Unnecessary Gods

I started a conversation with some Twitter participants yesterday with the comment that: Theists work diligently to define away a god’s omnipotence.   I may address this in a later blog with more detail.  This in turn led to a dialog regarding a statement that I raised regarding gods and religions being unnecessary, continuing on; also indicating that religious actions and resources collected by religious sects are also wasteful and misdirected. 

I was then asked the question, what is necessary?     My response was to indicate that the basic human needs are met (using Maslow’s hierarchy of needs) – there is really no need for humanity to neither accept nor embrace any religion.  Prayer has no effect on outcomes and is unnecessary.

I think there was some misunderstanding of the shape.  The shape of the hierarchy is a pyramid defined from the bottom up.  The bottom being the basis, or the foundation of human need being; Food, Water, Shelter, Sex - once those needs are met that can be built upon and establish the development of Safety and Security and the process goes on.  Maslow indicated that if primary needs are not met you will have difficulty, if not impossible, to get the higher order needs met.  This makes the persons who are lesser educated and in poverty highly vulnerable to cults, religions, and other con artists who work to obtain power and influence.

Religions were first formed for the need of making sense of the things that we as humans did not or could not understand.   Earth was a scary and unsafe place.  Religious/cultural leaders encouraged investment in an imaginary deity and huddling together sharing food, shelter, and meeting each other’s needs.  This was reinforcing the behavior of all parties and survival was enhanced.   As humanity becomes more informed and understands the dynamics of the space where we live, the need for religion to provide; Food, Warmth and Safety and Security are no longer necessary.   Many religions continue to use these as leveraging tools to keep their flocks attending or maintaining their commitment by controlling getting their parishioners needs met.

Given an entity (religion, church, or cult) is so influential as to use primary needs to control the actions of others; use of food, safety and security to elicit compliance to the dogma or tradition seems manipulative, unnecessary and bordering on criminal.    It is unneeded.  An argument that morals are delivered via religion is fallacious argument, morality is established by empathy and social reciprocity.  Religious morality is artificial and static imposed by sly hucksters.

Humanity will continue to exist without religion.  It becomes extremely wasteful of religions to construct building so that people can sit and listen to well-paid con men/women to convince them that the only way to survive death is to continue to come back and give them money, time and prayer.  If all that time, money and thought was invested in the development of a cure for some diseases or disabilities there would be far less suffering in the world.

Religion meets the needs of some persons.  Atheists (this atheist) do not need religion to feel safe and to have a productive life.  Defined: Atheism – A lack of belief, or faith in gods or deities.   It is not a religion.  There is no belief structure, commitment to any authority, and any exchange of funds or resources is typically done as an act of kindness and not a tithing to any deity or representative.  To define it as a religion is a projection of cognitive dissonance.

I am not my atheism.  I worship no man, deity, and do not waste my time praying or sitting in a church listening to someone lecture me on outdated, stagnant, and festering morality.

God's Plan - Pathetic Excuse

I recently had an exchange with set of twitter users that indicated that all the death and suffering currently being imposed by religious extremists in the Middle East is all part of a plan imposed/implemented by god.  They openly admitted that they are comfortable with this plan.  This plan contains everyone who is murdered or tortured by the Islamic fundamentalists.  All of this is based on some perverse love of Bronze Age ideology

One of these persons used the martyrdom term and prayer to cover for their rationalization of the horrors committed in the name of a god.  They will pray for those persons beheaded or slain in a bathroom because they did not meet the standard of the persons using god’s law to cleanse the earth of kafirs.  It is atrocious to think that prayer or doing nothing but thinking about god’s plan, will actually help anyone or anything change for the betterment of humanity.

What becomes evident quickly is that there are victims/cowards identified and barbarians/murderers and those who believe in any god will comfortably slip between roles because they are championing gods great plan.    Congratulations you have equated the phrase, it was part of gods plan to  - Allah akbar.  

The use of the term, gods plan, is an excuse to murder, torture, or marginalize humanity or is a way to watch from a safe distance and do nothing.

For those who do not speak up or act up to change the outcome of your own future hiding behind a plan from an imaginary sky daddy are actually worse than those who commit the atrocities.  You had the ability to act and you failed.   You are cowardly little shits and deserve the guilt you feel.    Unfortunately it is likely you feel no guilt for these people, their families, or the persons who watched these horrific events. 

Until you realize that guilt, sadness, fear, and anger are signals that something must change you are destine for a horrific outcome.

I am an atheist and do not support nor understand your twisted sense of reality.  I support humanity hoping that it will shed the need for a religious construct to feel better about the way we treat each other.  Facts are facts humans are animals, religion does not elevate us from that fact.  Some of these animals are so profoundly damaged by religious zealotry that that they cannot see belonging to a religion does not keep you safe it imperils your existence.

Religion poisons everything and will eventually destroy humanity.  I will work diligently to conversationally neuter any person or entity that supports this pathological perspective.  

Abrahamic Theism Is A Death Cult

I have seen frequently in the exchanges between theists and atheists the claim that atheists/atheism has killed more people and is responsible for more of the world’s tragic human events.  This would be the one fallacy that the theists cling to for comfort when the facts point to the contrary.  Theism – Abrahamic sects [Christianity, Islam, and Judaism] are in fact the most prolific death cults on the planet.

Let’s start with the Christian claim the Pol Pot, Chairman Mao, Hitler (actually Catholic), and Stalin being ‘atheists’, killed millions of people.  There is no question that these persons did horrible things and worked to eliminate persons who did not conform to their perceived ideology.  

I cannot find in any document that these pariahs used atheism to further their causes.  No evidence exists indicating that these populations were put to death due to their failure to participate in atheism.  Unless – you put on your biblical glasses (thanks Ken Ham) – then you can lie for Jesus all you desire to support your position and attract new followers.

When asked for evidence to support validity of this claim; the debate tends to devolve into accusatory statements and spraying hostility to deflect from the fact there is no direct evidence to support the position.  I have yet to have a Christian produce ANY clear evidence that the persons mentioned are acting on behalf of ‘Atheism’ to rid the world of non-participants in atheism.  North Korea is not a good example… the practitioners believe that their leader(s) are gods and it appears that atheism is not a good way of describing the necrocracy in that country.

Challenge: Theist please provide a clearly defined case of an atheist, leader or singular atheist who has advocated and acted on the presumption that atheism prescribe(s) death to those who do not follow the established dogma and ideology.

Actions of theists: - Especially ~ those of the Abrahamic sects, toward those who are not of the same faith paint a far different story.  The Christian, Islamic and Jewish operator’s manual (Bible, Koran [Quran] and Torah) have clearly defined actions to be performed by the believer on the non-believer… Death.  They also describe very horrible ways of dispatching non-believers.  This accomplishes three things:

1.       Affords the opportunity for the punisher (killer) to experience a euphoric event of taking the life of another person, sense of complete control.

2.       Inflicts horrible pain and suffering on the person being killed.  Usually in a humiliating way.  (cutting off your head, burned at a stake, throwing stones, shot in the head) whilst saying, “Allah -Ackbar”, “May Jesus have mercy on your soul.”

3.       Clearly advertises: Join us, and follow our dogma, or we will kill you – in a horrific fashion – in front of your friends and family.

Theism is a Cult of Death, and the practitioners are fully aware of this fact; but work hard to deceive themselves, conscript others given; the promise of eternal life in paradise, 72 virgins, and the Promised Land of milk and honey.  This being an “Army of god.”   Christians, Islamic fundamentalists... embrace genocide - In Africa, Christians/Muslims are working diligently to kill off the homosexual population:

History has presented, a well-documented, long and growing list of atrocities associated directly with the belief in a god(s).  Projecting these events onto atheism to escape the guilt and culpability is pure spinelessness and using your indoctrination to protect your fragile psyche.

Abrahamic Religions are barbaric and abhorrent cults with the emphasis on inclusion of the feeble minded and imposition of a horrific death of those who should be excluded for any dogmatic reason.  Mormons are included in this ever increasing cesspool of human detritus.

Theists:  Please be aware that your words, dogma, and actions do not match: this is a sign that either you are profoundly mentally ill or so intensely brainwashed that it would be in your best interest to seek help.  I am willing to fight you to the death to prevent your dogma from retarding humanity back to the dark ages.  Self introspection is highly recommended.....  You have pledged your allegiance to one (or more) of these sects. Think about it.

I Am Not My Atheism

Many persons take their religion so profoundly personal that when an atheist expresses something perceived as hateful or disrespectful the observation is that the attack is an individual one.  Nothing should be considered personal from a disrespectful attack on religion (any religion). 

Please keep in mind that if a practitioner of said religion is so enmeshed in the dogma, tradition, and belief structure they have difficulty separating where the religion ends and person begins there are internal issues of identity. 

I am not my atheism.  My atheism does not dictate my actions for me.  My current assessment of reality is that there is not enough, nor there is any credible evidence to support my belief in the existence of any god.  This does not discount my respect for any person that expresses an interest or belief structure that is invested in the existence of a god or gods.    My actions are never taken to directly insult nor infer insult to a person unless their actions have manifested a direct attack on me personally.

I have respect for the great majority of users on the internet.  Very few have gone out of their way to personally attack me or my lack of beliefs.  That is greatly appreciated.  I have also had a great deal of constructive conversations with persons who have had differing perceptions and beliefs.

Stated clearly and succinctly I have no respect for religion, all religions are in the same dubious pool.   My life experiences with three different sects of Christianity have given me nothing but a lifetime of broken promises, false hopes, and wasted prayers.   I do not hold any one person, or group of persons, responsible for this circumstance.   The blame lies squarely on the oversight and implementation of dogma, tradition, and edicts lay down by the authority of the religion. This is typically in a written form and known as holy scripture.

In my life (any and all) religion is function-less and devoid of any meaning.  It operates like a business to collect funds and then hides all its misconduct behind the idea that it must be respected because of its legal status as a religion.  It leaves a horrible feeling of mistrust in all of my dealings.

There are many in the community who work diligently to attack me and my secular friends for our lack of any belief.  There have been many who have stood upon their pulpit of love and acceptance to fabricate stories about persons who do not fit the religious standards casting us into hell and ‘rebuking’ us in the name of Jesus.    This two-faced and cowardly approach to dialog does not inspire confidence fostering a relationship between the secular (atheist) and the religious persons.  These double standards and unfair expectations of respect based on title and religion are irrelevant.  A religious practitioner should never expect anything more than respect from one human to another and no additional privilege or respect based on religious affiliation.

Atheists free from the threats locally will turn the internet to seek out persons of the same perception persuasion.  Doing this locally causes extreme reactions from religions for reasons that are veiled in ritual and dogma.  We are human and have feelings also.  We deeply love our families and have positive and lasting relationships with many people.  And we react strongly when we feel that we have been treated unfairly or in a fashion that is demeaning to us as human beings.

I advocate for atheism.  I operate under the principle that I have but one life to live and I have to make it count.  The only thing that will remain after my death is what actions I took, and I will be remembered for the legacy I leave.

I hold no resentments against anyone who does not feel the same way I do about religion.  The dialog is free of emotion and considered nondestructive until the attack is directed at a human being. 

Islam Hides behind Racism to Protect Cowardice

There appears to be a negative and hostile reaction when atheists/agnostics/humanists become disrespectful or speak in undesirable terms regarding Islam.  The respondents to these comments typically cry foul and indicate that the individual is being racist. 

This is a clear indicator that the person playing the racism card has either been indoctrinated into Islamic perspectives or is grossly under educated and socially retarded. 

Islam is: a monotheistic religion based from the Qu’ran on the teachings of Mohamed’s interpretation of how life should be conducted and the religion spread.  Race is: a systemic way of classifying humans based on many different physical and social features.  Racism is: the equating that one race of humans is of greater value than others based on perception.  

Using the racism card to deflect attention from the religion’s actions or to elicit negative responses to those who are detecting that the religious affiliates are acting in an exceptionally inappropriate fashion is cowardice.

For the sake of argument could we invoke the same argument of race to all religions: Wiccan, Sikh, Mormon, Christian, Jehovah’s Witnesses’, Buddhists, Taoists, and  Pastafarians.  Then what of those who express NO religion?   Does that equate to no race?  

What is being projected by Islam is an illusion of victim-hood, maintaining claims of racism because the perception their religious beliefs are being disrespected.  I have read the Qu’ran, and the Bible both are rife with racial, gender, and religious inequalities in such a profound fashion that both texts call for the death of those who do not ascribe to the teachings of their prophets.  

This spinelessness is not just applied by Islam.  Many if not all religious sects use this tool to manipulate the populous into believing they are the victims of some horrible onslaught from other (races, religions, or social groups).    The proud portrayal victim-hood leads many leaders of these sects to advocate for abhorrent actions by their followers as a way of getting their agenda heard.  This is equitable to the use of terrorism to get religious or political attention.

Islam has a very bloody, violent, and socially retarded history of destroying all that is not of the same faith or religious practice.  Some of the rituals of this religion are bloody violent and horrifying (Halal).   When humanity starts to progress socially, choosing to abandon the, unnecessary, perturbing and archaic religious practices or they fall out of social favor it is not racism it is social maturation.

Islam – not a victim of racism, but a highly manipulative, aggressive, and hostile religious/political sect that uses carefully calculated psychological tools to hide behind.

I am likely to get a death threat for disrespecting Islam.  All that does is solidify my disrespect for all religions, contributing to my being more vocal about their eventual extinction.

Refugees of an Imaginary War

I keep reading or hearing about this ‘War on Christianity/Christmas’ ’War on Religion’ ‘Assault on Religious Rights’ posed by the Right Wing Nut Jobs – or at a minimum the Teabagger ~ Patriots spewing their hate swill on Fox News.

Hate to break it to you but, there is no war.  One may feel as though their ‘right to religious freedom’ is under assault.  I cannot find evidence of this.  What I do find evidence of is; the privilege/power, and unfair advantage of the overtly religious is being questioned by the populous.  There is a steady decline in the populations identified as attached to religious institutions and an increase in those who identify themselves as non-religious (atheist).  The power brokers of these religious institutions are starting to panic, and in their efforts to maintain their flocks of sheep, they have fabricated a war.   

The ensuing panic has led to a propaganda campaign by those who still have an audience to play the victim card; ‘War is being waged on our religious beliefs.’  Terms are thrown out like, ‘patriot’, ‘Christian warriors’, ‘racially motivated (Islam)’ and ‘homosexual agenda’. 

This is nothing more than a strong effort to consolidate the base of voters, or sheep, to remain faithful and pressure the lawmakers to aid alignment of their power over the perceived enemy (Atheists).  From the pulpits come the threats to the families to keep a tight rein on their potential wanderers.  Both the Jehovah’s Witness and the Mormon sects have documented systems to maintain this fear via processes dealing with apostates (control).  Islam takes it to the extreme.

Fortunately the more intellectually involved and informed can see that these propaganda efforts are in the long run; eventually destructive.  These efforts to control from within, eliciting power struggles appears as dictatorial events within almost all of these faiths.  When people can get past the fear and the understanding that departure from these faiths is healthy, natural, and beneficial they step away. 

Religion is destined for extinction.  The function of religion to control and maintain order is no longer necessary.  People hold onto the vestigial components for comfort and they serve no purposeful function other than to calm the fear inspired by the sect leaders.    This war is of attrition the faithful are dying out and the children want no part of the diseased relationships managed by the leaders of the faiths.   I don’t seek out the youth to ‘turn them’ from their religion.  They come to me asking questions and I answer them with honesty, truth, and reason.  They are refugees of an imaginary war.

My efforts to catch those who question their participation in this co-dependent relationship with their religions takes the form of starting a local Atheist group both on Facebook, and helping @FreeAtheism with the Atheist Paper Route.   Fliers handed out when they come to my door, and left on the doorsteps of local churches.

Question Everything.

Atheism Advocacy via Paper Route

Spending the last week participating in the Atheist Paper Route was well worth the time.  Initially I perceived it as waging some war on the religious factions in my home town.  After participating and starting some dialog with other atheists, I see it now more as a way of switching up the way that information and perspectives are shared.   Currently I am only one voice (delivery boy).

In this part of Idaho there are more churches than any other location I have ever lived.  One cannot travel more than half a mile on any road until you see a church or two.  There are a preponderance of Christian churches attuned to the charismatic evangelical populous and a very large number of Mormon stakes.

It often feels as though I live in the ‘Bible Belt of Idaho’ (a doubling of hellish experiences for an atheist).  There are a large number of missionary individuals going door-to-door to share their perspective on faith and to encourage many to join them for service at their holy place.    I have most certainly turned them away in a fashion that is appropriate and respectful.    Even the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

After posting several fliers on the doors of these establishments in an effort to ‘door-to-door’ advertise that atheists are here and we have valid points, the responses are typically bordering mild passivity.  I was expecting some letter to the editor with some fierce rhetoric (still waiting).  There was one church that did respond with a ‘Good Luck’ message on their sign. 

Is it a safe assessment of the situation that if they do not attend to us that we will fade into obscurity?   Maybe there is a more xenophobic approach that they are working hard to shield their populations from the information that is being dropped on their doorsteps? 

As the ‘Easter Season’ gets into full swing many of the churches have advertising to solicit new members to join them.  I will be there to deliver my paper and share with them that there are more options to choose from.  Remaining connected to some religion based in fear is asinine.    If I can reach one person give them the confidence to step out of the shadows it is well worth my time to advocate for atheism.

I want to thank the following:

@FreeAtheism

@GentleAtheist

@Atheist_Forever

@BrianBrachiopod

 For their support on Twitter!

Resources available here: Free Atheism Paper Route

Bullying and Cowardice of the Theists

Watching the constant ebb and flow of exchanges between the theists and the atheists on twitter something becomes more relevant at every exchange.  Escalating emotional responses to perceived hostility and/or disrespect directed at one person’s religious beliefs or perspectives.

What makes this even more salient is the amount of personalization that takes place in the exchange, where the religious person thinks that because their religion is under attack, or their beliefs are being ‘disrespected’ that they are personally being attacked.   Quick and visceral reactions range from simple name calling to threats of physical violence and promises of death due to a violation of religious doctrine.

What is painfully evident is the media is they work hard to sanitize their approach and presentation of the happenings in the world due to the responses from the fundamentalists and even some of the moderates.  This is ever more unmistakable with the presentation of Islam.  There is a prudent effort on the part of media to ‘not offend’ the Islamists.

Politics.... 

There is strong reason and evidence to continue to do this based on plain and simple fear.  Islam explains the use of violence, in some of the most cruel and hostile fashions, when the perception their doctrine or dogmas are threatened with disrespect or offense.  What is even more astounding is the response of Christians and other faiths to these threats – capitulation, lending to a very unhealthy and abusive relationship between the two parties.  

After I did some research it appears that this fear goes back centuries.   The populous of most of the world is genuinely frightened by the Islamists.  Not due to any feigned threats to act, but due to the actual facilitation of described threats.  When these actions are on put on display to a very wide audience to see and appreciate.  This public display of horrific acts of violence, retribution, desecration of humans and other religious faiths persons or property, with the intention of intimidation.   Much of this is Muslim on Muslim but open threats toward others are also common.

This is not just an Islamic issue only there are other sects or cults that use fear or intimidation to elicit compliance to demands for respect and conversion.    Christians often use the threat of eternal damnation to coerce their flocks to join and to establish retention.  Christians often prey upon each other not for conscription but for wealth and prestige.    They want your money not your soul.

The most disturbing part of this relationship is that, Christians are taught to forgive and to accept that they may be asked to die for their faith.  Muslims are taught that they should kill for theirs.  Christians are told that they are guaranteed a trip to heaven in service to their god and Muslims to paradise with lots of virgins to remove non-Muslims from the living.  This lends to a very ugly looking system of abuse.

When an atheist becomes involved and threats are made we are not likely to surrender to either party.  This causes the situation to escalate rapidly.   The roles being played are that of abuser and victim.  Atheist chooses to not play and calls the bully (Islam) on their aggression and the victim (Christian) on their cowardice.    Atheists are likely to stand up for the victim but they actively decline the assistance under the pretense of continuing to be the victim.

Any attempt to threaten me to achieve surrender becoming a bully or join a culture of victimization and the likely end will be a strong hostile response.  Bring it!

Psychology of Fundamentalism and Limiting Projection Issues

Given my propensity for evaluating human behavior in its many forms, one thing becomes evident; the individuals who identify themselves (passively or actively), as bible fundamentalists, young earth creationists, evangelicals, Teabaggers (all inferred insults applied), Christians, right-wing-nut-jobs etc. have a very well developed defense mechanism of Psychological Projection. 

Defining Projection -   albeit an older term (Freud) it still fits the thought paradigms today.  Simply defined:  A person will reject their own negative personality/character attribute(s) and then assign those same attributes to the person or entity they are in conflict with, in an effort to quell or reduce cognitive dissonance.  Described as a defense mechanism it works very well for the user as a way of displacing responsibility or distracts from the harm produced by one’s comments or actions.  This has also be identified as a False-Consensus  event but for the purpose of simplicity and ease of use I will continue to use ‘Projection.’

This can take on many forms.  As a whole Americans are naive to the effects of projection.    A person makes an assumption that all persons of the same persuasion or belief system thing and behave in the same fashion as he/she does given they ascribe to the same system – Both positive and negative. One is the perception that all Christians worship the same god or that all follow the same interpretation of the bible.  

More insidious Projection takes place when an Atheist confronts a Fundamentalist on their negative character attributes or perceived bias and they are reflected back with strong emotion and hostility.

An example of this was and exchange between a talented blogger nonprophetess and a random fundamentalist here.  He clearly has very biased views and aggressively projecting them on her and the other participants of the conversation.   

When addressed directly the dialog becomes immature and is resembles the grade school dialog “I know you are but what am I...?”  This will generally elicit a strong Counter Projection (Jung) escalating the conflict.

Example:

Makes one think, "Are you that unaware?"

When addressing Projection events one must understand that this is taking place at a rudimentary behavioral level and typically based on a defect of character or personality.  In the simplest terms it is like arguing with a five year old who needs a nap.  How to successfully address an exchange one can rely on the basic application of Applied Behavior Analysis.  Strongly reinforce any positives identified in the dialog even if that requires re-framing the dialog (this can and will elicit a very strong negative emotional response from the projector).

Dialog with a person projecting should resemble that of a dialog with a five year old.  Treat them accordingly.  You may have to break down the dialog into short simple sentences – state a core topic and stick to it.   They like to take people down the rabbit hole of delusion.   Continuously redirect them back to the core topic.  Consider if you will gain any benefit from it or will the other party?  Remember you are the one in control of the conversation and your emotions.  They are not.  Don’t own their issues.  We have enough of our own.

When a ‘Projector’ hits Crisis Phase (cognitive dissonance) this can and will elicit ‘Word Salad’ from the more disturbed individuals.   This should be a trigger to end the conversation due to individual being in an emotional crisis and unable to respond coherently.    This is also identified when scripture or bible verses are being quoted.  This is a signal that there is no longer a productive dialog going on and the person has recluses into their mental safe zone.

Decline the invitation to be angry and stay rational.

Race, Rights, and Religion Rant

I have been accused of racism based on my ridicule of Islam.  I am very curious why so many people perceive Islam as a race of individuals?   These persons are very eager and aggressive in their use of the racism perspective to defend the religion or their discriminatory actions.

I have also been very open with my criticism of Christianity and the associated actions of that religion.  Let’s take for examples in Idaho where I live; the Christians are working very hard to accomplish a couple of new laws:  No protections for LGBT individuals basically legalizing discriminatory practices against that part of the population.  A second piece of legislation allowing faith healing groups protection from prosecution based on the death of children due to negligent practices (faith healing).   

Using religious practices to inflict harm or actual death on a differing group of persons is akin to racism but  actually should be classified as discriminatory practice.   They then hide behind their ‘religious freedom’ to practice discrimination and negligent homicide of their own children.

There is no mention of race associated with these religious practices.  Yet there is a perception among the religious that one set of humans has more respect or rights to live free of discrimination or negligent death.  This profound lack of introspection by the followers is astounding.  The delusions professed by these people shake the foundations of reality and yet no one calls them out.

Using ‘religious practice’ as a shield to protect a person or a community based on bias is spineless and principled in disordered intellect.  To witness the death of a child due to willful disregard and then to attribute it to the will of some god is tantamount to negligent homicide.

When called out on their obvious immorality and held to scrutiny by the population as a whole as being corrupt they hurriedly build a barricade of racial or religious discrimination as a case against the accuser.

It is a cowardly practice to cry foul when the only misconduct has been on the part of the religious practitioner and you are unwilling to accept responsibility for your deeds.

Humanity cannot continue to hold any religion in reverence when it‘s followers use it as a way to deflect responsibility for immoral, discriminatory or juvenile actions.  

Sometimes those who are offended need to be.

Morning Rant - Sex Ed and Dogma

Just had a great rant with my best friend via email.. Figured I would not waste the rant..

Some of what I have seen/read recently has to do with the establishment of moral underpinnings complicating the teaching of sex education. Given the application that a person's morality is based on a set of rules grounded in emotional constructs, and there are negative connotations applied to the basic attributes of human existence (religions/doctrine/archaic texts tend to lay claim to this perspective) and elicit a strong negative response emotionally when there is a perceived violation of these constructs creating cognitive dissonance. These rules are applied to elicit fear or trepidation and less to do with actual learning of reproduction and the actions associated with it.

 Parents of these students are so heavily entrenched in their thinking and the fear of information reaching their child that is contrary to the dogmatic principles they are infected with that it nearly paralyzes their actions. A parent shirking their responsibility for sexual education to the school or another entity should clearly understand that the actions of sexual reproduction, and/or sexual acts will be discussed in detail and without the associated emotional content.

 If one can separate the emotional construct from the context of a behavioral action based in reproductive biology and present only the facts associated with the reproductive act that is sex education. Chillingly there are so many religious and conservative factions that apply artificial rules or frameworks to this associating a strong emotional content because of the morality that was dispensed at a very young age.

 As a matter of circumstance and relevance morality does not come from dogma, doctrine or religious scripture. It existed long prior to the establishment of any religious or dogmatic construct written down in a book or on a rock somewhere.

 What is difficult for many people is to discern the fact that actions of reproduction should be taught, (somewhere, accurately an positively) so that the fledgling humans are not guessing and causing injury, spreading disease or unintentional pregnancies. The willful ignorance that most, if not all, religious sects advocate does nothing to foster development of independent rational actions or thoughts associated with reproduction.

 Whether the religies, conservatives, liberals, or just your basic human loons get it or not.... reproduction is going to happen between humans... whether they like it or not.... Morals taught by parents or teachers are irrelevant if based on complex dogmatic principles. Sexual behavior is a primary drive in humans equitable to the drive to obtain food and water. This has taken place for millions of years and the artificial application of dogmatic morality in the last 3000-4000 years only leads to complicate it further. Think of it this way we are teaching our kids morals and reproductive science based on a Bronze Age dogma. What does that say for us as a species?

 Facts and behaviors are real and can be measured and observed. To apply dogmatic principles to establish some moral code to this conduct only adds a layer of complexity that the student rarely if ever can understand due to the underdeveloped cerebral cortex of any human under the age of 25.

 If we don’t make some kind of effort to grow up we are destine to be stuck in the dark ages.

Conditioning Part II

For this post I would like to create a general overview of ‘religious behaviors’.  These are broad reaching and can incorporate many differing patterns of definable events.  The short list includes; worship, prayer, attendance to church activities, reading of religious texts, expression of religious perspectives, singing religious songs, raising ones hands to the ceiling and swaying to music or choir music.  The list can go on.  These are actions that can be seen, measured, and established by inter-observer reliability to establish religious behaviors.   If there is any disagreement with this definition I would gladly accept it later.

I would also like to define the, for the purposes of explanation, the use of the ABC behavioral chain within the Operant Conditioning Framework to best establish the function of the behavior.  A – Antecedent: the event preceding the behavior (not the cause of the behavior but the event signaling that a reinforcer is available if the participant chooses to engage in the target behavior).  B – Behavior: the action or event that takes place after the presentation of the Antecedent.  Target behavior in this case being religious behaviors described above.  C – Consequence: The event following the behavior.  This can be one of three things a Reinforcer: Item, action, or removal of item or action to increase the likelihood that the preceding behavior will take place again.   A Punisher: Item, action, or removal of item or action to decrease the likelihood that the preceding behavior will take place again.  Extinction/Recovery: Failure to provide any type of signal that the behavior was successful or unsuccessful in obtaining the desired or undesired outcome.

Looking at the ABC model of religious behaviors the Antecedent is typically either related to the day of the week, established holiday, trigger of other person who is guiding or leading the congregation etc. These antecedents are not naturally occurring events, and are not established in our genome.  Extrapolation of this is the event of prayer – a new born or even a toddler does not know innately how to pray or even what to pray.  These are instructed by parent’s teachers and others that the human trusts enough to emulate or follow directives.  What does a newborn human know how to innately do? – Suckle, cry, grasp, explore, swallow, breath, touch and bring items to mouth/face.    Given a typical Antecedent to religious behavior I would challenge any religious petitioner to provide an established Antecedent to religious behaviors and measure the response of a 6 month old.  It is highly unlikely to produce religious behaviors without substantial conditioning.

A child is almost always ‘persuaded’ or in this case reinforced initially to participate in religious behaviors.   It begins with the most rudimentary level of reinforcement at the bottom rungs of Maslow’s Hierarchy.  The learner is presented with food, shelter, warmth, safety, security, and belonging for participation in religious behaviors. 

The child also receives feedback in the form of punishment for failure to participate in religious behaviors.  In the case of when asked if a god exists and the response is “no”.  The social group will ostracize publicly, shame, or resort to physical violence to suppress or limit that response from occurring in the future.  This can also be applied to the adult.

Given that a parishioner does not participate in a group activity the leader or other participants may verbally question the reasons for not participating.  This is more often done in a manner that appears as a matter of concern for the spiritual well-being of the participant.  In actuality it is confrontation of unexpected outcome.   As an adult or a child lacking the understanding of the confrontation dynamic it feels uncomfortable and likely punishing for failing to participate in the religious behavior.  This particular conduct is equitable to bullying.   The goal of the person confronting the non-participant is to increase the participation.  Confrontational behavior is supported and often reinforced by the leaders and other parishioners as it has been reinforced in them by their peers/supervisors.  This is also provided by the delivery of reinforcer events associated with the participation.  A short list; positive verbal praise, coffee and/or treats after Sunday service, shaking of one’s hand, hugs, exclamation of how much they enjoyed spending time with the participant, and invitations to participate in ‘exclusive’ events.

I opted to go through this much detail to describe these events to characterize religious behavior is NOT a foundation to human development.  The teaching of these behaviors starts at a young age and is developed and fostered over time starting with the use of primary reinforcers the goal of the reinforcement being intrinsic in nature.  

In the simplest of terms, persons wishing to have their children become one of the ‘faithful’ build in from a very early age a full system of indoctrination with both strong reinforcers and punishers to entrench the belief structures.  To maintain this over time the introduction of heaven and hell are offered as the ultimate reinforcer or ultimate punisher.

Having been raised as an atheist and not experiencing this dynamic.  It was very alien to have conversations with the faithful.  They used language I was unfamiliar with, however they were very well versed with both reinforcement and punishment. 

Conditioned Part 1

It is a matter of perspectives.  Christians, Muslims and Jews (others), advertise that they are standing on the ‘Moral High Ground’ and use that as the leveraging point to assail atheists and others not of their religious persuasion.  When given the feedback that they have failed to prove a point, establish a solid position, or are just plain wrong they respond harshly and with strong negative emotion.

I always found it interesting that those who call themselves ‘religious’ or ‘faithful’ cannot be wrong or in error in some manner.   The perception of infallibility is well entrenched in the process of indoctrination of the converts and factions.   The perspective is well endowed with logical fallacies, failed reasoning, and a profound lack of self-examination.  Behaviorally speaking, whether portrayed as a cult, addiction, disease, or gang religious affiliation and the corresponding faith attributed has a central theme ‘god first’.   The faithful must protect the religion at all cost.  If an atheist introduces doubt it shakes the foundation and creates an existential crisis for the believer.  This crisis is so profound that it rattles the underpinnings for the believer.  These kinds of processes are akin to the feelings of fight, flight or freeze responses when one’s life is in jeopardy.

Examination of basic behavioral principles applied to Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs.  Tying each of the levels to some feature of the religious practice:

The foundation of the pyramid are well described in most religious texts as to the; who, what, when, how and the where.  Many religious organizations offer, food, water, and a place to sleep if the person is not able to provide for self.   Given the person’s participation in the eating, drinking, sleeping and other basic physiological needs the religious organization only asks that the participant then pray or worship with them.  This is the beginning of the indoctrination, the underpinnings if you will the brain-washing using the basic human needs to entice the participant into the organization.

If the individuals basic human needs are met then safety and security are used as a tool to entice the participant into the religious organization.  They offer security of the individual.  Organizations sometimes an offer of stable income, establishment of a set of moral standards that the person finds appealing, establishing a strong sense of safety and stability; written in the religious texts and applied by the faithful.  This is a very strong motivator for those who have experienced trauma.  Religious aid groups offer support and guidance to individuals who have suffered from natural disasters.  Most if not all have some way of communicating that the ‘religion’ is responsible for the care and comfort of those suffering. 

If an individual’s physiological needs, safety and security are met the religion also offers love and belonging.  One is always greeted with a smile at a church and a hearty welcome.  A great way to advertise: “You are welcome here.”  They offer coffee or conversation after the sermon, and social groups associated with the religion, some are secret – requiring an invitation.  Some require a special handshake lending a lot of secrecy and enhanced inclusiveness.

The religion continues to work all avenues of the pyramid to offer something of reinforcement to the believer.  The holy book comes packed with all kinds of morals, lessons, and tools.  The sermons come filled with self-esteem boosting, and many religious leaders recognize parishioners during the sermon to point out achievement.  There are awards that are given for differing levels of accomplishment.  These are frequently offered (if not always) in front of the audience advertising advancement in the religious practices.  It fills the person with pride and inspiration to do more. 

At the top of the pyramid is self-actualization.  Goals set here by the individual include becoming a teacher of religious doctrine and becoming a leader of the faithful.  There are some issues with abuse of power and influence at the top of the pyramid.  This is best left for a different post.

Atheists chipping away at any one of these parts of the pyramid demonstrating a believers responding to  basic classical (or operant) conditioning perspectives tend to elicit a strong response as an argument on the person directly due to the nature of the conditioning that has taken place. 

The same human needs are applied to atheism as well.    This can be tempered with intelligence and forethought when approaching the needs of humans.  Ego and self-importance are not what atheism is about.  It is the rejection of a god.  The rejection that the only correct way of thinking is a religious way of thinking, any implication to the contrary is horrendously flawed.

The faithful do not understand the influences acting on them.  They feel that they are standing on the top of the pyramid looking down upon all others.  This is an illusion conditioned over time.  They are just as susceptible to all human (animal) conditioning.