Money and Power

What two words describe politics better than money and power?

As Americans are coming closer to government program budget sequesters and higher tax rates for 2013, there is a lot of worry in the air. And anger. And fear. And spin. I hate spin.

I understand the need for this to be covered in the news. I am happy to hear about things that may happen in the future, but please keep your pants on.

Speaking of pants, merciful Noodley One, save us from the craziness that is happening in the Mormon blogosphere.  Wilt Thou decree, "Let them wear pants!" and lead us to equity and congeniality in the Mormon ranks.  But I digress...

I recently read on a friend's Facebook page that he is happy that our Congress is so glacially slow at change because it keeps them from screwing things up too quickly. A small part of me agrees because if Congress rewrote all the laws of the land every two, four or six years, depending on what group is in power, we would be in for even more of a mess.  So yes, thanks for being such a loser Congress. :)

Now if we could put a low-pass filter on the media...

Religion Is a Funny Thing

Religion is a funny thing. So is English, but that is an entirely different story. I find it really strange that at the same time I am leaving the Mormon church and religion in general, my gay dad is trying to find his way back into the Mormon community (while completely open about his husband and his prior excommunication). It's not that he believes the correlated doctrine of the Mormon church is true, but that he craves the unity and community that was forcibly taken away so many years ago when he was excommunicated.

It just struck me as a strange pair of unrelated events.

Makings of a Cult

Religion, cult, there's no real definition of which is which. It's more like, "if the shoe fits". I personally define a "cult" as any religion with fewer followers than Snooki has on Twitter.

--Bill Maher

The difference between a cult and an established religion is sometimes about one generation.

--Scott McLemee, "Rethinking Jonestown", salon.com

Many people have made claims that Mormonism is a cult. Having been on the inside, I can certainly see some of the reasons that people might say this. What I find funny, after hearing about the Russia's Young Guard recently protesting against Mormonism in Russian as a US cult/CIA conspiracy/totalitarian organization, is that all of this is just the pot calling the kettle black. Cult has a very strong negative connotation, to the point that some people argue that we shouldn't even use it.

As a kid, I can remember hearing from other kids in school that Mormonism was not a Christian religion, but a cult. It hurt a little, but I didn't really see any harm in my family's beliefs at that time. But what I am starting to see now, as I start to step further away from religion altogether is that ALL religion is a bit cult-ish. Before I get out the skewers and start roasting on this front, let us pull up some examples of what religion is doing for us today.

Religion has many faces. Some are pretty, others are downright ugly. Take, for example, the idea that all mankind is born in such an awful state that God himself (or his Son) had to come down and be killed in a most brutal manner to save us from original sin. If that is not ugly enough, how about the idea that if you don't accept Jesus as your personal savior, after you die, you will spend the rest of eternity roasting in hell. The Christians are safe, but what about the Muslims, who only believe that Jesus was a prophet? Historically, both religions are willing to die (or kill) to enforce and prove their beliefs, yet both cannot be right. The same goes as we move on to other world religions. Some nice beliefs might be love thy neighbor as thyself. Or the giant relief organizations sponsored by churches around the world. A sinister face that all religions (as well as political views and other cultural memes) have is that children are indoctrinated from an early age to believe that they belong to the only true religion.

Sure, you can call Mormonism a cult, but you have to accept that every other religion in the world has many of the same terrible cult behaviors. The only difference is that for other well-established world religions, the internal biases that people carry from their infancy convince them that their religion is not a cult. I think it is pretty clear that most sane adults would steer clear of a cult if they were approached by it in adulthood. Very few Christians convert to Hindi, and very few Muslims convert to Christianity (and some don't live to tell the tale or live in fear for their lives.) The reason is that those childhood indoctrinations have such a strong hold on the mind as to make all other beliefs seem preposterous.

This is not to say that all religion is bad. Religion has given us many wonderful things: art, music, community, etc. I just wish that we could somehow strain out the ugly parts and keep the good. I think the part of religion that makes it so cult-ish is that when you have a set of [religious] beliefs, you can see and believe nothing that does not fit within that paradigm. This makes it very difficult to see that there even exists grass on the other side of the fence, let alone that it might be greener. And if it is not greener, there is no point in leaving the comfort of your own pasture to seek the unknown. This is why every religion is somewhat cult-ish; very few can escape the fences in their own minds.

Planet of the Asses

I like bananas, coconuts and grapes. I like bananas, coconuts and grapes. I like bananas, coconuts and grapes. That's why they call me Tarzan of the Apes!

--Unknown, Summer Camp Cheer

Peaceful donkey

Some people say we evolved from the apes. That would make this the planet of the apes. But I am here to tell you that I believe this is the planet of the asses. I am an ass. You are an ass. We are all asses. Let's get over it.

Just because deep inside my brain I have some a section inherited from early primates does not mean that I should throw my poo when I get upset. Nor should you. But if by chance I get hit by your flung poo I promise to do my best to resist the urge to retaliate.

Resisting the urge to get upset becomes a lot easier if you adjust your expectations to align with reality. I really do HOPE that you can behave with respect, kindness, etc., but if I understand that you are really an ass in sheep's clothing (mixed metaphors are fun), then when you behave like an ass I should not be surprised. Being imperfect myself, I occasionally say or do things that might upset others. Beware! I am an ass.

Now that we understand that we are all collectively asses, we can adjust our expectations of others' actions so we don't have to get so upset. You can be happy and well adjusted even if someone else flings poo at you. He only did it because he's an ass; it's only to be expected. And when he says a kind word about you, you can continue to be happy and maybe a touch happier because he was behaving better than expected.

Every day, all day (unless you are an island,) you will be surrounded by asses. Armed with this knowledge, rise above that and don't act like one yourself. But don't be surprised when others don't follow suit. This little treasure has helped me keep my cool on many occasions as well.

Telling Friends

I don't really have that many close friends. I will be honest. I am not much of a good friend. I never call, I never write. But mostly I am the same person that I was before I had this 'transition of faith.'

Visible changes:

• I don't attend church. I might stay at home with my kids. Or go visit the zoo.
• The occasional lattè or mocha is delicious. No coffee habits, thank you very much (I can't afford them).
• Tea is a very relaxing afternoon drink. Mmmmm. Earl Grey is the best.
• I don't wear the Garments of the Holy Priesthood anymore. It's debatable how visible this change is, and really it's none of your business what kind of underwear I am wearing.
• I don't pay tithing (but I do give money to local charities.)

 The same:

• I am a bit of a snarky person. (some things never change.)
• I love my family. (how could I not?)
• I don't kill people.
• I don't steal.
• I don't take the Lord's name in vain (any lord, you pick. It is only offensive to those who believe and offers nothing—not even cathartic relief—for me)
• I don't swear (except when there is a good reason.)
• I don't smoke (well, other than meat and cheese, but that's different.)
• I have not found sufficient interest in beer, wine or liquor to try any yet.
• I don't have any body piercings or tattoos (and am not planning on it either.)

One of these days, one of my college friends (who I work with, but don't see very often) will see me with a cuppa and start asking questions. Or I am going to say something on Facebook and friends will start asking questions. But I really don't have much to say. I don't have plans to ruin anyone else's faith.

So far, as people have asked about our (me and my family) absence from church, they don't seem to hold it against us. We have not been shunned by our faithful Mormon friends. Hooray!

The Gay Gene

K0k bL0k  - a smart blog

I had a pretty early exposure to homosexuality due to my dad being gay. Long story short, the LDS church's policy at the time was that if you were leaning to the gay side of the path, get married and have kids and all that straight sex will get you on the right path. Eventually, my dad left his wife and children so he could pursue his gay lifestyle. (No hard feelings, read on, Dad.) While the LDS church no longer pushes this as the current 'cure' to being gay, the church certainly does not have a very gay-friendly environment; they say you can be gay as long as you don't act on your feelings.  Wow. That's so magnanimous.

When I was a kid, I believed that being gay was a choice. To be honest, I didn't really spend much time thinking about homosexuality, other than the strong link in my head to 'bad.' I didn't drink colas as a child because they were 'bad' too, but a modern analogy might be deciding on your favorite cola: most people like Coke, some like Pepsi, and even smaller numbers choose Dr. Pepper, RC, or cheap knock-offs. What I didn't see until my teenage years was the HUGE social stigma against homosexuality; even if being gay is just a choice, you don't get shunned by friends and family for choosing to drink a Pepsi. Not the same.

Well, if it were just colas, you can acquire a taste after a time. You could forget how you like that twist that Pepsi has as an aftertaste. The bold tang of Coke might persuade you to only drink Coke (especially if all the Pepsi was gone from the fridge.) Since being gay is NOT a choice, my dad's only real choice was to either live with the mental anguish of being squished into the straight box or to leave his family and be happy. My mother remarried and I had a wonderful childhood, so really, I think things turned out best for everyone involved. Now I have a good relationship with my gay dad.

In high school, we learned some about evolution and genetics. Enough to make ill-informed decisions, I think. I decided that homosexuality could most definitely not be genetic, and MUST be a choice. Why anyone would make that choice, I don't know, because it seems so weird from the straight side of the path (so says the 16 year-old Mormon brain). Plus, look at me, my siblings and I are all straight (insufficient empirical evidence.)

There very well could be a gay gene. Some scientists say that they have found one (a gene that is passed on from your mother) that is linked to "increased fecundity" in women. This would cause the women to be more attractive to men, have an easier time with childbirth, etc. If this gene has the side-effect of pushing men to the homosexual side of the path, it still helps the mother have more children, thus increasing her chances of her genes being propagated.

From reading more on genetics and evolution, it seems that all things are possible as long as evolution can find stasis along the pathways of that change. All genes are 'trying' to survive, as much as a gene can try. Really, it is just a matter of genes that don't survive disappearing from the pool. If a gene and its alternative allele can strike a balance with one not completely obliterating the other in terms of reproductivity, then it will survive. This goes for all sorts of things you can imagine, from homosexuality to male-pattern baldness to the propensity to bear twins. This is not to say that the only factor is genes, but I think that there is likely a genetic basis. Environment likely also has a role in shaping what for each individual defines a 'normal' and 'healthy' attraction and relationship.

In the end, I think it matters less WHY a person is homosexual than how we treat them. Does it really matter who a person is attracted to? Does it hurt you personally if your child/friend/neighbor/coworker is homosexual? Genetically speaking, heterosexually inclined people should be unconcerned that there are homosexuals because it means less competition in terms of offspring, given that only heterosexual sex causes offspring. Are gay people less human? In many states, they are by law. If a gay man ignores his homosexual tendencies and lives the straight life, does that make him more human? It seems to come down to majority rules without minority rights. Nothing a little bit of tolerance, understanding and humanity can't fix. Love thy brother. And his husband.

How to Live Forever

Brother Brigham was obviously full of something when he said that by living the Word of Wisdom, we should all easily be able to attain at least two hundred years of age ("The Word of Wisdom—Degeneracy—Wickedness in the United States—How to Prolong Life", Journal of Discourses, Volume 12, pp. 117-123).  Yet by pushing the evolutionary envelope, it theoretically would be possible to increase the life span of humans through selective breeding.

I am currently reading "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins.  This idea comes from there.  If we restrict having children until age 40, then after several generations, bump it up to 50, then 60, and so on, eventually, the 'old-age' diseases that are hereditary, including old age itself, would be selectively bred out.  On paper, this sounds all fine and dandy, but first off, it would be very difficult to accomplish, and second, we have no idea what the side effects would be.  Maybe nature would trade off the shorter life span for a smaller brain.  We then would all live long lives as idiots. :)  In the process, it is possible that much of the human gene pool would go extinct, which could also cause problems.

But this is certainly a much more scientifically founded idea than 'no hot drinks, alcohol, or tobacco' will make our marrow and sinews stronger, enabling us to live hundreds of years.

Telling Family

Imagining it is bad. Doing it is worse. Done with it is a weight off my chest.

I have a pretty good imagination, but I don't really think much could have prepared me for telling my family. Especially my folks. Mostly my Mom.

The storm is brewing...

We went to visit my parents and other family in the area, hoping for the chance to talk to Mom and Dad face to face rather than over the phone for this big conversation. I had hoped for a nice conversation with them, but my Dad always seems to dominate the conversation whenever we talk (unless he falls asleep). As per usual, the Dad-dominated conversation turned to politics and why the liberal Left is wrong and why the conservative Right is going to save the country from certain, imminent peril. As I have grown older, there is less and less that I agree with him in these areas, so occasionally, when I could get a word in, I would try to rebut his arguments. On one such occasion, I asked the question, "Do you have to be Mormon to be a good person?" Mom jumped on that immediately and asked "Why?" I think she may have started to suspect something by this point in the conversation.  I had tried to move the conversation over to the whole lack of faith thing several times by this point only to fail. Given her tone and a glance at the clock on the wall, I figured maybe our conversation would have to wait until tomorrow. A quick brush off by my sweet wife and the conversation moved on to other topics, like why we don't need to worry about global climate change because God will step in and fix it before it is too late. Yikes.

The next morning after exercise and a shower, Mom confronts me and says she is worried about me and my family. I tell her that we are fine. She moves on to ask how my testimony is doing. I tell her that it is non-existent. I realize that this may have been somewhat blunt, but I couldn't lie to her and I didn't want her to get the impression that I was merely having questions. Remember that by this time, my questions had moved up the food chain from "was Joseph a true prophet of God?" to "does God exist?" So basically any testimony of anything I had before withered in the presence of the larger question. The only question that had no dependencies in the tenets graph.

The conversation with Mom was mostly how could this happen, where did she go wrong, why didn't I speak up sooner, how can I not believe, etc. I tried to reassure her that she did nothing wrong raising me. I grew up strong in the faith. But when I realized that the things my faith was based on were unfounded, I could no longer depend on that testimony. She did not seem to catch this logical conclusion, making it very hard to talk with her. I didn't want to tell her sooner because until the very last straw, I always assumed that I would figure out how to make this all work and would stay a faithful member of the church. Why bring up worries if I was only going to return? I tried to explain the need for evidence and that a feeling does not count as evidence because I can recreate that on demand, thus invalidating all prior foundations based on feelings. As expected she is really worried about my eternal fate, and I told her that *if* God really does exist and really loves us then he will have to find some way to sort out this little misunderstanding. Then, as expected, she pulled out Pascal's wager, saying what do I have to lose by believing? Really my only answer to that is my sanity and integrity. I could not go on as an orthopraxic member of the church with my personal beliefs so widely different than what the church teaches. At one point she said that she could tell even as far as a year back that something was up, but given that I didn't even know it then (because nothing was) I can chalk that up to over-active 20-20 vision. We covered so many topics, but I don't really think she was actually listening to any of my words, because nothing I said seemed to help her. I think the worst part about this is that I can see both sides of the story, having lived on both sides of the fence.  But from her perspective, the world outside is too dangerous to even think about, let alone step into even for a second. By this time, we were late for our next engagement and the kids were getting impatient, so we called a truce until later.

That night, we all discussed this some more. Mostly it was bearing testimony by parents, but that really doesn't do anything for me, given that their testimonies are not founded in evidence that I can believe. At times the conversation got heated and I nearly walked out more than once, but came back at pleadings to not leave angry. In the end, it was more a "agree to disagree" sort of thing, but it was over.

Over the next few days, I called all my siblings. The sisters, who I don't have quite as much in common anymore, took it pretty hard. Some had friends or in-laws that had recently left the church and were very worried for me and my family. I know just like my Mom, that they are only showing their love and concern, but really at this stage in my life, I am absolutely sure that I can make these decisions for myself. My brother, on the other hand, said, "Yeah, I could kind of see that coming." Unlike my Mom, he is a 'book friend' and he noticed that I had posted a review for "No Man Knows My History." So we talked for five minutes about my disaffection and then continued on for another forty about the things we usually talk about. Nothing had changed. It was wonderful. This was the only good experience that I had talking with my family about my new beliefs.

God of Love

I think all of us would agree that if God exists, we would prefer that he/she/it to be a God of love.  I mean really, who wants a hateful, jealous God?  Well, maybe some of our social conservative politicians worship a hateful God.

(credit: http://memegenerator.net/Vengeful-God)

Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said:

I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.

Did you catch that? <dripping sarcasm>God wanted you to get raped so you could create that little baby that will forever remind you that you were raped. Now that's a loving God!</dripping sarcasm>. But then what does he really mean? Because his first statement is not very ambiguous.

In a mad attempt to recant his words Mourdock said:

God creates life, and that was my point. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting that he does. Rape is a horrible thing, and for anyone to twist my words otherwise is absurd and sick.

Only later when he opens his mouth a third time do we see what is really going on. He has no idea how biology really works:

I believe God controls the universe. I don't believe biology works in an uncontrolled fashion.

Oh, so what he is saying that while God doesn't want the rape, God DOES think that starting a new life as a result of the rape is a good idea and as a result coerces biology to work in a "controlled fashion."

If abortion is only okay in cases where the mother's life is threatened, we are looking at choosing between two lives.  But in the case of abortion because of a rape, the mother (and likely the child) will be permanently, emotionally scarred.  Is that better or worse than aborting the pregnancy? It should be pretty clear by now that I would vote to allow abortion in the case of rape, incest, mother peril, etc.

If Mourdock can put words into God's mouth to say that God intended the rape-induced pregnancy to happen, I think I can put words into God's mouth to say that God is much more interested in the woman's mental well-being and happiness than the rape-induced life of a fetus.

Yes, life is a gift. We should cherish it. Some would debate whether it is from God or not. But would you EVER wish the gift of a rape-induced pregnancy on anyone you love? Do you worship a God who intends this atrocity to happen? Please say, "No!"

Eight Months of Hell

At first I thought I could be a cafeteria Mormon. While the actual cannon of Mormon belief is fairly small, the surrounding beliefs and cultural portions are varied and many. I started with a big list of things I needed to research more before making any decisions about cutting off 'parts of the body' as Paul might suggest.

The whirlwind of questions pelted me mercilessly. It was like the shelf falling off the wall set off an avalanche. Nothing to grab on to. Not much to keep me from going under.

I read Rough Stone Rolling by Richard Bushman, No Man Knows My History by Fawn Brodie, The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, more of the scriptures, almost the entire MormonThink website, various talks from The Journal of Discourses, hundreds of wikipedia pages, and various other websites; I listened to a bunch of the Mormon Stories podcasts, the Mormon Expression podcasts, and a few others; I prayed; I talked with my wife and another friend. This was an all-consuming quest for answers.

I would ask a question, see that it and three others would all depend on a larger question. Then move on to the larger question, only to see that it required another idea. I moved on until the only question out there looming in my mind was, "Is there a God?" If there is, he/she/it has a lot of 'splainin' to do. If not, my world makes a lot more sense because all those other questions are either not important ("Is Joseph a true prophet of God?") or no longer a question ("How does evolution fit in with the creation story?")

I ended up as an atheist. Maybe an agnostic. Whatever.

The Proverbial Straw

I was not looking for a way out of the church.  If anything I was trying to get questions answered. But mostly I was just trying to keep on keepin' on.

Then, out of the blue, a friend of a friend of a friend posted Why I Left the Mormon Church. Given my current state of testimony and shelf mass, I have to say that this was really the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. The blame does not go to Brandon, it is more that anything probably could have dropped the shelf at this point. But after reading his essay, I found that I agreed with a lot of it.

That's the last straw!

Several of my friends also read this essay. We planned to get together to discuss it. You know, book club style. I wanted to make sure that I could hold up my end of the conversation, so I read the thesis several times, reading references and doing other research to see how it fit in my way of thinking. Now I not only had his statements to prove or disprove, I also had all the junk that fell off my shelf. I was in deep trouble now.

Some issues that were plaguing me at this point:

1. If I can cause the 'burning in my bosom' myself, which from my perspective is indistinguishable in every way from what I have felt as 'confirmations by the spirit' throughout my life, how can I be sure of anything? Is all revelation bunk?  Suddenly my 'testimony' is a burning pile of hooie.
2. Why is it that my prayers are always answered with the feeling that 'you already know' or 'it is up to you'? Never a truly affirmative or negative answer.
3. Why has the temple ceremony changed so much since Joseph received it? Why is it so similar to the Freemasonry rites?
4. Blood atonement. WTF? Who EVER thought that was a good idea? It is appalling.
5. Why did I never learn about Joseph's polygamy and polyandry before now?
6. Translation of The Book of Mormon using a peepstone in a hat? And the Book of Abraham is really a bunch of funeral rites? Church history seems to be unraveling before my eyes.
7. What is God's true nature? It doesn't seem to be what I was taught all my life; there are too many inconsistencies with what I believe if I open my eyes and look outside my immediate sphere.
8. Why was the early church (even post civil-right movement) so racist?
9. Why is the church still so misogynistic?
10. What is really wrong with gay marriage?
11. How does evolution mix with the creation story?
12. The flood was a myth, what about the rest of the Bible stories?

As the camel's back broke, the load of straw started to fall, and fall, and fall. Where would this pile of crap questions land?

Pre-Fall Limbo

Busy, busy, busy.

Part of what the LDS church does to keep its members anesthetized from the influences of the world is to keep them busy. Every member needs a testimony, a friend, and a calling. This produces semi-permanent spiritual (and mental) adolescence. You never grow up. Bears hibernate every winter, but wake up each spring; Mormons serve and worship away their busy lives never knowing what lies outside the Mormon bubble.

I had a testimony. I had some friends. I had a couple of callings. I didn't have any time to go looking for trouble. In addition, shortly after we got married, we had a baby. Then another, and then another. Kids, cute as they may be, are parasites. Or maybe it is mutually beneficial because they do give back lots of joy. But the sleepless nights I will never get back are permanently damaging, I think. Either way, kids take a lot of time, too. So between work, family, church, and some cherished "me time," I didn't much time to think about anything, let alone the mysteries of God. I admit, there was a lot of spiritual stagnation during that time, but I was definitely far from losing faith in God or losing my testimony.

I kept serving in my callings. Notice the plural there. For several years, I had two, concurrent callings and for a non-trivial amount of time, there were three. It was exhausting. I don't know how bishops do it. I am certain my service hours came nowhere near what a good bishop would put in, but I was very relieved that I was released before I cracked.

I stayed in limbo for a while, not thinking much about the things on my shelf, just carrying on (enduring to the end?)  It's possible that I would still be in that same state had either some questions been answered to my satisfaction and nothing else upset my equilibrium. But the nature of the beast is to keep moving.  So off the wall the shelf fell....

A Public Plea for Sensibility

Riots in Libya (Mohamed Abd B Ghany/Reuters)

In the wake of the violent protests against the US spread over much of the Muslim world, here is my plea for humanity and sensibility. Some things that all human-kind should embrace or we doom ourselves to extinction by war.

1. Keep your inflammatory remarks and/or insults to yourself.
2. If somebody does insult you or your beliefs, ignore them, don't strike back.
3. There is no, repeat NO, justification for one human to kill another.
4. There is no need for violence.

Several things went wrong (in the recent past and in times long past). Shouldn't we, as human-kind be big enough to look past shortcomings in others and drop our grudges?

Having watched 'Innocence of Islam,' the alleged tipping point for all these protests, I have to say that I was uncomfortable with the terrible light it portrayed Islam's prophet. I think that the author of the video should be embarrassed for creating such a work. It's only purpose was to insult and provoke those who believe in Islam. Shame on you. There are better ways, more peaceful ways, more effective ways to spread your ideas. Just because your freedom of expression is guaranteed by the US constitution, doesn't mean that you should use your right to denigrate others' beliefs.

Then I move on to the violent protesters. Shame on you. The four US citizens you killed in Libya had nothing to do with the video in question. They didn't make it; they didn't promote it; they were most likely as embarrassed of it as I am. Why would you kill innocent bystanders? They were striving for peace and diplomacy and you respond with murder. Then there have are dozens of others killed around the world as the protests spread. I understand your anger. Nobody likes to have the beliefs they hold most dear to be mocked like this in public. But this does not justify violence. Grow a thicker skin and turn the other cheek. Let's face it, there are some hateful people in the world, but that does not mean we need to sink to their level. Rise above and don't give them the reaction they hope for. After so many of the 'extremist Islam' attacks in the world, much of the non-Muslim world links terrorism with Islam. While this may be an unfair association, violent reactions like this only reinforce that stigma.

South Park's Joe Smith

Several years ago, the TV comedy cartoon 'South Park' made fun of the Mormon prophet in what might be considered to be every bit as inflammatory as this video. I watched it myself and was sad that people could be so rude to others. I did not take up arms to protest. I killed no one. In fact, I think the majority of the Mormon believers just decided that they would ignore the video altogether. If not turning the other cheek, ignoring the initial blow. Today, many Mormons have probably forgotten about the South Park cartoon, especially in the wake of the Broadway musical hit 'The Book of Mormon,' which was written by the same people. My point here is that there are other ways to deal with an insult. Peaceful ways.

As a plea from one human to another: let us live in peace; stop the violence.

Why Evolution Is True

During my couple of years of good scripture study habits, I also made it a habit to read from 'good books' to learn 'Of things both in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass.'  One of these books was Why Evolution Is True, by Jerry Coyne.  Coyne built a very strong argument (based on Darwin's argument, of course) showing why evolution must be true.  As I read it, his argument seemed to be mostly fine without God's involvement, but what I had the most trouble with was the incredibly small, nay, preposterously small probability that evolution could have created human kind.  I said in my head, "Yes, but God must have nudged us in that direction."  I had been taught all my life that there was a God and I still believed despite what any book or any person said.

Looking back I see that adding another preposterously small probability to the first seemed to calm my troubled mind.  Now I just see a very strong case of the primacy effect telling me that despite all of this evidence that God had no hand in human evolution, he still did it.

Charles Darwin

The book did seem to raise some more questions though.  I thought I understood evolution before.  I think I did, mostly.  What I didn't understand is how natural selection causes evolution.  Human kind was not created overnight.  It took a million tiny steps to get here.  Not a million random steps, but a million naturally selected steps (the best of steps possible.)  I think at this point I kind of started believing that the story of Adam and Eve could not be taken literally; they were a myth or legend.

The funny thing about the book, though, was that as 'troubling' as it was to my religious beliefs, it really felt right in my brain.  For the most part, it made sense.  Several years later, I can see even more clearly how much sense it made.

I should probably go back and read the book again to see if my viewpoint has changed any.  Or maybe I should just read the original tome, On the Origin of Species.  Or for an overview of the book, you can see a great review with notes on Why Evolution Is True.

Problems With The Good Book

I freely admit that before I went on my mission at age 19, I had never read the Bible all the way through.  I had read The Book of Mormon several times, most of The Doctrine and Covenants, parts of The Pearl of Great Price, and parts of the Bible (I think I had read most of The New Testament, but only small portions of The Old Testament.)  Add to 'the quad' the missionary training manual, Jesus the Christ, Our Heritage, Our Search for Happiness, and True to the Faith, and you have ALL the reading material that missionaries are allowed.  Some mission presidents would also suggest reading The Miracle of Forgiveness, but I think that is just cruel and unusual punishment for a missionary and is a good way to get him or her to want to give up and go home.  But I digress.  Even with that limited set of reading materials, I still didn't make it through the Bible on my mission.  It's not that I wasn't dedicated to my spiritual nourishment, but maybe we can assume I was also trying to learn a new language.

Some time after my mission I got married.  Kids and work and life used a lot of my time and some of my spiritual nourishment habits, weak as they may have been, atrophied a bit.  Periodically, I would try my hand at a newly instituted daily routine of scripture study or personal prayer.  Sometimes they would last, mostly they didn't.  But I did continue to go to church and was a very happy, well-adjusted true believing member of the LDS faith.  I did not have much on my questions 'shelf' yet.  Nothing noteworthy that I can remember anyway.

It was not until I finally got time and then a good strong habit of daily scripture study that I made it through all of the standard works, one after the other.  I had lots of questions.  I asked people I could trust for their opinions.  I discussed some of the weird things I found with my wife.  Some questions got answered, some didn't.  In the end, my shelf was much heavier than it was the year before.

Some of my questions were along these lines:

1. Why do the accounts of the creation in Genesis, Moses, and Abraham differ?  And why does the account in the Endowment differ even more?  I can see Genesis and Abraham both having flaws, because they were translated.  But Moses and the Endowment were both revealed directly to Joseph, so they should both be 'perfect.'
2. I believe that science has shown that evolution is true, but how does that work with Creation then?  This is a real conundrum.
3. What death before the fall of Adam?  How could evolution have worked if there was no death?
4. Speaking of Adam, how do we get the diversity of the human race from two people?  Don't tell me that God cursed Cain to be a black man....
5. Again, how do we account for human remains that are older than 7000 years?  Are you really going to say that radio-carbon dating is a fraud?
6. How could the great flood have happened at all?  So many questions here...

1. Do you know how fast the flood waters would have to accumulate in order to cover the entire earth in 40 days?  Remember that volume increases with the cube of the radius.  Assuming the earth was shaped differently (fewer mountains) water would have to accumulate at a rate of more than 3 inches per *minute* for 40 days straight.  And that is if the highest mountain was only 15000 feet.  To flood today's earth it would take closer to 6 inches of rain per minute.  And that is over the WHOLE earth, not just some localized flash flood.
2. And where did all this water come from?
3. Where did the water go?  (Can we say water cycle here?)
4. How is it possible that two of every kind of animal (and seven of every clean beast) could fit on an ark.
5. Maybe he left some animals off the boat.  But then where do we get the sheer diversity of animals on the earth in the last 5000 years?  Even evolution cannot provide for so many creatures in such a short time.
6. What about the animal food?
7. What about the animal poo?
8. What about the diversity of the human race?  All from eight people now.
7. Why did the patriarchs live for so long? 400-800 years was a 'normal' lifespan.  Two hundred years ago, 60 years was a long life.  Now with medical and scientific advances, we might push that out to 90 for me.  I know a lot of good Mormons who have never touched tea, coffee, alcohol, etc., and are not headed toward that 200-400 year life-span that Brigham Young was talking about.  How did they live so long?
8. The God of The Old Testament was a very vengeful, jealous, racist God.  He said so himself.  He showed it with his actions:  merciless genocide, striking people down, sending plagues, floods, requiring human and animal sacrifice.  Is this really the same God as the 'Love they neighbor as thyself' God of The New Testament?
9. Either the title High Priest means something different in the Old and New Testaments than it does in the restored church because otherwise the children of Israel never did really have to live without the Melchizedek priesthood (as was taught to me in my youth.)  And the sealing/binding powers that were restored via Elijah?  He must have had the higher priesthood because that is not Aaronic stuff.  Along these lines, they had the Melchizedek priesthood in the Book of Mormon so they must have just gotten it from Lehi while they were still in Jerusalem then, right?

I probably had other questions too, but I can't remember them all right now.  But that was a good start.  The problem with many of those questions was that as I tried to answer them, the answers I found only brought up more questions.  I was starting to feel the shelf getting heavier.  But I stayed strong.

Religion Sucks?

Let's get started with a smash-up high thought.  This web comic was shared with me a few days back and I think it really resonates with what I am currently feeling about religion.  Kudos to theoatmeal.com.

After you have read it (two or three times), consider this question: is your religion really making you a better person, or do you act like any of the characters portrayed in the comic.

Really, I think the title should have been "Does your religion make you a better human," but that doesn't have quite the same ring to it.