The Hoarding of The Solstice

For as long as I can remember, I have been hearing the phrase: "Keep Christ in Christmas". When I was young, I mistakenly thought this was in reference to the obvious commercialization of the Holiday Season. As I grew older and became a non-believer, I began to realize that the expression "Keep Christ in Christmas" is really an attempt of some Christians to keep the Holiday Season the exclusive domain of Christianity. However, a brief look of the history of the Holiday Season clearly shows that neither Christmas nor its traditions are Christian in origin.

First and foremost: no one really knows when (or if) Yeshua Nazrene (Jesus of Nazareth) was born. So why is the Jesus' birth celebrated on December the 25th?

The reason is quite simple: There were a number of Pagan Holidays celebrated around the 25th of December and the early church "comandeered" these Holidays. Amongst the ones that influenced the decision of the early church was the celebration of "Natalis Solus Invicti" (birth of the unconquered sun), the birthday of Mithras (Persian sun god) and the celebration of Saturnalia. The common theme here is the rebirth of the sun after the winter solstice.

Even most of the traditions are Pagan in root. Amongst them are:

*Mistletoe: Which originated with the Norse religion.

*Christmas Trees: The origin of which can be traced as far back as the ancient Egyptians. The practice of bringing a tree into the house and decorating it was condemned in the Bible. In fact, even up to the 1840's, Christmas Trees were seen to be pagan in the United States.

*Carols: First Carols were sung by Pagans around stone circles during their Holy Days.

*Santa Claus: If you think the whole Santa Claus mythos started and ended with St. Nicholas, you have another think coming.

About the only thing that is Christian about Christmas is the abbreviation "Xmas". An abbreviation that absolutely drives many Christians nuts.

So considering the Pagan roots of Christmas and the fact many people celebrate other Holidays (such as Kwanza, Chanukah and even Yule) during this time of year; why do many Christians have a fit if Christ isn't kept in Christmas? There are many different possible reasons, but I would guess these people feel both insulted and threatened if one of their main religous Holidays is shown any kind of disrespect (whether real or just perceived). Interestingly enough, not even knowing the origin of their Holiday is showing it the supreme disrespect. This isn't defending baby Jesus from a "War on Christmas", it's hoarding the winter solstice celebration all to themselves.

So if a person comes up to you this Holiday Season and wishes you something else besides "Merry Christmas" do remember it is probably not a sign of disrespect or an attempt to be politically correct. It is probably just a case of different strokes for different folks.

That being said: I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas. That is the traditional way this Atheist celebrates the Solstice.

A Response To Tisha

On Sunday night, I received a tweet from my brother's girlfriend. She is a very kind person (and must be to put up with my youngest brother) and someone whom I hold in very high esteem. The tweet reads:

@tisharjohnson: @wizardoftodd Todd do you actually feel anger towards people who believe in some sort of higher diety? I'm just curious :)

The answer I gave was "not really" and in a later tweet, I promised to give her a full reply. My full answer is the following:

Tisha, I can understand how you might wonder if I have a lot of anger towards Theists, Deists etc. simply because they believe in a higher power. While I freely admit I express a lot of anger in my tweets, rest assured it is NOT simply because most people believe in some sort of "higher deity". I would find such anger to be both misplaced and absolutely silly. It would, in my humble opinion, be akin to being angry at anyone simply for disagreeing with me. Such an anger would be a waste of time and energy. Such an anger would be downright stupid. The anger I display is because of the deplorable way non-believers are treated, the vast amount of misinformation spread about Atheism and some of the things done in the name of a god.

I get angry when polls not only show Atheists are not trusted, but now there's evidence we are as distrusted as rapists.

I get angry when non-believers are openly discriminated against.

Other examples include:
    
     *Eight states have Constitutional bans against any
       non-believer from holding public office.

     *41st President, George H.W. Bush stating that
      Atheists are neither patriots nor citizens.

     *Non-believers are denied membership in the
       Boy Scouts of America.

     *Non-believers are, many times, denied custody of
       their children because they are non-believers.
    
     *Atheists are discriminated against in the military.

     *Atheists are blamed for natural disasters and
       indirectly for the 9-11 attacks.

     *Then, when we complain about being treated so
       shabbily; we're told to shut up.

If such a discrimination would occur to any other group, there would be a massive public outcry.

These types of discrimination do not just happen to other people. In fact, I too have experienced and seen, first hand, discrimination for being an Atheist by my own family:

When my older brother was outed for being an Agnostic, my Moms side of the family threatened to boycott the wedding. When I was married, I wanted my Grandparents to attend. My Mom said don't even bother asking them as I was not being wed in a Church.

There are other examples of how my own family discriminated against me (mostly cousins, aunts and uncles and grandparents) but those are the two examples that anger me the most.

Obviously, not every Theist discriminates against Atheists. However, virtually all of the discrimination against Atheists comes from Theists. I do not mean to paint all Theists with one broad brush but in my criticism of religion it may appear as though I do.

I get angry at the vast amount of misinformation spread about Atheists. I have been, personally, accused of being immoral, a Satanist (no offense to the LaVeyians, I find you guys more tolerable than many Christians) and wanting to destroy religion.

As far as being immoral, I find such a statement to be the biggest load of poppy cock I have ever seen. Atheists have a disproprtinately low presence in the prison population and less likely to file for divorce than Theists. Nations with the highest populations of Atheists are also the most peaceful.

As far as the notion of being a Satanist or a devil worshipper is concerned I simply think the ones making such a claim should invest in a dictionary and start using it.

Now for the assertion that Atheists wish to ban religion. While there are a minority of Atheists who do wish for a ban, the major Atheist activist groups simply wish to uphold the First Ammendment. Government institutions that promote Theism are engaging in an unlawful and discriminatory practice. People are free to practice their religion but not promote it in the government.

Once again, not every Theist spreads misinformation about Atheists. However, once again, virtually every piece of misinformation about Atheists comes from Theists. Also, I am not angry at the Theists who do not spread misinformation.

I am angry at some of the things some Theists do in the name of their god. Examples include, but are not limited to:

     *Modern day witch hunts in Africa.

     *Politicians who insist that the United States was
       founded on "Christian principles" despite evidence
       to the contrary.

     *Politicians trying to have religion taught in 
       publicly funded science class rooms.

     *The caste system in Hinduism.

     *Islamic "honor killings"

     *The "Code of Silence" in the Catholic Church
       regarding paedophila.

Yes, not all Theists are resposible for these things so I am not angry at all Theists. However, as you may guess: I do have anger by the boat-load.

On a final note, I also have anger for the Theists who see such things happening, recognize the wrong doings and shrug their shoulders and do not speak out against it. By remaining silent, many injustices continue to be committed. 

On the same token, I have seen many Atheists attack Theists simply because they are Theists. Oh yes, I'm downright pissed-off and embarrassed both about that.

Anyway, Tisha, I hope I've better explained both why I am angry and that I am not angry at all who believe in a higher deity.

Sincerely yours:
Todd

New York Cheesecake Recipe

Original recipe can be found here. (From MomsWhoThink.com)

New York Cheesecake

Ingredients:
1/3 cup butter, melted 1
1/2 cup cinnamon graham cracker crumbs
3 1/4 packages (8 oz. packages) cream cheese, softened
1 can 14 oz. sweetened condensed milk
2 tsp. vanilla extract
2 eggs

Directions:
1. Preheat oven to 300 degrees F.
Combine graham cracker crumbs and butter;
press evenly on bottom of 9 inch pie pan.
2. In large mixing bowl, beat cream cheese until fluffy.
Gradually add sweetened condensed milk, beating until smooth.
3. Add vanilla and eggs, mix well. Pour into prepared pie pan.
4. Bake for 1 hour, turn off oven but leave cheesecake in
oven with door propped slightly open for an additonal hour.
5. Refrigerate at least 6 hours until firm.

A nice alternative to pecan or pumpkin pie this Thanksgiving.

Another Case of Misrepresenting The "9-11 Cross" Lawsuit

In yet another example of lazy journalism in regarding the American Atheist Lawsuit of the "9-11 Cross", Andrea Peyser of the New York Post has vomited up an op-ed worthy of Faux News. The first line in the article reads: "These atheists can go straight to hell,". Sadly, the article only goes downhill from there, sinking to depths I thought only Bill O'Reilly would go.

She talks about her interview with the leader of American Atheists, David Silverman, and positively does a happy dance when Silverman gets angry at the traffic (he was driving at the time) and says "god damn it".

As we talked, Silverman got lost in traffic en route to Newark Liberty Airport. And then I learned all I needed to know about atheists and their lack of belief.

"God damn it!" Silverman shrieked suddenly. "I hate this Newark so much!"

"Did you just say God damn it?" I asked incredulously.

"Don't put in the paper that I said God damn it!" he repeated. Um, too late.

Talk about a classic case of "gotcha" journalism. Ms. Peyser, when does using an interjection qualify as a profession of faith? Also, the lack of journalistic integrity of including said interjection that is clearly not only supposed to be off the record but also irrelevant to the story boggles the mind. The inclusion of Mr. Silverman's outburst in her article is all I need to know of both the amount of ethics and dedication to the truth Ms. Peyser has. Which, of course, is to say not one god damn bit!

If Ms. Peyser actually acted like a competent journalist, she would have checked out Mr. Silverman's op-ed in the Guardian. Here's an interesting tid-bit of information Ms. Peyser did not mention:

What we seek is any remedy that honours everyone equally, be they Christian, Muslim, Jew or atheist. This can either be done with a totally neutral memorial that concentrates on the tragedy and not religion, or one that allows everyone to put up a display of equal size and prominence. In the latter case, we have offered to pay for a display ourselves. If everyone is provided equal treatment, we will drop our lawsuit, because fair is fair.

So even though American Atheists have offered to pay for religous and philosophical symbols to honor all Americans, those in charge of the memorial have opted with a Christian symbol only. Apparently the Christians want their cross and to be martyred on it too.

If you think that American Atheists are still being nitpicky, consider the following:

Suppose a group Muslims found a twisted piece of steel in the World Trdae Center wreckage that roughly resembled a crescent moon. Further suppose that this group of Muslims came to the dubious conclusion that this "symbol of Islam" represented both the Muslim victims of 9-11 and the true spirit of Islam.  Now suppose then that these Muslims decided to display this symbol at the 9-11 Memorial to the exclusion of all other religions including Christianity. (Do remember that a good chunk of funding comes from the federal government.) What do you suppose would be the reaction of Christians then?

If you just had an "Aaaaah!" moment, welcome to my world.

So you see Ms. Peyers, this lawsuit isn't about excluding Christian symbols. It is not about enraging a majority in this country for the sake of enraging the majority. This lawsuit is about dragging the Christian majority off their high horse of privledge and making them obey the same laws as everybody else.

In the end, this lawsuit is the truly patriotic thing to do.

Another Case of A Former Atheist Talking About Atheism.

A couple of days ago, while on Twitter, I came upon a link to an article by Jennifer Fulwiler titled: 5 Catholic Teachings That Make Sense to Atheists. The very beginning of the blog post gave me some hope that there might actually be some hope that Ms. Fulwiler was going to, at least, attempt an honest dialouge with members of the skeptical community. She started off almost well enough by stating in the second paragraph:

Though atheists typically see all belief in the supernatural as unreasonable...

Alright, you got that part correct. The only real complaint I have with that statement is the fact she spelled Atheist with a lower case "a" instead of capitalizing it like she does for Christians. Sadly, though, she completes the sentence and the theme for the rest of her blog post becomes apparent:

...some doctrines, like the ones below, strike them as less crazy than others.

Right then and there she makes the idiotic claim that there are some types of supernatural beliefs that Atheists actually agree with. They are, in order:

1. Purgatory

Spiritual re-education camp for the soul to change you into a perfect being before you go to Heaven.

2. The Communion of Saints

Your dead relatives watch you when you eat, sleep, poop, masturbate, are the point man in a circle-jerk etc.

3. Veneration of Mary

After all, she's god's mommy!

4. Salvation for Non-Catholics and Non-Christians

Only works if you were born on Mars and never had a chance to hear and accept the word of god.

5. Apostolic Authority

God runs the Roman Catholic Church. That guy in the funny hat who protects paedophiles? He's like a human dictaphone with a hot-line to Jehovah.
**********************************************
The problem with all of these teachings, which I am sure you have figured out by now, is that they ALL presuppose you already believe in a god. If one believes in a god then they are, by definition, a Theist which is the direct opposite of being an Atheist. Rather than finding these teachings to be "less crazy" than other theistc doctrines, they are all 100% certified bat-shit crazy.

This load of fertilizer, comes from someone who makes the claim that she not only talks to Atheists but was also once an Atheist herself. This, after she acknowledges that Atheists believe that "...the supernatural is unreasonable." I have come to the conclusions that she wouldn't talk to an Atheist (willingly) to save her own life and she is lying through her prosteltyzing teeth when she claims she was once amongst the ranks of the unbelieving.

So there you have it. In the end, she's just another liar for Jesus. I thought there was a rule against that in their holy book. Somewhere near the front.