Sunday, 29 December 2013

Christmas doesn't count for Atheists. Apparently.

In response to's article 'A Christmas gift for Atheists -- five reasons why God exists'

**Disclaimer: If you can't detect the sarcasm, this is purely a response to the article, and not a dig at a generalised Christian culture. 

Around this time of year, the small yet feisty race of the Fox News Christian Preachers, come out with all the best new information on the lesser known threat that is Atheism. The Christmas spirit seems to inspire the age old 'we are right and you are wrong' argument which often claims the ways in which atheists are always going so off the handle in their desperate need to believe in something that isn't actually there. The poor souls suffer in this festive season for their spirituality and happiness is concealed by an empty void known only to the Godless.

This is of course due to the fact they are unable to understand the origin of this celebration of the birth of a man 2000 years ago who may or may not be the son of a God. Every single atheist also does not participate in the originally pagan mid-winter festival because of this misunderstanding. Supposedly. This potentially contagious  way of thinking apparently doesn't even have a substantial back up. "There's no good evidence for God's existence!" is not a legitimate argument for not believing in the Holy Deity. Although, researchers have not found the appropriate argument for atheists world wide, and therefore they must stick with that insufficient reasoning.

Here is the insufficient reasoning:

1. There is no current evidence to provide the origin of the universe, only that it expanded due to the Big Bang Theory. The argument that this must mean God is the creator of all things is absurd, for if something cannot begin from nothing how is a transcendent, unembodied mind to be excluded from this rule? There is no evidence for how the universe began, which does not therefore mean one can instantaneously jump to the conclusion that it must be a higher being behind it because that surely seems even more illogical. For now let's just leave it and move on with our lives whilst scientists continue to research to fill our curious, human hunger for complete knowledge and understanding. Once they find the answer, we can potentially carry this argument on, or let it be resolved.

2. Scientific research provides the best explanation for the fine tuning of the universe. If you happen to mix a bunch of atoms together an great amount of things can happen at the right time, in the right place. The design argument is surely for those who struggle to accept the reasoning of physical necessity and chance. The latter actually lack the need for further explanation as to how and why this designer came to be in the first place.

3. Humanity and social evolution provide the best explanation of objective moral values and duties. Because EVEN atheists can realise that the Holocaust was wrong. And also because many Christians have interpreted some parts of the bible to be preaching a way of life that no longer corresponds with the current times, and have deemed it to be wrong. Therefore humans are not entirely reliant on a book to tell them the difference between bad and good. They can make decisions for themselves, due to a multitude of years developing as culture and society as an intelligent species.

4. Simple physical evidence provides the best explanation of the interpreted historical facts of Jesus' resurrection that probably didn't happen it was most likely a metaphor anyway. This one's quite simple, given we've recently realised a lot of the mistakes we've made with the meaning and translation of the bible what're the chances we've somehow mistaken an impossible occurrence for a ridiculous miracle? Particularly given there is absolutely no other evidence other than the sometimes unreliable bible for this death to life incidence.

5. Madness, desperation, delirium, and wonderfully passionate human belief can too provide personal experience with God. I once saw a water fairy in a lake when I was 9. I rest my case.

Alas, do not worry the good thing is that atheists tend to be very passionate people and want to believe in something.
(Please tell me what that is even supposed to mean)

Friday, 20 December 2013

Dear women,

To all the silly women this may concern,

I cannot remember a time when you didn't say you looked old despite you convincing me that only recently have you been making this observation. It has always been with a woeful sigh or moan that you pull back the delicate skin on your face and claim that this is how you used to look, when you had skin like mine. May I remind you however that I know for certain your skin was not uncomfortably tight across your cheekbones, tugging the corner of your eyes upwards at the age of 16.
"I look so much better like this," you say, staring pitifully at your reflection. "If I got a facelift this is what it would look like."
"And how ridiculous that would look." I have replied many a time, slightly fearful that a small section of your brain has been washed with the media's nightmarish beauty regime full of scalpels and implants.

It saddens me to know that when you look at yourself in the mirror it is not the bright, wide eyed face that I see but an old, ugly one only visible to you and you alone. I struggle now to tell you how beautiful you are, meaning it truthfully and adamantly, when I know you will not listen. For you, now that the smile lines have started to stay, the end is almost certainly nigh. The smile lines of course that you detest and the world around you enjoys, looks forward to even.

What topsy turviness we have entered into that you believe your wide eyes and pretty smile are not stunning but frightening. That they have been spoilt and hidden by a sea of wrinkles. Wrinkles, might I add for the thousandth time, that are invisible to everyone who is blinded by that kind grin you possess. Your eyes hold such warmth, such intensity and you have lost your ability to know that. Something makes you continue to complain to me how old you look, how ruined. How can you not see? Why would I be lying?

Alas, I know exactly what compels this despair you have for the apparent 'death' of your delicate features. Somebody, somewhere decided the age a woman must reach at the moment they turn invisible. Once a woman reaches this age no matter how pretty, how intelligent, how witty, how funny, how creative she may be the man who deems her undesirable no longer sees her. I know now that you are scared of becoming 'old', a term that should be taken gracefully and with honour, because you are frightened your voice is entirely dependant on itself. And who would hear a woman's voice anyway? Soon with any luck society will forget the female they can't fantasise about, they will become grandmothers and be put away in a cupboard of out of date women.

Why would a woman want anything to do anyway? Her life is over by 50. Even earlier than that, if you like.

I know how ambitious you are. I know that you still have dreams to do big things to go big places. You of all people have taught me that aspirations never fade, people will always dream. You still work hard for things, your life is not over and will not be for many years to come. You are not old. You are not yet tired. Those wrinkles you show me are not there. They don't exist.

So please, let me tell you that you are beautiful. Let me think it. I do know. I can see it.

Let me, for the sake of a new generation of women, not be afraid of becoming old. I want to do it as gracefully and brilliantly as is possible.

You are silly.