An insightful personal narrative of an apostate

"RELIGION IS STUPID, MURDEROUS, BIGOTED A...
Image by ruSSeLL hiGGs via Flickr

http://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/9fg1b/atheism_vs_theism_may_seem_like_a_battle_of_wits/

It is generally common for atheists to consider that the arguments against religion boil down to science, the facts, debate, etc. It puzzles many why someone when faced with all the evidence for evolution for example would still choose to ignore it. I think that many atheists are ignoring the REAL issue, the true reason why it is hard for someone to reject their religion.

I was raised Christian all my life, in a VERY fundamentalist home. I was taught the earth was 6,000 years old created out of nothing, heaven, hell – the whole thing. I was taught how important it was to witness and attempt to “convert” others. I was taught that even bad things, really bad things, had some sort of divine reason and plan attached to them. I believed this into my early twenties.

When I was finally faced with the irrefutable facts, and raw science behind them, I let go – very reluctantly – of my cherished beliefs. It was not easy, It was like wrestling a priceless gem from someone who would just not let go of it.

When you reject religion, its not like – rejecting the earth is not flat for example. With something like this you can say “Oh ok, now I know” – but religion has a much darker and deep rooted hold on a person, and a much more profound effect.

There were times I was actually in tears thinking about the fact that there was no “afterlife” – and that those I had loved who had died – were really dead. They weren’t watching me, or having some hand in guiding me. They didn’t still “love me”. That was pretty depressing.

It is strange how religion gives you a way to reject the reality of death – which I guess does help to ‘ease your suffering’, that you “know they went to a better place” – but it also prevents proper mourning. When someone you love dies, and they tell you on their death bed that they will see you one day in heaven, you are more prepared for them to “die” because you know they aren’t really “dead”.

To reject heaven and accept atheism – is not merely about science, facts, beliefs, etc – it is about accepting the reality of all those who have died – being really dead. It is accepting the same reality about everyone you love NOW one day being – really dead. It is accepting the same reality about YOU one day.

The older you are, the more dear loved ones have passed away, the harder it will be to reject the notions of religion. To reject religion requires the re-mourning of everyone who you love who has died.

Death is just one piece of a very complex puzzle. If you have spent your whole life “living by faith” – and you have made decisions “by faith” that have resulted in really bad situations in your life, you now have to own up to the fact that these situations came about because of YOUR choices. You do not have God to take the burden of this. You can no longer say “This happened because God has some plan for my life”

By rejecting religion, you must also reject the notion that you can avoid responsibility for poor life situations. That too is a hard pill to swallow.

Next, you must reject the idea that your path is somehow guided, that God is walking with you, that you are not truly alone as you walk through life. Imagine a man walking through a room on planks of wood suspended over spikes with large holes to fall in if you take a wrong step. He always manages to take the right next step, but he is never afraid because he “knows” that this is a solid wood floor he is walking on. Now turn on the lights.

To reject religion means to accept the idea that you CAN fall – and fall HARD. It means you have to recognize that up until now you have been fortunate – but now you have to force yourself to think about your next steps.

If you have been spending your life “following Christ”, or witnessing to people, to the extent of even studying this in college, or spending hundreds and hundreds of hours reading and studying the Bible, praying, etc – only to find out that ALL of it was utterly and totally useless, then you have another hard pill to swallow. Imagine swallowing that pill as an older person.

To accept this means to accept that you have lived a large part of your life in vain, while thinking it was purposeful. Talking to such a person about atheism is similar to telling them that their whole life is without purpose, misguided, and that they have missed out on the only opportunity they will ever have to live life.

Surely one can then see why the concept of atheism is offensive and infuriating to so many people.

Then there is the concept of a personal relationship with God. The idea that God and you are “friends”. That you are somehow “above the world”. That you are living in a bubble safe and protected by God himself.

To reject religion, means accepting that you are just like everyone else – and in fact, worse off than most and behind the race because of your past religious belief. To someone who has spent a lifetime believing they are special in this regard, a piece of them is gone, never to return.

Worse than this, such a person values their imaginary relationship with God more than any aspect of their REAL personality. Who you really are takes second stage to your supposed relationship with the almighty.

Rejecting this is surely very difficult, as it entails rejecting a large part of the perceived value someone has in themselves.

I know I have not covered it all, but I hope I have helped to show that there is more to the picture of “religion vs atheism” than merely science, and facts.

The emotional side of religion is by far a larger and darker obstacle than any other that would stand in the way between someone’s freedom from delusion and accepting reality.

There are professional people who specialize in “deprogramming” those who have been captured by a cult such as the Moonies. Society grudgingly approves, with reservations because cults are judged to be “dangerous” and harmful. But try to deprogram someone from a mainline “religion” and now you will encounter blatant open hostility from every quarter. This means there is a double standard. A person who succumbs to the mind control program of a cult deserves help to extract themselves. The theology practiced by Catholics, Mormons and other mainline religions is just as non-nonsensical and can harm the mental state of adherents just as much as the most superstitious cult. Why doesn’t the principal of harm apply here?

There are many self help groups on the web that offer advice and encouragement. But woe to the person who sets out to forcibly separate an individual from a religious faith. It has to be because there is wide spread denial that the fear mongering and guilt inducing methods used by mainline religions are not harmful. If only that were true.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Baby Girl Binns may pay the price

WWII Syringe for direct interhuman blood trans...
Image via Wikipedia

I’ve been reading comments to this article about the Fort Wayne Jehovas Witness parents who are refusing a blood transfusion for their newborn baby girl. The child may survive without a transfusion, but once more we are faced with the irrational judgments people make based on unfounded beliefs. There are a couple of themes that pop out.

The state has no right to interfere

Normally where bad decisions are made by adults and only they suffer the consequences I go along with this position. However in the case of children who are too young to give informed consent to medical procedures we, the people, have a right to guard the interests of our most powerless citizens. Parental authority is like every other right — it has its limits.

If we judge outcomes according to consequences we can make ethical decisions. Our overarching goal should be to try and advance the health and happiness of all of our citizens. People of strong religious faith such as the JW are obviously conflicted and biased, We should have no compunction whatsoever overturning their decisions when parents overstep their rights. In the case of the Binns they are showing by the claims they make that they cannot remain neutral. When they award priority to following bizarre interpretations of ancient religious texts they demonstrate they believe that saving their own supposed immortal hides is what they should do, not think rationally about what is best for the temporal health and even the life of their child. The Binns are not taking a principled moral or religious stand, theirs is an act of ignorant people infatuated with religion and frightened by their own mortality.

The really sad part is that they have absolutely no guarantee that if they follow their religious convictions they will achieve immortal life in heaven. No proof whatsoever, just a conviction is all that they base their actions on. If they are wrong, two outcomes are certain. They will not cheat death and they are consigning their child to an early and perhaps painful death. That is some gamble and unfortunately, the child cannot place a bet.

Religious parents like the Binns are acting out of pure self interest and hoping to gain points with a supernatural being they think they can influence favorably. Or if not that at least the other members of their congregation who are certain to judge the Binns if they don’t hew to the JW dogma.

We should not judge others

The strategy some people in the discussion advocate: “to each his own”, is no solution. We have a clear cut case of parents acting in their self interest over the interest of a helpless sick child. Such a position fails even as an indication of a broad mind. It is a cop out, a refusal to think long and hard about what is right and wrong. Ethical dilemmas occur all the time, shrugging your shoulder and saying let what happens, happen is no answer. People who say, to each his own, are not the ones paying the price. A luckless child is paying the price.

Most comments run in favor of the baby

I did not take a careful count of who supported the Binns and who was more concerned with the child, but it seems most people were for the baby. That is encouraging. Many of the parent’s supporters were confessed JWs and they tried to weasel the issue by pointing out how new developments in medicine have produced products that make human blood transfusions a thing of the past. I would have to see more substantiation and none was given in the article comments that I read. The baby is being treated with drugs to decrease anemia and we will have to see how that goes.

People who denounced the parents did so in no uncertain terms. Clearly it makes many people angry to be confronted with the gross ignorance and stupidity the Binns display. How did we ever let our secular country get to a point where religious practice rights took precedence over everything else? That has to get dialed way back and soon.

There is another JW case in Canada that bears watching. Some aggressive JW attorneys up there are having their competence and liability closely examined. (Zemanta article: Man sees subtle victory in fight…)

Enhanced by Zemanta