I am an atheist

I shouldn’t need to say that. Being an atheist should be the default human condition. It would be like announcing constantly that you haven’t got the lurgy. Religion is something you catch. It’s effectively a disease.

By the way, and for the record, i haven’t to my knowledge happen to currently be afflicted by the afore mention lurgy.

If you don’t feel that you can get through life without the crutch that is religion then that’s fine with me. Go ahead, but please keep it to yourself. I don’t need to know about it and please don’t indoctrinate others with your strange ideas.

Now I’m very fond of saying that nothing is ever black and white, which is truly the case, but I will try and keep this as simplistic as I can. Mainly because religion seems to be followed by mostly simplistic people. Okay, when I say ‘there is no god’ the god-botherers normally respond with something along the lines of ‘how do you know there isn’t a god?’ or ‘prove that there isn’t a god’. Why? Why do I have to prove the non-existence of something when there’s clearly no evidence for its existence? That’s like saying, ‘prove that Elvis isn’t alive and living on a double-decker bus on the moon’. The onus is on those who subscribe to the superstition to bring forth the facts. To date there is no evidence.

Beware people who quote the writings of Thomas Acquinas, they are some of the most narrow-minded of them all. They use it as ‘evidence’ to validate their superstitious beliefs. There is no evidence. The same applies to those who quote the bible, et al. The bible is a collection of contradictory writings by any number of ancient people’s trying to either explain their existence and or to keep others in line (oppress). This certainly applies to all other writings connected with the Abrahamic religions.

If there was a god, that god would be able to prove their own existence so that we were all beyond doubt. God hasn’t done that. I and millions of others are living proof of that. If there was a god that god wouldn’t want to be worshipped, that would make it needy. For a god to be needy is a flaw. For a god not to be able to prove its existence is a flaw. A god would be perfect, a god would be infallible. I could go on and on but I won’t. There is no god.

Religion exists to control people. Nothing more, nothing less. It is the opiate of the people.

If you’re happy with following a religion that’s fine but please don’t think it’s a normal thing to do. Question yourself, and I mean genuinely question yourself. Look for evidence. I guarantee you will find none. Have a nice day!

St George

I took this photo in the William Morris gallery in Walthamstow last month. I love the work of William and his contemporaries but this is actually a pretty ridiculous image. Whilst I'm not big on realism, this sort of impression paints a very wrong image that simpletons love to feed on.

I'm an atheist so I don't approve of religious symbols either but if you are going to feature a historic figure in a picture then it is quite offensive to change that figure's ethnic identity. The geezer that was George came from the Middle East therefore would have had a much darker complexion. The above Northern European looking person is just plain wrong.

Superstition

Religion and right wing politics exist to exploit and oppress large groups of people; enabling a few to control the many. They both offer easy answers. Answers that people can accept at face value without any thought. Answers that are no more than advertising slogans. It doesn't matter that the answers they give are not evidence based, or what they promise fails to materialise; there will either be an excuse, a distraction or a lie to cover up their failings, a papering over the cracks to hide their charlatanism.

Reactionaries and devotees of magic men with beards (right wing politicians and clerics to the simple) operate using the K.I.S.S. form of delivery: 'Keep it simple, stupid'. Not my phrase but one once used in business presentation circles. People like simple. Simple enables them to believe without intellect. They can relate to X being the problem and Y being the solution. They can't relate to the possibility that the solution might require measures that are complex and perhaps need to run in tandem or appear on the surface not to be directly connected. If chaos theory is correct (obviously it's a theory so it might or might not be) then existence is a multitudinal array of chain reactions going on ad infinitum.

Of course some questions/problems in life might not have a known answer/solution. This never worries the right-wing politician or man of religion. In religion if there's something wrong it's the work of a devil or the punishment of a god; little matter that there is absolutely no proof of the existence of either. In right-wing politics if there is a problem it's the fault of someone 'different' to their perceived norm; they'll blame foreigners, the sick, the infirm, the poor etc. There's always a handy scapegoat.

'Humankind cannot bear very much reality'. T. S. Eliot.

It used to be said that the Church of England was the Tory party at prayer. I'm not sure how accurate that is but in many ways they were/are similar in one respect in that they both peddle lies. Religion and reactionary politics are not based on facts; they are based on a warped faith. Faith is illogical, it is not thinking, but laziness. They are each no more than superstition.

Nothing is ever black and white. There isn't always an answer.

And now a few words from the master of right-wing propaganda* Joseph Goebbels:

'A lie told once remains a lie but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.'

'There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be "the man in the street." Arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect. Truth was unimportant and entirely subordinate to tactics and psychology.'

'...the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious.'

* These principles are still being used today.

Do you want to be in my gang, my gang, my gang?

Events don’t happen in isolation. Life on earth is an ongoing chain reaction with the past influencing the present and the future. As humans many of us like to categorise or compartmentalise bits of life. We want things to be black and white. But life ain’t like that. It's never that tidy. Pigeon holes are dangerous, and the human race is at its most dangerous and downright despicable when sections of it are tribal.

When people belong to a tribe all rational thinking goes out of the window. If you are not in a tribe you are the enemy. The tribe stifles creativity. The collective noun for sheep should be tribe. Tribal members are just one of the herd. They are no longer individuals. The tribe allows for easier manipulation. Tribe members become the foot soldiers to carry out the dirty work of those that pull the strings. In this country those pulling the strings are the white male English elite.

Countries, family, religion and sport are the main culprits when it comes to the creation of tribes. Tribe members, or sheeple, take the view that their tribe is the most important thing in the world and non tribe members are somehow worthless. Fascism loves tribes

I’m all for collectivism in the sense of working together for the common good, but I don’t see that in doing so your identity should be governed by the collective.

I think that events this week have reinforced my belief that tribalism is a parasite that is going to slowly but surely destroy the human race.

The world would be a better place without countries, 'family', religion or sport. Tribes divide. We need to learn to live together before it's too late.

I choose my blog titles very carefully by the way.

Letter to an unknown art teacher

At the afore mentioned Creative Writing class we were asked to write a letter, just a paragraph, to someone in our past. I chose to write my letter to an art teacher who only taught me for about a year at secondary school and whose name sadly I can't remember. All I know is he had quite a marked effect on my way of thinking. Here's my letter:

Dear Sir,

As a curious, but accepting of the world order, twelve year old you challenged me not only to think about art, but to think about life and the collective beliefs of society. That must be one of the greatest gifts anyone can give. Yes it's true that I had thoughts and questions before but you helped me to re-order my thinking, my perspective, my outlook. Life was never the same again after your art classes. You sowed the seeds for me to be, at least in a creative way, the person that I am today. I can no longer remember your name, sadly, but your influence lives on. I have a lot to thank you for; my atheism, my willingness to challenge accepted norms and my open approach to creativity. Little could you have known what fruit those discussions would bear, or could you? Perhaps you did, as after all it was the 1960s

Yours gratefully,

Paul.

Festive bases covered - All for only €165.00

If you like a lot of chocolate on your biscuit join our club

“God is a concept/By which we measure/Our pain” – John Lennon

I’m an atheist, but I’m sort of drawn to religion, even though I fight it. I’m not sure why as I’m not necessarily looking for answers. I suppose what I’m after is to obtain a peace with myself.

“They call me The Seeker/I’ve been searching low and high/I won’t get to get what I’m after/Till the day I die” - The Who

Some of my earliest searching led me to read about Buddhism. I knew I didn’t want anything to do with ‘god botherers’ and Buddhism seemed to offer a religion that sort of made sense. I say sort of because I have one really big problem with Buddhism and that’s reincarnation. I don’t believe in it. For me gods, reincarnation and time don’t exist; only the here and now.

As I’ve mentioned before on this blog I used to attend Quaker meeting for worship. I did so for five years which was pretty good for me but for a number of reasons I couldn’t sustain it and never felt able to apply for membership.

“I don't want to belong to any club that will accept people like me as a member". Groucho Marx

I think this is the problem I don’t really want to join a religious organisation but I want to partake in some of their practices and thinking. Perhaps there’s an online community that I could dip into?

My dad loved his life!

I’ve never really understood the point of funerals. I’ve always questioned the need for them. Much to most people’s bemusement. And please don’t tell me that it is about saying goodbye because it is not as the deceased is long gone. I’ve also never understood the need to worship the dead like so many people do. By worshipping the dead I mean the very existence of a grave and the tending there of. Or, the laying of flowers at a roadside, or where people have fallen. What is that all about?

I think that it is about people being in denial. Denial that their loved one has died and denial about their own mortality. Most people can’t seem to grasp the concept that death is final. They are desperate to believe that there is more. Now I can’t prove that there isn’t more, the same way that I can’t prove that there isn’t a large blue elephant with pink spots floating around on a fluffy cumulonimbus, but given that there is no evidence for either, both would seem highly unlikely.

The trouble is that most people tend to become highly emotional around death and rational thinking goes out of the window. Questioning the necessity for a certain type of funeral or a funeral at all would seem like a pointless exercise.

We buried my father yesterday. He died on 10th March as a result of a heart attack he’d had two days before. It was a CofE funeral and a burial beside the village church. Not what I would have chosen but they were his wishes. I was asked if I would like to read a lesson. I declined but said I would be happy to say a few words. Which indeed I did. I thought I would share those words with you:

In many ways father and I were like chalk and cheese. He was a very practical man, good with his hands and could turn his hands to most things. I am a DIY numpty. He loved sport, whilst I can’t abide it. He accepted tradition and superstition and I challenge it. But, stood together there was never any doubt that we were father and son. We had the same boyish good looks. We both had the large Garrard ears or lugholes as he would have said. We shared mannerisms and both had the same laugh. In fact it is the laugh I am most grateful for, because it was from father that I inherited my wonderful sense of humour. He gave me the ability to laugh at the most ridiculous things, and to see the funny side in much of everyday life. Father could tell a good story as well. Much better than I could ever hope to. As kids we would always be laughing about something with dad. There was always laughter in our house.

Growing up he rarely called me Paul it was either boy or the slightly enigmatic Lard-head. These were terms of endearment that I happily answered to.

I have so many nice childhood memories involving dad that it’s hard to single one out. The Christmas I received a Scalextric set was one of note. I’m not sure who derived the most pleasure from it. The track took root on the dining table and we would spend hours racing against each other, both of us equally excited and enthusiastic. One big kid and one little kid. Kids in their element.

Father was never prolific in telling us off. I remember in my teenage years the first time that I came home rather the worse for drink. Rather than scold me he laughed. He knew that I was learning the hard way. He was shrewd enough to know that a life lesson has more effect on a teenager than the words of a parent. And he laughed again.

I remember father was always very keen on swimming and despite my general disinterested in sport it was something that we had done together both in my childhood and then later when three generations of the Garrards went to the pool; Dad, myself and my son.

Something else that we had in common was our love of good ale. I treasure the memories of the few beer festivals that we attended together. Both as eager as the other to try something new.

Now fast forward to January of this year. He was so happy the day he reached his eightieth birthday. To him it seemed like a major achievement. And indeed it was. A few weeks prior to his birthday he had said to me in quite an earnest but enthusiastic way “You know, I like my life. I really enjoy it”. I was well moved. Here was a man whose body had been ravaged by HD and still he was happy with his life. I think it was the most inspiring thing that he had ever said to me. I certainly won’t forget it. It is the overriding memory that I shall carry with me always. My dad loved his life!

Mustard or tomato sauce?

In need of a breath of fresh air I wandered out on Boxing Day afternoon. We live close-ish to the Riverside shopping area in Norwich and all was quiet as I walked across Morrison’s empty car park, but I was surprised to see much activity as a bunch of shops on the far side hove into view. I hadn’t realised just how many shops open on Boxing Day. It would seem that even though many people had overspent at Christmas they were still keen to part with hard earned dosh or dosh yet to be earned. There was hustle and bustle in the clothes, electrical, household and hobby shops. People even had need for things at a pound. I was truly amazed. What is wrong with people?

I have only ever seen shopping as a banal chore. How anyone can derive pleasure from it is beyond me. I do have this feeling that the sort of people that see shopping as recreation also watch soaps and reality programmes on the telly, will see celebrities and the monarchy as something to be interested in and be hoodwinked by every fad and fashion that the media dictates; sheep!

I suppose one can dismiss such behaviour as shiny bead syndrome; people are hypnotised by what is put in front of them and fed to them. Whilst not really understanding it by interpreting it like that I can sort of accept it and leave it at that. As I walked by the open shops I noticed that there was a hotdog stand on the footpath, and not only that there were between six and eight people queuing for hotdogs. That perplexed me totally. No doubt after the excesses of the previous day why on earth would anyone what a hotdog whilst out shopping, and why would anyone queue for such a pointless comestible?

Losing my religion

I received a state education during the sixties and early seventies. Up until the age of fifteen RE, or Religious Education to give the full title, was compulsory at our school unless you had parents that objected. Mine did not. So along with 99.9% of the other children I was indoctrinated with a belief system based on Church of England teaching. I fell for it hook, line and sinker. I trusted my educators, accepting what they told me to be true. All was fine, I was happy to be burgeoning fodder for the ruling classes; I was addicted to the opiate. That’s how it was until a particular art class at the age of twelve or thirteen. I’m not sure what priceless work of art I was creating at the time, it was possibly a coil pot, but I do remember the conversation in class turned to religion. We had at that time a young and enlightened art master who allowed us to chat in class and who would join in with the conversations. We were an all boys school where the conversations amongst my contemporaries would predominantly be about sport, telly, music, anatomy or bodily functions. Having said that, there was a rump of us who would happily discuss politics or philosophy. For art classes our class was usually split into two and we would alternate between painting/drawing and crafts. One group doing the former whilst the other group did the latter. Our group seemed to be made up of the more creative and rather more cerebral of our class, which is why when on that fateful afternoon the conversation turned to religion no one would have turned a hair. The conversation was going well when Ron Murrell declared himself to be an atheist. It was a word I had heard before, and was just about familiar with its meaning, but it was not a word that I had pondered on greatly. All was about to change. The teacher joined in, saying that he too was an atheist and outlined his reasons for being so. For the first time in my life an authority figure had offered a different perspective on life. One that challenged the status quo. This was a momentous revelation. A teacher had said that he did not believe in God and nothing had happened. Dark clouds did not part and he was not struck by a thunderbolt. Perhaps he had a point. For several days I mulled over that afternoon’s discussions. Could it be that perhaps I was an atheist too? I did not reach a conclusion easily. But eventually I decided that, yes, I was indeed an atheist. The mumbo jumbo that is mainstream Christianity no longer seemed credible to me. To me the scriptures were now just glorified fairy stories. And an atheist was the way I stayed for around the next twenty years; a zealous and committed non-believer.

I won’t go into the details of my religious experience (or awakening) but suffice to say that I no longer considered myself to be an atheist. I wasn’t actually sure what I was but I knew I was no longer an atheist. I became a seeker. After much enquiring I learned of Gnosticism. It seemed to describe how I felt. I did not believe in the existence of God I just knew of God’s existence. I wasn’t sure what I should do with this new found knowledge so I carried on seeking. It was to be another ten years before I found myself a spiritual home. Led there peculiarly by my interest in the Civil War. That home was to be the Religious Society of Friends, better known to most as the Quakers. And there I stayed for the next five or so years; an enthusiastic Attendee, an almost friend. But it was not to last. My world was to be turned upside down when my marriage ended and my Gnostic status severely challenged. I questioned all my beliefs again. Nothing was sacred. I realised that my ‘revelation’ years earlier was probably down to some neurological blip, temporary chemical imbalance or just wishful thinking. The angel of God it most certainly wasn’t. I returned to being an atheist, and whilst I was aware that there were friends who were also agnostics and atheists, I no longer felt comfortable attending meeting. Me and the Quakers parted company. I have been to meeting once since moving to Norwich. It was earlier this year. But I did not feel at all good about it so I’m not sure that I will ever return.

As a born again atheist I am fervently anti-religion now. As I’ve said before on this blog, I don’t object to anyone following the religion of their choice as long as they don’t try to foist it on to anyone else. And, the default position of society should only ever be secular. The older I get and the more pain and suffering I witness in this world, the more I find the concept of a creator unbelievable. If there is a God, and I don’t see how there can be, it must be a very sick bastard indeed. Religion and gods are the invention of man; they are tools of oppression, not based on any real evidence. I like to think that I am now a confirmed atheist and all the better for it.

Liberty is only ever secular

“Democracy can never flourish if the workings of a state or the major influences within that society are not secular.” *

It should be every person’s right not to follow, or for that matter to be able to follow a religion or belief system of their choosing. It must wholly a personal issue. As soon as religions try to indoctrinate, coerce or oppress people then liberty is lost.

Unfortunately in undemocratic Britain we still have institutionalised religion. Despite its influence declining the C of E still has connections with government. Parents are allowed to brain-wash their children and get state help with that brain-washing through the religious school system.

My big fear is that with the cuts in public services the only charities that are well funded enough to take up any of the slack will be religious based ones. My even bigger fear is that, as part of the Big Society, Tories will turn a blind eye or even encourage religious groups to provide services and proselytise. Vulnerable people will be at the mercy of god-botherers of all shapes and perversions. Liberty for the disadvantaged will not be an option.

*a quote by me on Twitter on 14/3/11

Blasphemy and sin

Blasphemy and sin are two highly emotive words that conceptually don’t have a great deal of value. I suppose I would think that being an atheist, but even trying to put myself in the shoes of a person that subscribes to a religion, I still find them to be words that are philosophically bankrupt.

Blasphemy is the irreverent, impious and disrespectful utterance or action toward religious artefacts, customs, gods and beliefs; so what. What harm can blasphemy possibly do? If you are an omnipresent, all-powerful, all-knowing, all-seeing being then a few words or insults are hardly likely to affect you. They’ll be like water off a duck’s back. A god won’t be worried by a bit of ‘blasphemy’; in fact a god won’t even ‘worry’ surely. I suppose it’s debatable, that were a god to exist, that it would be capable of emotion, but it might. It does seem highly unlikely though. As a god if you were offended by language you’d have left out the offensive language gene when creating humankind, wouldn’t you? And, even if you’d have overlooked it in the original version you’d have made damned sure that you installed an upgrade as soon as you realised. But then if a god was offended by language or some other form of insult this would imply a failing or imperfection on the god’s part. Is ‘an imperfect god’ an oxymoron? Isn’t the nature of a god to be perfect? Imperfections would render one’s god-ship null and void. A god that is imperfect is not a god.

Sin is a different kettle of fish altogether. A sin can only be committed by an adherent to a particular belief system that has proscribed an action as a sin, or if as an individual you believe an action to be a sin. This is because unless you believe something to be ‘a sin’ then it isn’t. Sinners are essentially hypocrites.

Having dismissed both ‘blasphemy’ and ‘sin’ I will now give you an example of one action that qualifies as both. It is the only true ‘blasphemy’. The one true blasphemy is the taking of another person’s life. It is a blasphemy, for those that subscribe to a religion, because you are destroying your god’s ultimate creation. You are saying to your god, “I have the power of life and death. I’m better than you”.

No religion is based on truth or fact but purely on faith. You either have faith to follow a religion or you don’t. Religion can only ever be a personal choice. There is no value in a coerced set of beliefs.

Marching misogynists

The trouble with free speech, and of course living in a democracy, is that you often have to listen to stuff you don't like. The one thing that you must always keep in mind, when faced with someone else's unpalatable viewpoint, is the strength of your own convictions, whilst trying to understand their position. I didn't like the idea of Nick Griffin being on question time, but I recognised the importance of allowing him to be on, even though I had no desire to watch it. I also don't like the idea of Muslims marching through Wootton Bassett, but not for the same reasons that the Daily Telegraph/Mail lynch mob might object. Highlighting the absurdity and futility of war is very laudable. Thousands of innocent lives are being lost and for no good reason. It is right to protest against the carnage and doing so in a place like Wootton Bassett will have maximum impact. But will it do any good?

I don't think so.

Islam4UK doesn’t seem like a very friendly organisation, unless you are some kind of mentalist, and whilst I disagree with their aims totally it’s not my main reason to object to what they propose. I object to what they are doing because they are doing it as a religious ‘collective’. To me a person’s religion is personal and not to be shoved in another person’s face. Marching in the name of humanity would be so much more preferable. These Muslims are missing two tricks here. One by identifying themselves by their religion, and in such an extreme way they guarantee to alienate a vast majority of the population, and secondly if they wish to take as much public opinion with them as possible they would be better off doing it within a secular political framework. Anti war groups are always going to be able to draw on more support and opinion than narrow overtly partisan organisation. Inclusive is always going to have more political success than divisive.

?

Religious schools - licensed child abuse

Whilst I abhor physical abuse, messing with people’s minds is equally abhorrent. ‘Brainwashing’ is evil, inexcusable and surely has no place in modern society. I’m quite firmly of the belief that there is no god, although I do accept that it should be a basic human right to be able to practice the religion of your choice. Equally it should be a right not to practice a religion if you so choose. It should be down to the individual,  a matter of personal choice.

Selfish parents are those who choose indoctrination instead of education for their children. Sending a child to a religious school is barbaric and really has no place in the twenty-first century. Teach children about the religions of the world by all means, but imposing a religion upon them is an act of fascism. Religion is something for adults to follow through their own volition. Children’s minds are not sufficiently mature to be able to make choices of this kind. How any self-respecting government could permit religious schools is really beyond comprehension.

Holy hot air

Apparently atheists are responsible for global warming. It’s all our fault!

Well that’s according to that well known nutter who trades under the alias of ‘The Pope’

Info here...

I fart your general direction

Apparently when the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, met his popeness recently he gave him a customary gift. The gift in question was a bottled beer, Holy Grail, a beer brewed by the Black Sheep Brewery in Masham, North Yorkshire.

Nothing wrong with that you might think, a York bishop taking local produce as a present. But wait a minute. Holy Grail is actually a tribute to 'Holy Grail' as in 'Monty Python and the'. Those lovable Oxbridge lads, who were near-excommunicated for the film The Life of Brian. I suspect the Archbish doesn't have a clue what he has done. It's effectively an insult worthy of the Knights that say Nee!