Je suis pas Charlie

I am an ass. And damn proud of it too.

--Charlie

I am not Charlie. Charlie is an ass. But I am Charlie's brother; I love Charlie and believe that even though he is an ass, he deserves to live a life free from fear. It doesn't matter that Charlie makes fun of things you hold dear.

They were human. Just like you. Each of the cartoonists at Charlie Hebdo was a human; with a life; and a family and friends. You killed Charlie, you bastards! I feel angry. I am furious. You behaved like a two-year-old throwing a tantrum. "You don't hit!" I tell my kids. You don't kill, I tell the adults. WTF!?! I shouldn't have to tell you that. I don't even have words for this.

Words are just that, words. They may hurt, but they don't kill. Drawings are just another form of words. Words that are blasphemous to one may not be to another. Given the vast variety of religions and gods that are held in belief by the human population on this planet, the list of blasphemies that could be uttered is very long indeed. And it is not possible to circumlocute around all of them. We, as a species need to develop a thicker skin; be slower to take offense, even when offense was inteded.

The artists of Charlie Hebdo are magnificent at what they do. They poke fun at everything. Nothing is sacred. In fact if it *is* sacred to someone, they will likely poke fun at it just because it is. This is why I say they are asses. I commonly refer to Richard Dawkins as an ass as well. Sometimes it takes an ass to get the point across because all of us pansies are carefully tiptoeing around, too afraid to offend. So I stand up for Charlie Hebdo and their right to be a collective ass.

I am a pacifist. I do not believe that killing of another human is ever justified. Let me make that clear. Killing is always the wrong answer, even if the other person is an ass.

Thinking outside of the box

I recently attempted to engage in civil discussion about the Ordain Women (OW) movement in a forum. How did that go, you ask? Not so well. I mean I am pretty it was a waste of time and effort because everything I said fell on deaf ears. It turns out that there are some topics in Mormonism that are taboo to the point of anathema. Literally. There is a woman professor at this very moment under 'investigation' at BYU-Idaho for expressing her personal opinion on her Facebook page. A former student read her remarks and anonymously turned her in to the honor code office. Now has to talk with her bishop, department head, maybe the dean, and who knows what after that to see if she is aligned with the school honor code and church views. Yikes. If she is found to not align with the honor code and church views, her job could be terminated. Anathema.

This is how Mormonism forces people to tow the party line. You agree with us or you get kicked out (and by inference go to Hell.) Some topics are worse than others, but any outspoken idea that does not fit within the correlated doctrine of the church can put you on the outside. OW is one of those ideas. And really it is not so far fetched. Other Christian churches have allowed women (or gasp! homosexuals) become ministers or pastors holding the priesthood. But not Mormonism. It is still waiting for God to reveal to its privileged, white, male, prejudiced leadership that this is the right thing to do. But this won't happen any time soon because the patriarchy must protect its position of power. Don't even mention that SO many women could be wonderful bishops or other leaders. So many are willing and able. The church is overlooking half of its adult population for positions of service just because they are female.

[ It turns out that your experience will widely vary from ward to ward, stake to stake. The ward I am currently in, though not exactly active, has a very understanding bishop, who really is Christ-like and loving. He knows who I am and what I believe (or don't, as the case may be) and all he asks is, "Is there anything I can do for you or your family?" Awesome. Now if all wards and stakes in the church could be so inclusive. ]

Another form of sanction besides excommunication is revocation of a temple recommend. One of the questions is: "Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?" So agreeing with OW at this point in time is technically in violation of the questions asked to get a temple recommend. Apparently I am not worthy.

There is so much vitriol on Facebook and other social media sites against any pro-OW discussion. Only in private circles does any reasonable discussion take place. The funniest thing about this is that the people who are so anti-OW would likely about face if the prophet came out tomorrow and announced that women are now eligible for the priesthood. But until that happens, the topic is not up for discussion. Shut it down.

But who am I to talk? I opened my mind to discussion and new ideas and completely lost my faith. So maybe it is better to shut it down and push out the riffraff.

Beyond Mere Replication

We have the power to defy the selfish genes of our birth and, if necessary, the selfish memes of our indoctrination.

--Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene

By nature, all organisms will tend to look out for their own (genes) best interest. That is what The Selfish Gene is all about. It is not about a gene that makes organisms selfish, but rather how the genes will ultimately program organisms to better replicate themselves. Not that genes have that kind of foresight, but it is more of a trial and error, feedback-reinforced cycle that we call natural selection. Basically, genes that fail to propagate to the next generation will not be seen again. Replicate or die.

In many cases this causes the organisms themselves to behave in rather selfish manners. This includes humans. But as humans, we are among the few species that might possibly rise above this selfish gene-level programming to be better individuals and better as a whole.

"I'm gonna tell Dad." "I share no kinship with that individual!"

--SMBC episode 3101 by Zach Weiner

Life as a 'higher' organism, whatever that may mean, implies to me that our concern should be more than just what our genetics would dictate. In the cited SMBC episode, the mother says that she has no kinship with her child's father. While she has no kinship with the father, she has a vested interest in keeping him around so he can contribute energy in ensuring success of THEIR offspring. But maybe it rings more true in this comic strip because the mother now has a cloned daughter that carries 100% of her DNA, so there is not as much need for the sexually produced daughter that only carries 50% of her DNA. We don't currently have a way for people to clone themselves commercially, so our most selfish of desires (to live forever, either ourselves or through our DNA legacy) cannot be fulfilled quite yet. But I digress....

Our legacy is carried on through our offspring which each carry 50% of our DNA. Because the portion carried may overlap, there is no way to guarantee that all of our DNA is copied into our children, but obviously the more kids we have the higher the probability that we have not missed any of our DNA. But what I would like to argue is that it is not just our kids that carry our DNA. Each of our parents shares half our DNA. And our aunts and uncles share a quarter, as do our grandparents and grandchildren. Our first cousins share one-eighth of our DNA. Or wait, they share 99.99% of our DNA. What am I thinking?!? We are all HUMAN, which means we all share 99.99% of our DNA. Hell, we share 99.5% of our DNA with chimpanzees, and we don't even count them as humans. What I am trying to get at here is that we have moved the US and THEM line too far up the tree. If we push it back just to the point that separates us from the rest of Mammalia, then that leaves a big US. Like almost seven billion of us. Say it again.... There are almost seven billion of *us*. You and I are one kind. You and I may not have the same mother, but we are siblings. Nearly identical in every way except those that don't count (hair color, skin color, eye color, height, weight, strength, etc.)

This is our chance to take that step, to learn ourselves what it means to be inclusive, to teach our kids to love humankind, each and every one. There is no reason for killing. There is not reason for violence. There is no reason for hurt. Realization of who we are (NOT sons and daughters of a vengeful god), brother, sister, mother, father, all of the same family, can lead to a world of peace, a world where we can grow and become much more than mere replication could have ever imagined.

American Gods

This is a bad land for gods.... The old gods are ignored. The new gods are as quickly taken up as they are abandoned, cast aside for the next big thing. Either you've been forgotten, or you're scared you're going to be rendered obsolete, or maybe you're just getting tired of existing on the whim of people.

--Shadow in American Gods by Neil Gaiman

American Gods was a really fun read. I like the strange world that Neil Gaiman came up with. Or was he just writing the reality that he saw? That is what I would like to discuss here. Ever since the possibility that God may not be what I think He is, I started to wonder why religion and gods exist at all. This story explains many of my thoughts in a very artful way.

Gods started out as a way to explain all the things.

 At some point in our prehistory, one of our ancestors found the mental capacity to think about something besides survival; food, protection, and reproduction. They had questions like: why lightning? or what after death? or cause of random event? Maybe the first questions were even more basic than these. "Some external power makes it so" seems to be a reasonable answer when you don't have any other answer. As one person told another person this idea, it spread like wildfire because there was no evidence to the contrary.

People believe. It's what people do. They believe. And then they will not take responsibility for their beliefs; they conjure things, and do not trust the conjurations. People populate the darkness; with ghosts, with gods, with electrons, with tales. People imagine, and people believe: and it is that belief, that rock-solid belief, that makes things happen.

--Shadow in American Gods by Neil Gaiman

We believe not because we want to believe, but because the evidence compels us to believe. It would have made my life a lot easier to just believe that God exists and not deal with the fallout with my believing family, but the evidence compelled me to believe that there probably (very, very, very likely) is no god, thus my exodus from religion. But when fire still seems like magic, and lightning can only be explained by supernatural powers, believing in a god only makes sense.

There are fewer things that need explaining.

 The gods (and mostly Yahweh, because he was the main God in the region at that time) started to loose their mighty grasp on the minds of their creators sometime around the Renaissance. People started to think, reason, and understand; science started to explain the mysteries of God. Copernicus, in my opinion, though he was a Christian, pried back the first finger of God, allowing later freethinkers to finish Him off. Stating that the earth is NOT the center of the universe starts one thinking about why God would have created humankind, the pinnacle of His creation, off to the side, putting the sun at the center of our galaxy instead. So maybe we aren't as important as we thought? As science and reason advanced, we found that lightning (and all weather in general) is not caused by a vengeful or loving god, but rather it is a natural part of the earth's ecosystem, water cycle, etc. The same goes for earthquakes and volcanoes, tsunamis and hurricanes. Not a vengeful god that is trying to punish us, but rather the earth, doing what it does without malice or forethought. Medicine has come a long way from humours and leeches to antibiotics and DNA sequencing. Thanks to Darwin, humankind no longer has reason to doubt that we are cousins to every living thing on earth.

Gods die. And when they truly die they are unmourned and unremembered. Ideas are more difficult to kill than people, but they can be killed, in the end.

--American Gods by Neil Gaiman

The gods are going extinct.

It would take hours to list all the things that were once ascribed to gods that we now have non-supernatural reasons for. The tenacious grip of god has turned tenuous. The gods of yesteryear are merely the stuff of myth and legend today. If it were not for the vast quantity of writing and digital caching of the Internet, they would fade away even faster. For this same reason, it seems that Yahweh (and Allah for that matter, though they are really just two names for the same God) have had a strong grip on the world because their stories are immortalized in the written word.

If it makes you more comfortable, you could simply think of it as metaphor. Religions are, by definition, metaphors, after all: God is a dream, a hope, a woman, an ironist, a father....

--American Gods by Neil Gaiman

Someday, I expect, that even though it says in the writing that those books of scripture are the word of God written by his holy prophets, people will come to realize that it is just a story (and not a very good one at that). They will realize that religion is a metaphor, a tool that was used to calm the doubts and fears of the masses to allow civilization to flourish.

What is religion anyway?

Yes, I believe that we are genetically inclined to believe in religion. I think that Richard Dawkins has some great points in The Selfish Gene and The God Delusion.  I think that religion evolved as a social mechanism to help mankind form societies where intelligence, peace and prosperity could thrive, thus further separating us from our cousins and reaffirming the dominance of our species. But, as Dawkins says in The Selfish Gene, "Whenever a system of communication evolves, there is always the danger that some will exploit the system for their own ends." This is one of the dangers of religion: leaders wielding their power for their own ends, usually with detrimental effect to many others. Now that science has squeezed all the gods into the cracks of the unknown, another one of the issues I have with religion is that it reinforces ignorance and praises blind faith. I find it hilarious that many Mormons (members and leaders) are terrified of reading "anti-Mormon literature" because it can pull you away from the true teachings of the church. Yet, if there are things that are that dangerous to your "truths" you may want to examine those truths again to see if they match up with reality.

Natural selection builds child brains with a tendency to believe whatever their parents and tribal elders tell them. Such trusting obedience is valuable for survival: the analogue of steering by the moon for a moth. But the flip side of trusting obedience is slavish gullibility. The inevitable by-product is vulnerability to infection by mind viruses.

--The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins

As terrible as the phrase sounds (and I think the pointed wording was on purpose, because we all know that Richard Dawkins is an ass), it really rings true to me. I believed as a child with all my heart in the truth of the gospel as taught by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I knew it was true because I was taught that it was true. I had become a carrier to pass it onto my children as well. And I did. Isn't that how viruses spread? Or how 'viral marketing' works? One person to the next because of how great it is. When you are a believer, your religion is the one true religion and it is great, so you want to pass it on. The newly indoctrinated take over the cause and make it their own.

Now if religion did no harm, I would not have so much problem with it. But you saw how the gods in American Gods fought each other. Their subjects do as well. They are commanded by their gods to conquer other unbelieving nations and impose the good word on the infidels. Nearly universally, they oppress women and homosexuals (and every other minority). Because of this, I am somewhat anti-religious. Yes they do great good, but until we can convince the leaders of these religions of the need for HUMANITY, that there is no "us and them," that we should not be fighting, but helping, lifting up instead of oppressing, most all religions should be torn down.

Now I get off my high horse.

What is a Friend

Friends are folks that despite yourself
Are beside you, buoyant as can be.
Like family, but not quite the same
'Cause they fell from a different tree.

No need to judge a friend or argue;
He's not your cousin or brother.
Accepting differences between you and me
Requires no common mother.

--Me

Sorry for the cheesy poetry. I occasionally get the urge to wax poetic and I am going to blame it on my gay dad. His execution is just more refined than mine.

I don't have a lot of friends. Well, at least not close ones. I did get an email from a friend that I haven't seen since I stopped going to church saying we should have lunch sometime. I was curious to know if it was because he missed our snarky conversations at the back of the primary room or if he was prompted by someone at church to reach out again to the less active. After I asked myself the question, I think I have to go with the former because he doesn't really seem the type to reach out if he doesn't want to.

Lunch confirmed it. He just wanted to say hi and catch up a bit. It was very nice and refreshing. Not to mention good food too. He didn't ask why he hasn't seen me at church more than twice in the last year. We talked about work, vacation, houses, kids, etc. All safe topics. I don't know if he was itching to talk about my apostasy or not, but this is a thank-you note because he didn't.

Leaving the church was a pretty easy decision for me. Once I made up my mind, I feel like I am fairly OUT. But telling people never really got easier. I haven't really told any of my friends that I am not that close to. Most of my friends from BYU don't know that I am an atheist (or agnostic or whatever). It doesn't really come up. And I don't feel it is really that important to our relationship (not that I am really *close* with most of my facebook friends). So I carry on not telling people. If anyone asks, I won't hold back, but not even friends from church that I have talked to ask. In a way, that helps me because our friendship should not be based on religion or theology. I don't ask any of them if they believe in the flying spaghetti monster. And I don't care.

Maybe it's not telling friends that is difficult. The hard part is bringing it up in the first place. Why is it so hard to talk about that 900 lb. gorilla that is standing next to me?

Telling Mom: Revisited

Mom, it's okay. I'm okay. I'm an atheist.

--The Thinking Atheist

This is the sort of conversation I had with my mother in person. It hurts more than words can say. People can say terrible thing (me included) in situations like these. I wish sometimes that it hadn't gone down like it did. I hope when my kids come to me with something, I can react differently.

Yes this is staged, but it rings so true.

Cell-icide: drawing a line in the sands of abortion

What bothers me is that if a rover
on Mars discovered a single cell organism,
the science world would be abuzz
about the discovery of life.

But discover a single cell organism
in the human uterus, and they refuse
to recognize it as life.

Hypocrites.

--Repeated again and again on the internet

I recently saw (for the thousandth time) this comment on Facebook. This pro-life argument lacks steam because it's not that I don't recognize the fertilized egg in a uterus as life, it's that I don't recognize that it is human. So terminating its life is no different to me than pulling a carrot from the ground, using anti-bacterial hand wash or squishing a mosquito. The true hypocrites in this are those that refuse an abortion to 'save a life' when the mother may die or the child, when born, may die an early death anyway from some terrible debilitating disease. Who are you to sentence a mother to death or another human to lead a life that he never would have chosen to live?

I think we can all agree that killing humans is bad. The big question then becomes, "What is a human?" The North Dakota 'Personhood Amendment' would define that a fertilized egg, or zygote, is human and therefore unlawful to abort. I think they could go farther. Even human egg cells are alive. They respirate just like any other human cell. Human sperm cells are alive as well. In some religions it is already unlawful according to God's laws to 'spill seed' or masturbate. Enlisting a federal ban on masturbation might help prevent killing all these innocent sperm. We should also take this procreation debate one step further and ensure that no human egg cells are wasted; we should ban menstruation. It would be required for all women of menstruating age to become pregnant to prevent the loss of the precious life of these human eggs.

Sound a little bit crazy to you? Me too.

I don't know a man alive who would vote on a *secret ballot* for a ban on masturbation in order to 'save seed.' Maybe publicly they would support a ban, but not when it comes down to the actual vote.  And I am sure that all pro-life women would support a ban on menstruation requiring them to be constantly pregnant to save their eggs from certain doom and destruction.

Let's get real. We need to draw a line in the sand, but let's do it with logic, not emotion; science, not god.

What IS the difference between the amoeba on Mars and a human zygote? Potential. The amoeba will not grow into a multi-cellular, intelligent, life form. I am going to pull a fast one and swap out that amoeba for a chimpanzee zygote. Now, both will grow into multi-cellular, intelligent, life forms. The only difference is that one will grow into a human and the other a chimpanzee. Since we kill chimpanzees all the time, it is okay to abort a chimpanzee embryo. Wait! We kill humans all the time too....

If we use DNA to compare the difference between the human and chimpanzee zygotes, we find that we share 98.7% of our DNA in common with chimpanzees. So we are really close. At the zygote, blastocyst and embryo stages, I am pretty sure that it would be impossible to tell a chimpanzee from a human. Well other than the obvious fact that chimpanzee embryos grow in a chimpanzee uterus. It should be possible to find some point at which it is obvious that a human fetus is really a human fetus by observation.

Just because it looks like a human does not necessarily make the thing a human. Can it sustain life outside of the uterus? If no, I would still argue that it still has a parasitic relationship with its host. Why didn't I say mother? Because theoretically we could come up with some machine that could serve as a host to a fetus. Doctors can already keep a fetus alive long before the 40-week mark.

We can take this too far in the other direction too, though. A one-year-old child cannot survive on his own. He requires food, shelter, protection, and love. That sounds like a parasitic relationship to me. So really only independent adults are human. You don't like your needy teenager? Abort him!

It turns out that we can really draw a line in the sand anywhere from pre-conception through early adulthood. Almost all using the same logic. The saddest part of this is that while we debate this, people are dying; people are getting killed. Abortion clinics are getting bombed. Teenage girls are dying from back-alley abortions gone wrong. Where is the humanity. I don't care if you believe in a god or not. Do you love your fellow humans? Maybe you don't believe that it is right to have an abortion. So don't have an abortion. But understand that maybe someone else has a different point of view on what a human is. Maybe you are not human to them.

Personally, I don't believe that abortion is a good practice. If you don't want to have a baby, don't have unprotected sex. But I can't fault a person for drawing the line at 10 or 20 weeks because I really don't know if that is a human yet. Because there is so much gray area in this matter, it is hard to say exactly where to draw the line. I don't want to snuff out human life, but I don't yet really understand what it means to be human. I am on a journey of learning to find that answer for myself. In the mean time, I don't plan on killing anybody: pro-life or pro-choice.

The Book of Mormon Musical

A couple of weekends ago, I was able to attend a performance of The Book of Mormon musical. In two words, it was "f@ckin' awesome." That is not language that I normally use, given it is pretty offensive to many people, but Trey Parker and Matt Stone have no trouble using it when creating their shows. The show had some very offensive material in it, but it seemed to be more an integral part of the show rather than its actual content; like the makeup or costumes for the characters.

Of course, parody isn't reality, and it's the very distortion that makes it appealing and often funny. The danger is not when people laugh but when they take it seriously—if they leave a theater believing that Mormons really do live in some kind of a surreal world of self-deception and illusion

--Michael Otterson, Head of Public Affairs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

I don't think that anyone who actually watched the show thinks that Mormons are that crazy, living in a world of self-deception and illusion, but the truth is that many people (not just Mormons) really do live in that world. What I take from his quote is not that the danger is believing that Mormons live that way, but really, actually living that way. Living in reality (whatever that is) rather than self-deception is the only healthy way to live. I believe that humor is also an important part of a healthy life. Being a post-Mormon, part of me really wanted to see the Mormons getting poked in the eye. And they did, but it wasn't so bad as it could have been. I actually think that Trey and Matt took an almost sympathetic and kind sort of poking at the Mormons (and really at religion on a larger scale).  As my wife said, "It was very crude, but also kind of sweet."

I watched the South Park: About Mormons episode way back when I was still a true-believing Mormon. I found it amusing to hear a complete outsider's view of my beliefs and had to laugh a little. I didn't find it offensive and it did not lead me to lose my testimony. I would have to say that same about The Book of Mormon. It was funny to see a slightly twisted view of what Mormons really do believe. It was a great satire. As such, it gave a lot of food for thought. Some that the LDS church could use to feed its fleeing masses.

I have maggots in my scrotum!

--Village Doctor, The Book of Mormon Musical

The points chosen for abuse were exceptionally well chosen.

1. How can a first-world raised, nineteen (and now eighteen) year-old young man even start to comprehend the problems facing an impoverished, third-world village?
• Unless you have health, food, shelter, and safety, spiritual things don't matter. How can the Book of Mormon (or any book of scripture) cure your maggots, feed your family, keep you safe, etc.?
2. Is not acting on homosexual tendencies really just lying to yourself? Because lying is one of the big Ten.
• The song "Turn It Off" was hilarious.
3. Sal Tlake a-City does not really exist; it's a metaphor!
• All religion should be taken metaphorically. Otherwise you get terrible stuff happening.
4. Some take a lot more time to grow up.
• Arnold learned quickly that it didn't really matter what he was teaching the people; the important thing was to help them—in ways that really mattered at their level.
• Keven, on the other hand took a much longer time to really love the people and see that the Book of Mormon really could not help them (or at least until he could cure AIDS, secure the food supply, guarantee safety, and remove all scrotum maggots.)
5. Mormon Hell was a funny place.
• It's true that Mormon's have a different view on Heaven and Hell than much of the rest of Christianity, but abandoning your mission companion does not put you in the same place as Hitler or Genghis Khan.
• Mormon Hell really is anywhere you are, knowing that you could be somewhere better. So the second level of the Celestial Kingdom of Heaven would be Hell, knowing that you weren't in the first level. But to someone in the Terrestrial or Telestial worlds, both are evidence that where you are is Hell.
6. How is your story really better than mine?
• We all live believing some stories. It is likely that none of the stories in anyone's head are true. So why is the Book of Arnold any less precious than the Book of Mormon?
7. "Hasa diga eebowai" is not a bad way to live, but a better way might be to embrace a way of life that does not depend on God in the first place.

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...

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.

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!