Category Archives: Religion

Religious Person at the Doorstep

I was playing piano and I heard the doorbell ring. Figuring it was my parents, I opened the door. I instantly see the suit and I know it has got to be some religious bloke. At least he was rather polite, and he wasn’t a Jehovah’s Witness. I think he was opening up a new church and was trying to recruit people. I know I’ve probably changed some of the details and left things out, but here’s a recount of the short conversation:

“Are your parents home?”
“No, they’re not.”
[hands me something, gives a quick introduction of himself, blah blah]
I don’t know what impelled me to, but I say, “Actually, I’m an atheist.”
“Oh, how old are you?”
“Sixteen.”
“Do you think you’re old enough to make a decision to be an atheist?”
“Yes, I do.”
“Did you know it takes more faith to be an atheist than being a Christian?”
“No, because atheism is the default position, you don’t start out believing, you don’t have to know anything really…”
“So, you’re saying you don’t know anything.”
[Okay, that was my mistake. I meant this: Animals don’t believe in a god. Babies, when born, don’t believe in anything. They’re born atheists. I lose the point there.]
“Well, not exactly.”
“That’s what you said. Do you go to a church?”
“No, I don’t.”
“Have you ever gone to one?”
“No, I have not.”
“What about your parents?”
“I don’t know. But, at my school, I’ve taken religious classes, so I think I’m rather informed.” [I go to a catholic school.]
“Learned all about all the religions.” [emphasis mine. I think he may have been thinking something about the whole ‘equal’ treatment of all religions thing.]
“Well, no, but I’m planning on taking a major religions of the world course.” [which I actually am going to, already signed up]
“Tell me, what happens when you die?”
“I decompose.” [easily my best line. I say this calmly. If I was unsure, he would have attacked. Instead, it seems as if I’m sure and resigned to this fact.]
“That’s very interesting.” [he tells me about the back of the handout, tells me to read it. We shake hands.]
[exit, door closes]

I wish I was a quicker thinker than I already am, but then again, I didn’t want to be rude. I don’t believe I came across as a teenage smart-ass.

Actually, remembering another event is why I said it, now that I’m reviewing my motives here. My family and I were at a restaurant and some guy comes up to us. He says that we must be a good Christian family because we were really nice-looking and quiet, etc. We aren’t Christian, but none of us really say much. He can infer it, but we’re not overly contrary to him. So, I guess this was something of a second chance for me.

The guy was nice, and he didn’t try to uber-proselytize. He just wanted people to know about his new church and wanted to give them an opportunity to join. I think he was the pastor. I don’t remember because I threw away the sheet.

Well, I thought it was a bit interesting. This is the first real event that inspired a thoughtful weblog entry.

Pledge of Allegiance

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

There are two words in there that shouldn’t be in there, can you spot them? Answer: under God.

In a pure poetic sense, they don’t fit. They sound completely mashed in there. When people say “one nation under God / indivisible,” they speed through the line as fast as possible and it doesn’t fit the meter. Everything else is said slow and fits rhythmically. It also sounds weird that the one word indivisible is set off separately from that long line. When said the other way “one nation / under God / indivisible” it still sounds tacked in there. It’s an exact syllabic repetition. It sounds extra and uneeded. You might as well tack in 100 three-syllable lines. Say it yourself without the “under God” and see how much better it flows.

More importantly, the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional with those lines in there. It forces one to admit to a faith in order to pledge allegiance to this country. It establishes a fact that there is a god. Any profession of faith in a god is a religious statement. No matter which way you look at it, god equals religion. Therefore, the Pledge of Allegiance specifically violates the establishment clause of the first amendment. It also violates the free exercise clause. I’ve heard that it doesn’t because it’s not specific to one religion. If it wasn’t specific to the Christian God, it would say “under a god” not “under God.” The capital letter makes it a proper noun, or a name, specifically, the name of the Christian God.

Some may say, I’m not forced to say the pledge, so I shouldn’t complain. It doesn’t matter because it’s the country’s pledge, not just something I recite. Besides, I want to recite the pledge. It’s not fair that I should have to say I believe in a god to profess allegiance to my country when I don’t believe in a god.

I want “under God” specifically removed from the pledge because it wasn’t in there before. It was added in for the purpose of making children profess faith in the Christian God. (Don’t believe me, look up what the president said when signing it in to effect.) Taking out religious references from sources that originally contained religion would be defacing art. Read the Coda from Ray Bradbury’s Farenheit 451. However, adding religious references to sources that don’t contain them defaces art just as much as the other way around. What if the word God were inserted all over the Constitution?

Adding “under God” to the pledge ruined the poetry, and made it unconstitutional. The meaning of each word in the pledge carries great weight, and I don’t wish for the United States to deface it with proselytization.

[11/06/03 – EDIT: I have responded to the one comment for this entry.]

Simple Atheism

I am an atheist in the simplest terms. One without a belief in any god(s). The burden of proof lies with those who say there is a god. Since there is no proof, I don’t believe in any god.

In regards to a metaphysical god beyond comprehension, I take what’s known as the strong atheist position, that is, it’s impossible to prove that god exists. If a being is beyond comprehension, then it can never be defined. If it can’t be defined, then you can never prove that it exists, simply because you don’t know what you’re looking for. For argument’s sake, let’s say there is such a god. Any way that god chose to manifest itself, there could be no way to prove that it is attributed to that god. For example, let’s say that such a god decided to show itself by using a voice of some sort. This voice could be attributed to something else. Any apparation could be said to be some other type of supernatural happening. You could always make up these levels of proof, just as theists try to make up levels of disproof.

There is much more I can say about religion, but I’ll save it for later blogs.