TurboFool (Neither, really)

All right, new episode of Mr. Deity is up, and I’m in it again! Woohoo, go me, living the dream, etc. Check it out (and stick around for the begging segment at the end):

Another good episode, and I loved the PZ references. Definitely some good, subtle stuff in there, and as usual plenty of ad-libbing (the Dagon reference was something I was especially proud of).

Anyway, the season’s nearly wrapped up, then there’ll be a small hiatus and for the first time ever, a Mr. Deity DVD release of the entire third season! Hopefully there’ll be a bunch of bonus content like outtakes (we have, on some very, very rare occasions, botched a line, or done something else mildly unplanned) and extended scenes to make it extra worth it, but just having it without the GoDaddy ads is enough for me. That and maybe no begging, although I find the begging bits nearly as funny (and, admittedly, occasionally funnier) than the episodes themselves, so hopefully they’ll be on the DVDs in one form or another.

Btw, if you were at all confused by the beginning, you may want to check out this Super Bowl commercial after the break to clear things up a bit:

More »

That’s right, folks, Timmy’s back! And check out what a headache he’s got on his hands…

This one was a doozy to film, because the dialog was so tight and the timing had to be so perfect that we had a lot to focus on. Plus I had worked late the night before, and Jimbo and Brian had spent the day filming another episode first, so none of us was as well-prepared as we would have liked. But that never stops a Mr. Deity, and better yet, some of the funniest things that come out of our mouths are born from sheer delirium.

As well, I was deeply honored to learn (and confirm upon reflection) that I am officially the first recurring character in Mr. Deity history (obviously not counting the four principle players). It means so very much to me to have been so openly and warmly accepted into this group and brought on-board such an amazing project. To go from a rabid fan (thankfully the doctors got that taken care of) to a recurring role as the head of R&D for the entire universe is a literal dream come true. I couldn’t be happier to be involved in something so clever, witty, original, and meaningful.

Well, enough blubbering. The next episode is one I managed to operate cameras and sound for, and it’s damn funny, despite me not appearing in it. Look forward to it in a couple of weeks. And word is I may appear in at least one more episode this season. Stay Tubed…

I don’t believe in God. That’s no secret. If you’ve read my blog or had a conversation with me on the topic, you’re aware of this. I work hard to be respectful of the people I know and love and their right to believe what they wish, and I avoid arguments with them simply because I like to maintain the relationships I have with them. But that doesn’t keep me quiet everywhere, and that doesn’t stop me from caring.

But why DO I care? After all, if I don’t believe, then what does it matter? Why do I as an atheist, or all atheists, seem to spend so much time talking about something we don’t believe in? Religious people seem to find this concept silly, and on the surface I can see why. I don’t put a title on my lack of belief in fairies, nor do I write blog posts about it, have heated discussions online, join activist groups, attend conferences, or read books about it. And since I respect each individual’s right to those beliefs, what does it matter?

I’ve wanted to answer this question for quite some time, honestly, and get into the nitty-gritty of it. But today, my Twitter friend @natheist favorited a new (well, maybe just new to me, I didn’t check the date) video by the AWESOME @gogreen18 (who is awesome, to clarify, for being brilliant and well-spoken, all while happening to prove the stereotype that gorgeous women can’t be either is complete bull) that just so happens to say everything I wanted to say better, more compactly, and with prettier eyes. Take a look:

That’s it, in a nutshell. That’s why I care, why it all matters. Historically, and currently, religion tends to impact my life and those of the people I love more than most other forces, and it’s my opinion, and that of a consistently growing number of people, that it does so negatively. Now perhaps you’re one of those who believes in a god or spirituality in some more generalized or personal sense, and one who doesn’t buy into this organized religion thing. Then perhaps you’re one of the people who doesn’t directly harm me. But when you believe your holy text overrides my rights as someone who hasn’t bought into it, you impact my life. And that’s when I have to start doing something about it.

More »

Religious folk have it easy (minus that whole eternity of nightmarish torment for kissing the wrong person thing). See, they get to live in a world of black and white, good and evil, right and wrong, yes and no, heaven and hell, The Beatles and Celine Dion. They get to state absolute certainties regardless of their inability to back them up because they have “faith.” And it’s really quite an enviable position, as it doesn’t require much in the way of intellectual leg work*. Debates can pretty much start and end with “this is just how it is,” and anything they add as to why or how is icing on the cake and optional (not to mention easily changed on the fly if the person they’re arguing against calls them on it). They know what they know, and usually can’t be swayed, which makes them look pretty darn strong to an unbiased and inexperienced onlooker.

This difference puts those of us who invest in science, reason, and honest self-examination at a bit of a disadvantage. When we’re explaining our position on a subject to a third party, assuming we play by our own rules, we must readily and honestly admit when we DON’T know something or can’t be 100% certain. While there’s much we’re clear on, there are many topics that aren’t cut and dry, or that we can’t prove/disprove beyond all shadow of a doubt. But those who subscribe to religious beliefs can claim with absolute certainty anything they feel, and when someone’s looking for an answer, especially in a moment of weakness, self-doubt, grief, loss, fear, pain, etc., certainty sure is nice to have.

This comes up quite heavily on the issue of God (we’ll simply go with the Judeo-Christian one for simplicity here, but this applies equally to all other deities and spiritual forces and such), and especially the matter of his existence or lack thereof. See, while religious folk are quite happy to stick with a firm, hard, unwavering “yes, He definitely exists,” those of us with a more scientific angle can only stick to much more wishy-washy answers such as, “we have no evidence he exists,” “his existence is highly improbable,” “while I can’t rule out the possibility entirely, I’m not convinced,” etc. As I remember hearing someone point out recently (wish I remember who so I could credit them), a true scientist if asked whether the sun would rise again tomorrow would say, after pointing out the inaccuracy of the phrase, that all he or she can state is that all observable evidence suggests so. We simply cannot guarantee that a cosmic disaster won’t take place before that moment, or that some reality-altering shift in the universe won’t change all that we know. We’re pretty frickin’ damn sure it’s going to “rise” again tomorrow, as it has every day throughout recorded history, and well before that as we can extrapolate from the preponderance of evidence, and we see no sign of impending doom in any of the vast fields of research in which such an event could be foreseen, but committing 100% is foolish when looking at something scientifically. The unknown must always be accounted for. So the same has to apply to this question of God’s existence, no matter how sure we are he doesn’t exist.

What I’ve noticed from this is that it often affects how a person portrays their philosophy on the subject, leading some to describe themselves as agnostic simply due to accepting this minute possibility that they’re wrong. Now this seems to me a very slim minority of those who are agnostic, with most somewhere between simply not caring and lacking the knowledge to make an informed decision. But some actively decide that it’s impossible to know for a fact or dishonest to state it as such, therefore they’re unwilling to come down on either side of the fence. And while I find this quality admirable, and befitting the attitude of the true rationalist, it just doesn’t work for me on a personal level.

See, I too accept the possibility that I could be wrong, simply because the claims are NOT falsifiable. If it can’t be disproven 100%, I can’t say I’m 100% sure it’s not true. So much like Richard Dawkins, I have to place myself as a 9 on the scale of hardcore believer to hardcore unbeliever, as stating definitively that there is no God is just as dishonest as stating there most definitely is. I can’t say it’s impossible, as the rules under which he fits are just wide enough that I’d be lying if I said I know I’m right. So then why am I an atheist and not an agnostic? Simple: are you an atackliotist, or are you agnostic to Tackliots? What? You don’t know what Tackliots are? You’ve never heard of them before? That’s because I just made them up, but shhh, don’t tell anyone. Let me fill you in on the background of the amazing being known as the Tackliot:

The Tackliot came into existence before the dawn of time. Now I know what you’re thinking: How can something come BEFORE time? The answer, of course, is shut up. Now the Tackliot was simultaneously everything and nothing. That Tackliot was not only the entire universe, despite the fact that it didn’t yet exist (buh- buh… that’s better), but it also wasn’t the universe. Not even slightly. I’m blowing your mind, right? No? Read it again and then answer that. Not even a little? Try again, but squint this time. Now? Tiny headaches count as a sort of blown mind… Okay, sweet. Anyway, the Tackliot got bored with complete lack of time and a universe, and decided to make one. Since the Tackliot was everything and nothing, it was a simple task to instantly create every possible combination of designs for the universe at once, and then pick its favorites to keep. The Tackliot then absorbed the rest back into itself, and left the remaining universes intact. This meant the Tackliot was no longer everything as some universes now existed outside of itself. Thankfully it couldn’t cease to be nothing, so was able to enjoy this small cold comfort. However the Tackliot soon found that the universes it had created were full of small flaws and holes, and its work was cut out for it patching and fixing all of these various issues, tweaking something here, mending something there, until it had managed to give all that remained of itself to the various universes it had created, once again managing to become everything, and also nothing (see how I tied all that together so masterfully? Yeah, I’m totally down for drinks…). Our universe is but one of the myriad of universes that make up the Tackliot, and we should remember every day the beauty and history of this being that put us here in the lives that we lead. Also, next time you masturbate, remember that the Tackliot is watching you from the air, the walls, the ceiling, the floor, that sock, and is also your hand and junk. Have fun!

Now I know what you’re thinking right now after reading that wacky paragraph: that is AWESOME! Right? No? Try reading it again, but put on 3D glasses this time. Mind-blowing headache, right? Anyway, point is, there’s a being who may or may not exist. Its legacy makes as little or as much sense as most other religious stories about the origin of the universe, and we can’t disprove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it doesn’t exist. Now before you read this, you had to have been an atackliotist because you had no belief that the Tackliot existed. Now that you know the possibility exists, it would arguably be dishonest to say it’s 100% impossible as the story really didn’t provide any falsifiable details.

Of course one thing the story of the Tackliot lacks that the religious stories have is a vast backlog of books, stories, hymns, etc., all backing up the story. It also lacks the thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, or billions of fellow believers in the story. It lacks preachers, evangelists, and missionaries spreading the word of the Tackliot. So my story is at a pretty serious disadvantage, leaving it still pretty logical to be an atackliotist and not agnostic to his beauty, despite the inability to disprove the story. But what if Christianity didn’t have all of that? What if it lacked the books, the believers, the evangelists, etc.? Would it be any more convincing than my story? Well, without all of that vast wealth behind it, it really is just another story. No better, no worse than the rest. And just as unconvincing. But thankfully for it, it does have all that backing, right?

The thing is, though, for some of us Christianity DOES lack all of that. Because when I examine all of the materials used to prove the subject, I’m left thoroughly unconvinced, not to mention underwhelmed. I find the holy texts lacking all evidence, backing, logic, reasoning, structure, consistency, or believability. They seem to scream to me that they were written by primitive men who needed to explain the world around them based on the limited knowledge they had, while infusing it with stories and rules that backed up what was already important to them while condemning what their enemies held dear. So that, for me, cancels out the books, stories, hymns, etc. They might as well not exist for me.

But then what of the preachers, evangelists, missionaries, and believers? Surely I can’t discount all of them? But I can, because they exist only because of that now-forgotten evidence that left me so very, very unimpressed. They bought the stories that I didn’t. They believed the tales I saw as no different than the average fable. They accepted the stories of other believers who fell for the same poorly-written evidence that left me feeling unimpressed. And for this reason, they no longer exist in this equation. And what does that leave us with? Just another story. Just another story that had I not heard it before, just like you hadn’t heard the story of the Tackliot 10 minutes ago, I would never have even considered as an option in the way the universe works. I’d lack belief in it simply by virtue of the thought never having entered my head. And once I examine the evidence, discount it, and discount all of the surrounding noise that came from it, I have no remaining reason to treat it as anything more than just another story that in another universe I may never have even heard.

It’s for this reason that I, a rational-minded, free-thinking, skeptical, scientific person who must readily admit what he can’t know for certain, and who listens to evidence and changes his position when it becomes clear that it’s time to do so, still chooses to label himself as an atheist and not an agnostic. I was born an atheist, as is every other human being on this planet, and until I’m given something more than noise to consider, I’m going to remain one. Prove me wrong. Please. It’ll blow my mind (more than just giving me a headache), and open up this already incredible universe we live in even further. And contrary to popular belief, there are few things scientists love more than finding out what they believed was wrong and they have a whole new field to explore, complete with vast amounts of research grant dollars. As a mere science spectator (to borrow a term from Penn Jillette), I won’t benefit from the grant dollars, but I’ll be cheering on from the sidelines as we expand the world’s awareness that much further. Yeehaw!

*I need to clarify here that I very much am generalizing for the sake of dramatic effect. I know many religious people who would fit my description of being some of the most intelligent, thoughtful, insightful people I’ve ever known, and I’m lucky to have them and their brilliance in my life. But they’re the minority of what I see from those making religious arguments, especially on the Internet, and so I go after the low-hanging fruit. If you don’t fall into the traps I describe in this post, consider yourself not someone I’m describing.

In this day and age there’s a definite feeling among atheists that we’re on the shit list. We rank below the “terror” that is the Muslims (no pun intended), we’re barred from public office in several states, and considered sub-human by well-spoken members of the clergy. Most atheists are afraid to admit their lack of belief, and will do whatever they can to avoid the subject. Some go so far as to fake belief in order to avoid detection.

I typically find a middle ground between this and the heavily outspoken atheists that are finally making us known. I rarely directly bring up the subject (except online), especially as there’s rarely a point, but I also don’t avoid it. If someone asks me my religion, I’ll readily state that I have none, and am an atheist. But that doesn’t mean I don’t dread the moment, wondering what reaction I’ll get.

Now I’ll admit that in Southern California it’s really not that hard for me as it would be elsewhere. I can’t really think of any moments where I’ve been directly, recognizably persecuted for my lack of belief, or treated especially poorly. That said, outside of my circle of friends, it does generally bring up challenges. I’ve had people tell me it takes as much faith to be an atheist as a Christian. I’ve had people start questioning me on where love comes from. I’ve had people try to prove the divinity of the Bible. I’ve had people in a conversational, accepting, friendly tone let me know that they accept that I’m an atheist, but feel bad for me that I’ll be burning for eternity in Hell. The point is, it’s very uncommon that it’s mentioned and doesn’t lead to someone trying to save me, or point out that I’m wrong, and that’s never comfortable.

Yesterday, though, I was at a client’s office, assisting with the phone support for their email host. I spelled out my name to the support technician, and heard the owner of the company joke to her associate, “ooh, a nice Jewish boy!” I chuckled slightly at this since yes, my surname and background back up this assumption, and I’ve heard it before. I’ve also had the least problem with Jews as while I disagree with their religion no less than any of the rest, they tend to be some of the most likable and least judgmental towards others of any religious group that I’ve dealt with.

Anyway, her associate chided back that she had no way of knowing I was a Jew. The owner pointed out my last name. The smirk on my face was growing by the second. Her associate parried back that just because I had a Jewish last name didn’t prove my religion. Maybe I was Catholic. “Heck, I bet he’s an atheist. I’m sure of it.” I could barely keep from laughing on the phone at this point as I finished up the call.

Once I hung up, the owner asked me if I was Jewish. I laughed, gestured to her associate, and said, “nope, she wins,” with a chuckle as I got back to work. Her associate cheered over her successful guess, we chatted for a few moments about my family history, explaining the blood connections and roots of the name while I worked, and nothing else was said. It was friendly, open, non-confrontational, and felt nice.

Why can’t we have this more? Why do people like us have to live in dread of these conversations going the other way? Why can’t all of us be this tolerant of others and their idiosyncrasies? I think people’s religious beliefs are completely wrong, but I’m respectful enough to begrudge them their right to them and not treat them poorly over them. And likewise I’m sure many of my friends and coworkers who accept me believe I’m nuts for not accepting Jesus Christ as my personal lord and savior, or whatever their religion dictates. But the people I choose to surround myself with are respectful enough to recognize and accept that difference. Heck, one of my best friends from my old job, and one of the most intelligent people I know, is an extremely hardcore Christian, but I only learned this from his MySpace page. Hasn’t changed the way I interact with him one bit, and considering how open I am about what I believe, I can only assume he’s aware of me. Yet neither of us has ever discussed the topic, and I hope to keep it that way. I respect him too much to get into a religious argument that could damage a friendship. And don’t get me started with the most important person in my life, the woman I’ve chosen to spend the rest of my life with. We even take the risk and have the conversations, but we still work hard to respect each other’s differences and grow our perspectives off them, and it’s fantastic.

My point is that there’s plenty of room for this in the world, but there seems to be so very little of it. Right now Christians claim there’s a war on their religion from the secularists. But what they don’t seem to realize is that they started it. Their lack of respect for beliefs no more crazy than their own, and their push to either convert us or make us live by their laws has forced our hand. We’re not at war with them, but we’re also not going to be stepped on by their bigotry, prejudice, and disrespect any longer. We’re here, we live alongside them, we’re just as valuable to society, and we’re HAPPY to work together with them to make our towns, cities, states, and countries a wonderful place for us all. There is a middle ground, and most on our side are merely striving to reach even that. Right now we’re barely pushing back from the edge. But we’re gaining. Mingle with us in the center, like so many of the wonderful people I’ve managed to associate with, and everything will be just fine. Those that don’t will likely eventually find themselves on that very same edge.

So a few weeks back, one of our local City Council members, Bob Kellar (ex-mayor, if I’m not mistaken), shocked the room by proposing we add “In God We Trust” to the city seal. His feeling was that it’s somehow raised morale in other cities that have done it, and in these trying times, we all need a little more… what, exactly? What is it that a few words on a sign that reference something a large percentage of the population have no belief in is expected to do?

Either way, it was agreed to table it and discuss a vote at a future meeting. That meeting was held last night.

According to SCVTalk.com, that discussing didn’t go quite as was expected. Seems the council felt it completely unnecessary to have the fair citizens of this city vote on the subject. “I strongly believe we are a representative government,” Mayor Frank Ferry said, according to The Signal [warning, link full of incredibly ignorant comments]. “We are elected to represent the people.” And so, with that understanding, they went ahead and made the decision without us.

Apparently these people are unaware that their view of God is not the only one that exists. Not only that, but apparently it never crossed their minds that the people who voted them into office didn’t do so with any remote expectation that they would be representing not only their interests in managing the city, but also their religious affiliation. While I didn’t vote for any of the people who make up the current council, I also didn’t vote for the people I did based on their likelihood to vote against combining church and state. That was never discussed in campaign speeches or mailings. But then again, with comments like “What I don’t want through a city election is for this to become a religious issue; where it’s atheist verse Christian, Atheist verse Catholic or Christian verse Jew” by Mayor Frank Ferry, maybe I give them too much credit. Apparently they were aware we exist, and were aware we would be upset by this. So, as opposed to recognizing it’s a controversial subject and skipping it, or as opposed to allowing us to be adults and have those arguments, they simply made the decision for us to approve one of those viewpoints over all the rest.

I’m unbelievably frustrated, saddened, angered, and disenfranchised by this. I am not the only atheist in this valley, nor are atheists the only people given the finger by this decision. In God I don’t trust, but I was under the impression that I could trust the people who were elected to manage this city to make decisions in the best interest of its people, and their personal freedoms. Deciding their religion needs to be displayed all over our city in an official capacity does not protect those interests.

Santa Clarita is not in the middle of nowhere. We’re not in the bible belt, we’re not a small town with nothing but churchgoers. We’re in Southern California, not that far from the coast, right outside of the big city, and our town’s made up of people who commute to those coast cities. We’re therefore a melting pot of beliefs and opinions. Yes, this city tends to lean right-wing, and therefore religious, but I never had the impression that it was this close-minded and foolish as to forget such a large percentage of its citizens in exchange for what? Simple platitudes on a wall? Something that will make a few religious people smile when it happens, and then forget about it within days, but will stand as a silent, yet blaring reminder to the rest of us that our city thinks we’re irrelevant?

I don’t know what else to say. I’ve never felt this directly persecuted before for not going with the status quo and pretending to believe in something for which I see no reason to believe. I would never, and will never, begrudge these people their beliefs. And I would never decide, if elected, to modify the city seal to represent something that I believe that others do not share. I would, instead, leave well enough alone and choose to keep the city seal the simple, non-denominational, non-controversial seal it was, and leave the personal beliefs to our homes, churches, temples, synagogues, libraries, strip clubs, movie theaters, and wherever else we feel comfortable expressing interest in things others don’t necessarily share.

I don’t know what, if anything, can be done. But if there’s anyone else out there who’s as pissed off as I am who wants to do it, please join me. Let’s make a difference and remind these people that their entire citizenship matters.

EDIT: A friend of mine recommended the following revision to the seal. Seems just as fair:

A hastily-drawn alternative

EDIT 2: Dave Nichols does a great job addressing this issue, and its overall implications, from a much broader level. Check it out here.

My five-year-old daughter goes to a preschool/daycare that wasn’t, when we signed up for it, outwardly religious. We were careful to ensure a place that wouldn’t impart any specific religious biases on her so we can do our best to give her a well-rounded view of religion.

Without our choice, though, she was eventually transferred to a new chapter of the organization that was located on the grounds of a Lutheran church. And since then she’s been coming home with lots of interesting new "knowledge." She won’t be there much longer.

Despite the encroachment on my daughter’s innocence, there is always humor to find in these circumstances, and this one’s great. Yesterday I picked her up and noticed some foam art pieces the kids had made in class of what is presumably God’s hands holding the earth. One child, however, apparently didn’t quite get the concept of how those hands are supposed to be positioned…

Those of us who have been permanently blinded by the Goatse phenomenon should find this reference all too familiar.

Don’t you love it when religion inadvertently imitates disgusting Internet porn fetishes?

Apparently the followers of a group known as the “Creation Science [sic] Evangelism Ministries,” led by currently imprisoned tax evasionist Kent Hovind, have been sending false DMCA copyright takedown requests to YouTube on any and all videos that dare to suggest that creationism is anything but non-scientific garbage. Due to a loophole in the system, YouTube essentially just automatically deletes these videos with little or no effort to verify the claims.

Brian Sapient, of Rational Response Squad fame (I forgot to add them to my links section sooner, which I’ll do now), posted a video on YouTube about this issue and his account and video were promptly suspended by YouTube.

What gives, YouTube? Your entire business exists because of your community, and lately this debate has been a heavy part of it. You’ve now drawn lines and taken sides by accepting the false claims of the creationist movement that these videos somehow violate copyrights of their founder (the people in the videos in question refer to quotes of Ken Hovind’s, but quoting a person’s opinions has never been a violation of copyright). And you’re owned by Google, whose motto, I thought, was “Don’t be evil.” Are we meant to take this as a sign of who you do or not think is evil now?

Below I’ve posted a video, which clearly states it’s perfectly legal to do so, and which is NOT hosted on YouTube, which details the RRS’s issues and request. They are considering suing Creation Science [sic] Evangelism Ministries, and they have my full support. The Atheist community (as scattered as it is) has never tried to forcefully remove any of their claims for the internet via spurious methods such as these. We’ve merely used the tried and true methods of proving their claims are bullshit. It’s worked well throughout history, and although it’s a touch slower than other less honest methods, it generally has a longer-lasting effect.