You know it’s going to be one of THOSE emails when…

**You know it’s going to be one of those emails when you see these at the top of the page: 

It means the sender is most likely older, or more correctly, unsophisticated in modern communications. Those lines mean you are being sent a message that has previously been forward many, many times by similarly unsophisticated communicators. It probably also means they are so passionate about the subject that they don’t hesitate to spew it around liberally. Which doesn’t mean they’re a Liberal – most likely the opposite.

And if the next thing you see is a picture of Ben Stein looking dour and pompous as usual

then you know they’re not a Liberal.

And when the message is presented in 36-point EndTimes Extra Bold – in color of course – and in italics – you know you’re in for a right wing christian screed:

And if it comes from a relative, then you know it’s going to be a pile of right wing religious bullshit – because as far as I know all my relatives are right wing Christians. 

I don’t get as much of this crap as I used to, because early on I let people know I wasn’t interested in their religious or political views.  But every now and then righteous amnesia, or something, overtakes them and they send out drivel like his hoping it will be a “comfort” to me, whom they believe to be languishing in atheistic angst. (I am, but their drug is no longer a palliative for me). 

Maybe it’s because of the “holiday” season, and it gets harder to maintain customary prudence and yield to the pent up desire to celebrate one’s delusions and disseminate them widely, like xmas gifts.

I was going to post the forwarded message here but then realized it would make this diatribe much longer, but also would be cooperating with the evangelical recklessness of the original poster and help spread manure on what they hope will be a field of fresh-grown recruits. If you’re really interested, you can look it up using the clues I’ve given above.

I did a Reply All to that message so that the rest of the family would have no doubt about where I stand. Here’s the reply:

I must have been put on this distribution list by mistake. I am a born-again atheist who thinks Ben Stein reached his peak of intelligence when he did voice overs for Garfield.

That prompted a reply from the original sender:

No mistake. I don't use distribution lists. What little I forward goes only to those I love and care about. Funny, I thought "born again" and "atheist" were mutually exclusive. Be careful what you close your mind to; it's the only one you have, and darkness is clarity, as ignorance is bliss.

Finally, it's the message not the messenger you should pay attention to. 

And my reply to that (and only to the sender, not All):

"Born again." Ah, you get the irony. In my case it means, been-there-done-that-got-the-t-shirt so I know it's all bullshit. And my atheism is only one degree more than yours: I include your god in the same list as you include everyone else's. 
When considering the message, it's wise to consider the source. I defer, not to BenStein but to Einstein, who said "The only difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
My mind is closed to what I saw when it was open to this monstrous belief in an imaginary friend.

And then today, this from one of the All (notice the BloodOfChrist font):

Make no mistake for sure....the message has meaning to all of us. I personally take offense at anyone who expects me to respect their views and rights, but finds it completely fine...even their right and their privilege to stomp all over my rights as a Catholic, as a Christian and as a Parent. Thanks Daddy, From a standpoint of someone who is growing the future leaders of this country.

It’s the last line that bothered me and prompted me to write (the rest is the usual paranoid fist-pounding). This person has no idea of what “the future leaders of this country” will most likely be. This is someone who obviously doesn’t realize that “this country” isn’t what they thought it was going to be when they were young. It is increasingly diverse in cultures, ethnicities and religious persuasions, most of which are neither Christian nor Jewish. It also ignores the fact that the portion of the population who today profess to be “non-believers” in any kind of god-like entity has increased from 8% in 1990 to 15% today. And this percentage is expected to grow. The “future leaders of this country” are more likely to be secular than religious, and most of them will be atheists. 

The brainwashing of children by religious parents is one of the most egregious silent crimes being perpetrated daily. But I expect that a goodly portion of those kids will be able to break out of the mental addictions their parents are cultivating in them. With a more educated populace, and continued rapid advances in science and technology, fewer young people will be enticed to hold to ideas that are so patently ridiculous. Even those who are right now being “raised” by parents who hope they will become fully robotized religious fanatics like themselves and get this nation back to its religious roots. 

And by the way, the assumption that America was founded AS a christian nation is bogus. It was founded as a place where even religious people could believe whatever claptrap they want without having the government prevent them. Here’s an excerpt from my handy “Atheist Pocket Debater,” an iPhone app:

Our Constitution contains no mention of a God, a Creator, or Christianity. It is a secular document. It mentions religion only once, in a passage dealing with religious freedom, which states, “No religious test shall be required to serve public office.” 

…

Many of our founding fathers and patriots were not Christians. They were Deists! These include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Monroe, James Madison, John Adams, and Thomas Paine. Some actually having much contempt for Christianity. Thomas Jefferson created the “Jeffersonian Bible,” in which he removed all of the supernatural events and miracles of Jesus, just keeping his teachings. Payne wrote” The Age of Reason,” a scathing critique of the Bible

And when these fist-pounders insist on the right to brainwash their children, and to be free to perform whatever form of hideous rituals and practices their delusions encourage regardless of their impact on innocents and bystanders, they grab all the freedom for themselves and leave the rest of society in want. In my own case, the belief that a god-like power would rescue a child dying from acute diabetes is not a delusion that anyone should have the right to practice without constraint. 

Religion thrives in a climate of fear. It shrivels in an atmosphere of reason, education and free discourse. What these spammers are possessed by is the fear that they could be punished for not believing enough in nonsense. They fear hell, and the wrath of some Uber-Parent they might piss off. So an underlying motive is to spread anxiety (which is why so many of them are Republicans) and in so doing build a widespread climate of cowering religiosity to ratify their own fears.

Follow the Romoney

**My first political video

** I have been working on a video for friends whose parents have just died, in their 90s. So I spend a lot of time viewing photos of these people throughout the years. How vibrant and alive they are! I think of how I try to make my days mean something, prove my existence, contribute something to the future. But I know that, video or no, it will all be dust someday. In the meantime, eat, drink and be merry.

**From way before the god era, this struck a chord in me. And now that I know better, it's an entire symphony.

**The "comforter" is a drug

To those who claim their belief in god is comforting, this from Lawrence Krauss in his new book "A Universe from Nothing."

"…the ultimate arbiter of truth is experiment, not the comfort one derives from one’s a priori beliefs, nor the beauty or elegance one ascribes to one’s theoretical models."

And the truth is that life is hard, unfair, chancy and lethal. So take comfort in religious theories, but you're not going to avoid the truth of life itself.

"It surprises me..."

**I don't publish or respond to the comments I get that are just ad hominem invective. But if there's a bit of a point that gets me thinking, then I do reply to the comment, or in this case post a whole blog entry based on it. Such is the case with a recent comment.

It surprises me that you would have - as an intelligent and already seasoned adult -- found a religion and decided to devote your life to it, and then reach a point where you're trying to disprove the very premise of the religion.

Yeah, it surprised me too. I thought I was just pissed off at Tom and the other phonies who took advantage of my trust (gullibility), but in 2005 after a few months in the California sun - and several months ruminating - I realized that CS was just a more "reasonable" substitute for a deeper delusion in my life. As I've written earlier, I was raised Catholic and was pretty devoted to it - especially as a young person, which is unusual. When you're raised to believe absurdities you seldom question them. So, when I had a problem with religion, I took it as just brand dissatisfaction. I still believed the category itself was legit. After the ensuing wildness, fear zoomed to the forefront and CS appeared on my scene. It promised to make me "good" as religion is supposed to, and since it was almost diametrically opposite to RC it seemed like a complete solution. So for the next 30+ years I tried to live up to what I thought were the ideas and ideals of CS. I even became a staunch defender and apologist - and to some, an example of how liberated it could be. 

But time took its toll on delusion and little by little it disintegrated. Applying my mind to the alternatives I eventually questioned the CATEGORY itself and not just the brand. It was the belief that there is a god or principle that controls the universe, who loves his creation and can intervene when we have problems - and the rest of the 9 yards. Once free to look around at the alternatives I found a rich field of facts that satisfied every objection to the claim of a spiritual dimension and a spiritual principle. 

I can't say I feel happier or more optimistic. Sober is more accurate. I suppose part of the endurance of a delusion is the comfort it can bring at times. Having made up for lost drinking time over those 30+ years, I really do understand the comforting power of mind-altering influences. And its dangers. Happiness is no indicator of rightness or safety. Just because we all desire comfort and happiness doesn't mean it is actually attainable. So arguments for the proof of a benevolent agent based on the way it makes the  believer feel don't sway me. "Truthiness" (per Stephen Colbert) is not the equivalent of truth.

So what is life like without the narcotic of spiritual belief? Not great. But not very different either. Once you understand the totally accidental and unintentional origin of life, that there is no "creator" or "first cause" then you can begin to appreciate the awesomeness of existence - its wonder and its horror. The algorithm that impels complexification has yielded the amazing world we live in. When I look at the natural world, what wows me isn't that some supreme being created it but that each plant, animal - even mineral and gas - is a SURVIVOR! It had countless predecessors, none of which survived. Given the enormity of time and the working of that algorithm  - to make complex things out of simpler components (I'm simplifying here) - an enormity of possibilities can arise. In other words, it doesn't take a watchmaker to make a watch. It just takes time and persistent experimentation. Reading Daniel Dennett's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea" really expanded my view of life. It was the second of his books that I read. The first was "Breaking the Spell." About the time I was clearing out the rubble of my so-called religious life that book had just come out and he was doing radio interviews. I heard just a few minutes of an interview and knew I had to explore his ideas. Richard Dawkins came next. And Sam Harris. And Christopher Hitchens. And Victor Stenger. And some others. 

What impresses me most about these writers is the clarity of their explanations and, except for Hitchens, a lack of (deserved) vitriol. You don't have to be an evolutionary biologist, neuroscientist or physicist to grasp the immense implications of their world view. It blows ”god” and all that ”spiritual” paraphernalia away like chaff. No, these thinkers don't claim that they or science itself has definitive answers for all questions, but the worst of their ideas demolish the best spiritual arguments. And I know the spiritual arguments well. Very well. I used to hone them for warfare on atheism. I taught them, made a career out of being a voice and practitioner for spirituality. I was even trained early in Catholic theology and Thomistic philosophy. I do know my way around these ideas, and have known or heard a great many spokespeople for spiritual belief. I proved my sincerity and my commitment. And not just for a season, but for decades. So, yeah, it's surprising, this complete turnabout. But what's more shocking is how deeply the delusions went and how long they persisted.

Ah, sweetness

**For those who don't follow the comments section, here's part of a response to a recent comment, and some expansion:

Surely you don't begrudge others from all organized religions from feeling content, even happy because of their beliefs? You can't be that bitter?

Got nothing to do with being "bitter." Just as I don't begrudge someone from getting drunk or high in the isolation of their own home or among friends, people can take comfort in their religious delusions. It's when they foist it on others - children and non-believers (think Santorum, Dobson, etc) - that makes them begrudge-able. Any bitterness is sweetened by the clear fact that this organization and its influence in the world is rapidly sinking into impotence.

The fact that a delusion offers "content, even happy" feelings does nothing to convince a true "seeker." It's "truth" we seek, not "truthiness" (as Colbert would put it). And so far, all I've been able to discern that is "true" is what I wrote in a recent song ["Choppy Waters" http://youtu.be/t15Ql0jU7x4]:

"There's no one in charge,
You're a runaway barge,
And mostly you're on your own."

At this late date, the conclusions I've come to are expressed in words at the end of the song::

"Here's a little bit of wisdom I've seen:
From time to time and storm to storm
There's a little bit of peace in-between
That's the time to float [another song]
Make love in your boat
And do it like it's gonna be your last
Next storm run-in you could be succumbin'
And nothing exists in the past."