Should these men get to tell you what's right and wrong?

*Note- I toned this post down a little when I rehosted blog photos in 2026.*

(Link to article from which I got the picture)

Bush says he wants to honor the Pope's conviction that, “...there’s right and wrong in life, that moral relativism has a danger of undermining the capacity to have more hopeful and free societies.”

Hmm... let's think about that. Yeah, there's right and wrong, but who says the Pope knows best what they are?

Figuring out what's right and wrong takes careful thinking and discussion about the happiness, suffering, and other possible consequences of an action. Maybe the pope does that. But it seems more like he cherrypicks his definitions of right and wrong out of a self-contradictory body of ancient literature that purports to be revelations from a supernatural being.

So I think that "morals grounded in faith" really means something more like, "arbitrary rules based on personal bias and ancient superstition". Popes, prophets, and presidents might imagine that they have a magic moral guide, but really, common sense and rational ethics are all that any of them, or we, have ever had to decide what's right and wrong.

Don't let them take those things away from you.

It's okay to be A

**WARNING- This post was written in 2008. My views have evolved a little and I would now call myself a skeptical-but-spiritually-open agnostic as opposed to a pure atheist**

*Begin Original Post*

The fact that the majority of people in the world believe, without evidence or critical analysis, in some very unlikely things, has me worried. Most say that (religious) faith is a always a virtue, but I think it can sometimes be a liability.

So, with apologies to conservative friends and relatives, and some trepidation about over-sharing personal information on the Internet, I've decided to come out as an atheist. Unfortunately, this makes me an official member of the most distrusted minority in America. Yet by coming out I may change, in some small way, the negative attitude against atheists, if only by showing that we don't all have horns and tails.

Anyway, if you've got some time and a curious mind, check out this British documentary "The Root of All Evil" on the dangers of taking religion too seriously. It's hosted by biologist Richard Dawkins, author of "The God Delusion" and "The Selfish Gene" (both excellent books). Dawkins can be arrogant on camera; he is definitely not as lovable as Carl Sagan or David Attenborough, but he does pretty well for a scientist. The videos are too long to watch at work so you better wait until you get home and get cozy.

Blasphemous Bears

America was appalled when Sudanese extremists called for the death of a teacher who had allowed a teddy bear to be named “Mohammed”. We rightly noted that their murderous intentions were a horrific overreaction to what was, at most, a trivial gaffe.

If there was a general lesson to be learned from that ridiculous episode it was, “You shouldn’t freak out over any little thing that you can construe as an insult to your religion.” But obviously many Americans missed that broader lesson, because now WE are freaking out over silly bears; the ones in the new fantasy movie, “The Golden Compass”.



It’s not the bears, per se, that have people boycotting the film. It’s the fact that the movie is based on a book by an atheist author, and the plot pits the good guys against a big, bad religion.

Ok. First of all, who cares if the author is an atheist? Watching something written by an atheist won’t make you an atheist if you don't want to be an atheist. Second of all, the movie doesn’t imply that religion itself is bad, just that oppressive, corrupt, state-sponsored religion is bad. Do the people who are making a big show of being offended by the film actually think that oppressive, corrupt, state-sponsored religion is GOOD? I doubt it. So if you ask me, they should lay off the movie, and get to work making sure their own religions don’t become oppressive, corrupt, and state-sponsored.

Grrr…