Skip to main content

It's Good to be Human

By Carl S ~

One day I was walking through a barn under construction with 2 or 3 other men. All of a sudden, I woke up in the arms of a man who was carrying me. At this point, we were 80 or more feet out of the building. He told me, “It's a good thing you were out in the open when that falling scaffold hit you; if there was a beam behind your head, you'd be dead now.” Considering the fact I was in the presence of men who had dedicated their lives to, “Having a close relationship with God,” it strikes me as odd nobody said then, or in the following days, that God saved my life, it was the will of God I live, or other pious platitudes. Their reactions were secular, not religious. Would you say honest?

Remembering this experience leads me to ask, “Isn't every automatic reaction to tragedy or impending tragedy, a non-religious one? Aren't the first words out of somebody's mouth when tragedy happens, accidents cause loss of limb, mind, life, usually “Oh shit!' Or, “goddamit?” Or “What the fuck is this?” No normal person says, “Oh dear Lord.” Okay, those first words are vulgar, but doesn't the word vulgar” mean “common”, as in the common man? And your first responses afterward are not to praise a god for saving your ass, but relief from having survived. Ceremonial praising of a god by survivors and consoling survivors by telling them the victims are in a better place or in heaven with Jesus – all that comes much later. Don't you think that the first response to impending danger or loss of lives and property just happens to be the totally honest one? Sure it is, despite centuries of propaganda trying to convince everyone there's a god involved when, really, shit happens. Even when you hear, “Thank God,” it's spontaneous secular relief!

Okay, back to the barn. So there I was, settled safely outside, but in a community without a doctor, unwilling to send me to a hospital to see if I might have a concussion. They put me to bed rest for a few days, then it was back to work. What if I was killed? Guess what, I never would have woken up; I'd be “ceased.” No future with wife and kids, no sex and raising hell. I couldn't miss what would never happen to me. Wonder how those God's people would react to my making those points. Aren't they “vulgar” interpretations of what really would have happened? Don't they know some of their priests and monk predecessors in Medieval times joined with the common folks and were vulgar, mocking the Christian faith, praising pagan gods, and most of all, praising reality in the vulgar and carnal, using the very same terms? There's truth in the initial reactions.

We are vulgar by nature. This isn't nice, romantic, or pleasant; it's reality. And accepting this will keep us human. And human, despite what every friggin' religion tries to suppress and control, is good. Life means experiencing and it also means experimenting. We are pawns to our experiences even when we create them. When we think we have control, things can still go awry, despite the fact life is usually gambling when the odds of coming out ahead are pretty well established. Only the biting-off-more-than-you-can-chew experiments tend to fail. (As in the movie plot of: “Odds Against Tomorrow.”) We can't help but tempt fate, for better or worse. And unless you're indoctrinated in a religion, your primary instinct can smell its bullshit a mile away. That's the vulgar way to say it, and what a relief from belief!

Life is good when we experiment with it. This goes beyond mere temptation. As children, we experiment to see how far we can push a parent before we get a reaction. You may steal a candy bar from the store or eat a forbidden fruit to see if it makes you wiser. Experimenting urges us to use any way possible to find solutions, for example, for diseases every wise mind tells us can't be eradicated. Haven't you noticed: the killjoy clergy who condemn scientists are getting the best science has to offer- rejecting prayer healing for medical care, driving cars, flying in private jets?

Experimenting will get you into bed with the right or wrong person, while you're ignoring the danger warnings of your religion, which has been your “whole life.” We were never cut out for a protected Eden existence; we'd be bored to death. You rebel, declare your independence. You “take no one’s word for it.” Then you find sex feels right, is really good: essential for your emotional health. Virginity's crap.

Not experimenting on your own terms can get you mixed up in the wrong crowd, but on your terms, may cause you to reject them and head for the healthy lifestyle. Experimenting with blasphemy and pornography, like experimenting with new musical forms and writing styles, seems inevitable after they succeed. We tempt life, we mold and manipulate it, like every other animal, and in ways no other animal can. I survived. Life is good. The Earth and Space are our playgrounds. Let's go experimenting.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not

Why I left the Canadian Reformed Church

By Chuck Eelhart ~ I was born into a believing family. The denomination is called Canadian Reformed Church . It is a Dutch Calvinistic Christian Church. My parents were Dutch immigrants to Canada in 1951. They had come from two slightly differing factions of the same Reformed faith in the Netherlands . Arriving unmarried in Canada they joined the slightly more conservative of the factions. It was a small group at first. Being far from Holland and strangers in a new country these young families found a strong bonding point in their church. Deutsch: Heidelberger Katechismus, Druck 1563 (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) I was born in 1955 the third of eventually 9 children. We lived in a small southern Ontario farming community of Fergus. Being young conservative and industrious the community of immigrants prospered. While they did mix and work in the community almost all of the social bonding was within the church group. Being of the first generation born here we had a foot in two