Just a theory...

Do you wash your hands?

Ever wonder what's to blame when the same belly pain comes around from scarfing down a piece of food left out for days? It's no mystery (in recent history), the culprits for your lack of ease are simply these:

Doesn't take a nut, a gullible idiot, or a zealot to believe. Germs are everywhere; in your eyes, in your hair, from the skies above to a bug's derriere. But are they meant to deceive? Precisely why our brightest minds have come up with the germ theory. For anyone leery, it's clearly up to you to pull out a microscope. Against all hope, it's your task to cope with the facts as they are. Debate all you like, but without a gigantic crack in the dike of accepted science, your defiance isn't likely to tell germ theory to take a hike. This is the weight we attribute to the word. It's absurd to stand in the face of such evidence and become incensed that your defense of empty hypotheses can be dismissed with ease. But do you yield? Behold as the impropriety of our society is duly revealed.

All 4 Dist. 95 candidates back teaching creationism in science classes

Three states promote anti-evolution bills

Lovely, is it not? These legislatures are hot to trot claiming creation's found in nature (it's not) and is a truth our youth should be taught. If I haven't made my point clear, allow me now an open ear:

Evolution is a theory.

Was that too hard to hear? By all means, question the science. Doubt our unhealthy reliance on facts and tests and all the rest that make up a theory's clout. If you can find the proof that science is aloof to some demonstrable evidence of creation, you'll find me devout. I will shout it from a roof. "Hurray!" the Atheist will say. "God is great and no big deal an appeal to reason was made a touch late!" Until that fateful day, am I unreasonable to say you shouldn't teach our young some silly bung made up to fill in our gaps of knowledge? Why not teach the wisdom we preach of the tooth fairy in college? Don't use laws to pause our understanding of the universe. And if I seem harshly terse, I merely ask you heed the gravity of my call.

Of course, gravity is a theory, after all.

Thanks @stevesilberman,@JoshRosenau, @coopmike48, and @timminchin for the inspiration!

Grand Ol' Proselytization

Before I cared enough to pay attention, I often wondered why such a strong political divide existed in the country. Americans, for the most part, can conduct affairs in a sane, intelligent manner while making compromises to suit the common good, right? ...Right? This, of course, depends on whose definition of "good" you may be paying attention to on the TV/internet. Turns out politicians don't consider the country's diversity of values and beliefs in making their legislative decisions. Sadly, these egregious moves pandering towards a single sect of Americans are becoming all the more common. They also happen to be coming from a single political party. I don't like to name names but... well, take a look at this.

Conservatives vow to make gay marriage a 2012 issue

I argue that an atheist's view of homosexuality is based upon reality. Evidence of it is found readily in nature, crossing species and continents without bias. It's also a trait found documented in humanity for thousands of years. Also worth considering is the fact that humanity isn't classifiable as only male and female. Sexual characteristics are hardly black-and-white, but instead a healthy shade of gray. Is it any wonder that humans are capable of sexuality outside male/female relations? The only opposition to such facts of life can be traced to musings on whichever bible happens to be given the weight of divinity. For argumentative purposes, a christian perspective can be found here. If every passage of the bible can be applied as such, we could also argue that slavery is permissible, adulterers should be murdered, and cannibalism leads to salvation. Ridiculous? Yes. In conflict with how much of Christianity's followers interpret the bible? Of course. Why then does such a large portion of our society take such a narrow minded view of homosexuality? Social conservatism has demonized and politicized it. We are asked to ignore the very foundation of the American constitution which states that all men and women are guaranteed equal freedoms and protections under law. If a man or woman cannot marry another consenting adult with the same legal protections, inequality is written for all nations to behold. Of course, it'd be much simpler if marriage were the only issue encroached upon by religious bias.

Tennessee introduces "Don't Say Gay" bill

State senator Stacey Campfield and representative Bill Dunn want to make it illegal for homosexuality to be discussed in public schools. Let that sink in for a minute. Got it? Elected representatives who undoubtedly convinced the people of Tennessee that if elected, they would work for the community to fix the economy and reduce deficits, are now telling their constituency that it should be illegal to educate, discuss, or council students on homosexuality. By ignoring what they consider personally immoral, do they hope the "problem" will just go away? Does anyone see how making a supportive environment for possibly conflicted or harassed teenagers should be subject to penalty? If you do, I'd suggest reexamining what Jesus meant when he said "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. (Matthew 7.12 ESV) How would these government elects feel if their children were not allowed to discuss religious persecution because broaching the subject was deemed immoral?

Unjust treatment of homosexuals may not catch your attention. I'd urge you to take note as legislators' treatment of homosexuality proves telling of how they'd treat any view differing from their own. Still, even more examples are popping up showing how social conservatism attempts to strip away society's ability to reason.

Let's consider abortion, another tricky subject wrought with emotion... but little rationality. For a representative perspective, I submit Juno Walker's explanation of an atheist's view on abortion. For fetal abortion to be qualified as murder, one must believe that a fetus has a sense of self from the moment of conception. Often, this is represented as the "soul". For the rest of us skeptical of the soul hypothesis, the brain is arguably the seat of Self. By this definition, a fetus up to a demarcation line asserted by brain development is simply a "potential human". A handful of cells yet to take anything close to the semblance of personhood. As Juno Walker states, pro-choice advocates are not saying abortion should be doled out like aspirin. Just as with any surgical procedure, there are risks and complications and the matter shouldn't be taken lightly by doctor or patient. Still, by understanding an atheist's, biologist's, materialist's etc. viewpoint, doesn't legally protected choice sound reasonable? Advocate against abortion as much as you like, and when the situation arises, choose not to get an abortion. This gives no one the right to make sweeping legislation removing a woman's freedom to make reproductive decisions. And yet...

State legislators push to change justifiable homicide language to include fetuses

 Three states have submitted bills that could feasibly be used to defend violent crimes against mothers and abortion providers. Their authors have stated this was not the intention, but it doesn't take a law degree to see how such changes empower those who consider fetuses to be fully formed humans with all the rights and privileges herein. If that seems like too much of a stretch, take a look at this.

Rep Bobby Franklin: Miscarriages are prenatal murder

You read that right. Georgia representative Bobby Franklin wants a bill stating that all miscarriages are murder. Does this elected official realize that "studies reveal that anywhere from 10-25% of all clinically recognized pregnancies will end in miscarriage?" This displays an abominable ignorance of a reproductive issue that nearly 1 in 4 women will face in their lifetime, not including their partners. Franklin wants all of these women criminally investigated to make sure "legal human prenatal murder" is witnessed and punished. This is coming from an official with the authority to make sweeping changes to the way thousands of individuals live their life. Are you disgusted yet? If not, you have no reason to complain when you or your partner goes to jail for losing a fetus to natural causes, if only for failing to choose a lawyer versed in Biology 101.

Florida mayoral candidate jokes about bombing abortion clinic

"Pro-life" takes on new meaning when politicians joke in a church about bombing centers that provide often necessary medical procedures to women, doesn't it? In his defense, Mike Hogan does state that he was joking with a congregation that is "110% pro-life". Does that mean they more readily sympathize with violent rhetoric that ought to make any sane politician wonder what the hell he was thinking?

While the skeptics and the faithful may not be able to see eye to eye on many matters of life, we ought to agree as Americans that using law to push personal beliefs is unjust and immoral. Share this with your friends and family, and tell your representatives that you want your freedoms protected against biases that have no place in government. After all, does criminalizing women and homosexuals help turn the economy around?

Not unless you're passing around a collection plate.

Thank you to @pzmyers,@kzelnio, @MotherJones,
and @kdrum for the links, research, and opinion!

Correction: PZ Myers' blog Pharyngula held guest blogger Juno Walker for "An Atheist's View On Abortion".

Baby brains and telephone bibles

Once more into the breach, dear friends!

Designer babies will be godless achievement machines

@PopBioethics shares this piece. If you've never seen "Gattaca", rent it and then ask why you've hated yourself for so long. It details a fictitious future where babies are selected to be of utmost appeal; with beauty, brawn, brains, and a big old superiority complex to boot. Truth is often stranger than fiction, and the technology for such a future no longer seems out of humanity's reach. The article provides an argument to Peter Lawler's belief that this sort of progress will destroy our ability to think for ourselves and behave as abominably atrocious automatons. Kyle Munkittrick argues this better than I can so have a read. I only add the thought that Lawler's objections may be to a more highly civilized and intellectual populace realizing that religion, while charming for some, supplies little more than a nail in the rubber wheel of progress.

Understanding the brain's "brake pedal" in neural plasticity

@sciam, never short on compelling research and opinion, educates us on neural plasticity and the chemicals responsible. In brief, our brains are remarkably adaptable and receptive. Children pick up languages with ease, like little sobbing sponges. As we grow older, however, neurochemicals play the role of cementing such knowledge in our minds, making us a more clouded and stubborn receptor. With a complete understanding of such dynamics, could we perhaps augment our mind's plasticity and take a two-week seminar in French? Afterward, we need only some chemical treatment to return our brains to  normal operational status, complete with French poetry ripe for recitation on that special romantic encounter. Another question to ask, of course, is how plasticity plays a role in our cultural awareness. If a devout Catholic returns to a child-like understanding and studies Scientology for a week, would they be disastrously divided on where to spend all their hard-earned money?

Why exactly can nothing go faster than the speed of light?

@seanmcarroll, via @eugenephoto, share a blog post explaining this fascinating question. For the short attention span or physics illiterate, the idea can be roughly described as comparing the speed of light to a horizontal line. Asking what goes faster than light is like asking what is straighter than straight. The notion is impossible considering the laws of our universe. Without breaking or bending those laws, such travel is strictly prohibited. Dang!

No such thing as The Bible

@CNNbelief supplies this article, confirming what most Atheists already know: "The" Bible is a nonsense title without prefacing which version is up for debate. Much like the village bicycle, pretty much everyone has had a ride. In deciphering the true words of whichever god gives you that good old-fashioned oxytocin buzz, one must consider how much the manuscript has been translated, articulated, mangled, shredded, collaged, twisted, integrated, obfuscated, and inundated with biases running the gamut of human interpretation. If a god did divinely inspire man to write endless versions of ancient stories meant to teach future millenia of millions of people how to manage their naughty bits, you'd think he or she might have administered some authority as to which version captures divine intentions with the least amount of mortal fluff. Take comfort in knowing the next time someone claims "The" Bible as inspiration, you can probably safely assume they haven't been carrying around all 150-some versions to cross-reference their righteous assertions! I'm sure, between the lines, they all mean to say do unto others as you'd have them do unto you anyway.

Ain't no creator, faith-healer, or climate change neither

So much news, so little time! After a brief respite, here's what's been going on this week.

Natural selection and evolution: material, blind, mindless, and purposeless

@seanmcarroll shares with us a succinct argument on why evolution and natural selection cannot be taught alongside creationism. Saddening, I know. The bottom line is essentially that what is observed in nature is absolutely indiscriminate. At no point in humanity's research has any deliberate, mindful, or "miraculous" touch been witnessed. As much as a god is supposed to be responsible for the heavens, the earth, and whether or not we find a twenty by the side of the road, he or she certainly hasn't revealed any identity or cause in the origins of life. "Why are we here?" may not be definitively answerable in science (yet), but "how" we got here is a matter of evidence. How we got here is a rich, incredible tale of ideal circumstances with just a pinch of dexterity. This ought to lead us not into questioning what purpose a god has given us, but rather a profound appreciation of how lucky we are, and how easily circumstances may conspire to take it all away.

Religion: Oregon to eliminate faith healing as legal defense

@BibleAlsoSays provides the next news item. As science has revealed no need for a creator hypothesis lying in the origins of nature, Oregon swiftly rejected all protections for faith-based practices, revoked tax-credits for churches, and required all of its children to have a rudimentary understanding of biology. We wish. Still, they've taken a step in the right direction for society by firmly stating that allowing a child to remain ill and possibly die of an easily preventable illness is NOT a terrific way to raise a child. I don't know why people would insist on playing Russian-roulette with their own spawn, but if the motivation is secretly based in eugenics, aiming to create a more resilient generation of determinable ignorance, may I suggest starting with an education in genetics before throwing caution (and reason) to the wind? Perhaps then a simple antibiotic, or even an aspirin for crying out loud, may not seem so morally reprehensible. It's a delightful snippet of the human condition to see people finding a shot of insulin more repugnant than letting a child succumb to diabetic ketoacidosis.

Ray Kurzweill: Climate change no problem

Care of @guardianscience, Ray Kurzweill, of "singularity" fame, shares his views on how progress in solar energy will rapidly diminish our need for fossil fuels, thus reducing global to emission levels far below the tipping point climatologists have been warning about. If you're not familiar with the singularity, a quick summary: Humanity's ingenuity, understanding, and advancement of medicine and technology will unite biology and circuitry into a being with a vastly superior intellect and possibly endless life span. Kurzweill believes this revolution will come sooner than we think and shares the sentiment with solar energy's influence on society. If the technology could advance in the commercial sector as he predicts, we may be seeing self-charging cars, phones, clothes, homes, and countries within a handful of decades. Skeptics often down-play Kurzweill's lofty predictions, which I cannot refute. However, in some aspects of life and humanity, a little faith ain't so bad!

Join the Out Campaign, and in time...

The myth of militant atheism may come true?

Someday the majority falters, people pour from the alters,
their heads held up high looking up to the sky with the burden of dogma off shoulders...
On that pending day, the sky still turns gray
when a handful of fools use their newly found tools of reason a violent way.
'Til this comes to pass, it's quite fair to ask
why people see "militant" where people use merely those words angry or crass.
No excuse lies before anyone's eyes
to lower the task of a skeptical mass seeking only to pull back the disguise.
Fear not the hatred of god-fearing patrons,
be true to yourself and tell everyone else what goodness awaits emancipated.

Join the Out Campaign

GE cafe: now serving fillet

Speedy evolution, indeed

Hudson river fish were presented with a rather nasty dish. Polychlorinated biphenyls aren't part of a healthy diet, so try it and see how your offspring will vanquish. The fish were affected, which scientists tested and found their kids' hearts defected. Still, from GE's crime, we mine the knowledge curtailed in order to hail Darwin as his theories again, as suspected, prevail. Fish that adapted bred very rapid, replacing the weak and dying. So yet again science sees, through no lack of trying, nature surviving with ease. The tool for resolving all these threats revolving? Evolving. No miraculous decrees. Try new Hudson river fish! Now with PCB's.
Pass me the salad, please.

One world, under humanity

Could we conceive of Adam and Eve speaking to us all? How would they feel after seeing a reel of our political/religious brawl? Perhaps some day if peace finds a way to permeate networks of people, we'll find no more need for malice or greed, be they under a governor or steeple.

Thanks to @BibleAlsoSays!