I have a million and a half pictures, I’m just not home yet - so I’ll do a photo post later. Usually after a speaker comes here I like to rip into them a bit to say what I didn’t like about their talk. Hemant Mehta [I Sold My Soul On eBay] did his talk here in Toronto on Friday so I guess its his turn, oui? So, what didn’t I like?

• there weren’t enough people there to hear what he had to say…Justin counted around 60 people in attendance, I don’t think this was nearly enough - although I should add that 1) its the summer, so no one is on campus, 2) its the long weekend so many people are at their cottage and 3) its pride weekend… no one can compete with pride. Suffice to say the next time we get him here it will be during the school year.
• he didn’t give me credit for stealing at least 89% of my view points out of my brain on atheism and theism
• he didn’t do the talk topless
• the “what about the physical lord our god, Jesus Christ?” lady
• there weren’t more questions
• … that’s about it

If you haven’t gotten it yet - I really liked his talk. I had absolutely no disagreement with him, I loved his delivery, there was a great crowd, it was super funny and he’s an awesome guy. The director of the multi-faith centre wants to bring him back in the school year, and the York group wants to steal him at the same time to do a talk in the North end too. Its already been deemed by many as one of the best talks we’ve have… because he was just really interesting, and his delivery was super entertaining.

Anyway, more on this weekend later/when I get home! It was a fabulous weekend.

A lot of the feedback I’ve been getting has been on Dawkins. I’m sure the Dawkins that I know is a LOT different than the Dawkins that say - PZ knows. because i dont *know* dawkins - what I know about him is what i’ve read and what i’ve seen. So until I see differently, it is what I believe - and that is the very bottom line of everything in my life, really. So here’s the downlow.

• I didn’t like the Root of all Evil. I thought it was a fair representation of a certain percentage of christians. I could do the exact same interview with every Christian I know and get a completely different outcome than what Dawkins got with Ted. Yeah - Ted is an asshole. And yes - his push to teach kids anti-science and to push religion on everyone is absolutely what I’m against. That doesn’t make me like Dawkins anymore.
• He’s pretty smug and arrogant. Or at least he comes off that way, and I honestly don’t like listening to people who think they’re all “woo me!” … Some people are saying that’s how I come off - meh … so be it. If you met me in person or heard me talk you’d realize I’m really just an outspoken kid who happens to have a blog.
• I’ve read his books, I love The Selfish Gene, I really do. I also loved the Extended Phenotype. The Blind Watchmaker - I was a little less hot on. The God Delusion, I didn’t like what-so-ever. I 100% stand behind his criticism on creationism. I do not - however - agree that you can not be rational AND religious. He has been quoted as saying “Let’s stop being so damn respectful”… I can’t stop being respectful.
• this is the one that is going to get me beated … I think a lot of my dislike stems from his obvious complete lack of understanding of being religious. Moran has at least stated that he doesn’t have such a firm grasp on spirituality, and I strongly respect that … if you can admit that you don’t know, it’s a lot better than just pretending that it wouldn’t be helpful to know. And yes, you can say “do you have to understand fairies to know they’re crap!?” … No, but MILLIONS of people don’t find inner peace, don’t cope with death, don’t shape their lives around… etc… fairies.

now … dawkins et al have certainly put out a foundation for us to work up on. And yes, I have no problem standing on the shoulder of these giants and taking advantage of the platform they’ve created for us. I have no problem doing that, while saying that I disagree with them. The one thing I’ve always liked about being released free from religion is that now I have the freedom to disagree. I have the freedom to have an opinion that doesn’t have to follow any sort of rule. I absolutely HATE that I wrote a piece and was then ripped apart by the people who I thought were all for thinking critically and seeing the other side of things.

I sat down with my step dad this morning and he spouted a lot of stuff that I disagreed with, and we talked about it. We talked about what happens after death, the definition of god and what role faith has in someone’s life. The important thing was that we had a discussion, and at the end of it had a better understand of where the other is coming from.

Anyway. That’s my take on Dawkins slightly more explained. I know people fall to his feet and love what he does… I love what I do, and would rather have myself as an example for people than Dawkins. I’ve managed to find a balance between fighting for secular politics and life - while still maintaining respect, discussion and friendships with theists. I’ve managed to become the president of my student group, vice president of a secular canadian charity and do a TON of secular multi-media projects across Canada… all done while never letting it get to my head, never telling a theist they were stupid but still stood firm on issues like politics and religion staying separate.

You don’t have to be loud and proud to be effective.

I’m sorry that I talk about Hemant so much - but I really only have time to read like 3 blogs, and his happens to be the one where all the interesting stuff happens. …He has a new girl blogging on his site - Lindsay Fay. She’s really funny, young (around my age), really pretty and a member of the mormon church.

When I first heard about Lindsay going to blog on Hemant’s site I was actually pretty excited - because I like to learn about new religions and talk to people about their religions.

However, some people at the humble abode of Hemant haven’t been so responsive to the newcomer.

RobL says:
Decided at 14 that it was total mind bending nonsense and have been atheist ever since. Joseph Smith was just a skilled con artist who duped all his naïve followers. Thanks for bringing back all the things I spent years trying to forget…

kamod says:
First of all most us know about Mormonism.. Yes it does involve in believing loads of things. But this post has done it finally, I agree with being friendlyatheist and all that shit. But I can’t read this blog anymore.. Well done Hemant. Good going.

Darryl says:

I know everything I need to know about Mormonism. It’s the product of one of the most obvious cons in religious history. The only aspect of it that’s worth study is its sociological meaning. I never cease to be amazed that otherwise intelligent and educated people can actually believe this stuff. Ah, the power of the imagination.

Escualidus Arrechus says:
I have to agree with kamod, actually, minus all the profanity.

Hemant has worked himself into an interesting corner. I don’t really care that these guys can’t just STFU and skip over stuff they don’t want to read but it all raised some interesting thoughts.

The easiest way to run an atheist blog is to post things that mock religion - because that’s what a lot of people read. I’ll even admit that I like looking at that sort of stuff. And really - thats a lot of what Hemant had gotten into posting. There has also been a lot of really good recent material on atheist groups and the evolving that they’re doing. But still - a lot of that stereotypical mocking religion stuff - and the crowd that’s reading played it up even more.

The comments were probably the biggest hazing ground for the religions that were brought up in the post.

So then Hemant introduces a religious person. Not only a religious person - a mormon. Once my grandma said to me [my sister is dating a guy from Utah] “Oh, lets just hope he’s not one of those crazy mormons” and she’s been a devote christian her whole life. Most people know Mormonism is a little strange. But that’s the new very part time face of the Friendly Atheist site.

How are people supposed to react to that? A lot of us who are now atheists used to be something else… United, Baptist, Anglican, Mormon, Catholic, Hindu… whatever… After that gigantic flip in our lives we’ve had to search for somewhere else to fit in. Find new connections, new places to go read and new people to talk to. So for me personally - I was waiting for those comments to come into Hemant’s blog.

It’s not that these people who are commenting are totally intolerant of religion - but they had found a domain to get information and people who shared a common lifestyle and common ideas. To throw a Mormon into the mix to write about her Mormonism and to teach us all about Mormonism just had “bad news” written all over it.

I know that Hemant wants to open up dialogue with religious people, but I don’t think inviting a Mormon to come into the atheist’s cave to talk about her Mormonism and teach us all about the rules and practices of Mormonism is the smartest way to go about doing that. Most of us left religion because it was a horrible experience in our lives. We didn’t like it, we felt that it was brainwashing, it was irrational… etc. Very *very* few people are like me… who left religion, but still wants to research religions, talk about faith, explore other people’s faith and get into their minds. Most just want religion to eff off, and don’t want to have to deal with it again.

On Friday CFI held an event with the producer of the Agenda, Wodek Szemberg, on the topic of why we see so few atheists in the media. I *really* wanted to go - but again the whole sick thing got in the way.

I heard feedback about the event that wasn’t so hot, on point in particular stuck out to me where one of the members of our group said he was ignoring/disregarding scientific fact. As someone who has spent the last few years fighting for rationality and science that tickled me wrong. However - when I dug for more info the “truth” of the matter came out.

Some people in the crowd were getting angry because the speaker wasn’t feeling sorry for atheists. Because he was telling it like it is. He claimed that all shows that are free of God and religion, are essentially secular - like a sporting game.

Now I can see why people would get angry about this. Because when they think “secular television” they think TV that is actually catering to their… “movement” or whatever. They are thinking a show ABOUT atheism/secular humanism like the Skeptologist or Point of Inquiry. They’re shows made my skeptics/atheists/humanists to cater to that crowd about issues they deem important.

… People want to see atheist propaganda - and simply secular television isn’t good enough for them. Ah ha. But I see where the confusion is coming in for people.

People want to see loud and proud atheists on TV shouting “WOO DAWKINS!” or talking about how awesome science is. Having a secular program, just isn’t good enough for them. An important point that was made is that they weren’t feeling like the victims anymore - and that wasn’t good. Because if we’re not the victims, how can we make everyone feel sorry for us?

Simply put, I feel bad that this guy took flak from the audience for telling the truth. The fact of the matter is - the proposals that are put in to make secularist television shows are SO lame and cheesy. It’s difficult to create a television show surrounding a movement. There aren’t really that many environmentalist television shows, or feminists television shows. There are shows with feminists on them, there are also shows that are written and directed and produced entirely by women - but the theme isn’t always feminism. That doesn’t make it a non-feminist show.

If there was an “atheist” show on television, I likely wouldn’t watch it. Just like I don’t read many blogs that are loud and proud about atheism 24/7. The one statement that really got me worked up was this by Rod “He sure doesn’t sound like an atheist.”

Why? because he didn’t tell you what you wanted to hear? because he didn’t make it seem like the media was giving atheists a spanking? because he didn’t start spouting anti-religious propaganda? Ask me about my views on religion - I don’t sound like your everyday Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris atheists. I can assure you of that. To say that someone “doesn’t sound like an atheist” because they didn’t tell you that the people in your movement are being victimized is pure crap.

I really wish I would have gone to that talk. I think the speaker was spot on, and deserved much more credit and appreciation than what he was shown.

*UPDATE*

Zak has a blog. I think I knew it existed a long time ago, but couldn’t find it again. Anyway, he does write ups about CFI stuff - and I like them because he a) doesn’t sugar coat things and b) usually formulates some of my thoughts into sentences that I usually don’t know how to formulate. His sum-up of the event:

Overall, the evening was a refreshing look into atheist activism in Canada. I now realize that about half the visitors at CFI events are morons who have more in common with the religions they claim to oppose than the freedom of thought and ideas that CFI is suppose to really be about. However, the question period that followed was long (as was expected) but the questions were generally polite and supportive since the rude and crazy people made themselves heard throughout the presentation and, I suppose, couldn’t think of any new ways to rant. More importantly, the activists in the crowd (the ones who actually do things) were generally supportive of the message being presented so I hope we can use the opportunity to start working towards more productive and realistic goals.

Amen.

*update #2*

So… I had to take all the quotes out from the e-mails, it’s hard to gain the same message from the post, but alas… gotta do. Everyone who has been reading my blog for a while knows I hate more than anything on earth taking stuff off of my blog - especially when it’s been there for more than a few days and has gotten a lot of reads. I remember when the christian camp asked me to take stuff down it nearly went as far as court.

I think the last time I willingly took content down from my site is when a friend of mine was arrested for manslaughter… after I posted the stuff, I decided I didn’t want it up.

However. …I … whatever.

I’m running out of energy to keep blogging. I get in trouble too much.

Imagine a pope or a prophet was androgynous. What if Jesus comes back with boobs!?

An Egyptian pharaoh was… I find it interesting that a pharaoh was androgynous, but if any sort of authority figure was in this day in age, that is supposed to be more progressive, people would be totally pissed. I guess I dont know if Egyptians were totally pissed or not.. Anyway, it’s interesting. heh.

The pharaoh’s feminine mystique was the result of a genetic mutation that caused his body to convert more male hormones to female hormones than needed, Dr. Irwin Braverman believes.

“[He had] an androgynous appearance. He had a female physique with wide hips and breasts, but he was male and he was fertile and he had six daughters,” Braverman said.

It’s so cool what we can find out about ancient people… Science is neat.

(While looking for a head of jesus I found this picture called “jesus laughing” and it’s actually kind of scary.)