Though I’m by no means a reductionist, when I follow all of the roads that lead to social injustice, nearly all of them lead back to religion, and more specifically Christianity (in the U.S. at least). The other roads lead to Capitalism, and horrible political philosophy but that’s a discussion for a different day. The historical context of this is infinitely complex and beyond the scope of this article. However when we speak of racism, sexism and heterosexism, all signs point to conservative Christian values.

Simply put, white men use religion to exploit fear, silence dissent, and perpetuate divisive politics. Religion gives these men power.

These are my main problems with religion, the values espoused by most monotheistic religions reinforce beliefs that are fundamentally opposed to reality and social justice. So the question comes to mind, “what if Jesus was gay.”

Of course this question didn’t spring out of thin air, or even as a result of my rumble pack play time. It’s an idea proposed by Pastor Paul Oestreicher, and he even shared this with his congregation during a Good Friday service.

What if Christianity eventually adopted this as a truth? I mean Christians have accepted the assimilation of their most important holiday into a cash grab of perverse proportions. Christians have come to accept that women aren’t objects and should have the right to vote and own property. There’s been a tremendous amount of progressive change in the Christian church.

What if one day all of those values that make Christianity so deplorable and its adherents so exploitable didn’t exist? What if Christian socials in 2050 more closely resemble bondage parties? What if Christians realized it’s more Christian to ensure everyone has equal marriage and reproductive rights?

I don’t know for certain, but I do know that the idea of a gay Jesus makes me happy. Religion will always be a repository for kooky beliefs and superstition, but if those weird beliefs are mostly harmless I think it would be just another nail in the coffin that is social injustice.

So dear readers would a progressive Christian nation be any less fucked up than the one we already have? Do you think Christians could ever accept the idea of a homo-ssiah? Let me know what you think in the comments below, or head over to the Godswill forums and join the discussion.

In the coming weeks, we will be publishing testimonials from atheists all over the world who have experienced coming out as a non-believer to less-than-supportive family, friends, and other loved ones. In some cases, the people featured in this series will have been ostracized or rejected by fundamentalist peers. And, in some, they have been met— as should always be the case— with love and respect. Each testimonial featured in Atheists Coming Out will help give insight to the large percentage of atheists who, for fear of rejection or misunderstanding, have not been open about their lack of faith. I will choose five (5) of the featured stories to be included in an upcoming book on this very topic. To submit your 1000-1,500 word de-conversion/coming out story, please send it to David@DavidGMcAfee.com with “Godswill Atheists Coming Out” in the subject line. Stories will be published on Gods Will and my website. Please feel free to share this page to ensure everyone gets the opportunity to participate.

Last week, we published David F. Pickard‘s story. This week’s feature is by Julia:

My parents met each other while both attending a small Bible College in Houston, Texas. My father, a New Yorker raised in a Catholic Church, had a “born again” experience while serving in the Marine Corps. Once discharged from the military, he decided to attend the small Houston bible college with the hope of becoming a missionary in Africa. My mother is from Arkansas and was raised in a Pentecostal Church. She left home at the age of 18 to attend the school. They married two years after meeting one another at the college. Needless to say, I grew up in a very religious home. I don’t recall a Sunday morning or a Wednesday evening that we weren’t in a church service or bible study. At the age of five, I accepted Jesus into my heart and was “saved.” To this day I can still remember showing them the heart that I made in Sunday School that said, “I asked Jesus into my heart today.” To my parents, following Jesus was what we lived for and was something that was never to be doubted.

At a very young age, I remember having questions about the Christian faith. One specific question I remember asking my father was, “As Christians, how do we know that we’re right?” I think I questioned this because I had neighbors and classmates that were from different denominations. I also couldn’t understand why a loving God would only reveal himself to certain people while much of the world wouldn’t know him. As a child I remember my heart aching for them. I couldn’t understand why we were so special to have the revealed truth while others didn’t.

Growing up in a very religious home and having parents that were fanatical Christians, there were many discussions of Heaven and Hell. I was taught that people who didn’t accept Jesus into their heart weren’t “saved” and would go to Hell when they died. I was also told that I could go to Hell if I didn’t ask for Jesus to forgive me of my sins on a daily basis. Unfortunately, this caused a tremendous amount of fear and guilt. While I wasn’t a perfect child, the fear of dying and going to Hell led me to be a well behaved child until my teen years. As most teens do, I went through a little rebellious stage. This is when my guilty conscience started to affect me almost daily. I had visions of what Hell looked like and how I would suffer there because I didn’t always make the right choices. This was painful for me. I don’t think I will ever understand why my parents thought that it was okay to let their children suffer in this way. I have three other siblings that also dealt with this and still believe this to this day. I am a mother of two small children and I have a baby on the way. I can’t even imagine making my precious children suffer in this way. I’m completely aware that my children will hear about God, but I’ll stand up and protect them from ever being tormented with threats of eternal damnation. My oldest son, who is at the time of writing nearly six years old, has asked many questions about God. Family members and classmates have talked to him about God. My husband and I have explained to him that we don’t believe in God, but that many people do. We’ve explained that he’ll understand this more as he grows older. He says that he doesn’t believe in God and compares Him to the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, and Santa Claus.

For the first thirty years of my life, I was a Christian and believed that Jesus was the only answer. I attended church and longed for a deep connection with God. On many occasions, I would pray and ask God to reveal himself to me. I wanted to see miracles and have personal experiences with God. While there were times I thought I may be experiencing God, I often wondered why I didn’t experience Him like others did. I wondered if I just wasn’t good enough. I later started to question if God was even real. I wanted to believe that some of the good things that happened in my life were the result of God being present, but I often wondered if giving God the credit was just what I was taught to do when something good happened, and that it really didn’t have anything to do with him at all. I wondered why everything had to be accredited to God?  These questions started to haunt me. At first it, was difficult to accept that I was questioning God’s existence. It went against everything that I was taught and left me having more fears. I dealt with these thoughts for nearly a year before I was vocal about it.

Accepting these feelings and expressing them to my husband wasn’t easy. Church had always been a part of our life. He was a former worship leader and Bible School student. At the time I started seriously doubting, we had adopted a much more liberal faith and were attending an Episcopal Church. I found myself not wanting to participate because of my doubts. When I first brought up these things to my husband, it was difficult. At that point he and I weren’t on the same page. He still believed and found it difficult to consider questioning his faith. Most Christians believe that when two people marry, they become one, and I feared that this could possibly tear us apart. He worried about what we would teach our kids. We continued to attend church and I became more vocal about it for several months. My husband started to research how the Bible was formed and, along the way, discovered that he may have questions after all. After much study, we finally came to the realization that it wasn’t crazy of us to question things. My last prayer to God was just over two years ago. I decided on that night that if I didn’t get answers and hear God’s voice, I was no longer going to live as a Christian. It goes without saying that I didn’t get answers. I’m almost 33 years old and I’m now an atheist. I’ve never felt so free. I’m free from the guilt that once tormented me. I’m free from the thoughts of Hell. I no longer believe in God. My life no longer revolves around this imaginary creator that lives in the sky. I believe that life is too precious to live in constant fear that there is a higher being that controls what happens to us when we die.

While this new outlook on life has brought me much liberation, it wasn’t without its share of pain. Coming out as an atheist had social ramifications that I underestimated. Given my family’s religious background, this didn’t sit well with them and created some tension that still exists today in some respects. I know they feel like I’m just lost and I’m afraid they’ll never understand how I feel about these things. They’ll never understand the liberation that I feel as an atheist. Our friendships also suffered and we’re still in the process of rebuilding our social lives. Living a suburban life in Texas hasn’t made it easy, but we’re trying. No matter what, I’m happy to say that my husband and I now live godless lives and enjoy what each day has to bring.

Julia

 http://www.facebook.com/anatheistgirl 

To submit your 1000-1,500 word deconversion/coming out story, please send it to David@DavidGMcAfee.com with “Atheists Coming Out” in the subject line. Please feel free to share this page to ensure everyone gets the opportunity to participate.

Join the forum discussion on this post

Luther was most upset about the Catholic practice of selling Indulgences as a way of raising money. Indulgences were sort of “get out of purgatory free” program. If a Catholic bought an indulgence, he was able to get some time off from his stay in Purgatory after he died. The money collected during the sale was used to help finance St. Peter’s Cathedral in Rome. Leave it to the Catholics to find ways to raise cash. An Indulgence was the way before Bingo was invented.

Luther also had an issue with divorces. He felt that the church had no business sticking their nose in that matter. He regarded marriage as a civil ceremony that could be revoked like most contracts for just cause. In short, he believed you could divorce your wife, and get on with your life if things didn’t work out.

Luther was an impetuous sort. He demonstrated his petulance by nailing his arguments against the Church’s sale of Indulgences and other complaints, all 95 of them, to the door of the church in Wittenberg. He messed up the wooden doors big time. The bishop sent him a bill for a new church door which Martin refused to pay (rumor and speculation).

Due to this door nail incident and the “Diet of Worms,” Luther was kicked out of the Church in 1521. Eating worms on Friday was apparently prohibited. To the less informed atheists, Diet refers to the “Assembly” and “Worms” is the town where the Bishops assembled to deal with Luther, setting the groundwork for Henry VIII who later applied Lather’s principles about divorce to his personal life.

When his excommunication was complete, Luther began the development of his new religion. He pretty much kept the ceremonies, costumes and the whole ball of wax intact. Differences between Catholic and Lutheran ceremonies, prayers, etc. are virtually indistinguishable. Catholics claim they can tell the difference because Lutherans sing every chorus of every hymn they use. Catholics tend to sing one chorus, then head for the gates.

Other differences include:

• No Pope
• No Cathedrals
• No Bingo
• Bible based, but Lutherans have doubts about 100% reliability of translations.
• Lutheran priests can marry.
• Who’s yo’ daddy? – Don’t call them father. Pastor is appropriate.
• Without Martin Luther, would there have been a Martin Luther King?

Anyone who is worth their salt in sales, so to speak, knows that in order to sell the product you first must sell the need. The best salesman that I ever knew said he never once in his 40 years of sales ever sold the product, but rather he sold the need for the product. Once the need for the product is sold the potential buyer cant see how they can get by without the product. Religion wants to sell us a cure to a disorder that does not exist. We are not sick, they simply make us believe that we are sick so that they can sell us the cure. In other words, the church makes us hypochondriacs of sorts. The disease that the church invented, and convinces us that we are infected with is sin, which is defined in most dictionaries as a transgression of divine law, so first they made up a god, then they made up his laws, and then they tell us that we broke them and must be punished unless we warrant forgiveness. With so many “divine” laws it is impossible to live life without breaking some, especially when many of them are contradictory. It causes us to live in a state of constant worry and constant guilt, over breaking a supposed law of a god that never existed in the first place. That much stress, guilt and fear cannot be auspicious to ones health.

Basically anything we do, or anything we want to do, that is part of the natural human condition is considered to be a sin. I think the Book of Mormon puts it into words the best when it says in Mosiah 3:17 ” For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.” While most Christians do not consider Mormons to be Christian their own doctrines are basically the same on this subject as it is for the Mormons. I think that it is important to note that one of the qualities that this verse mentions that we must have is to submit to anything that the father wants to subject us to, so basically anything that happens to us we must happily accept it as the will of god. The Bible also talks often of the natural state of man as being fallen and worthless.

Let us examine a few of the things that churches consider to be “the natural man” and how they deal with those who do them. A great many of the things that are considered to be grave sins are sexual in nature such as homosexuality (though when asked they say that homosexuality is not natural), premarital or extramarital sex, masturbation, pornography, and for the Mormons, any sexual activity with your spouse other than the “missionary” position. Even looking at another person and thinking, “Wow, they are hot!” is considered lust and is therefore a sin. Questioning the church doctrine or dogma is considered to be a grave sin. We are even made to feel guilty for things that we think, even if we never act on the thoughts. When a person is doing something that the church considers to be wrong they will try to guilt you to death until you are doing what the church wants you to do. Religion has its subject “hard wired” to feel guilty when they do anything against the will of the church, and if they  repent to the church they are made to feel like they are the worst person in the world and that something is wrong with them. I personally think that if these things were actually wrong that it would yield a lot better results to show love and understanding towards the “offender” instead of giving them reasons to fear and making them feel guilty.

Often times when a teen or young adult goes to their parents to talk about their same sex attraction they are judged, forced to “confess” to the ecclesiastical leader, and do and are given crazy things to do in order to be right with god. To always be “right with god” is a Sisyphean task. Basically they try to pray and guilt the gay away.For a person who knows at ten or twelve that they are gay, becoming straight can be a Sisyphean task and therefore we are always in need of repentance and told that we are eternally in the debt of god.  I know a man, who when he was a teen, told his mother that he was gay. Her immediate reaction was to get upset and defensive and to tell him that god only makes straight people and that since god had made him straight it was a choice and that he would not be gay unless he chose to be. She told him that he must have been sinning or else the adversary, what the Mormons refer to Satan as, would not have been able to tempt him and make him think that he was gay. She then told him about how god felt about homosexuals and ordered him to pray until he no longer felt an attraction to the male of the species. More than ten years later it is very obvious that he still liked men but got married to a girl out of fear of being ostracized if he told anyone. Even though it did not make him happy he felt forced to stick with what the church expected of him, and that is to get married in the temple to a woman and have children and raise them up to be Mormon. When he was a teen he even considered suicide because he could not will himself to like what he was told to like and would not be accepted if he did not . For some people the strain of pretending that they are someone who they are not is too much, and they cannot deal with the condemnation from everyone they love, and they cannot handle the insurmountable amount of guilt they feel so they kill themselves. To some suicide seems like the only way out.

A lot of religions, and especially the Mormon religion, tells people that the only sins more serious than sexual sins are murder and denying the Holy Ghost. I once asked my bishop if two college students who were in love had sex, both participants being willing, if their act was really almost as serious as murder. The Bishop said that indeed it was as bad as murder, and in his opinion it may even be worse. I could not believe that the church actually felt that strongly about it, and I have never believed sexual “sin” to be even anywhere close to the degree of murder unless you are talking about rape. I was told that the reason it is such a big sin is that our body is not our own and it belongs to the lord, but when we get married he shared the ownership of out body with our spouse and the ownership of their body with us. This view though helps to perpetuate misogynistic views since the man is god’s and the woman is the man’s.

When I was religious I was in constant fear that I was doing something against the will of god, and anytime I even thought I might have offended god I would pray and ask for forgiveness, sometimes silently and sometimes vocally. I always felt guilty, even when I was not doing anything that was contrary to what the church, and therefore in essence god, wanted me to do. There are so many things that god supposedly wants us to do that it causes religious people to be in a constant state of fear and guilt. Loosing your faith in god and religion is healthy because it gets rid of a lot of stress and guilt and allows us to live our live in a more suitable and pleasant way.

Join the forum discussion on this post

Without any further ado, let us begin, naturally, at the beginning: The book of Genesis.

Most folk, and indeed, two of the translations of my Bible, that being the King James and Amplified versions, refer to the first five books as The ___(fill in the number) Book of Moses. And already I branch out. Did you ever wonder why there are so many translations? Did you ever notice at the bottom all the footnotes? Did you ask why they are there? The various translations exist partly due to literacy reasons. The New International version for example, more like a Readers Digest form of the Bible, whereas the New American Standard might be looked at as more academic. The footnotes are there because they can’t decide on which translation is the correct one.
WTF!? You say? Yes, that’s correct. So maybe we don’t actually get to text today. Yes, the original copies of the writings of the Bible in every case, no longer exist. In fact, just taking the newer part, we don’t have the first copies of the originals. Or the second or third generational copies. Most of the copies of the New Testament fragments we do have are Greek. I’m sure already you noticed the obvious: the Jews and other peoples of the Middle East in and around Jerusalem didn’t speak Greek. Nor could they write. The literacy level was considered to be about 10 to 15%. Do you suppose the literate ones were the fishermen of Judea? Or the carpenters? Athens at its zenith of playwrites and philosophers and the like barely achieved 15% literacy. So ancient Israel might have seen a somewhat lower figure than what I have generously stated. So since they couldn’t read or write, just how the hell did the Bible ever come about? Good question! How come an alleged omnipotent God couldn’t see to it that the originals were retained? Wouldn’t that miracle be somewhat more important and relevant than some of the ones reported in the Bible? We have the original Constitution from over 200 years ago, yet God couldn’t save His own inspired writings? Unless….

Notice that four of the five books all open with a third person account of the Lord talking to Moses. Some might argue that that isn’t so unusual, but you’d have to prove that for ancient writings and not use current materials. Which brings us to Numbers 12:3, where we have a problem if this is Moses speaking. Oh the arrogance that boasts of its meekness! Unless Moses didn’t write it. So let’s put this to rest. In the last chapter of Deuteronomy, chapter 34, vss. 1-6, we find some interesting details. Weird, contradictory, and revealing details, all at once. The contradictory part is where we are told that no one knows where the sepulcher of Moses is, the last half of verse 6, but in the first half says it’s in the valley opposite Beth Peor. Then, at the time of this writing, which is noted in the first verse, The Lord supposedly showed him the real estate. “There it is man, all the stuff you could have had, but for your own stubbornness. Beautiful isn’t it?” Nice guy, this God they worshipped. And He showed Moses all the land, “Gilead as far as Dan…” Whoa! If we look at Judges 18:27-29, we find that it was formerly a city named Laish, and the Danites, a tribe of Israel burned the city of “a people quiet and secure” and killed its inhabitants and then renamed it Dan. Nice folk these Israelites. As best I can figure out, that makes this account of the death of Moses about 300 years after the fact. So tell me, did Moses write these books? In Genesis 36:31, we see a reference to the Israelite kings. Oh, now wait a minute. There couldn’t be a reference to something unless that something was already history, making these books of “Moses” something constructed no sooner than the time of Saul. And pretty much the same language of Genesis 36:31 is found in 1 Chronicles 1:43. Perhaps the same author some time long after the alleged events of the first 5 books?

So what can we see so far? We see that the original Biblical manuscripts, written on matchbook covers, napkins, parchment, papyrus, and toilet paper didn’t survive God’s best efforts, until the time they started writing them in Greek, which by the way, had no spaces between the letters, and no capitals. Therefore, nowhere could be no where, or now here. The author is long dead. What to do? Second, we see that Moses, often ascribed as having written the first 5 books, indeed did not. So perhaps he wasn’t as meek as made out to be. After all, his grudging Sky Daddy kept his fanny out of the Promised Land for getting pissed, and even rubbed Moses’ face in it on Mt. Pisgah before Moses died. All in all, material not to be trusted, because we guess at what the originals said which are long gone and hence any authority or validity they might have, and we certainly can’t trust the content. We see that it’s inconsistent with what he hear from the pulpit, and since the stories Moses allegedly told were written hundreds of years after fact, how can we trust their authority?

So crack open a cold one, and try wrapping your head around the fact that the God of the Bible does not exist.

May 10, 2012

The discovery of Jesus Christ’s alleged tomb has been the center of much controversey since its discovery five years ago in a southern suburb of Jersusalem. However, following the release of new carbon dating data and DNA analysis, most scientists agree on the tomb’s authenticity. And while many have anxiously anticipated the Vatican’s response, none were prepared for the shocking revelation from The Holy See earlier today.

“I guess there’s really no point in keeping up the charade any longer,” Pope benedict began, “The truth is, we made the whole thing up. Christ’s divinity, the virgin birth, all those so-called miracles are all just pure fiction,” the former Hitler youth declared during his sermon following morning mass.

“I mean, really, the whole thing was getting more and more difficult to keep up with a straight face. Anybody who knows anything about the ancient world and its mythologies knows that the whole ‘God came down and sired himself a child’ deal was nothing new. I frankly wish the authors of our faith could have been a little more creative.” The stunned audience at St. Peters Cathedral filed out of the majestic structure in silence.

In an exclusive interview with The Garlic Press, Monsignor Dick DeYounguns made further revelations.

“The truth of the matter is Mary, you know, the mother of Jesus, well, she was a real slut,” the scholar of texts unseen by any but the most trusted followers of the church stated with a wry smile.
“I could quote numerous passages from the original gospel of John the Baptist–mind you it’s quite different from the one that has been peddled to the people over the last couple of millenia–but, suffice it to say that Mary laid with many men and she just had no way of knowing who Jesus’ father was. And, as she had not laid with Joseph in several months, she was at a loss to explain to her husband how she had become pregnant. Fortunately for Mary, though, Joseph was pretty dimwitted and he fell immediately for the whole ‘God planted his seed in me’ bologna.” The Monsignor added that he was in talks with Random House to publish a translation of the true story of Jesus. The working title of the project is In the Footsteps of Jesus: Mortal as You and I.

Elsewhere, President Ahmadinejad of Iran broke down in an emotional speech on Iranian national television.

“I was so moved by the honesty of the Pope that I could not resist responding with equal candor. The truth is that all those stories about Mohammed are nonsense. Let me clear the air here. The idea that the man was some kind of night-time flying equestrian enthusiast is ludicrous. As most of my policies are based on my fanatical devotion to the nonsense that is Islam, I have decided to change my ways. Iran will immediately cease all work on its nuclear program and request immediate and open dialogue with the west.”

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romneywas quick to comment on the staements made by both the Pope and Ahmadinejad.

“I think its great when people can recognize that they were wrong and completely change their mind about things. I do it all the time. And clearly the claims that these religions made were baseless. And to the followers of those faiths, the truth of the Mormon Church welcomes you with open arms.” When asked for further comment, Romney’s new, and clearly masculine spokesperson Ted Nugent just shook his head and then proceeded to shoot a moose.

Join the forum discussion on this post

In the coming weeks, we will be publishing testimonials from atheists all over the world who have experienced coming out as a non-believer to less-than-supportive family, friends, and other loved ones. In some cases, the people featured in this series will have been ostracized or rejected by fundamentalist peers. And, in some, they have been met— as should always be the case— with love and respect. Each testimonial featured in Atheists Coming Out will help give insight to the large percentage of atheists who, for fear of rejection or misunderstanding, have not been open about their lack of faith. I will choose five (5) of the featured stories to be included in an upcoming book on this very topic. To submit your 1000-1,500 word de-conversion/coming out story, please send it to David@DavidGMcAfee.com with “Godswill Atheists Coming Out” in the subject line. Stories will be published on Godswill and my website. Please feel free to share this page to ensure everyone gets the opportunity to participate.

Last week, we published Wil Sinda’s story. This week’s feature is by David F. Pickard:

 Hold the Door Rabbit

by David F. Pickard

Before that day my theological ideas were: God made us, Santa brought us presents on Jesus’ birthday, and the tooth fairy gave me money for discarded teeth.  It was deeper than it appeared on the surface, not much, but it was a religion I could believe in.  My brother was about to destroy that belief.

It was Easter. The bunny had already come and gone. I didn’t get to see him that year, but I’d met him the year before and he’d been scary, so I didn’t mind not seeing him again.  I appreciated that he brought me candy, but giant rabbits were upsetting to me at that age. To be fair, I still find giant rabbits somewhat disturbing.

My Grandparents had driven down from Pittsburgh to share the holiday with us. My mother and grandmother were in the kitchen preparing the meal.  The smell of ham permeated the house.  Standing at the threshold to the kitchen, I watched, hoping for some pre-meal morsel.  It was then that Grandmum noticed me. She called my brother and me over to her. A feeling of dread washed over me, but still, I did as commanded.

“Davey, why do we celebrate Easter?”  This was her custom.  She would make us stand politely while she asked us questions and ridiculed us for our answers. It was normally very traumatic for me, but this day I had the upper hand.  Only the day before, I had been lecturing the neighbor children about this very subject.  With a feeling of superiority I stared into her evil twinkling eyes and I recited the story of Easter.

“Two hundred years ago the Romans nailed the Easter Bunny to a cross and hid his eggs.  When he got down he couldn’t find the eggs, so he asked some kids to help him look.  Now every year he brings baskets of candy to kids all over the world to say thank you.”  I stood smugly, hands behind my back, and waited for my praise. But she laughed. She laughed!  I was stunned.  My brother, my betrayer, cursed favorite, proceeded to tell her the Christian version of the story.  As he spoke, I marveled at the blasphemy that he spouted.  Jesus was a baby!  He was a Christmas person; he had nothing to do with Easter and I knew it.  He finished his bizarre tale, looked me square in the eye and said, “The Easter Bunny isn’t even real.”  In my shock, I cried. And Grandmum laughed.

I spent the rest of the day in my room.  I had no taste for Easter after what I’d heard.  After dinner my mother came to me.  I asked her to tell me the truth; was the Easter Bunny real?

After a moment, with tears in her eyes, she said, “He’s real if you want to believe in him.”  But it was too late; I wanted to believe, but I couldn’t.  He just wasn’t there anymore.

There, on the edge of my bed, I asked the next logical question: What about Santa?  What about God? There we sat, and we cried; my illusions shattered and her baby aging before her eyes.  

That night I prayed for the last time.  I prayed to God, and I prayed to Santa, and I prayed to the Easter Bunny.  I apologized to them.  I asked them to try and understand why I couldn’t believe in them anymore.  I wanted to, truly I did, but they just weren’t real.  I said goodbye and showed them the door.  I think they understood.

To submit your 1000-1,500 word deconversion/coming out story, please send it to David@DavidGMcAfee.com with “Godswill Atheists Coming Out” in the subject line. Please feel free to share this page to ensure everyone gets the opportunity to participate.

Join the forum discussion on this post

Back in the early 1800s, a guy by the name of Joe Smith found some gold tablets written in a language that apparently was translatable only by him. These gold tablets gave Joseph the guidelines for his new-found religion. Since no one else could read the instructions, it gave Smith a free reign to improvise as he went along.

His sidekick was an angel that went by the name of Moroni (Italian)? Moroni claimed that he was a warrior, who after his death many centuries before, transformed himself into an angel with the duty of guarding the gold plates he had buried somewhere near Joseph Smith’s back yard in upstate New York – kind of like the Dead Sea Scrolls of the Great Lakes.

Joseph Smith was quite the man – horny might be a more apt description. The guy married 30 women, including some who were already married. That was probably a good reason for many other guys to join the movement, though most men in their right mind find one wife hard enough to try and keep happy.

It seems no one liked the Mormons, and as a result they were chased from one community to another; including Ohio and Missouri, until they eventually settled in Utah. It seems that none of the former settlements had a need for a choir the size of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. They caused such a racket that they were forced to locate in the far away corners of Utah, where their constant vocalization wouldn’t bother anyone. Now, that’s just one version of the story.

By the time they got to Salt Lake, poor Joseph was out of the picture. He had been replaced by Brigham Young who guided the tribe of wandering Mormons there. It has been said that the Mormons were actually one of the lost tribes of Israel who got off the path in their search for the promised land.

When the Mormons finally got themselves settled, they actually got involved in a war with the US government. They went on to develop a pretty fair football program at Brigham Young University and bred some fine looking women. Remember the hot chick from Dancing With The Stars, Julienne Hough? It’s no wonder the guys have a penchant for polygamy. They can’t get enough of a good thing. Incidentally, if you ever try to make it with a chick and you find that she is wearing an odd white garment under her street clothes, she is probably a Mormon girl gone astray. The garment you inadvertently discovered is actually “Temple Wear,” which is the preferred magic underwear for all Mormons, male and female.

Outside of their home grounds in Salt Lake City, how would you go about recognizing a Mormon on the streets? That’s pretty easy to do. They’re the dorky looking guys and gals that come knocking on your door trying to convert you to their cause. They wear suits and ties. Remember suits? If they happen to be women, they are awfully pretty and are wearing modest skirts. These poor kids are on missionary duty, a requirement they must all fulfil. Buy some cookies from them and send them on their way. They’re harmless, but you better watch out for that Romney guy.

Join the forum discussion on this post

I actually endured this practice for an entire year, in a failed attempt to save my marriage and lie to myself completely about my belief in a god. Needless to say, my sex life took a massive plummet, as well as my feminine self esteem. I was uncomfortable and overheated every single day, and many times decided not get dressed once out of the shower because I loathed these religious garments so much. Once I’d had enough and just couldn’t stand it any longer, I threw them away. Which is a sin in itself. Garments, once worn out and no longer useful, are to have the special symbols cut from the fabric. These symbols are to be burnt, not thrown away, as they are secret religious symbols with spiritual meaning.

Not only are garments clad with special symbols, incredibly uncomfortable, and a fabulous fashion statement but they are said to possess magical powers of protection for the wearer.

In order to enter the temple and receive the garments, you must obtain a temple recommend from the bishop of your ward. You will be interviewed to ensure your faithful devotion to the church and asked a series of questions such as:

So, after answering all of these questions satisfactorily, you will be handed a temple recommend. Simple enough.

And then you will be bound to wear these for the rest of your days. Now, these aren’t as bad as what they started out. Over the years since Joseph Smith prophesied garments were to be worn, they have gone through incredible alterations. Funny how God allows changes for fashion’s sake.

Bras are to be worn over the garments since the purpose is for them to be constantly touching your body in order to protect you. No underwear are to be worn underneath. I guarantee that there is no way to ever feel sexy in these yet Mormons are encouraged to multiply and replenish the earth. These garments keep couples from being open sexually and comfortable with their bodies. I once got a Kama Sutra book for a Mormon friend to help her spice up her love life. Her husband made her feel so guilty about even possessing such a book that she was told to return it as it was pornographic and not necessary for the practice of reproduction. Wow.

I feel that garments are yet another way to ensure control over the members of the Mormon religion, along with many other devices concocted by the church. How is it that so many intelligent, prominent men and women are such devout believers in such nonsense? This is one thing I will never be able to truly understand.

Join the forum discussion on this post

Last week, we published my coming out story. This week’s feature is by Wil Sinda:

I was born in 1954 in New York, brought up on Long Island in the middle of Suffolk County, and raised as if a Catholic. I say as if, because when I was finally informed of the mythology of the faith, my first and enduring reaction was a guffaw. I reasoned, even at the tender age of nine or so, “surely, this is just a tale for the sake of a holiday, like Santa or the Easter Bunny” — neither of which were ever a plausible reality for me, much to the apparent chagrin of my father who thought I was a chronic party pooper.

When my mother read me that first catechism lesson, which covered the talking points of Creation, Eden, Original Sin and Jesus — you know, the basic ‘plot’ of the story — I let out a gasp like someone who realizes a gag. My first words were something like, “Get outta here!” My Grandmother, who was also present, chuckled, and my Mother laughed with a sense of futility. I expressed my utter disbelief, and in no uncertain terms. My Mother’s only substantive response was to warn that I not tell the nuns.

I never did, but I did conspire against the faith among my comrades. Not that that was my intention, but I had to know who amongst us believed the story. Only one or two friends openly agreed with me, including one, Linda, who also informed me that Jesus was a Jew. (Odd that they left that bit out. Later on I asked a nun about it, but she would only say that Jesus was king of the Jews, but that the latter were the killers of Christ.) The other kids mostly shrugged with an ‘I dunno’, marking them as that great majority of ersatz followers who are merely passive and really not believers in any strict sense.

Being young, I had no doubt that the proffered theology was true (the Church was the “Rock”, after all), while at the same time knowing that it was most certainly not. In Catholic terms, I had no faith; I was faithless; in other words, doomed. I was indeed troubled by this for a time; but not only did I not believe, I also found the prospect of believing so depressingly horrifying that I gave up trying to assuage my cognitive dissonance. I say depressingly horrifying, because I realized that were any of it true, all reality would be disqualified. It would be like finding yourself living in a fairytale, and without possibility of parole. All of what I would later know as ‘rationality’ would be futile and, in fact, irrational. Up would be down; true would false. It would be, literally, a nightmare.

When sitting in the church pews, I would look around to the stained glass windows depicting the “Passion.” They looked to me like a glorification of revenge; a ‘you’re gonna get yours’ tale. It seemed not only petty to me, but below the dignity of what a god should have had truck with. In fact, the whole discourse seemed to me to be a retaliation on those who were not part of the faith. Nonbelievers, heretics, other denominations, Jews – all would suffer an eternal torment, a penalty about which the faithful could rejoice and experience a special spite. And, of course, it was also a warning to the congregation to toe the line. How different from the “Labors of Heracles” that I had read in school, a tale with real pathos.

As the years went by, and I came more into my own, my relationship to the Church, which ruled the area socially, was purely and only formal. My last day as a practicing Catholic, as it were, was my Confirmation at the age of thirteen, an extremely distasteful affair, right down to the singing of “We are Christian soldiers.” But despite this regime, I never for a moment declined from expressing my utter atheism to family, relatives, neighbors and teachers, and I always assumed that most others must surely have felt the same as myself. Even after my radicalization on the issue after reading things like Nietzsche and Existentialism, my assumption was that I was more vocal and combative about something that others just avoided confronting at all, but for which they really had only perhaps a sentimental attachment on holidays. I believed this until the second Bush term. Then everything seemed to change radically.

I had long before then moved to New Orleans, which I hasten to remind everyone is in Louisiana. Louisiana is one of those States that isn’t completely modernized. There are still areas that do not have power. It is Arkansas with New Orleans, in other words. It is a very rich and complex culture, for sure, but one that has always been under the thumb of the most backwards and reactionary kinds of ‘faith’ and politics. It is said that the only schools that teach science in Louisiana are Catholic schools run by Jesuits. The public schools have always either taught Creationism or avoid the subject altogether. They made this ‘legal’ here in the state this year.

When the recent religious contagion started to spread across the land, sometime into Bush’s second term, I warned my friends of what would be in store for them, having seen signs of a new agitation from the faithful down here. They all laughed at me, even the practicing Christians that I knew. None of them believed that it would soon be de rigueur for a Christian to be a ‘young Earther’, or a Creationist, or anti-science, for example. All of the aforementioned Christians now tout those beliefs without a second thought. The shift in basic rationality has been as decisive as it has been anti-rational. I am reminded of Ionesco’s “Rhinoceros.”

From a lifetime of being relatively uncontroversial as a non-believer, I am now perceived as a radical, as someone who “goes too far.” While it is true that my definition of a religious fanatic is someone who believes in God, I am not sure what the gradation is for non-belief to be considered extreme. If you do not believe, then you do not believe. I suppose what they mean is that I also say that there is no God, no magic Jesus, nothing like that. It is often said that you cannot disprove God. That is a mistaken notion. It relies on equating truth with propositional demonstration. I appeal to a basic class of wisdom: if your explanation of the cosmos and everything in it is a story, a tale with characters whose personal events have ontological import, then it is a primitive myth like all others of the sort, a primitive and naive impulse to attach a narrative to Being. Such a thing should already make one smirk. If that basic condition of truth is not already part of someone’s intellectual arsenal, discussing the matter would be as futile as discussing classical music with a rabbit: those big ears will just be of no use.

Fight the good fight.

Wil Sinda

To submit your 1000-1,500 word deconversion/coming out story, please send it to David@DavidGMcAfee.com with “Atheists Coming Out” in the subject line. Please feel free to share this page to ensure everyone gets the opportunity to participate.

Join the forum discussion on this post

For the most part, after the American Revolution in 1776, the Anglicans here in the States changed their name to Episcopalian because it might be considered politically incorrect, awkward and treasonous to pay allegiance to the English king, who was the self proclaimed leader of their church. Today the terms are used interchangeably by many. It may not be right, but who cares? There’s not enough of them to worry about.

Anglicans are notorious copy-cats. Instead of coming up with new ceremonies, prayers, churches and all the trimmings, The Anglicans and Episcopalians recycled all their Catholic stuff, the whole kit and caboodle. They did change the official church language to English from Latin, but kept the rest the same. In that respect they beat the Catholics to that move by over 400 years. During the entire changeover, the Brits maintained a stiff upper lip and kept a lot of copywriters busy for years on end translating all the Latin prayers, services and Bibles into high English. To many, the English replacement was as difficult to understand as Latin. To the ears of the unwashed, church-going, peasant masses going to the new English masses, it was all still mumbo jumbo.

The Queen of England is now the head nun of the church for lack of a better title. That makes her son, the newly wed Charles, the Nun in Waiting For a Seat on the Royal Throne, better known as the order of NIWFSORT. No doubt that is why you often see him dressed in kilts. Part of his responsibility is for the care and faith of gay and lesbian priests of either sex, as well as the female Bishop.

To their credit, few instances of sweet, sweet love between priests and boys have been uncovered. Marriage is allowed, hence the urges and frustrations of the priests are dealt with in an adult-on-adult manner.

New Jersey couple, Josue Chinchilla and Michele Callan, claiming that their rented home is haunted, have filed suit against their landlord in an attempt to break their lease and seeking a refund of their $2170 security bond. Their orthodontist landlord, Dr Richard Lopez, isn’t buying their claims and says the couple is simply trying to renege on a contract. To bolster their claim, the couple hired a team of paranormal investigators, The Shore Paranormal Research Society, to use “science” (or pseudo-science aka woo depending on one’s definition of science) to lend support to their claim.

Josue Chinchilla and Michele Callan claim their New Jersey home is haunted.

Part of the “evidence” the paranormal investigators captured on video was a bowling pin (why there was a bowling pin leaning against a wall is not explained) that fell over “for no reason” just as they began stomping up a nearby staircase. Another example of their “proof” is an electronic voice phenomenon (EVP) which they recorded. The disembodied “voice” says, according to their claim, “Let it burn,” which has no supporting context whatsoever, but who ever said ghosts can’t engage in playful non-sequitors?

For their part, the couple claims to have felt tapping on the husband’s shoulder, to have heard tapping on their television, and to have seen lights flicker. This is of course all solid evidence of something, and according to them it is solid evidence of ghosts. Of course since nobody can prove that it isn’t ghosts, clearly that’s what it must be; and not simply the house settling, muscle spasms or an electrical short.

So the question becomes, will the courts recognize the validity of this claim? Well that may depend on how much reality television the judge watches. In recent years, there has been a proliferation of cable network programs dedicated to documenting the lives of psychics, extra-terrestrial history buffs and hunters of Sasquatch. However, it is the ghost researchers who have garnered the lion’s share of air-time. Networks such as Discovery (Ghost Lab,) The Learning Channel (Ghost Intervention,) and even the Travel Channel (Ghost Adventures,) have programs showing teams earnestly exploring claims of haunted locations with EVP readers (which are also known to pick up static electricity, stray radio waves and other stray known phenomena,) night vision cameras, thermal readers and (I kid you not) flashlights. These programs run as part of the same prime-time line-ups that feature programs such as Myth Busters, Bizarre Foods and Frozen Planet: shows which actually are reality based and by virtue of association lend credibility to the woo. At least the program Ghost Hunters has the self-awareness to be on the Scy Fy Network.

This is a civil matter and should be adjudicated by a trained judicial arbiter or in some other form of bench trial. Theoretically, American judges have a background in critical thinking and have some understanding of the difference between science and confirmation bias, so we could hopefully rely on a judge to do the right thing in this case and find in favor of the landlord. Unfortunately, in America, it is still possible for a lawyer to request a jury trial in cases involving a substantial monetary obligation. I’m not so confident that we can rely on an American jury to not find in favor of the astral plane.

No, it turns out that even after pressure was put on him, he sort of apologized, saying he overestimated the progress made in slaying the ghosts of the past. Overestimated? Here’s where one want to knock on his head and say, “Hey. McFly! Anyone home?” Overestimated? Try grossly underestimated it. Try missed the point completely. You showed what was in your heart.

That isn’t all. As it turns out, this man who surrendered to the ministry (read his letter of apology at http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=37620) wasn’t at all surrendered to the notion of stealing the work of others. So much so that the archives of his radio program through the ERLC have been pulled from the site! SUH-NAP! The head lopped off! Or at least the appearance thereof.

However, these folk are in a precarious political position. We already see that they are whores. They do what they do for political power and money, trying to prove only to themselves that our nation is “godly.” There is an election coming up. And their outreach goes out to untold millions that swallow their filth. My prediction? That they will slap his wrist. Some sort of probation, he’ll have his come back to Jebus moment, and in a year all will be forgotten. Except the altered archives. Then look for more of his heart rottenness flowing out of his mouth after that. Maybe I’ll be surprised. Maybe they’ll be just and fire him. I don’t look for justice from any church organization though. In the guise of forgiveness (he brings in money), they will appear to discipline him. In the event they do fire him, look for him to land with a group like Wallbuilders, Family Research Council, or equally phony group of believers that will allow for the lies and hatred. Land would fit right in. After all, he was head of the Ethics Committee.

So what kind of heart does Richard Land have? That tree has been dunged for a long time. It’s time to cut that phony fruit tree down, dig it’s root out and throw it on the compost pile. It would make lousy fire wood.

Thanks to RWR and the Baptist News!

In a stunning move, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) introduced legislation today that would prevent Yahweh from joining popular social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. The legislation comes at a time when the Almighty has sent signals that He/She/It was warming up to the idea of reaching out to the human race via the Internet.

“Coming from The Bronze Age, God is a bit behind the times as far as technology goes,” Senior Heavenly Spokesperson Archangel Michael told The Garlic Press in an exclusive interview. “Yet, He/She/It recognizes that He/She/It can use social media to reach billions of people, as opposed to one or two nomads like with the old burning bush method of communication. Looking at it from that perspective, it seems to many on His/Her/Its staff that opening accounts on Twitter and Facebook would be a great way to expand His/Her/Its reach.” While Michael indicated to The Garlic Press that momentum in Heaven was shifting in favor of embracing new social media, it is clearly a slow process. “We still can’t get Yahweh to switch from his dial-up service with AOL,” a frustrated Archangel Michael admitted.

Yet, many are confused as to why Republicans–the party most Americans identify as being the more aggressive supporter of Yahweh–is seeking to block God’s access to social media sites.

A staffer from Rep. Ryan’s office explained, “People have to remember that we are beholden to our constituents. And the overwhelming majority of clergy in this country are afraid that their businesses would be severely damaged if they had to compete directly with the Almighty. And, when it comes to financial support, God has not once donated even a single penny to the Republican party, or any of its candidates.” In truth, The Garlic Press reviewed public records on all political donations for the last fifty years and could not find a single entry for God.

Johnny Stooge, the booking manager for religion superstar Rick Warren, informed The Garlic Press that he already saw a decline in demand for speaking engagements just based on the rumor that God might begin to directly communicate with humanity. “If God were to do this, it would completely destroy the whole religion industry. And not just in this country. Religious institutions around the world would be in danger of collapse. Why go to a messenger when you can go directly to the source? The implications for the global economy could be devastating.” This fear has led to an unusual collaboration with many Democrats on Capitol Hill who fear that the economic effects of God in social media could hamper President Obama’s chances at re-election. And though Congress tends to shy from controversial legislation in an election year, it is this spirit of collaboration between Republicans and Democrats that has several Washington insiders privately stating that the bill has a good chance of passing both the House and Senate.

Of course, not all supporters of the legislation are as candid about their concerns. Choosing instead to play the fear card, Speaker John Boehner issued a stern warning to those in opposition at the press conference held to announce the bill’s introduction to the House agenda.

“Who on Facebook will be playing Scrabble with God? Consider the frustration of competing with an omnipotent being. And what would happen to someone if God defriended them? What would God do if someone defriended him? Do we really want our children to see pictures of God’s activities from his private life, or worse, of what he did in college? Are we as a society prepared to deal with these issues?”

When asked if the president would sign such legislation, the administration released a statement indicating that the president would have to consider the bill after he has had a chance to fully review its final language.

And while campaigning in Idaho, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney had this to say on the Ryan proposal: “I fully support and condemn this necessary and over-reaching bill. You can be sure that I would not hesitate to sign and veto any such bill were it to land on my desk.”

by David G. McAfee, author, Disproving Christianity and other Secular Writings

In the coming weeks, we will be publishing testimonials from atheists all over the world who have experienced coming out as a non-believer to less-than-supportive family, friends, and other loved ones. In some cases, the people featured in this series will have been ostracized or rejected by fundamentalist peers. And, in some, they have been met— as should always be the case— with love and respect. Each testimonial featured in Atheists Coming Out will help give insight to the large percentage of atheists who, for fear of rejection or misunderstanding, have not been open about their lack of faith. I will choose five (5) of the featured stories to be included in an upcoming book on this very topic. To submit your 1000-1,500 word de-conversion/coming out story, please send it to David@DavidGMcAfee.com with “Godswill Atheists Coming Out” in the subject line. Stories will be published on Gods Will and http://www.davidgmcafee.com/. Please feel free to share this page to ensure everyone gets the opportunity to participate.

To begin the series, I published my own coming out story:

“It is an interesting and demonstrable fact, that all children are atheists and were religion not inculcated into their minds, they would remain so.”

- Ernestine Louise Rose (January 13, 1810 – August 4, 1892)

Born Atheist

To properly understand this guide to “coming out” as a non-believer, some might wish to learn more about the particular context in which I, as a secular author, am writing. In Chapter Ten: Testimonials, you’ll read five stories from atheists who wish to share their de-conversion stories for the benefit of those who may be facing difficulties in their own coming out process.  Here, I do the same:

Now, the way I see it, everybody is born an atheist and, without submersion into religion as a child, we would most likely maintain that position… more often than not, however, this is not the case. I don’t remember a particular time in my life in which I believed in the validity of a particular religious tradition but, eventually, even I had to break the news to my family and become “open” regarding my secular mindset. My parents were not always religious people… They may have abused substances religiously— but, when I was very young, church was probably the last thing on their minds. When I was two years old, my parents divorced and began their separate lives pursuing drugs to feed their addictions; thankfully, my grandmother volunteered to care for me until my mother or father could afford (financially and emotionally) to raise me. She never mistreated me or abused me, but she was the first person in my life to introduce me to religion and the authority of the church. My grandparents with whom I spent the majority of my childhood considered themselves Baptist Christians— and I was raised in a way that, they thought, would encourage similar ideologies in me.

When I was a bit older— around six years old— I went to a Christian church with my grandparents; this was my first real experience with a religious institution. The church, located in a small town in Northern California, considered itself “non-denominational,” and usually consisted of a pastor reciting well-chosen biblical passages for about an hour and providing some minor inspirational interpretations. Needless to say, I was not moved by the experience— and didn’t take the idea of church seriously. Even though this doctrine was being force-fed to me for as long as I can remember, I always had questions about its veracity— questions that, I quickly learned, were considered inappropriate to ask. My grandmother was a self-described traditional, god-fearing, Christian woman— though it wasn’t until much later that I would realize the closed-mindedness that this mindset bred in her and others. She saw that I was not excited about attending church on a regular basis and, at around age eight, she mandated that I attend a weekly children’s class at the same church in an attempt to force my involvement and encourage participation within the “House of God.” I remember my first day at this Sunday School very well; I remember that my younger step-sister was there with me in a classroom-like setting learning about Jesus Christ and his message, obviously at a superficial level that could be absorbed by young children. I also remember the tactics utilized by the “teachers” to keep the attention of the children and get us excited about church— usually giving gifts of candy and other prizes for active participation. I do not doubt that the intentions of these people were positive but, in hindsight, I cannot help but see the gifts as a type of mild bribery in exchange for the willing indoctrination of a child. After we earned a certain amount of “Bible Bucks,” which were awarded for correctly answering trivia questions about the gospels and participating in Christian songs, we could cash in these vouchers for prizes like candy, toys, or even a ten-minute break to play on the trampoline behind the church.

The bus ride to and from Sunday School was the most exciting part of the event for me and my step-sister; we would play games, sing songs, and we were always given a lot of candy. My point in telling you this is not to glorify the practice of forcing a religion on a child, but instead to illuminate the ways in which this act is carried out within the Christian community and other religious traditions. My step-sister was always excited to attend church for the candy and prizes… it didn’t take long for this connection to become a subconscious one, which helped foster an extremely positive outlook of church and religion in her mind. For one reason or another, I did not have this reaction— I simply didn’t take church or religion seriously. I remember thinking of it more as a pastime or a game to occupy my time on Sunday mornings, acknowledging that the “miracles” portrayed in the Biblical Texts could not have possibly occurred. There is no point in my past in which I would have considered myself “Christian,” or affiliated with any other religion for that matter. But, as my parents became increasingly religious over time and my grandparents had always taken Christianity as God’s inherent truth, I was afraid to voice my opinions on the subject. It was this disparity between my family’s faith and my lack of faith that spurred my interest in the study of religion. It wasn’t until age 13 that I became interested in actively studying the various religious traditions in the world and their effects on society at large. It is because of this curiosity, and my sincere hope to avoid familial confrontation, that I decided to remain silent about my skepticism surrounding Christianity— and all religions. I continued to accompany my family to church on Sundays— as a silent observer. After years of attending the same Christian church nearly every week, however, I had a lot of unanswered questions about the religion’s history, principles, and how it has become the most followed tradition in the world. But, out of fear of being ostracized, I remained silent and did not raise my concerns to my family

At age fifteen, I decided that I wasn’t getting enough information out of the weekly sermons to justify any sort of divine revelation— I decided to read the bible to get a more complete picture of what it teaches and why. It is at this time, after seeing first-hand the violent, discriminatory, and hate-filled passages that our pastor had neglected to read aloud, that I decided that I was not only not a Christian, but I was against the notion of organized religion. I could have remained silent for years as so many of us do, but instead I decided to confront my family head on. It is at age fifteen that I first told my family that I didn’t want to go to church anymore because I disagree with the religion on a moral level. I was honest and respectful about my opinions, but that didn’t stop them from attempting to force my participation in the church— they probably thought they were doing the right thing, trying to “save my soul.” I remember them being upset with me at first— as you might expect. But, because of my straightforward and honest attitude, and because I broached the subject rather early in life, it blew over relatively quickly. In short, they got over it. From age fifteen on it was known to all those in my immediate family that I was a Religious Conscientious Objector and, while some of the more closed-minded family members looked down on me for this rather bold decision, I simply turned the other cheek. Now, I am an open atheist in my private and public life and believe that I am truly better off for it. While keeping your opinions hidden might help to avoid small confrontations, being honest with yourself and others will be more rewarding in the long term and I truly empathize with those people who are still being forced to hide their non-religiosity from friends and family who might otherwise discriminate against them.

I understand that, because I never fully believed, my de-conversion isn’t as divisive as some of my atheist friends and colleagues. Those who were more invested in church might have a more difficult time sharing their new-found skepticism with friends and family. This includes those non-believers who were once clergymen or preachers or otherwise associated with a religious tradition— this dynamic presents its own set of unique challenges. But the reason my de-conversion was not a traumatic moment in my life, is precisely because I didn’t wait. By telling my family as soon as I was sure that I didn’t want to be involved in the church, it became a soon-forgotten aspect to my developing personality— in other words, my family got used to it. By the time I was eighteen and decided to attend school for Religious Studies, nobody in my family or circle of friends was surprised that I was interested in studying the phenomenon of religion from a secular perspective; and, though I catch flak from strangers every once in a while, my true friends and family love and respect me for who I am, regardless of religious and ideological differences. This is, in my opinion, how it can and should be for everybody, provided that you are honest with yourself and others in a respectful manner; here, I will outline some steps to make the process easier for you and your loved ones, provide testimonials from non-believers of all ages who decided to take the enormous step to become open about their lack of belief, and provide helpful information, resources, and support systems for open non-believers. The intention is that these instructions and stories will help people who are being forced to hide their thoughts and feelings from family and friends in a society largely dominated by religion.

Join the forum discussion on this post

Sociologists feel that the gangster culture and public disrespect of authority our country continues to embrace was drawn from years of being a “dry” country. If anything, more alcohol was consumed and more laws were broken during the years of the ban than in any previous period. Crime hit never-befor seen levels, and politicians were brought into the mix by the temptation of lucrative bribes and pay-offs. Police departments were compromised, and the public became corrupt as well. Their doctrines are exactly the reason why the Godswill Ministries feels an obligation to decry fanatics such as the old-school Methodists. They were the Al Qaeda of Christianity in years gone by.

Not only did they have issues with alcohol, they were prominent supporters of the illustrious Ku Klux Klan and any other fringe group who hated Catholics, Jews and a myriad of other religions that did not follow their example. These followers are true examples of how Christianity in action should not work, but often does.

How did they get this way? Simple, someone taught them to read, and we atheists are still looking for the guilty parties. In essence, the Methodists are nothing more than Baptists who can read. Once they learned how, they were on their own, free to interpret their scriptures anyway they chose. They read things into their books that only unreasonable people could. Baptists shared many of the fundamental principals of Methodists and were also advocates of the Klan and Prohibition. Presbyterians also have a lot in common with Methodists and Baptists who find comfort in each other’s distorted views. Often, like Baptists, they buy forbidden liquor in the next county to avoid discovery by Catholics who love to catch them with a cold one in their hands. For what it’s worth, George W. Bush was a Methodist, but he was also once an Episcopal Church member during his partying days. He got caught quite often with several “cold ones” in his hands.

Dearest Gay-

First of all, the fact that your religious family would disown you over such a small thing as sexual preference really chaps my leathery hide. I might understand if you were a rapist, catholic priest, murderer or deceitful con man…but for being gay? Such persecution by the religious is disdainful and, frankly, pathetic. I feel sorry for those minds that have been so corrupted by religion that they would abandon their own flesh and blood. Jesus himself had more than a few romps up the hershey highway and he’s considered a god now!  It is understandable that you are afraid to be you. But there is a huge community out there that will support and understand what you a going through. I say that you should hop on out of that closet and into another, less restricted and less fearful life. If your family cannot accept you, fuck those fucking fucks!  And, who knows? Maybe they’ll come around one day.

In Love and Grace,

Sister Mary Motherfucker

Though the non-traditional program, Learning for Life, does not restrict participation other than by age, membership in the traditional BSA programs is more restricted and controversial. Girls can only join Venturing, though women can be adult volunteers in all programs. In 2004, the BSA adopted a new policy statement, including the following as a “Youth Leadership” policy: “Boy Scouts of America believes that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the obligations in the Scout Oath and Scout Law to be morally straight and clean in thought, word, and deed.” The conduct of youth members must be in compliance with the Scout Oath and Law, and membership in Boy Scouts of America is contingent upon the willingness to accept Scouting’s values and beliefs. Most boys join Scouting when they are 10 or 11 years old. As they continue in the program, all Scouts are expected to take leadership positions. In the unlikely event that an older boy were to hold himself out as homosexual, he would not be able to continue in a youth leadership position. BSALegal.org published these policies until February 2010, when it was removed from their website.

The BSA contends that these policies are essential in its mission in the traditional programs to instill in young people the values of the Scout Oath and Law. These policies have been legally challenged as unjust at the state and federal level. In Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, the Supreme Court affirmed that, as a private, expressive association, the BSA can set its own membership standards under the Constitutional right to freedom of association. However non-discrimination laws may prohibit some types of government support, and other lawsuits continue to be filed to determine what is and is not permitted or required.

Scout Oath, Law, Motto, Slogan, and The Outdoor Code

Main articles: Scout_Law#United States of America and Scout Promise#Boy Scouts of America

The Scout Oath for the BSA developed from the original version by Lord Baden-Powell, the main difference was that the second line stated that “I will do my duty to God and the King.” The Scout Law for the Boy Scouts of America was originally adopted in 1910. By 1911 it was adjusted to what it is today. The original version by Lord Baden-Powell had only 10 points to the Scout Law (the tenth and twelfth of the BSA version were added when the BSA was founded).

 Scout Oath

• On my honor, I will do my best
• To do my duty to God and my country;
• To obey the Scout Law;
• To help other people at all times;
• To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.

Scout Law

A Scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.

An Honest Scout Oath and Scout Law

In order to keep things honest, I’ve taken the liberty to amend the Scout Oath and Scout Law.

Honest Scout Oath:

• On my honor to adhere to Biblical discrimination, I will do my best
• To do my duty to a fictitious sky God and my country;
• To obey the Scout Laws of ignorance and discrimination;
• To help others at all times, as long as they believe what I believe;
• To stay heterosexual, mentally repressed and morally bankrupt

Honest Scout Law:

A Scout is white, christian, heterosexual, selectively friendly, obedient to its ignorance, discriminating, judgmental, and willfully ignorant

Judas

Portland, Oregon

Scientists have known for years that approximately eight percent of all male sheep, or rams, seek to have sex with other males exclusively. Until now, the scientific community was unable to explain why.

Dr. Ewe D’Amour of the Foundation for Animal Behavior Under Lewd Or Undesirable Standards, or “FABULOUS”, announced that research facility’s findings after a ten year study. The answer for this behavior in the rams: Choice.

“We considered the possibility of genetic predisposition to the behavior, but were unable to find evidence in support of the theory,” the FABULOUS Dr. D’Amour stated. “It was through years of surreptitious observation that we were able to learn the sordid truth.”

Dr. D’Amour went on to explain some of the details of his research, most of which is far too inappropriate to mention here (many hours were logged for undercover work involving the use of a ram costume and tens of gallons of lubricant). However, the FABULOUS team spoke of caves–dubbed “ram holes” by the researchers–where these wayward sheep would meet and congregate. A FABULOUS researcher also noted that some of these rams work as recruiters–what the FABULOUS team calls “ram-rods”–which seek to indoctrinate young rams into the lifestyle. Though the team of FABULOUS researchers could not identify how this behavior has been able to emerge in the ram community, they did note the apparent absence of a belief in the divinity and teachings of Jesus Christ.

The FABULOUS research has shocked many in the scientific community which has documented many cases of homosexual behavior in numerous species. The prevailing theory until now is that the behavior is natural and normal in the animal kingdom. And the controversey has only gotten more heated.

One of the most famous gay couples from the world of animals released a statement this morning refuting the FABULOUS report. Silo and Roy, two Chinstrap Penguins who have been in a committed and loving relationship with one another for more than a decade at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan, stated the following:

“Though we may never know what it is that has drawn us together, the suggestion that our lifestyle is somehow an immoral “choice” on our part is, in short (no offense to our species intended), simply ridiculous. And to imply that, as a result of our love for one another, we are leading immoral lives is both wrong and irresponsible. It is precisely this kind of bigotry that leads to hate crimes against gay penguins in zoos around the world.”

The Central Park Zoo would not comment on past bias attacks against the gay penguin couple, but anonymous sources in the zoo’s administration office noted that some of the incidents have gone well beyond mere taunts by penguins and other species. Allegedly, there was an instance in which one of the zoo’s polar bears distributed a particularly graphic and offensive leaflet amongst the exhibits. That bear’s computer privileges have since been suspended, The Garlic Press sources have confirmed.

In response to Silo and Roys statement, Dr. D’Amour answered just this: “I think our FABULOUS data speaks for itself.”

In an interesting development, The Garlic Press has learned that disgraced evangelist Ted Haggard is interetested in meeting with the gay rams. “It is my goal to assist these poor animals in their sin–I mean, to assist them to overcome it,” the reverend stated.

Upon hearing of his plight, a nearby Baptist church raised $400 for him, an act which so shocked Greene that he eventually converted and is now planning to become a pastor. According to a report in the Athens Times this action left Greene “flabbergasted that Christians would help atheists.” Apparently, for Greene, the fact that a few Christians donated a couple bucks is a better demonstration of the moral superiority of the Bible and it’s adherents than the $500 an atheist group also raised via a Chip-in account is a testament to the natural generosity of mankind.

Patrick Greene with his cat, Big Boy.

Actually, Greene has long been known by the Texas atheist community as a bit of a kook. Back in 2008, Greene got into an email argument with Ray Comfort over Comfort’s distributing a bumper sticker declaring April first “atheist day.” In his opening salvo he actually threatened to bring legal action against Comfort, “for telling people lies.” After this, he was made fun of by Matt Dillahunty on “The Atheist Experience” so he wrote the show demanding equal time. This episode ended up in Dillahunty planning a special episode of his show called “Atheists who got it wrong.”

Reports of Green’s conversion have given fodder to Christians, but only because they are viewing the story through a certain prism. As Greene expressed his gratitude to the Christians and hinted at his conversion, even more donations began to pour in so that now Greene has enough money to not only pay his doctor bills, but also to move out of his San Antonio apartment and into his wife’s “dream” mobile home. Moreover, Greene plans to write (and presumably sell) a book about his conversion with the no-true-Scotsman tile of, “The REAL Christians of Henderson County.”

Nonetheless, the story that Greene is planning to become a pastor is surprising. Less than two weeks before the story of Greene’s conversion and decision to become a pastor appeared, a story in the East Texas Tyler paper quoted Greene announcing that he planned to buy a star for the nativity he was no longer opposing. Said Greene, “I just hope that the Christians that weren’t a part of this contribution to us don’t mind that an atheist bought them a star.”

Greene has tried to assuage some of the doubts about his sudden conversion by insisting that he has always had questions about the fundamental differences between mankind and animals. According to an interview he gave the Christian Post, Green says the theory of evolution never answered his questions, so he just pushed them to the back of his mind.

So what are we left with? Well, we either have a genuine miracle, or we have a cab driver and attention whore who never quite understood what it was he didn’t believe who was forced to retire from his business with no insurance who found a new career in stroking the confirmation bias of a gullible audience. I leave it to the reader to decide which.