TruthHammer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7h08RDYA5E

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_03/017528.php\

HARD TO ARGUE WITH LOGIC LIKE THAT…. It was certainly discouraging that Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) argued, publicly and with a straight face, that if we limit carbon emissions, we’re “taking away plant food from the atmosphere.” But I was also impressed by Shimkus’ theological argument against combating global warming.

Shimkus explains — well, perhaps “explains” is a strong word — his belief that we need not worry about the effects of global warming, because his interpretation of the Bible suggests planetary changes are solely in the hands of the Christian God. “The Earth will end only when God declares it’s time to be over,” the Illinois Republican said. “Man will not destroy this Earth. This Earth will not be destroyed by a flood…. God’s word is infallible, unchanging, perfect.”

What’s more, be sure to watch to the end of the video clip, at which point Shimkus argues that we’re not pumping enough carbon into the atmosphere: “There is a theological debate that this is a carbon-starved planet, not too much carbon.”

I’ve heard a few conservatives over the years argue, “Kill ‘em all and let God sort ‘em out.” I didn’t expect, however, to hear an elected member of Congress apply this thinking to environmental policy.

Shimkus’ “insights” came around the same time as Rep. Joe Barton’s (R-Texas) argument that we need not worry about global warming, because in a pinch, humanity can simply pursue an “utterly natural reflex response to nature,” by finding “shade.”

There’s a genuine policy discussion to be had about climate change. If policymakers like Shimkus and Barton represent the mainstream of House Republican thought, this discussion won’t be bipartisan. Indeed, for humanity’s sake, it can’t be.

There’s a long, long list of things etched into the back of my mind regarding crazy religious people. It’s easy for me to add to this list because, among other things, I was a crazy religious person. I remember a shouting match in an after school debate where I insisted evolution was a complete farce. When I was finally reduced to answer a logical question with a logical answer, I opted for Christian Reponse #68. Well, I don’t want to live in a world where there isn’t a diamond the size of a refrigerator buried in my back yard.

The only response to this type of argument is total abandonment of principle and a resort to nonsense, such as physical violence. It is in our nature after all, and this trait was certainly apparent on the face of the kid I was arguing with. He “knew” he was certainly right, but he did not realize that I knew I was certainly right. I imagine I was more confident in what I was saying than he was.

There is no best or even good approach to arguing with a confident fool. It is nonsense. If you are certain that the religious person you are arguing with is confident, and that your genius Christopher Hitchens questions will have no affect, then:

1. Remind the person of the role of the faithful. A man of faith has no business arguing about the finer points of anything based in an empirical world, outside of religious texts. If you take it on faith that that God made the creatures, then it isn’t acceptable for you to be critical of evolutionary science. These practices are mutually exclusive, and any attempt by a person of faith to enroll in scientific dialog is blasphemy and unethical.

2. Tell them they don’t really love Jesus. That’s a caveat to Christianity — you don’t really believe it. When I was a Christian I said to others and to myself that I loved Jesus. (I also told myself that I was going to stop eating too many tacos, but I did not.) Sam Harris says that we partition our mind to accept religion without applying our standard rules for rationality. I disagree with him in this respect, because I don’t think its possible for the mind to work this way. The mind isn’t like a computer hard drive, and just like you can’t partition part of your gut to process only certain foods, you cannot partition your mind. We process everything we hear, and no matter what we say we feel, our mind doesn’t allow is to truly believe something that we can’t rationalize.

Now, before I go too far, I want to say that I understand there is a large gradient of both ideas and fashions of belief. My point is that when your brother says he’s going to pray for you, he doesn’t think that he needs to run home and pray for you right now, lest you succumb to the wounds from the car wreck and perish. He tells you and himself that he will pray, and he may or may not. Either way, he does not believe this prayer is a pivot to your safety or survival. This formula can be applied to most religious beliefs, even the most precious, the belief in Jesus.

Christians want to believe that Jesus is real, and they can make it real for them on a social level, but their minds just won’t allow it to dig deeper (unless they are really, really dumb). This is why the religious aren’t compelled to drop to their knees and beg for forgiveness on-the-spot; they just don’t honestly believe they need to.

- Person W

Some things overheard from the crowd after Expelled:

“I’m so glad they’re all going to hell.”

“I wanted to punch that guy [Richard Dawkins] in the face.”

“Evolution is such a stupid concept.”

“Hallelujah!”

Freedom From Religion Foundation national convention is October 10-12, 2008 in Chicago. Details: http://ffrf.org/events/2008/  It will have Daniel Dennett amongst many other great speakers.

Atheist Alliance national convention is September 25-28th in California. Details: http://www.atheistalliance.org/conventions/2008/AAIConventionDescription2008.pdf  It will have Christopher Hitchens along with many other great speakers.

The American Atheist event in Minneapolis went very well.  I especially liked Dawkins & PZ Myers talking about the adventure they had trying to see Expelled. 

I’d encourage anyone reading this to consider attending one or both of the events above.  I will likely be at both.

Hey everybody, go see the movie Expelled in theaters this Friday. We’ll be blogging about it

Today I was thumbing through mail and noticed a magazine for Crown College alumni. (I am not a Crown College alum, so nevermind that.) The cover story on the magazine was “Militant Atheism.” I read through this article and it called out a few specific books like Breaking the Spell, God is Not Great, The Selfish Gene, and The God Delusion. Then it said some encouraging words for believers and gave some tips on what questions to ask atheists. I might address those questions later. But for now I would like to address another issue.

The article following Militant Atheism was about evangelizing to Muslims. This sets up a fine contrast: that the Christians actually have a mandate to turn other people to their religion. Non-religious people have no mandate to convert people to atheism under any doctrine.

I want to investigate and inspire open-mindedness. But in my personal life, I do not want to evangelize or give anyone a reason to call me a militant, or provoke anyone to argue that “atheism is just like any other religion.” We have no mandate, and that is a good thing.