Category Archives: Deep Thoughts

I think…therefore I’m dangerous.

Toggling the Religion Switch

Posted on by
7

Hypocrisy and cafeteria-style belief systems.

Bible Quote
The way I read this is that you should stay humble and let God do the worrying. When God feels like it, He might make things better for you. Because He cares. Is that an accurate interpretation?

The other day, a friend of mine went into “Bible mode” on Facebook. He’s done this before, not long after I met him at a Meetup outing. I didn’t know him well back then and I just assumed he was a religious person. (Although I’m an atheist, most of my friends are believers in one form or another.) Then he broke up with his long-distance girlfriend and, six months later, was living with another woman in town. Bible mode ended abruptly. But it’s back now, and rumor has it that he’s engaged to yet another woman he met online and has seen in person only twice.

Whoa. (Honestly, I can’t make this shit up.)

“Bible mode,” in case you’re wondering, is my term for when a person starts posting social media updates that either quote the Bible or refer to Bible verses. I find it odd in general — almost as if they’re advertising their belief system — but have come to expect it of certain people, such as a young earth believer and a biblical scholar I know. It sort of makes sense for these people — who obviously hold deeply ingrained religious beliefs — to refer to the Bible in their daily life. But I find it extremely odd when it’s done by someone who normally seems to have little regard for the Bible, Ten Commandments, or the moral principles set forth in the Christian denomination he purportedly follows. You know: moral rules about things like adultery, sex before marriage, and lying.

Wikipedia defines hypocrisy as:

Hypocrisy is the claim or pretense of holding beliefs, feelings, standards, qualities, opinions, behaviors, virtues, motivations, or other characteristics that one does not actually hold. It is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one’s own expressed moral rules and principles.

The way I see it, if you pretend to be a devout, Bible-quoting Christian but have cheated on your wife or screwed women you aren’t married to, you are a hypocrite.

Unless, of course, you believe that Jesus died on the cross to save us from our sins and therefore you can commit as many sins as you like as long as you’re sorry for them. Jesus has you covered, right?

You know, the Christian “Get Out of Jail Free card.”

This particular person’s flicking of the religion switch bothers me a lot and I’ve given it a lot of thought. I’ve seen the pattern — he turns on Bible mode when he’s hanging around a certain group of people. I’m thinking that he’s toggling the religion switch to the ON position to better fit in with these people. You know — to show that he’s a card-carrying member of their club.

Whatever.

I think it’s a shame that people have to pretend to be someone they’re not just to maintain certain friendships. If you can’t be true to yourself, you can’t be true to anyone. Who wants to live a lie?

Of course, maybe he really has “gotten religion” again. And maybe he’ll keep it this time. Turn over a new leaf. Get married, stay faithful to his new wife, attend church weekly, raise more children, and study the Bible with his family. Maybe the verses he’s quoting from the Bible will actually guide his life. Maybe he’ll remember and hold sacred all ten of the Commandments. Maybe he’ll be a “good Christian,” who actually follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Or maybe he’ll be another example of a “cafeteria-style Christian.” You know: the kind who picks and chooses from church doctrine to live his life the way he wants, no matter what his church of choice says he should do. And figures that just going to church and quoting the Bible will give him enough creds to get into heaven.

Of course, I don’t understand why we need organized religion or a book full of parables to guide our lives. George Carlin said it succinctly when he boiled down the Ten Commandments to just two. Other people have summed it up with just one: “Don’t be a dick.” Anyone who understands the difference between right and wrong should be able to live a good, morally sound life without worries about violating some church doctrine or pissing off an all-knowing God. But that’s my belief. Apparently, it isn’t widely shared in this world.

But what I’d really like to see is an end to religious and moral hypocrisy and the hiding of a person’s real self behind Bible quotes. Because seriously: who do you really think you’re fooling?

On Having Low Expectations

Posted on by
4

For things I can’t control, anyway.

Within the past year, I came upon the realization that my expectations can determine my level of happiness. I’ve been giving this a lot of thought lately and thought I’d set down my conclusions here.

Maybe this is something that most people have already realized and I’m just slow to figure it out. (It wouldn’t be the first time I missed the forest for the trees.) But maybe not. And maybe — just maybe — the thoughts shared here might help you achieve more happiness in your life.

Expectations for Myself

Expectations Quote
I’d edit this to say “High expectations for yourself are the key to everything” or “High expectations are the key to everything.”

Throughout my life, I’ve always had high expectations for myself.

The way I see it, I’ve got two things going for me: my brains and my health. I’m white, which is helpful in today’s world, but I’m a woman, which is not — I figure that those two factors sort of cancel each other out. I’ve got a college education, but just a BBA degree — not an MBA or PhD or any sort of fancy accreditation that puts letters after my name. I come from a middle class family which is neither rich nor poor — although in the past 50+ years, I’ve experienced life on most points of the financial spectrum.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that I’ve got what it takes to succeed in life, but I don’t necessarily have anything going for me that would make it easy. I have to work — sometimes very hard — to succeed at the goals I set for myself.

Anyone who says they’ve never failed at something they’ve tried to do is either a liar or hasn’t tried to do anything difficult.

And I do — for the most part, anyway. I succeed at most things I try to do. Sometimes that success is tiny and not worth remembering; other times it’s surprisingly huge and it changes my life. It depends on what it is, of course, and how much of myself I throw into it.

To me, that’s what life is about: trying new things, setting goals, working to achieve them, moving on to the next thing.

I’ve been called a Renaissance woman by people impressed by my widely varied interests. And I’ve been called an overachiever by people jealous of my ability to do the things I’ve done.

This is who I am — this is what makes me. I don’t have kids or, at this point, a life partner to distract me from what I want to do. No one is cheering me on, but no one is holding me back, either.

I set high expectations for myself and I work hard to meet them. When I meet my expectations, I’m happy and move on. When I don’t meet them, I’m disappointed, but I either try harder or let it go and move on.

That’s me.

But this isn’t about expectations for myself. It’s about what I expect of others. Unfortunately, my expectations for myself play a major role in my expectations for others.

Expectations for Others

Because I set high expectations for myself, it made sense to set high expectations for others. After all, if I could do something I set out to do, shouldn’t others be able to do it, too?

In hindsight — which is always viewed with 20-20 vision — I realize now that I got it all wrong.

My earliest example of this was when I worked for the New York City Comptroller’s Office. At the age of 22 — I graduated from college at age 20 — I was a supervisor in the Bureau of Financial Audits with 13 people under me. Every single one of them was older — some old enough to be my mom or dad. When it came time to do employee evaluations, I used my high standards to evaluate my staff’s performance. I can’t remember how the scale worked, but it was likely 1-5 or something like that. I my mind, 5 is “perfect” or nearly so. And very few of my staff members met my idea of perfection in the various areas I had to score them on. So there were a lot of 3s and 4s but very few 5s. And, to my surprise — remember, I was only 22 — these people had a problem with their scores. One of them even went so far as to accuse me of trying to sabotage her career. I wasn’t. All I was trying to do was point out where improvement was possible.

But possible for who? Possible for me, certainly — after all, I had definite ideas of how I could do it better. But possible for the staff member? Maybe not. Maybe she was doing the absolute best she could do. Maybe it was my expectation of her capabilities that were wrong. Maybe it was my expectation of how the job should be done that was wrong.

Expectations reared their ugly head any time I had people working for me. I always expected people to do a task to my standards, whether those standards were based on quality, speed, or any other factor. Back in 2003-2004, I ran the fuel concession at Wickenburg Airport’s FBO. I had about ten people working for me. Yes, I expected my employees to arrive on time for work. Yes, I expected them to limit personal phone calls on the company phone during working hours. Yes, I expected them to know how to store a delivery of ice cream in a freezer without guidance. Yes, I expected them to do their jobs as defined, as I trained them to.

This is the reason I don’t have employees anymore. Dealing with them frustrates the hell out of me.

Expectations were definitely a contributing factor to the failure of my marriage. I expected my husband to do the things he said he was going to do. I expected him to achieve the goals he set for himself. I expected him to keep his promises to me, especially when those promises affected my life and work. I expected him to be honest and to communicate with me when he was unhappy. When he failed to meet my expectations, I was disappointed. When he failed over and over with most things I expected him to do, I became frustrated and annoyed. I didn’t enjoy my time with him and he apparently didn’t enjoy his time with me. Our marriage dragged on with bad feelings on both sides for a few years longer than it should have because I kept expecting things to get better when they simply got worse.

Low Expectations Prevent Disappointment

And that brings me to my realization: having low expectations for others prevents you from being disappointed.

Let’s look back at my airport FBO employee situation. Maybe I should have expected some employees to have trouble getting to work on time — even though they lived within 10 miles in a town with no rush hour traffic. Maybe I should have expected some employees to occasionally not show up for work at all without calling. Maybe I should have expected that some employees, when bored, will fill their time with lengthy phone calls to their spouses or kids. Maybe not everyone is smart enough to figure out that ice cream, when delivered, needs to go right into the freezer and that each bin in the freezer is set up for a specific type of ice cream so it can be put away orderly so customers can find it.

I expected my employees to be able to handle the job the way I handled it — after all, I did the same job, too. But was it fair to set my expectations of their performance as high as I set my expectations for my own performance?

Now let’s take this the next step.

Suppose I don’t expect an employee to show up on time. And sure enough, he shows up late. He has met my expectations. I’m satisfied.

And what happens when he shows up on time? Or early? He has exceeded my expectations. I’m thrilled.

Pretty simple example, huh? But you can see how this works. Just set low expectations for anything you don’t have control over. You’ll never be disappointed.

If you’re trying online dating, you need to read my take on online dating profiles. I promise you’ll get a good giggle.

Here’s an example of how I apply this in my life today. I’ve been playing around with online dating. And my apologies to friends who have managed to find a viable partner through this completely impersonal method of meeting people, but I have never seen a bigger collection of losers and liars in my life. Seriously. Half the guys look like they crawled out from under a rock and have to rely on selfies for profile photos, likely because they don’t have any friends. They describe themselves as “average” build and say they go to the gym regularly, yet their photos show an obvious couch potato with a beer belly. Most of the others are married or barely separated, shopping for some side action or their next caregiver.

Want some real examples? One guy claimed to be a pilot at the local airport; when we actually met, it turned out that he hadn’t flown in more than 15 years. Another guy claimed to be divorced, but was living in an unfurnished apartment and admitted that neither he nor his wife had filed for divorce yet. Another guy claimed he was single, then admitted that he was in a long term, long distance relationship and was exploring online dating as a “social experiment.” Another guy, when taken for a flight in my helicopter, lost his lunch. (I will never get the image of vomit on his mustache out of my mind. Needless to say, that didn’t go any further.) And this doesn’t even count the guys I’ve messaged with who haven’t been worth meeting.

Low ExpectationsI see how bad online dating is. And although some friends have made good matches this way, I don’t expect to. My expectations for online dating success are rock bottom low. In my eyes, it just isn’t going to happen. I’m so sure it’s a waste of time and money that I closed my online dating accounts.

Yet just before my Match account was closed up last week, I met not one but two possible matches. From their profiles, they look good — same interests, interesting backgrounds, right age range, not bad to look at. A person with high expectations might be very encouraged.

But I’m not. Although I hope to meet one or both of these men in person — we’re in touch via email and text right now — I don’t expect either one to be my next life partner. My expectations for success are low. So when things don’t work out, I’m not disappointed. I never expected them work out so the result has met my expectations.

What happens if one of them turns out to be someone I do want to spend time with? And the feeling is mutual? Well, then the match has exceeded my expectations. I’m pleasantly surprised.

And if one of them happens to become my next life partner? Well, then I’m thrilled!

Low ExpectationsApparently, I’m not the first person to realize this. I did say that I sometimes don’t see the forest for the trees, didn’t I?

Get it?

  • Low expectations = seldom disappointed, often pleasantly surprised, occasionally thrilled.
  • High expectations = often disappointed, seldom pleasantly surprised or thrilled.

I don’t know about you, but when something works out better than I expected, I’m happy. So it logically follows that low expectations can lead to happiness.

It Takes Effort

After almost a lifetime of having high expectations for myself and others, it’s not easy to set the bar lower. It takes a conscious effort. Sometimes, when things don’t work out the way I expected them to, I have to remind myself that I really shouldn’t have expected it to work out right. Over time, I’m getting better at it.

And I’m really seeing a difference in how it affects my overall level of satisfaction and happiness with life.

What do you think? How have expectations — high or low — affected you?

The Little Prince

Posted on by
15

A classic children’s book full of ageless wisdom.

The Little PrinceYesterday, I read The Little Prince a novella by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry. According to Wikipedia,

The novella is both the most-read and most-translated book in the French language, and was voted the best book of the 20th century in France. Translated into more than 250 languages and dialects (as well as braille), selling nearly two million copies annually with sales totaling over 140 million copies worldwide, it has become one of the best-selling books ever published.

Odd that I should live 53 years before managing to squeeze such a famous 98-page read into my busy schedule.

On the surface, this children’s book, which includes simple watercolor illustrations by the author, tells the story of an aviator who has crash-landed in the Sahara Desert. He’s working hard to repair his plane when he meets a small prince who has travelled to earth (and a few other places) from a tiny asteroid. What follows are stories from the little prince’s travels, each of which has an important message that isn’t just for children.

The Fox

Chapter XXI made the biggest impact on me. In that Chapter, the little prince meets a fox who explains to him, in the course of their conversation, the meaning of the word tame:

“It is an act too often neglected,” said the fox. “It means to establish ties.”

“‘To establish ties’?”

“Just that,” said the fox. “To me, you are still nothing more than a little boy who is just like a hundred thousand other little boys. And I have no need of you. And you, on your part, have no need of me. To you, I am nothing more than a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes. But if you tame me, then we shall need each other. To me, you will be unique in all the world. To you, I shall be unique in all the world…”

Later, the fox adds:

“My life is very monotonous,” the fox said. “I hunt chickens; men hunt me. All the chickens are just alike, and all the men are just alike. And, in consequence, I am a little bored. But if you tame me, it will be as if the sun came to shine on my life. I shall know the sound of a step that will be different from all the others. Other steps send me hurrying back underneath the ground. Yours will call me, like music, out of my burrow. And then look: you see the grain-fields down yonder? I do not eat bread. Wheat is of no use to me. The wheat fields have nothing to say to me. And that is sad. But you have hair that is the color of gold. Think how wonderful that will be when you have tamed me! The grain, which is also golden, will bring me back the thought of you. And I shall love to listen to the wind in the wheat…”

Can you think of a more beautiful way to describe the bond between two people who have come to love and depend upon each other?

There’s more to the story than that, but I’ll let you discover it on your own. I’ll just say this: the end of the story of the fox made me cry when I read it yesterday and it made me cry again today. There’s so much truth in the words. I’m filled with sadness at the knowledge that so few people understand this simple wisdom and how it applies in their lives.

You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed.

Matters of Consequence

Underlying most of the book is the idea of what’s really important in life. Saint-Exupéry refers to this as “matters of consequence.”

In the little prince’s travels, he meets a businessman who is busy counting and doing sums. He’s too busy to relight his cigarette and almost too busy to answer the prince’s questions between counting and adding. He tells the prince that he can’t stop, that he has so much to do, that he is concerned with matters of consequence. Those matters turn out to be counting the stars, which he has claimed ownership of, despite the fact that he’s not even sure, at first, what they’re called. The prince has questions about this:

“And what good does it do you to own the stars?”

“It does me the good of making me rich.”

“And what good does it do you to be rich?”

“It makes it possible for me to buy more stars, if any are discovered.”

Later, the prince asks the man what he does with the stars.

“I administer them,” replied the businessman. “I count them and recount them. It is difficult. But I am a man who is naturally interested in matters of consequence.”

The little prince was still not satisfied.

“If I owned a silk scarf,” he said, “I could put it around my neck and take it away with me. If I owned a flower, I could pluck that flower and take it away with me. But you cannot pluck the stars from heaven…”

“No. But I can put them in the bank.”

It’s that what it’s all about for too many people? Slaving their life away in pursuit of the almighty dollar, neglecting what’s really important in life? All so they can accumulate what they believe is wealth and keep it safe from others?

Later, the little prince is angry with the pilot because the pilot has failed to answer a question the prince thinks is important. He sums up his meeting with the businessman and what it means to him:

“I know a planet where there is a certain red-faced gentleman. He has never smelled a flower. He has never looked at a star. He has never loved any one. He has never done anything in his life but add up figures. And all day he says over and over, just like you: ‘I am busy with matters of consequence!’ And that makes him swell up with pride. But he is not a man — he is a mushroom!”

In my life, I’ve spent far too much time with mushrooms. Indeed, I think I was a mushroom for a time myself.

Read the Book

If you’re more interested in morals and philosophy than what’s on reality TV, celebrity gossip shows, or the business press, do yourself a favor and read the book.

Read it slowly and savor the lessons revealed in the little prince’s travels. I’m sure you’ll take away a lot more than what I’ve shared here — I know I did.

God is love? Why am I not seeing that?

Posted on by
18

And when will we ever have religious tolerance?

The other day, I read an article shared on Facebook by my friend Derek, an active member of the Skeptic community who is mostly known for his fight against the anti-vaccine movement. Although Derek has been sharing tons of articles about vaccines and the harm currently being done by the anti-vax movement these days — after all, measles is on the rise because of parents opting out of the MMR vaccine for their kids — this particular article was about the role of religion in child rearing. Titled “Godless Parents are Doing a Better Job,” it summarized information in an Los Angeles Times Op-Ed piece titled “How Secular Family Values Stack Up.” That, in turn, summarized the findings of several polls and studies.

Because so many people seem to think that atheists and non-believers in general — the so-called “nones” — are amoral and likely evil, it was good to see an article that confirmed my thoughts on the subject: that belief in a God has no bearing on a person’s morals. I shared the article on my Facebook timeline with the following description:

Takeaway quote: “Parents who raise their kids without religion are doing just fine, studies say, possibly even better. Overall, not believing in God seems to make people and their offspring more tolerant. Less racist. Less sexist. Enviro-friendly. And their kids care less about what’s cool, which—say it with me—only makes them cooler.” That last bit also makes them more practical and more likely to live within their means — something that has made a huge difference in my life and my ability to be and stay happy.

My post got a modest two “likes” and, more surprisingly, two “shares.” One of the shares was by my friend Barbara, who used the description:

An interesting article, sure to stir up lots of discussion. And I would love to know more about each individual study. For me, the take home is that a strong moral foundation, no matter what you call it, is the key to successful parenting.

Clearly, Barbara drew a similar conclusion to what I did, although she did hint at skepticism by saying she wanted to know more about the studies.

Sadly, Barbara’s Facebook friends weren’t quite as open-minded about the piece. Most of them latched on to the unfortunate lede of the article:

Hate to break it to you, Bible thumpers: Parents who raise their kids without religion are doing just fine, studies say, possibly even better.

Ouch. Apparently, believers don’t like the phrase “Bible thumpers.” Although the author was trying to be cute, all she (not he, as those who claimed to read the piece referred to her — I guess there are some men named Tracy, although their profile pics don’t usually show a woman holding a small child) managed to do was alienate anyone who dislikes that trite descriptor. I suspect that most stopped reading there, because their comments were more about the author’s bias than what came after that first sentence.

I see a lot of that. People who simply switch off their brains when they get to a word or phrase they don’t like. It makes it tough for writers to get what they want to say out if they have to worry about a choice of words offending a particular part of their audience.

(I suspect that the title of this post will have the same affect. How many people will comment without bothering to read it? Read the comments and figure it out for yourself.)

I attempted to comment about this from the point of view of a non-believer:

I agree totally with Barbara when she says that a strong moral foundation is necessary. But I do not believe that God or any religion is necessary for that moral foundation.

This particular website tends to present articles with a very definite slant — likely to fire up emotions and get hits — but if the conclusions presented here are backed up by real studies, the presentation tone is beside the point.

I also do not see how she is singling out Christians in any way. And doesn’t really make a difference that there are more people who believe in God than people who don’t? The “nones” are a growing segment of our society. When faced with the choice of a country run by politicians who want to insert religion instead of science in our schools, I’ll vote for a “none” any day.

I then took it a step farther:

As you’ve probably guessed from my comments, I am a non-believer. But I was raised as a Catholic including regular attendance at Sunday school until after Confirmation. Still, I don’t think I ever really believed that there was a higher power in control of the show down here on earth.

About those studies…

I’ve had time to do some searching. Here’s some reading material for those of you who think atheists are amoral. Educate yourself:

“Religion Doesn’t Make People More Moral, Study Finds,” livescience, September 2014.

“Atheists More Motivated by Compassion than the Faithful,” livescience, May 2014.

“Study Reveals Atheists Are MORE Compassionate And Generous Than Highly Religious People,” Addicting Info, May 2012

“Highly religious people are less motivated by compassion than are non-believers,” UC Berkeley Newscenter, April 2012.

“Atheists ‘just as ethical as churchgoers’,” The Telegraph, February 2010

Believers seem to think that without belief in a God to punish us for our “sins,” people will have no moral foundation for life. Studies have shown that this is not true. And no, unfortunately I cannot provide links to such studies at this moment. As a nonbeliever, I think it’s sad that people need to live in fear of punishment by God to simply do the right thing. I don’t need a list of Commandments to tell me what’s right or what’s wrong. It was not me, the atheist, who committed adultery – it was my believer husband who did so. It was not me, the atheist, who stole and misused funds given to me by people who trusted me – it was more than a few televangelists preaching the word of their God.

It’s the hypocrisy of believers — not all of them, I hope — that makes me angry. Yet I’m still very tolerant. As far as I’m concerned, people can believe whatever they want, as long as their beliefs do not harm others. Sadly, very few believers are tolerant of people like me who do not share their beliefs. Tell me: who’s on a higher moral ground?

I was ignored. The comments continued to revolve around the bias of the author, continuously referring to her as “he.” They were clearly made by people who had not bothered to read the entire piece or the piece it was based on. Instead, they took offense at “Bible thumper” and focused their angry comments on that.

Finally, I commented:

As usual, everyone misses the point.

And that’s when the attack turned on me. Someone said:

The point you’ve missed, Maria L, is that if you believe in God, it’s about love, not punishment.

It’s about love?

God is Love?

They Say God is LoveI remember “God is love” from Sunday school. In fact, it’s the only thing that sticks with me all these years later. I’d like to think that they tried to teach us more than that simple phrase, but, in all honesty, that’s all I remember. It’s almost as if it was pounded into our heads.

Heck, I don’t even remember any Bible stories being taught.

But even back then, “God is love” was meaningless to me. And as I sit here, I still can’t imagine what this is supposed to mean.

And if a belief in God is “about love,” then why do religious folks bring moral standards into the argument all the time? Why do they say atheists are amoral? Love and moral values are two different things.

Aren’t they?

Seems to me that the person who responded to my last comment was just regurgitating the same nonsense they pounded into our heads in Catholic Sunday school. It didn’t make sense to me then and it doesn’t make sense to me now.

In fact, given the history of the world, God seems to represent just the opposite: a reason to hate.

God and Hate

Try — if you can — to look objectively at the role of religion in current and past conflicts.

Nowadays, the big problem is terrorism by radicalized Muslims who believe that the world should be run according to strict adherence to Sharia Law. This set of laws is painfully outdated and ill-suited for today’s world. (Yes, that’s my opinion. Read the law objectively before you tell me you don’t agree.) Worse than that is the simple fact that since it is based on the Qur’an and Hadith — which have no bearing on non-Muslims — there’s no chance that it could ever be adopted by the entire world.

Yet there’s rampant hate, murder, and terrorist acts by these radicalized Muslims who claim that they are acting on the will of Allah — their name for God.

(Or is it a different God? I’ve never been able to figure that out.)

But it’s not just Muslims committing atrocities in the name of God. You don’t have to look back very far to see radicalized Christians bombing abortion clinics and killing doctors because of their beliefs. Heck, Wikipedia has a whole page dedicated to information about anti-abortion violence. Is this any different from Muslim terrorism?

And what about the Westboro Baptist Church‘s unsavory practice of picketing funerals — including the school children murdered at Sandy Hook Elementary School and those killed at the Boston Marathon bombing — to somehow protest gay rights. (Yeah, I don’t get the connection, either.)

You want some more information about Christians behaving badly? Check out Wikipedia’s Christian Terrorism page. (I didn’t even know there was such a thing until I started researching for this blog post.)

Hateful acts perpetrated in the name of God isn’t a recent thing, either. Look back in history and you’ll find the Salem Witch Trials, the Spanish Inquisition, and the Crusades. These are just three examples off the top of my head. I could spend all day searching for, reading about, and linking to other examples.

By why bother? I think I’ve made my point.

Non-Believers as Targets for Hate

I guess what bothers me most is how many people simply hate non-believers. I’m not sure why that is. If God is love, then surely that love should help believers tolerate the different viewpoints of others. After all, what is love?

Wikipedia defines love as:

Love is a variety of different feelings, states, and attitudes that ranges from interpersonal affection (“I love my mother”) to pleasure (“I loved that meal”). It can refer to an emotion of a strong attraction and personal attachment. It can also be a virtue representing human kindness, compassion, and affection—”the unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another”. It may also describe compassionate and affectionate actions towards other humans, one’s self or animals.

Yep, I added the emphasis.

If this is love and God is love then why are so many who claim to believe in God so full of hate?

Why can I, as a non-believer, have tolerance for religious belief systems when believers can’t have tolerance for mine?

Back to the Study Results

The article I should have linked to, the one without the offensive “Bible banger” phrase, is the one in the LA Times. If you haven’t read it, go do it now. It’s short and I promise it won’t offend you, no matter what you believe (or don’t believe).

It presents some conclusions that I find both confirming and reassuring. Because I know that most of you won’t bother to read it, I’ve shared a bit of it here:

For secular people, morality is predicated on one simple principle: empathetic reciprocity, widely known as the Golden Rule. Treating other people as you would like to be treated. It is an ancient, universal ethical imperative. And it requires no supernatural beliefs. As one atheist mom who wanted to be identified only as Debbie told me: “The way we teach them what is right and what is wrong is by trying to instill a sense of empathy … how other people feel. You know, just trying to give them that sense of what it’s like to be on the other end of their actions. And I don’t see any need for God in that. …

“If your morality is all tied in with God,” she continued, “what if you at some point start to question the existence of God? Does that mean your moral sense suddenly crumbles? The way we are teaching our children … no matter what they choose to believe later in life, even if they become religious or whatever, they are still going to have that system.”

The results of such secular child-rearing are encouraging. Studies have found that secular teenagers are far less likely to care what the “cool kids” think, or express a need to fit in with them, than their religious peers. When these teens mature into “godless” adults, they exhibit less racism than their religious counterparts, according to a 2010 Duke University study. Many psychological studies show that secular grownups tend to be less vengeful, less nationalistic, less militaristic, less authoritarian and more tolerant, on average, than religious adults.

Aren’t those all good qualities we want in our children and adults?

And look, Ma, no God!

Comments

Go to it. I know you have something to say.

I suspect this post will make the rounds of the religious websites, which will use it to show how evil atheists are. Whatever. It’s the same old, same old to me. I’ll just let those comments stand as they come in. I’m sure a good percentage of them will reinforce the truth of what I’ve written here.

I could remind commenters to read the entire post before commenting but most people can’t be bothered. The kinds of commenters who have nasty, hateful things to say don’t have time to actually read what they’re commenting on. They have lots of other sites to visit to spread their hate. It’s more efficient for them to zero in on a post title or sentence or phrase and comment on that.

But I also welcome comments by others who agree with what I’ve said — especially from those who can help me understand why this problem exists and what we can do about it — without pretending to believe something we don’t.

Dear Elizabeth

Posted on by
3

A letter to a former friend.

Dear Elizabeth,

Rooibos TeaAs amazing as this might seem, I’ve been thinking a lot about you this winter.

It started when I found an old box of rooibos chai tea in my pantry. You might not recall this, but you introduced me to red tea years and years ago at your Howard Mesa home. I bought a box and drank it often at home. Somehow, it got shifted to my RV and brought up to Washington. The box “expired” in 2009 — giving you an idea of just how old it was! — but the tea still tastes fine.

Each time I have a cup of that tea, I think of you. I think of your wonderful little home on the Mesa. The wood burning stove. The views. Your work-in-progress illustrated book about the local plants. The cats. I think of dinners there and the few times you came to our pitiful — but much loved, at least on my part — cabin a few miles away and let us cook for you and Matt.

I think of the old days, when things were still good between all of us.

I really liked you. I thought you were a good, well-grounded, happy person. I was happy that you’d become a part of your daughter’s life. You always made me feel welcome at your home. You made me feel like a friend.

So imagine my disappointment when I wrote to you in September 2012 to tell you about my ex-husband’s infidelity and warn you that some men, when left alone, will find companionship other than their wives. I never expected you to forward that email to Matt. I never expected it to be forwarded to my estranged husband with the complaint from Matt that I was trying to destroy his marriage.

I didn’t bother you again after that.

Or, actually, I did. As I was driving away from Howard Mesa that last time in April or May 2013, I tried to call you on the phone. It rang and rang. I wondered if you knew it was me and were purposely letting it ring. I don’t recall if I left a message. It doesn’t matter. You never called back.

At that point, I knew that any friendship we might have had was over. And I began to doubt whether you’d been my friend at all.

Fast forward to today.

A mutual friend — someone you might not even know personally — told me that you and Matt had split and that Matt had remarried very soon after the divorce.

All I can say is wow.

I’m left to wonder whether he already had a replacement for you when he complained to my future ex-husband about me trying to destroy your marriage. Or whether you finally wised up and dumped the man who’s likely responsible for some of the seriously bad advice my future ex-husband received during his costly and futile attempts to steal my business assets.

It doesn’t matter to me. Water under the bridge.

I called you today to chat. A little about this, and a little about what I want to finish up with:

I still think you’re a fine person. You have a good heart, you’re smart, you’re attractive, and you’re relatively young. I’m sure you’ll have no trouble finding a much better replacement for the man you left behind — if you even want one. Maybe you’ve already replaced him.

No matter what happens to you in this life, please know that I’ll always wish the best for you. Also know that if you ever need someone to talk to, my phone number is the same and I’ll do my best to answer or return calls from you. My door is always open for you, too.

If I never hear from you again, that’s fine, too. There’s just one tea bag left in the box. When it’s gone, I won’t be buying another box. The chapter of my life that included you and your rooibos tea will finally be closed for good.

Your friend,
Maria

—

February 8 Update: Well, as more facts about your breakup come to light, I now fully understand why you never got in touch with me again. Was it shame? I doubt it. Women like you don’t feel shame. No matter. I’m embarrassed to admit how much I misjudged your character. You’re just as low as the demented old whore who snagged my wasband with her sweet-talk, lies, and lingerie photos.

But I am glad that Matt was on the receiving end. He deserves whatever shit he gets.

Still, don’t marriage vows mean anything to anyone these days?

I’ll never understand why you forwarded my email message to him. But don’t worry; I haven’t lost any sleep over that and don’t think I ever will.

As for that invitation to call or stop by — you can just forget about it. And I’ll toss that last tea bag. I’m eager to close the chapter on you as soon as possible.