Ever since I declared myself an atheist (or at the very least, a non-believer), things in my life haven't changed very much. My outlook on the world, on the other hand, has changed immensely. This might also be due to the fact that it happened at an outlook-changing time of a young man's life: early adolescence. It is with no surprise to me that my atheism has come into question by those who do not understand. Likewise, I'm here to sort out and compile the most asked questions and the most said statements, and to answer and/or debunk them.

I want to ask at this time that all comments of this blog be strictly that: comments. I'm not looking to debate. I'm not looking to be told (I hope you come around and see the light [which is something I will be discussing, actually]). I'm looking for comments. Any looking to start a more detailed discussion on this blog isn't really being considered, as it's more of a "I just wanna say this and be done with it" type-of affair. If people talking about beliefs that are different from your own (while using abrasive language, no doubt) offends you, please either a. Don't read it, or b. Keep your offense to yourself, because I'm warning you right here and now.

Alright, so let's begin.


1. "Why don't you believe in God?"

The mother of all questions. Most of the following questions have something to do with this very statement. I've been asked the question "Why don't you believe in God?" more than I've been asked "Would you like fries with that?" This is the kind of question that, to an atheist, is so befuddling and difficult to answer that the hesitant silence that comes after the question's emission is usually seen as a triumph to the asking believer. Believe you me, there's no triumph in asking a question that cannot be answered immediately (something that a lot of you could learn from).

Of course, you all know as to why I personally don't believe in God (if you don't, read the entry before this one), but there actually is an easier and more versatile way of explaining it. When the question "Why don't you believe in God?" is asked, it automatically asserts the idea that "belief" is something that everybody has (and in the atheists' case, eventually loses). When you ask somebody why they have no belief, you're asking them why they have a different view than the majority of society. We weren't born with belief. The human mind is incapable of understanding when you are born and therefore ALL people are born atheists (that is, they have a disconnection with theism). So if we were ALL atheists at some point, wouldn't the more appropriate question be asked to the believers? "Why are you a Christian/Jew/Muslim/Hindu?" Because something in that person's life lead for them to become indoctrinated to that belief.

To better illustrate this point, let me use a more physical example. Little Johnny is sitting in his 8th grade English class when his friend Big Steve walks into the room. In addition, Obese Carl and Loner David walks in. They all have beards...except Johnny, that is. They all sit around Johnny and notice that Johnny is the only one without a beard and one of them asks him, "Johnny, why don't you have a beard?" The response: "I just don't."

That's really the bottom line: atheists don't have belief because they just don't. There's no magical cosmic reason to it. Some people seem to believe that atheists must have gotten angry at God and that's why they don't believe, but that's a foolish idea because atheists don't even believe in a God to get angry at. The very notion is a paradox within itself.


2. Atheists don't have morals.

This one's just plain silly and largely offensive in many ways. While this isn't one that is employed by all Christians (as a matter of fact, I'd say that the majority of Christians I know do NOT propel towards this belief [at least, not outwardly]), it's still a very ignorant and foolish statement. I have been told before that, due to my disconnection from God, I have no grasp on morals and basic human compassion. If you're an atheist, you might have at the very least heard something like this (even if it hasn't been directed at you).

The main thing I'd like to say on this (well, the first being a giant middle finger to anybody who follows this sort of process) is something that feels so basic and common knowledge to say that I feel redundant saying it once: the average atheist will have just as strong a moral foundation as the average Christian. Likewise, a person's religious background tells nothing about their moral standings. I can't comprehend what causes people to go towards this belief. Perhaps people assume that since we are breaking the first commandment that we are okay with breaking all of them?

Think about our prisons. The people in prison have broken the laws of our country. These laws (while not all of them) seem to be modeled off of the same sins and evils that have been seen throughout the history of mankind: murder, torture, rape, robbery, etc. Likewise, I think it's safe to say that by a believer's standards, there are lots of people in jail for deeds that are seen as sin. Do you HONESTLY think that all of the people in jail are atheists? As a matter of fact, a study was conducted in 1997. The percentage of Christians in jail VASTLY outnumbers that of atheists: 39.1 percent of inmates are Catholic and 35 percent of inmates are Protestant. The percentage of inmates that are atheists? 0.21 percent. And a few Christians have the nerve to say that atheists lack morals while Christians do not?

Of course, the low number of atheists in prison says nothing about atheists having HIGHER morals than Christians, but simply tells a tale that there are not nearly as many atheists as there are Christians. Either way, the point comes across as this: religion does not dictate morals.

Source of statistics: http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm


3-5. "I hope you will one day accept the Lord / Jesus Loves You / Atheists are only that way because they had a mistrust with God once before."

These all fall under a same general category, so I'm grouping them together (no friends, I'm not skimping out on you by lowering my writing duties in this conglomerate). I've heard this one in many different styles and flavors (so many that I could only list the three most common ones). Either way, they all look towards the same through-line, and that is, "You know, you may be an atheist now, but I hope/know/feel that you will accept Jesus into your life one day."

Christians don't realize what a rude and blatant statement this is. You are basically saying this in a candy-coated manner, "You know, your beliefs may be different from mine now, but don't worry: I know that you'll begin thinking the way that I do." How smug and arrogant is this? How would YOU like it if I said the same thing, only catering to my beliefs? It would go something like this: I know that you believe in God now, but don't worry, you'll get over your stupid fairy tale shit and come back down to planet Earth with the rest of us." Do I have the right to say that unprovoked? No. Would you, a Christian, be offended if I said that? More than likely, yes. So why do some Christians feel the need to say that awfully arrogant statement whenever they finish a conversation with an atheist about atheism? It's rude and I don't think they realize just how rude it is.

Let's take a look at the second one: "Jesus Loves You!" When somebody that I know tells me this and they know that I don't believe in Jesus, it's pretty much them flaunting their beliefs in my face. How would you like it if I said: "Nobody Loves You!". Same thing. Yet a good deal of Christians I know would throw a bitch fit over the very idea that I would say such a thing.

There's also a belief that some have told me in congruence with number three (and number one), in that people who have no belief in God are that way because of a specific event in their life that made them turn their backs to him and doubt him. Come on now...you really think that every atheist is this way? I don't even think I KNOW an atheist who has had this be the case.

Remember one thing: your beliefs are only golden within your own head. Once you put them out in the world, you can't treat your beliefs as fact. You can only treat fact as fact. Now, if you're one of those Christians who says, "I KNOW that my God is real," well then good for you. Now shut up and let me enjoy my burrito.


6. "If there's no God, what happens when you die?"

Following closely after the "Why don't you believe" question in popularity is this one. Christians, of course, believe that life continues after death (the definition of death being "the end of life"). Those who have lived good (Christian) lives get to go to a place of eternal paradise called Heaven, while those who were wicked (therefore, non-Christian) and sinful will be cast into a place of endless torture called Hell. It's not an original idea, believe me. The ideas of heaven and hell have been going around since the earliest of religions. As to why it always seems to come about, I have my own theories (those of which won't be expressed in here as I don't have time to explain the topic of "Religion and Population Control" [though maybe for another blog entry]). Either way, it's a belief that mankind has clung to for a very long time.

Likewise, I discussed something in my last blog entry called The God Module. If you didn't read and don't want to click away from this page, it's a primitive byproduct of self-awareness that prevents the brain from imagining an existence where its own being does not live anymore. This is where the life after death idea originated from, and it's no surprise that Earth's favorite religion contains this element.

Being an atheist, I'm not going to boast the fact that I can imagine an existence without myself. Because the truth is: I can't. Well, my brain can't understand it, but my consciousness can. I can consciously realize that there will come a time when I and everybody I know will no longer exist (save for some bones in a box or some ashes encased in ceramic). When the question of "What happens after you die?" comes up, I always respond in two answers: "I don't know", and "I don't care". My concerns here on Earth are of Earthly matters. If there is indeed a soul or a spirit within each person (something I don't believe in), then it is not of concern to my Earthly being. Some Christians will follow up my answer with a "Well I know what's happening to me!" No, you don't. Once again, nobody knows. The Pope himself doesn't know what happens when you die, yet you, a little white girl living in central Florida, know the almighty answer of what happens after death? Get real.

Of course, if there is a spirit in each person, it is assured that the body does not follow the spirit (since we see the body right here on Earth well after death). Your "life" after death (as oxymoronic as that is) is something that would transcend your human thoughts and is nothing that you can control while here on Earth. This is why I personally don't care.

(Oh, and as a side note, eternal paradise and eternal hell both have one thing in common: eternity. Can you really imagine living FOREVER? Eventually, heaven would become hell when you realize that there is absolutely nothing else to do, nobody new to meet, and no more angels to fuck [oh come on, Christians. I know you've thought about getting it on with an angel. The people in Genesis certainly did.])
 

7. "If there's no God, how did the world/universe come to be?"

This question is very close to the above one, in the sense that it involves a human asking another human something that no human could possibly know. Once again, I usually answer this question with the same "don't know/don't care" attitude.

The theory of creationism (or the even more absurdly thought out 'Intelligent Design') states that one day, a man who has existed forever (makes you wondered what he did beforehand) decided that he was going to make more of him. So he begun work by creating the heavens and the Earth (once again, if he created Heaven, where the hell was he prior to their creation? I always assumed that the character God lived in Heaven), then slowly adding more and more to it. For some reason, he had to rest after six days. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention: he's omnipotent and perfect too (but he has to rest? What the fuck is this?). That's kind of important for the story arc.

Anyway, creationism pretty much follows that idea that a man created everything (including man).

Evolution may not solve the problem of the world's creation (though the Big Bang kind of does [I can't wrap my mind around that idea either]). If you really expect me to sit here and type out the workings of evolution, you've got another thing coming. It is noteworthy that creationism can be summed up in such simple words while evolution (something that's actually credible and logical) actually takes time to articulate and explain. Kind of says something, doesn't it?

Anyway, both theories of creationism and evolution have one thing in common: they both TRY to answer the question of how things came to be. Yet neither really answers all of the questions (though with evolution losing its theory status, it's obviously become the one that intelligent people go for). Taking things to a more cosmic level, the Big Bang states that a sudden burst of energy caused our universe to come into force. Some Christians like to take that and say that the Big Bang WAS God's initial decision to create the universe (which they [well, some] also believe is only about 6000 years old, might I add), but isn't that just complicated something even further? If you think the Big Bang is a farfetched theory (a burst of energy within another universe created our universe), isn't adding God into it (a burst of energy within another universe sparked by a giant flying man who watches us 24/7 created our universe) even weirder?

Either way, it all comes down to the same principle: nobody knows how the world and the universe came to be. So stop trying to speculate and debate it, because you sound foolish (yes, I'm talking to both theists and atheists right now) when you try to prove your point.


8. "If you're right and I'm wrong, what do I have to lose?"

Ah, here's one that I've heard in many different ways. I've been asked this question before. I've asked this question myself once upon a time (as an 11 year old Christian, those were the days...XD). I've even seen it parodied in South Park. It's not anything revolutionary and new, folks. This is something referred to as Pascal's Wager, and it dates as far back as the 17th century. The statement goes something like this: "If somebody does believe in God and is incorrect, he has nothing to lose as he is now dead and (since he was incorrect) will not pay for his mistake. However, if somebody does not believe in God and is incorrect, he has everything to lose as he will now go to Hell and pay for his mistake. Therefore, the only logical choice is to believe there is a God."

What Blaise Pascal did not realize was...well, he didn't understand much when he spouted that moronic statement. There are so many things about his gambit that make absolutely no sense. Let's start with the one that I hold most dear: his statement of "A believer who is wrong has nothing to lose in death." is completely incorrect.

A believer who is incorrect has very much to lose. One who is a true Christian is one who submits to the teachings of the Old and New Testament. In the Bible, there are many things that a person is told to chastise from. Some of these things are completely natural and human to do/think/feel, yet the Bible claims that they are wrong and sinful. Right off the bat, a believer is chastising certain elements of his or her life by submitting to a belief system (and just so you all know, I'm NOT saying that a Christian can't live a happy life. I'm just saying that there will be an absence of many regular, natural things that the Bible claims is wrong). By being a believer, your life is being altered by limiting your rights as an organism.

It doesn't stop there, though, for Mr. Pascal forgot another element that doesn't hold well for him: he was, of course, speaking of Christianity when he made his ignorant statement. Well, what if Christianity isn't right? What if one of the other many religions is actually the correct one? Then, he who believes in God and dies has even more to lose, because the deity that actually exists is now pissed and is going to put their soul into a meat grinder (once again, even if there was an afterlife, you no longer have a body that can be tortured). This breaks Pascal's Wager up amongst many different religions that can now use his very argument to get people to join their own cause. Good going, Blaise.

Finally, there comes one vital key to all of this that completely blows Pascal's Wager out of a cannon and into the Atlantic Ocean, and that is this: belief is not something that can be forced. A person can't merely be sitting there and decide "I'm going to believe in Allah now." People don't work that way. I could decide today to read the Bible in full, attend church sermons twice a week, go to Sunday School, declare confirmation in front of a priest, etc. But it's not going to change the way that my mind thinks. If I were to fill my life with God and Jesus and all of that Christian crap, I would in no way be altering my mind to suddenly have a revelation of "This is real." I have no belief simply because I don't (going back to the first question a bit) and the inability to inject a belief or thought process into me without a logical and valid point is not able to happen. I am incapable of believing in God (unless he were to come tap dancing into my living room, but then I'd just assume that I'm schizophrenic).

So, dear asker, you have quite a bit to lose if you are wrong. And I have no way of changing my thought process. Of course, why would I want to? I'm happy as is, which leads me to my final question...


9. "How can you live with yourself when you believe that your life is for nothing?

One of the ideas that is slightly linked to question number two and even more slightly linked with question six is one that I actually enjoy answering. I won't say that I like the question very much, but I always feel like my answer fits perfectly. And to those who don't like my answer, I know that it's not because of any misspeaking and/or offending nature. Yes friends, I actually do enjoy saying things that are inoffensive, especially when they get a thought across as well as this one does.

I've been asked this in a couple of different ways, but it's usually asked a bit desperately and/or in a troubling manner. It goes something like, "How can you enjoy your life knowing that it has no meaning? That it isn't part of something greater? That your life ends with you?" Right away, I know what they mean, as it's a question that I struggled with as I made my first religious transfer from Christian to Agnostic when I was 14. It makes sense to somebody who has believed in something so high and mighty their entire life, doesn't it?

Many people who are believers will sometimes speak about their religious experiences. I've heard it most often referred to as "the presence of God", where an unknown mental and emotional surge will hit the person and cause them to feel as if God himself is touching them. It's a feeling that I myself used to identify with from time to time (I fondly remember one instance where I believed that God was telling me that Hell doesn't truly exist in the way that people believe it to), and it's a feeling that is truly asserting and wonderful.

Since becoming an atheist, I've had just as many of these spiritual experiences as I had when I was a Christian. They didn't go away. Nearly everything is the same, except for the source. The feeling of intense spiritual awakening that I've felt is not one that I feel is coming from the outside of me, but rather from the inside. The moment that I realized that my entire life was going to be seen and heard and felt through my body and my body alone, the moment I realized that reality around me is decided by how I think and act and feel, the moment I made sense of the fact that we are our own gods and nothing is more powerful than personal determination...that was when I had my most intense spiritual experience. Spiritual without religion. It exists. But people tend to associate spiritual with religion and it has made statements such as that one seem off.

My life doesn't not have meaning. My life is full of meaning. I'm fascinated with the fact that I'm one of the lucky people who gets to live on one of the few habitable planets of the known Universe (few being about a billion or so). I'm overjoyed at the fact that everything around me is being perceived as my body wills it so. I'm in love with the idea that existence exists. Don't ask me how it does, but it does. I don't know and you don't either, and your life is just as meaningful as mine. Once I realized that you live life for yourself, it became one of the sweetest and most heartfelt moments for me that I can think of.

There is very little different between us believers and non-believers, and if you choose to believe, that's the price that you've decided was worth it to live your life. But folks, I tell ya...you need to understand that atheists aren't the bad guys. We aren't people who need saving. We aren't stuck in the dark while you bathe in the light. No, we're all the same. All of us: organisms on a giant rock hurdling through vast nothingness and trying to enjoy our lives.