Atheism: Bringing the Sexy Back

It would be amusing to just have a contest asking people to guess what the vertical axis on this chart is supposed to represent. The answer is, “reply rate to first-contact messages on an online dating site, as a function of words appearing in the message.” In particular, the site OkCupid, which has a handy rundown of which words and phrases are most likely to garner a reply to an initial contact. (Via FlowingData.) The average response rate is 32%, so you can see how using some specific word increases or decreases your chances of success. Apparently mentioning “God” is a big turn-off, although calling Him by a proper name is slightly helpful. But nothing works at turning a stranger’s head quite like bringing up His complete lack of existence.

Yes, that’s right, kids: If you want to date online, start with you you really are (i.e., atheist), don’t be a jerk when you meet them, and they’ll be nothing to worry about.

By the way, for face-to-face dating, I’d suggest the same thing. Saves a lot of time and aggravation…

Virtus in media stat.

Pursuant to an ongoing online conversation at Pharyngula, it turns out that some groups have declared a War On Porn. This is no surprise: not since Edwin Meese issued that ridiculous report fatwa in 1986, and guess who was on that allegedly ‘objective’ commission? Why, none other than our old buddy James Dobson, a diehard ‘family values’ fanatic. Guess who else was on it? Why, none other than Rev. Bruce Ritter (and what a surprise! Turns out old Brucie had a Haggard style relationship with a male hooker! What is with these guys anyways?)

And of course, they were able to spin up some evidence via a fellow named Victor Cline. In fact, he released this report, outlining his findings on the matter of porn addiction. However, while his credentials look sound, when someone actually starts pulling out the ‘serial-killer-inspired-by-porn’ credo, my eyebrows narrow with suspicion (because I’ve heard this nonsense before, only it was blamed on evolution).

And sure as shitting, this guy obviously has an agenda to promote:

The Church views sexuality positively-as a sacred gift from God with the primary purposes of reproducing life upon the earth and bonding the husband and wife together in an eternal, affectionate, committed relationship. High standards of personal morality and sexual conduct, including chastity before marriage and fidelity in marriage, are taught as norms for Church members. These standards are perceived as reflecting God’s will and counsel for his earthly children.

Not to mention his signature on this little ditty that he signed with NARTH to the APA. Also, he’s a member of the Lighted Candle Society, which claims to be non-religious, but in a newsletter dated May of 2003 quotes “For those whose religious tenants regard the human body as sacred, or in the words of the Apostle Paul, as “…the temple of God, which temple ye are,” any presentation of willful violence against another human being is obscene.” And among the Genitalia Police is one Judith Reisman who is a raging anti-Kinsey anti-porn advocate, who has formulated a most…interesting theory (definition #6):

Reisman says that there are chemicals in the brain, which she has dubbed "erototoxins," that are produced by watching pornography and that have toxic influences on the brain. Reisman lists these "erototoxins" as testosterone, adrenaline, oxytocin, glucose, dopamine, serotonin, and phenylethylamine. While some of these chemicals are related to arousal or orgasm, none are specifically associated with toxicity or the viewing of erotic images.

Anyone surprised that the backbone of the anti-porn movement is religious? No? Me neither.

This perturbs me on multiple levels. Firstly, that this particular crusade is spilling well into the realm of thought control. That a group of people would subject millions of people to their draconian criteria is very much Orwellian by any definition.  Also that it would deprive people of the right to choose what they do with their time as well as their bodies – something that never ever works in realtime.

It is no secret to the observant, that this is payback for centuries of tight-fisted religious control of human sex drives. When an inhibition (individually or collectively) is broken, the floodgates open and the instinct is to wallow. 

Is the sex worker industry in serious need of reform? Of course it is – but it needs to be regulated, not driven further underground, not relegated to the sewers. These are human beings that are supplying a demand – and while it is image-driven, there are indeed folks out there who cannot make a living outside their good looks. And it’s a 200 million a year industry, so I think the likelihood is slim that those self-perceived guardians of our genitalia are going to have any luck in this endeavor at all, unless they impose a theocracy.

The major problem is sex, and our perception of it. The American culture is still burdened with overtones that vacillate between Puritan, Victorian and Dorian Gray. Sex is many, many things. It is dangerous; it is fun; it is something to be approached with some sanity; it is exceptionally messy; but it is something integral to our fundamental nature, something to be accepted and not stigmatized. An expression of ourselves in our individual glory.

But as long as we have these self-appointed privates-police, there’s always going to be some crazed contingent that fears the power and mystery and majesty of our most primal drive, who are more than willing to substitute the chains of behavior for the clear light of reason, these are the people we must guard against, speak against, shout down and marginalize, otherwise, we will be marching lockstep back into the Dark Ages.

Till the next post then.

If there’s one thing that always cracks me up, it’s apologists. Most apologists are actually okay to talk to for about five minutes, and then the obvious causes them to say something really stupid, like — well, like this idiot…

Does Picking Up Sticks Deserve the Death Penalty?

Barker claims that “we all agree” that picking up sticks on Saturday or Sunday is harmless. However, Barker does not take into account that the man was in direct violation of a specific command issued by God to the Israelites. One of the Ten Commandments specifically stated: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work” (Exodus 20:8-10). [...] Implied in Barker’s assessment of God’s punishment in this incident is the idea that Barker (and many skeptics like him) seems to think that he knows disobeying a “petty” command from God could not cause harm. In truth, there is no way that Barker could know what would have happened if this man’s disobedience was not punished as it was. [...] The simple truth is that laxity in obedience to small regulations breeds laxity in obedience to other ordinances. And if that laxity is not punished quickly and decisively, it has the potential to be contagious, and spread throughout the entire group or organization. And while inadvertent missteps in dress might not receive extremely harsh punishment, openly rebellious behavior to those of higher rank certainly would carry a significant punishment. [...] The Bible says that God knows “all things” (1 John 3:20). Since that is the case, only God can truly determine what is harmful and what is not harmful, and only God has the prerogative of determining the proper punishment for disobedience.

Yes, no one really knew that picking up sticks on the sabbath couldn’t have resulted in the deaths of millions (only God could know that), so it’s okay to stone someone to death.

Could picking up sticks on a Saturday have the same consequence, for all we know? Sure, but that doesn’t matter. In fact, nothing about what we “think” or “know” matters when it comes to God’s commands. God says it, so it’s right. Does it sound utterly fucking stupid? Well, sure — but God knows more than you do, so God’s automatically right, and you’re automatically wrong, no matter how dumb it sounds.

The core of xianity is nihilism, a denial of value. But there’s also the part that’s based in contradiction, since xians want to hold on to God’s commands as “grounding” value — while at the same time rejecting those values whenever God happens to change His mind.

Nice “grounding of value,” xians…

Reminds me of that Book of Job thingy-dingy…

On Thursday November 19, 2009, Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort (the banana guy) will be distributing thousands of copies of Charles Darwin’s ‘Origin of Species’ at universities across America to students for free. However, as with all dishonest fundies, there is a catch!! Each copy has been altered with an additional 50 page intro about how evolution has never been proven and how Darwin helped inspire the Holocaust.

After a huge uproar from the science and educational communities, Ray Comfort posted this at his blog (which he has a header that at first glance makes people think it’s an atheist blog calling it Atheist Central) Ray writes:
(I didn’t tamper with the spelling)

The Origin of Species Give-Away is Getting Bigger!

It’s now heading for 100 universities and 100,000 copies, and it will be the entire book (every jot and tittle). How wonderful that 100,000 students will get a complete copy of Origin of Species with a full color cover. The publication will have a total of 304 pages.

Thanks to advice from Atheists and others, the new Introduction will address Darwin’s “racism”–and how he was truly a gentle-man who was admantly against slavery.

And it will qualify his apparant denegration of women. Besides, the moral character of Charles Darwin is irrelevant to the Theory of Evolution, just as the Theory of Relativity should stand on its own merits, and not on the morality of Albert Einstein.

I will also make it clear that Hitler abused his theory, and is also irrelevant to whether or not it’s true.

I want this Introduction to be fair-minded, free from prejudice against Darwin, no straw men or quote-mining. I’m sure many of you won’t believe that, but it’s the truth.

Fair-minded fundie who is free from prejudice and no straw-men or quote-mining? Bullshit, I don’t believe it. And why is he being allowed to “pollute” Darwin’s book with his bullshit creationist propaganda? Sorry, but “honest fundie” is an oxymoron.

To TRY to help keep Ray Comfort honest, go to his blog and let him know we are all waiting to counter this bullshit plot of his. Anyone who’s familiar with Ray Comfort’s tactics knows we have good reason to suspect that this might just be some elaborate trick.

And if you can stomach it, here is the monkey boy’s video:

Altered Copies of Origins into Schools.

As one commenter at Ray Comfort’s blog wrote: “I think PZ Myers or someone should write an abridged version of the bible just for fairness, since the bible should be under public domain as well.”

Ramen to that!

If Ray Comfort does not keep his promise (which he most likely will not), the “Kirk Cameron has gone too far!” group on Facebook will coordinate with campus groups across America to ensure that Ray Comfort does not infect too many young minds with disingenuous religious propaganda disguised as scientific literature.

One kick-ass talk given by Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Man, this guy really cracks me up…

Stupid design, indeed…

[LINK]

I found this article via American Atheists. In response to the article, one commenter wrote: “this law was passed in extreme haste by the outgoing administration right before the far more moderate leaders who were voted in earlier this year take over.” But will Sharia Law be overturned with the new administration? It’s mind-blowing that these sorts of things can even be considered in today’s world, and once again based on ancient superstitious beliefs and religion-fueled bigotry and prejudice.

Indonesia: Stoning for adultery – Aceh passes Sharia law

Aceh, a province of Indonesia, passed a new law making adultery punishable by stoning to death. The law, an ominous sign of creeping Sharia, also imposes severe sentences (up to 400 lashes) for homosexuality, alcohol consumption and gambling. Married people convicted of adultery can be sentenced to death by stoning. Unmarried people can be sentenced to 100 lashes with a cane. Human rights activists are condemning the new law as being cruel and degrading.

I did more research on this story and found dozens of links.

September 14, 2009 BBC News reports:

The legislation was passed unanimously by Aceh’s regional legislature, said assembly member Bahrom Rasjid.

“This law will be effective in 30 days with or without the approval of Aceh’s governor,” he said.

The governor of Aceh, a former rebel with the Free Aceh Movement, is opposed to strict Sharia law. He had urged more debate over the bill.

*snip*

Previously, Aceh’s partially-adopted Sharia law enforced Muslim dress codes and mandatory prayers.

“This law is a preventive measure for Acehnese people so that they will avoid moral degradation,” said Moharriyadia, a spokesman for the Prosperous Justice Party.

A new parliament will be sworn in next month, after local polls saw the moderate Aceh Party win the most seats in the provincial assembly.

The Aceh Party has said it will review the law once the new parliament is sitting.

“It needs more public consultation. We need to involve the ulemas – the Islamic clerics – in drafting the law,” said Adnan Beuransah, a spokesperson for the Aceh Party.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out, especially since the new government will be “consulting” with the Islamic clerics.

Thanks to Jesse Galef over at the Friendly Atheist blog for bringing this to our attention. This is the stuff that doesn’t seem to make it to the forefront of the news media. The Secular Coalition for America has sent out letters “to members of the Senate Finance Committee urging them to oppose two proposed amendments to the healthcare reform bill” says Galef.

The Secular Coalition for America states:

Senator Orrin Hatch has submitted amendment #C10 requesting that funding for Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage be restored. Senator Michael Enzi has submitted amendment #C15 to ensure that conscience protections are applied in the healthcare reform bill. Please oppose these two amendments. Both of these amendments privilege religious values over patients’ and students’ rights to ethical treatment and medically-accurate information.

Galef at Friendly Atheist writes:

President Obama’s proposed budget earlier this year removed funding for abstinence-only education, mostly because studies shown they hadn’t worked — some studies even found that the programs made things worse, discouraging contraception without actually reducing sex. And Senator Hatch wants to spend $50 million a year on these programs.

I thought that Rethuglicans were against “evil socialist programs”?

There was public outcry over a so-called ‘conscience protection’ clause the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was pushing right before Bush’s term ended. When Obama took office, he prevented it from taking effect. And now Senator Enzi wants to slip a similar clause into the healthcare reform bill.

It never ends with these sneaky fundie bastards. Gotta keep our eyes and ears on them every minute.

”Religion is the dream of the human mind. But even in dreams we do not find ourselves in emptiness or in heaven, but on earth, in the realm of reality; we only see real things in the entrancing splendor of imagination and caprice, instead of in the simple daylight of reality and necessity.” – Frederick Feuerbach,  The Essence Of Christianity

As an ex-stoner type, I still find myself fascinated by the constant struggles and efforts to instill an altered state in oneself. Whether it be fractal elves or magnetic helms, humanity has this ‘grass is greener on the other side’ mentality no matter how luscious the metaphorical vegetation may be.

And in my fractured ‘pilgrimage’ of the Internet, I stumbled across this little blossom, and thought to share it with you.

An entheogen ("creates god within," en εν- "in, within," theo θεος- "god, divine," -gen γενος "creates, generates"), in the strictest sense, is a psychoactive substance used in a religious or shamanic context. Historically, entheogens are derived primarily from plant sources and have been used in a variety of traditional religious contexts. With the advent of organic chemistry, there now exist many synthetic substances with similar properties.

More broadly, the term entheogen is used to refer to such substances when used for their religious or spiritual effects, whether or not in a formal religious or traditional structure. This terminology is often chosen to contrast with recreational use of the same substances. These spiritual effects have been demonstrated in peer-reviewed studies, though research remains difficult due to ongoing drug prohibition.

What it means by ‘spiritual effects have been demonstrated’, is that the substances in question have induced altered states.

And there’s some history:

R. Gordon Wasson and Giorgio Samorini have proposed several examples of the cultural use of entheogens athat are found in the archaeological record.^[3][4] Evidence for the first use of entheogens may come from Tassili, Algeria, with a cave painting of a mushroom-man, dating to 8000 BP. Hemp seeds discovered by archaeologists at Pazyryk suggest early ceremonial practices by the Scythians occurred during the 5th to 2nd century BC, confirming previous historical reports by Herodotus.

Interestingly enough, it turns out that psychoactives were prolific in religions throughout all the world, from India to the Americas, and even the ancient Greeks used them in their initiation rites:

The Kykeon that preceded initiation into the Eleusinian Mysteries is another entheogen, which was investigated (before the word was coined) by Carl Kerényi, in Eleusis: Archetypal Image of Mother and Daughter. Other entheogens in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean include the poppy, Datura, the unidentified "lotus" eaten by the Lotus-Eaters in the Odyssey and Narkissos.

And of course, our old buds, Judaism and Christianity, partook (albeit the latter denies it strenuously):

According to The Living Torah, cannabis was an ingredient of holy anointing oil mentioned in various sacred Hebrew texts. The herb of interest is most commonly known as kaneh-bosm (Hebrew: קְנֵה-בֹשֶׂם). This is mentioned several times in the Old Testament as a bartering material, incense, and an ingredient in holy anointing oil used by the high priest of the temple. Although Chris Bennett’s research in this area focuses on cannabis, he mentions evidence suggesting use of additional visionary plants such as henbane, as well.

Hey, don’t bogart that oil!

The Septuagint translates kaneh-bosm as calamus, and this translation has been propagated unchanged to most later translations of the old testament. However, Polish anthropologist Sula Benet published etymological arguments that the Aramaic word for hemp can be read as kannabos and appears to be a cognate to the modern word ‘cannabis’, with the root kan meaning reed or hemp and bosm meaning fragrant. Both cannabis and calamus are fragrant, reedlike plants containing psychotropic compounds.

Huh – I always thought cannabis mellowed people out and made them more ‘existential’.

Although philologist John Marco Allegro has suggested that the self-revelation and healing abilities attributed to the figure of Jesus may have been associated with the effects of the plant medicines [from the Aramaic: "to heal"], this evidence is dependent on pre-Septuagint interpretation of Torah and Tenach, and goes firmly against the accepted teachings of the Holy See. However Merkur contends that a minority of Christian hermits and mystics could possibly have used entheogens, in conjunction with fasting, meditation and prayer.

‘Firmly against the teachings of the Holy See’. Yeah, hard not to see that one coming.

Allegro was the only non-Catholic appointed to the position of translating the Dead Sea scrolls. His extrapolations are often the object of scorn due to Allegro’s non-mainstream theory of Jesus as a mythological personification of the essence of a "psychoactive sacrament", furthermore they conflict with the position of the Catholic Church in regards to transubstantiation and the teaching involving valid matter, form, and substance—that of bread and wine, which do not contain psychoactive substances. Allegro’s book, The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross, relates the development of language to the development of myths, religions and cultic practices in world cultures. Allegro believed he could prove, through etymology, that the roots of Christianity, as of many other religions, lay in fertility cults; and that cult practices, such as ingesting visionary plants (or "psychedelics") to perceive the Mind of God [Avestan: Vohu Mana], persisted into the early Christian era, and to some unspecified extent into the 1200s with reoccurrences in the 1700s and mid 1900s, as he interprets the Plaincourault chapel’s fresco to be an accurate depiction of the ritual ingestion of Amanita muscaria as the Eucharist.

Shorter version: it’s way easier to believe in wine=blood and bread=flesh, if you’ve imbibed enough. Allegro’s also a parallelist like myself (though maybe not a myther)

The question of the extent of visionary plant use throughout the history of Christian practice has barely been considered yet by academic or independent scholars. The question of whether visionary plants were used in pre-Theodosius Christianity is distinct from evidence that indicates the extent to which visionary plants were utilized or forgotten in later Christianity, including so-called "heretical" or "quasi-" Christian groups, and the question of other groups such as elites or laity within "orthodox" Catholic practice.

That’s a confusing paragraph. It’s barely been considered, but the evidence is distinct in what way? The accompanying references don’t explain it well enough. I think it’s a fair sociological evaluation (my fancy way of saying ‘guess’) that it’s a strong likelihood that plenty of Christians over the centuries have partaken of some of these items.

And, for a fairly amusing capper:

James Arthur asserts that the little scroll from the angel with writing on it referred to in Ezekiel 2: 8,9,10 and Ezekiel 3: 1,2,3 and Book of Revelation 10: 9,10 was the speckled cap of the Amanita muscaria mushroom.

Chewing on the old magical papyrus, ey, Zeke?

This comes as no surprise: history resounds with the echoes of powerful hallucinations, delusions that have wiped the world clean and scoured the perceived scourges from the public eye.

The question for the future is…can our species, with this knowledge, stop accommodating the crazy, and instead of granting them great power, medicate them instead? (And I don’t mean the self-medication we’ve discussed here.)

One can only hope.

Till the next post, then.