The Atheist Blogger

A new atheist blog, The Religion Virus has an interesting article in which the author Craig A. James argues that 70-80% of atheist bloggers remain anonymous, either using a pseudonym (as Mr. James used previously) or a username such as vjack who runs Atheist Revolution. Craig James says that atheists have no reasons to be in the closet, and he issues a challenge for more atheists to get out.

I am one of the atheists he used as an example of a blogger “out of the closet” so to speak. Although I don’t see how he came to this conclusion. “Adrian Hayter” could just be a pseudonym to the casual observer. Unless he had been reading my blog for a few months, or had stumbled on my personal website (now defunct). In any case, I disagree with his argument that atheists have no reasons not to come out of the closet, even thought I admire what he is trying to do.

I am “out of the closet” because I live in the UK, specifically the south which is one of the most secular regions. Although the majority of the population is religious, there is a large number (supposedly 30%) of atheists in the country. I don’t feel threatened at all, and the closest thing we have to fundamentalist Christians are the people who go around protesting abortion and homosexuality, but they don’t post any kind of threat. Most of the time they are laughed at.

Read the rest of this entry »

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

As reported earlier this week, 41 year old Brazilian Roman Catholic priest Adelir Antonio di Carli was confirmed dead after his ballooning attempt when badly wrong. The priest was trying to beat a record 19 hour flight, attached only to helium balloons. A day after he made an emergency call to say he was crashing into the ocean, a mass of balloons were found in shark infested water.

Now, the priest has been entered into the 2008 Darwin Awards for removing himself from the gene pool. The great thing is, since Roman Catholic priests enter vows of celibacy, he had already removed himself from the gene pool, resulting in the first “double Darwin” award.

A lesson should be learnt from all this. If you are attempting to do some kind of world record balloon trip, at least learn to use your GPS before you set off!

A week ago PZ Myers asked everyone to email the president of UCF to complain / voice concerns over the handling of students Webster Cook and Benjamin Collard. I sent a short email, along with a few other hundred people. Today I received this response:

Thank you for your e-mail.

Laws regarding student privacy prevent us from commenting about
individual UCF students. But, in general terms, when a student allegedly
violates student rules of conduct, his or her student account is placed
on hold.

The student is notified of this action and informed that the hold will
not prevent registration for classes. A student is allowed to register
after making a request to release the hold. The Office of Student
Conduct follows this procedure for any student who is referred to it.

More information about the entire Golden Rule and the student conduct
process is available on our Web site, www.ucf.edu. Please be assured
that UCF is committed to following its standard procedures to ensure
fair outcomes in all student conduct review cases.

Additionally, it is the university’s policy to treat all people with
dignity and respect, without regard to race, creed, color, national
origin, religion, sex, age, disability, marital status, sexual
orientation, veteran status, or political opinions and affiliations.

Amy J. Barnickel
Senior Executive Assistant to the President

From Promise to Prominence:
Celebrating 40 Years

Of course its the standard copy/paste response that was probably sent to everyone, but it’s the last paragraph that confuses me. Firstly I’m happy that Cook and Collard are not going to suffer any setbacks in their education because of this, but the so called “policy” outlined in the last paragraph clearly states

“without regard to race, creed, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, veteran status, or political opinions and affiliations.”

Clearly the university is going against its own policy by regarding the religion of others over the individual. If the policy actually counted for anything, this whole issue would have been brushed aside as “free expression”, the same as any political statement or opinion. The UCF need to stop bowing to demands of evil religious organisations and start thinking of their students.

Many people will recognise the above title as a line from Monty Python’s “Life of Brian“. Well, that is most people except those in the Welsh town of Aberystwyth where the film has been banned from viewing since its release, 29 years ago. The current Mayor, Sue Jones-Davies, starred in the movie as Brians girlfriend and now wants the ban lifed.

However, she might have to fight through some angry Christians to do it. Local reverend Stuart Bell says that attitudes amongst Christians have not changed (well when have they ever).

The film at its root is poking fun at Christ and we don’t want that to happen. I don’t think that the film should be shown. Why should the ban be removed?

Why? I’ll tell you why. It’s hilarious, has a great plot, and appeals to all ages. 30 years ago it was a breakthrough for freedom of speech and expression, making an obvious challenge to the countries blasphemy laws. It also outlined the irrational sheep-like followers of religion:

Brian: Look, you’ve got it all wrong! You don’t need to follow me, you don’t need to follow anybody! You’ve got to think for yourselves! You’re all individuals!
The Crowd (in unison): Yes! We’re all individuals!
Brian: You’re all different!
The Crowd (in unison): Yes, we are all different!
Man in Crowd: I’m not…
The Crowd: Shhh!

Of course Mr Bell has good reason to oppose the film, having only seen “a small clip, that’s all“. I doubt very much he saw the sermon on the mount part, or that he knows that Brian repeatedly tries to shake off the attention. No, Mr Bell just assumes the entire movie is about mocking Jesus.

Un-ban the movie, and make a whole new generation laugh.

According to the BBC, Birmingham City Council have decided to ban websites about atheism, witchcraft, the paranormal, sexual deviancy, and criminal activity. Every other site is allowed (especially Christian, Islamic, Hindu sites) but the new system has effectively outlawed any sites relating to satanism or the occult, which apparently now includes atheism. Strangely there is one section of the Birmingham Councils software description that stands out.

or any other form of mysticism

Hold on a sec. Mysticism is defined as “a direct, intimate union of the soul with God through contemplation or ecstasy”^[1], and as “the pursuit of achieving communion, identity with, or conscious awareness of ultimate reality, the Other, divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, or insight”.^[2]

It seems that every single religion practices this. Prayer, whether it is Christian or Muslim, is a “pursuit” of some form of communication between God / Allah and the believer. So already all Christian and Islamic websites which advocate prayer should be out of the loop. So should all evangelical websites that call for believers to have a “personal relationship” with Jesus. The last time I checked, a personal relationship is a union of sorts, but is definitely a direct experience. Indeed, many Christian denominations have a mystical theology called theosis, and the Muslims have a similar one known as Irfan.

Read the rest of this entry »