lutheran. I was told that I was Lutheran. I was told that I was religious. I was told that I was a Christian.

My kids are going to learn about all religions. They will not be indoctrinated with one belief. They will not be indoctrinated with any belief other than the knowledge they can choose for themselves what is right for them, and for them only. They will learn about religion, they will not learn to be a religion or not to be a religion.

Today is my birthday. I am 36 years old. I am a non-believer, secular humanist. I treat people with respect. I treat people decently. I am a good person, not because I am promised something or threatened with something to be a good person. I am a good person because that is what I know to be right; those are my morals and ethics.

This I believe…

…if you are a believer, good for you. I am happy for you. I am not trying to change your mind. I am glad you have your religion and beliefs. I do not judge you, and all I ask is you please do not judge me. Remember, I only deny one more god/deity than you do. Just as you don’t believe in Zeus, Thor, Isis, Osiris or any other 2,500 plus deities that have been worshipped as the one true god, I don’t believe in them either, nor do I believe in a satan or devil.