ABC's 20/20 on the Independent Fundamental Baptist Movement...

My future mom in law mentioned this in her comment on my previous blog post and it made me curious...so I went and found it...if you are interested in watching it....here it is...

Having watched this in its entirety I would like to make a couple of comments based on my personal experience.

1) I have heard of cases of child abuse in IFB churches but I would have to say that it is no more or no less than any other religious denomination (Catholics ring a bell?). Having said that I do not think that it is necessarily fair to paint all IFB with the broad brush just like I think there are well intentioned Catholics that do not condone or practice sexual misconduct I believe there are good people in the IFB movement. Having said that I believe that any environment that is built on absolute control results in an abuse of absolute control and there is little question that that abuse can extend and often does extend to sexual abuse as well as emotional, verbal and mental abuse.

2) I grew up in this environment and outside of the above comment about not all of them being guilty of sexual abuse or misconduct I would have to agree that the rest of it is pretty accurate. The demeaning and humbling of women, the public confessions of sins, the church "discipline", the insistence on corporal discipline, the absolute authority of the church and the pastor being the Man of God who is to be respected and obeyed.

As I watched it I remembered standing outside the Brightlight Baptist Church in Concord, NC and the pastor's wife telling me quite bluntly that my daughter's death was God's punishment on me for being in a movie theater. When my two month baby died I was in NC trying to start a church. That Saturday morning that she passed away I decided to take the morning off and rest and went to catch a movie, something that is very much taboo (as noted in my previous blog) but I have always been a bit of a non conformist. Hence the accusation from the pastor's wife.

I have my own personal beliefs, obviously being an atheist, about religion as a whole and I feel that all religion is built around control of some sort. I will admit freely though that not all things are not equal and some, such as the IFB, take it to a whole new level. The venom spouted by some of these pastors and preachers is scary and it is good to see that someone is speaking out on the abuse of control.

For those that might be interested on reading more you can look at these websites:

http://www.baptistdeception.com/

http://www.tinaandersonfoundation.org/

Welcome to the Cult...

I was raised Independent Baptist.  Independent Baptists are a special breed of Baptists.  As a matter of fact, they KNOW they are a special breed of Baptists.  They refer to themselves as Fundamentals.  As a matter of fact, one of the favorite books you will find they uphold is a little red book called trail of blood.  In this book they actually trace their lineage back to John, the Original Baptist.  I was raised with the understanding that while other sects. cults and religions may have representatives in Heaven, they will be there but saved with fear "pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh."  In other words, they barely got there.


I was raised in this holier than though system.  A system that is built around rules, control and fear.  A system that forces you into a mold, forces you into a mindset that you must accept without question, by faith.  Now by no means do I put all Christians in the same boat.  I understand that not all religions are the same.  If this doesn't apply to you then don't take offense.  If it does...then if the shoe fits...wear it.


What brings all this up you might ask?  Well my oldest two children live with my ex.  When she and I separated she moved back to Michigan where her family is from and there she filed for divorce and pretty much won everything she wanted as far as child custody and child support.  As a result I get my children about two and half months every year.  The influence I have on my kids, unfortunately, is limited, so I try to make the most of what limited time I have.

My ex is still in church.  Suffice it to say that the church has provided a guise of respectability and an unfortunate umbrella of anonymity and a silent and indifferent approval to her past and present indiscretions.  In short she talks the talk and plays the game properly and she does as she will and usually does not get caught.  When she does get caught she moves someplace else to a new cover.  It has worked for her unfortunately.

The church she is in is extreme right.  They were so right wing that when they wanted to form a Tea Party chapter in their church and the Tea Party people said they did not want to be affiliated with a specific church, the church formed their own, right of the Tea Party, group.  At least that is the story I have been told.  In this church they have a Christian School, something that is very big among radicals.  They have either Christian Schools or do home schooling.  The purpose is obvious: No outside influences.  They call it "raising a child in the way he should go" but ultimately it is exactly what it sounds like...brainwashing.  I know.  I was raised in a home school environment.   Heck, Christian schools were too liberal for my parents.

So the point of all this is that my children went out with their aunt who in her good will and doting way took the kids to watch a few movies.  Now these movies were all PG or less...to be specific..Gnomeo and Juliet, Rango and Hop.  ALl clean and goo fun.   However, the school found out and gave both of them ten demerits  (basically negative points).  My son already had five points (that he deserved) for not doing his homework and lying about it.  The five points with the additional ten for going to the movies resulted in fifteen points and an automatic suspension for him.  I have several problems with this:

1) How does a couple of children going to a movie affect the school and the education of said children. In short...not at all.  This is about control.  Pure and simple.  This is part of what I hate about church and about about religion in general; the incessant need to control every aspect of a persons life, even in areas they have no place.  As a matter of fact, it ill affects their education since my son is missing a day for watching a movie with an animated bunny in it!  Really????  How does that help him?

2) The standard is hypocritical.  Simply put if they had watched these same movies in the living room of their home it would have been ok.  But since they went to a movie theater it was evil and worthy of disciplinary action.  Really???  How hypocritical is that?  How totally and completely illogical is that?

3) The children (particularly my son) felt relieved because they recieved "grace" in the disciplinary action.  Apparently the "crime" called for ten points PER movie...in other words 30 points and that would have resulted in be expelled....can you imagine?  Expelled from school for going to a movie theater?  But the fact that such control has been placed on the thought process of my son that he feels relieved he only got ten points and a one day suspension instead of getting expelled concerns me.  He should be outraged that such control is being assumed by people that have no right to.

4) The first thing my son said to me is that he had signed an agreement to the guidelines and therefore had to follow them.  Simply put...that is bullshit.  My son is twelve years old.  He does not have any choice in the matter.  You either sign it or you don't go to school.  You either sign it or you are considered a rebel in need of pastoral counseling, or worse, need to be put in a "boy's home" (basically a brainwashing boot camp for rebels).  You sign it or become a disappointment to your parents, your pastor and your peers.  That is not a commitment, that is not a vow, that is not a word of honor...that is coercion and mental and emotional blackmail.

5) I spoke to their aunt and you know what?  The kid's mom (my ex) gave her approval and permission.  But the kids are the ones to get punished?  Really?  Where are the adults in this scenario?  How do you coerce a vow out of children, minors, and then punish them when the adults that in charge give their permission and approval?  What kind of message does that send?  That not even your parents have more control over you then they do, then their religious cult and facist regime.  The message is clear, your parents only have as much control over you as they allow and when there is a conflict it is their authority that rules supreme.

I will tell you how this ends, for I have lived this story before in my own life.  My daughter is already challenging them.  This is something that comes up in her report card every quarter.  She challenges, she questions...and they call it an attitude problem.  She is not completely unaffected by this episode, she is just not affected as they want her to be.  Simply put, she doesn't care, she thinks it is ridiculous and she has no qualms in repeating the "offense".  They are, in effect, pushing her away, which is, of course, just fine by me.  I only hope my son reaches his teenage years and follows his sister's example and begins questioning and challenging.  With any luck my children will begin a  journey of questioning of their own.  And ironically, considering how my ex and her cult have done their best to limit my influence on the children, it will be the church itself that pushes them away and starts them on their journey of inquisitive minds.

Is it really easier being an atheist?

Note: The following post will use the broad terms of "Atheists" and "Christians".  I do not presume to speak for everybody in either of those groups.  When I speak of "atheists" I speak first of myself and those that I know with the understanding that there are exceptions to every rule.  The same goes for when I speak of "Christians", I speak of my personal experiences as a former Christian and my experience with other Christians.  Do not take the broad statement personal.  If the shoe fits wear it, if not then be a grown up and put the shoe back. Don't get your feelings hurt by insisting on personalizing statements.

One of the common statements I hear and read when people are talking about atheists is that it is so much easier to be an atheist than it is to be a believer.  The thought process behind this is that faith is much harder to hold onto and that it takes more strength of will to have faith than it does to reject faith.  The argument goes that it takes more effort to believe in something than not to.  Some go so far as to accuse atheists of being lazy and that they reject faith because they do not understand it.

As I thought on this I thought how naive.  The person that thinks that it is easier to be an atheist has never understood what it means to be an atheist.  I have been both a believer and an atheist and I would like to make a few comments on the idea that it is easier to be an atheist.  Mind you....this is my personal experience and that is all I can talk about.

What it really means to be lost...

I remember what it felt like when, after several years of searching, reading, processing and finally reaching the logical conclusion that the Bible is not infallible truth and that there is no evidence to attest to the existence of a divine being. I was far from relieved.  I had been raised in faith all my life.  I had trained for the ministry from a child.  I had pastored, preached, traveled to preach in youth rallies and revivals.  I was teaching in a Bible institute.  Everything I had done in my life was somehow related to and directed at the ministry.  I now found myself with my reputation ruined, with m life's plans decimated and with my goals all wiped clean.

I did not know how to react to Sunday mornings.  After years of being forced to go to church and then in adulthood I having embraced it I was at an emotional loss of what to do with my time.  I had spent years studying the Bible and it had become the foundation of everything I did.  In essence the rug had been pulled out from under me and I lacked direction.  I had no idea what I was going to with my life.  I had no idea how I was going to cope with my problems.  I just knew on some deeper level that no matter what, I could never go back.

Did you ever watch the Matrix?  Ok I know, a lot of people see it as cheap sci-fi crap and couldn't get their minds to wrap around the acting of Keanu Reeves but over all I really liked them.  There is a moment in the first movies, (watch th clip here) when Neo walks into the room and meets Morpheus for the first time. As they sit and discuss the Matrix and the trip that Neo is about to make Morpheus plays idly with a small case. Finally he opens it and pulls out two pills, a red pill and a blue pill.  Morpheus offers Neo a final choice:  Take the blue pill and you wake up in your bed and nothing has changed and your life goes on quietly and peacefully.  Take the red pill and you discover the truth.  Later in the movie when Neo discovers the truth he asks Morpheus, "I can't go back?"  Morpheus replies, "No....but would you want to?"  This is how it was for me.  I was lost and without direction, but I knew in my heart I could never go back.

I miss my imaginary friend...

There are days I miss the coping mechanisms of faith.  Sure, they were ineffective and served no other purpose other than to assist one in coping but they were, in their own way, comforting.  I have often said that I am envious of the person that can look at their bills, look at their family problems, look at their problems at work and simply say, "God has a plan, I trust Him to take care of it" and roll over and go to sleep.  The atheist does not have that luxury because, faced with the cold hard facts, they realize that nobody is going to fix this for me, I have to fix it myself.  So to those that say it is easier to be an atheist I remind you that while you are sleeping peacefully, comforted in the non-existent "everlasting loving arms" we are actually trying to fix the problem.

Recently things have been a little difficult with Mandy and I dealing with some problems with my daughter Bethanie.  Those that have followed my blog know my daughter and know what she means to me.  In the last few months symptoms have begun pointing at the likelihood that she may have Asperger's Syndrome, and it has been a bit difficult to watch her struggle with this and not know what to do to help her.  We are progressing with tests and hope to get the assistance we need to help her adapt and grow up through it but for now, thing have been a little rough.  Monday I tweeted that it was one of those days that sucked to be an atheist, it would be really nice to have an imaginary friend to dump all my cares on.  Think of that next time you mock an atheist with how much easier it is to be an atheist.

I miss group therapy...

You know...Sunday morning, we all got together, talked about our problems, passed around prayer requests, passed the offering plates and went home feeling better?  You know what I talking about!  As an atheist I have my family to share my problems with.  Mandy is that center for me in many ways.  I remember growing up being saved by the bell because some Brother or Sister in the church helped us out.  That is a tough thing to replace and frankly I have not yet replaced it and probably never will.  The support network that come with being active in a church is simply hard to replace.  It is not that atheists do not donate and give to help those in need, it is just a matter of fact...we do not interact a lot or meet regularly in most cases so that sense of "family" is not there.  I will not deny that this is a strong point in favor of at least pretending to being a believer, but frankly I just don't pretend very well.

There is no going back...

But then the question is...would I want to?  The answer is no.  I cannot reject the truth that is before my eyes. I cannot go back to what I see as superstition and myth.  Once knowledge is obtained it cannot be un-learned.  I am not complaining or whining, it is what it is.  But I would have to disagree with the sentiment that it is easier to be an atheist, especially in the environment of a nation, or at least a region of that nation, where being a "Christian" is part of your citizenship.  Every where you turn are signs that you do not belong.  From the money we use to the music we listen to and the look of pity and nigh horror.

In no way do I think my journey is over.  I am always open to new ideas.  Should pertinent and reliable information present itself that proved me wrong I will accept it.  I do not pretend to know the future or predict where this journey will lead.  But I do know me.  I do know that facts are what are important to me.  It is for this reason that I do not see me ever able to go back to that life.  Oddly enough, I no longer wish to.

Are Atheists Angry?

Note: The following post will use the broad terms of "Atheists" and "Christians".  I do not presume to speak for everybody in either of those groups.  When I speak of "atheists" I speak first of myself and those that I know with the understanding that there are exceptions to every rule.  The same goes for when I speak of "Christians", I speak of my personal experiences as a former Christian and my experience with other Christians.  Do not take the broad statement personal.  If the shoe fits wear it, if not then be a grown up and put the shoe back. Don't get your feelings hurt by insisting on personalizing statements.

I was reading an article on yahoo about a pastor that got fired for supporting a book (Love Wins by Rob Bell, check out the YouTube video for it here) in which the author contends that not so many people are going to go to hell and that Christians are not such an elite crowd after all.  As expected the outcry is that, of course, there is only one way to heaven and everybody else is going to hell.  A hell that is at the center of the earth, filled with everybody that has gone there over thousands of years...occupancy must be pretty tight there...

Anyway, as I watched the you tube video for the promotion of his book, I was struck by his example of the art expo at his church where somebody had attached a note to a painting of Gandhi saying "Reality check: He is in hell".  And I couldn't help but think to myself, "And people think ATHEISTS are angry!"  Let's face it, one of the more common complaints you will find as you read across the internet and talk to people about atheism is, "Why are atheists so angry?"  or "Why do you hate God?".  Another aspect of this is that I often run into people who seem to think that I am an atheist because I got angry at God, or angry at church, or angry at religion or angry at...heck...take your pick...either way it always seems to come back to anger. So let me just point out a few thoughts on the subject...

I don't hate God

It is a simple logical statement.  I cannot hate someone that I do not believe exists.  Hate acknowledges existence.  I am not angry at God anymore than I am angry at Santa Claus for not giving me a Mercedes Benz for Christmas (or at the very least getting it confused and giving me a buxom blonde named Mercedes with a penchant for dancing and nudity!)  I cannot be angry at an imaginary person anymore than I can talk to them and expect a reply or assistance of any kind.  The simple fact is that to hate or be angry at God would be an acknowledgement of his existence.

Was I ever angry at God?  Absolutely.  Those that know me, know that I went through a journey to reach the point I am at today.  I was not always an atheist. I was raised in a Pastor's home, was trained as an old fashioned Baptist preacher, began preaching when I was only thirteen years old and was a pastor and taught theology in a Bible institute.  When my daughter died it was the catalyst for me to begin questioning things I had always accepted as truth.  I was out of state at the time of her untimely death and when she died I remember the very first question that started me on this quest for truth that led me to atheism: If you cannot trust God to protect your family when you are off doing his work then who can you trust?  That was the first time that I dared to question every thing that had been drilled into me from childhood.  Over the next few days I could make a fortune with a dime for every time I heard the words, "God knows what is best.  God knows what he is doing.  God has a plan.  She is in a better place." The platitudes began to disgust me and irritate me.  So yes I freely admit that my journey that led to athesim began with anger at a being that I firmly believed in at the time.  But the quest that began in anger developed over time into a quest for knowledge and understanding.  That journey began with anger, traversed through agnosticism and eventually led me to athesim.  I am today at peace with my daughter's death, though there are still times I blame myself for it...but ironically I do not blame God.  Once again, I cannot blame somebody that does not exist.

Now there are those that would read this and will just condescendingly shake their head and say, "Tsk, tsk, he is just in denial and is really and truly still angry."  My response to them is that it is easier for them to assume I am angry rather than to confront the obvious and prevalent lack of logic, truth and facts in which they have immersed themselves.  I understand that some might find that offensive and I apologize, but please understand, I am equally offended by the dismissal of what I have worked hard to understand and the conclusions I have reached as some simple temper tantrum of a child rebelling against a supposed benevolent father. 

Is it Atheists that are angry?

Ok..so here is a thought.  Let us compare for a moment Christians and Atheists. Compare their beliefs and practices.  Now mind you, as I said in my disclaimer, this is by no means a rule on all Christians OR Atheists.  This is my observations and personal experiences.  Yours may be different and you are absolutely entitled to them.  I will not judge you and your views, please return that respect.

Christians believe that, according to their sacred book, the Bible, all people are born sinners , born flawed due to a disobedient act made by the very first humans that were created by a divine being.  This divine being told them to not eat a fruit that he placed in their midst giving them access to it but forbidding them to touch it.  Now these two beings did not know that eating was wrong...how do I know this?  Well, the fruit was the knowledge of good and evil, so without eating it they could not know what was right and what was wrong, so they did not know that eating this forbidden fruit was wrong until they actually ate it and because they ate it they not only condemned themselves but everybody that was born after them.

So after condemning all of us, this divine being sent his only son, when he is divine, omnipotent and all knowing and could have or make as many son's as he wants to die so as to save the other creatures he had already created.  Now here it gets tricky because this son is him and he is his son...they are one and the same yet they are different people, so in essence he is killing himself, but...not killing himself but rather his son.  This death is deemed necessary so as to provide a path of redemption for the victim of the farce of justice that occurred in the garden.  So now we have a path to freedom and redemption and all you have to do is believe in this sacrifice and accept Christ as your savior and be born again, or is it be good and follow the rules? or is it be baptized? or is...well frankly it all gets a little confusing at this point but you have to get it right because to NOT get it right will get you into the lake of fire, or hell, forever and ever.

Now this exclusive club that gets to go to heaven, well, certain behavior is demanded of them.  Live right (which is open to interpretation), be good (also open to interpretation) and love everybody (unfortunately also open to interpretation and argument).  In the country we live in, these chosen few, get to decide what is right or wrong, they get to choose what is absolute truth and what is not, they get to decide the behavior that should be required and what gets into heaven and does not.  There is also a need to go to other places, other cultures and other religions (that have their own set of rules and requirements to get into their exclusive club) and convince them that their way to this divine being is wrong and therefore they must convert to the Christian way of getting to heaven.

This is a system built on fear, exclusivity, control and a need to force others into a conversion to their own point of view and religious order.

As an atheist I reject the myth of the fall of man and believe that I am responsible for my own behavior, not some ancient curse on a person that was guilty of a crime that they did not even know was a crime till it was too late.  I reject that I must do what is right in order to avoid eternal damnation and instead believe that I do what is right simply because it is the right thing to do.  I do not feel the need to convert people to my point of view and respect the right of others to hold onto their beliefs without me judging them and only demand the same respect in return.  I do not feel the need to go around telling people they are going to hell and that God loves them but will send them to hell...which is a contradiction in and of itself. 

In the final analysis I would argue that there are more angry Christians then there are angry atheists.  What other organization in the world could tell every body to go to hell...an get paid to do it?  I would argue that I am more at peace with myself now then I ever was as a Christian.  As a Christian I spent more time worrying if I was meeting up to the expectations of a being I could not see, could not prove with facts that he could see me, judge me or even help me.  I spent more time trying to correct others and help them be the best Christian that they could be.  I find myself at peace with the world around me.  I am a father, husband, employee and friend.  I strive to be the best father, husband, employee and friend that I can be.  I look within me and I realistically note the areas I need to improve in and I strive to make those changes that will make me a better father, husband, employee and friend.

In conclusion, it is sad that there are those that assume because atheists do not believe in their god myths that we are angry at them, at their god and even worse their country.  By that I mean that there are some that would argue that atheists hate America because they hate God.  Well having dismissed the myth that atheists hate god, I further add that loving my country does NOT require a belief in God.  I do not hate God.  I do not hate America. I do not hate Christians.  I am not out to persecute Christians or take away their rights.  I do not wish to silence them.  I do believe in separation of church and state and do not believe that Christians should be given the preference that they are given in this country but I do not begrudge their right to freedom of religion and only ask that they respect my right to freedom from religion.

Atheists and Morality

Note: The following post will use the broad terms of "Atheists" and "Christians".  I do not presume to speak for everybody in either of those groups.  When I speak of "atheists" I speak first of myself and those that I know with the understanding that there are exceptions to every rule.  The same goes for when I speak of "Christians", I speak of my personal experiences as a former Christian and my experience with other Christians.  Do not take the broad statement personal.  If the shoe fits wear it, if not then be a grown up and put the shoe back. Don't get your feelings hurt by insisting on personalizing statements.  


One of the primary complaints/arguments I hear and read by people who need to find a way to defend their faith and at the same time attack atheists and their lack of faith is that atheists are immoral at worst or amoral at best.  The argument goes that if there is no God then why would anybody do what is right or worse how would anybody know what is actually right or wrong.  The argument is based on the assumption that morality is determined by God and originates with God.  If the argument were based in fact then frankly it would be something that a person really should be concerned about because the ability to know right from wrong is something that is key to society, a fundamental building block as it were.   Let us consider a couple of things in reply to this concern/argument.

Does morality originate in God?

This is really a crucial question.  Does morality originate and by a lesser degree exist only in the existence, control and acknowledgment of a deity?  Is it possible for a person to have moral standards and not believe in God?  And, if morals do not originate or depend on faith in a deity, then where do morals come from?  These questions may seem obvious to an atheist but for many people it is not and therefore deserves a logical and respectful answer.

First, we must consider the real purpose of what we regard to be moral standards.  At their core, moral standards are codes of conduct that have adapted and evolved over thousands of years in human social development that stem the tide of chaos and anarchy.  In their most basic form morals are behaviors that keep us from destroying ourselves.  Moral standards are, at their root, rules of conduct that have developed over time through self interest.  For example, death is not something any of us enjoy, much less a violent or malicious death, neither do any of us wish to lose a loved one to a violent death, therefore it is in my best interest to adhere to a rule that bans killing somebody.  I like keeping the things I have worked hard for and I don't want some lazy bum with sticky fingers coming and stealing my stuff. therefore it is in my best interest to adhere to a rule that prohibits stealing.

It is this self interest that has established rules of behavior in a society where humans wish to co exist in a successful and peaceful manner.   More primitive cultures that do not have these rules live in a constant state of disorder and fear.  For example, early Native American cultures considered bravery to be of utmost importance and did not see a problem with torturing a prisoner before killing them, giving them an opportunity to demonstrate their bravery before they died, for all the good it would do them.  Primitive tribes in South America valued deception and considered it a measure of status in the tribe to deceive their victims, "fattening them for the kill" before eliminating them.  For these tribes being treated nice was something to be afraid of.  These tribes and cultures by logical progression end up eliminating themselves because they cannot exist indefinitely.  It is only in the establishment of set rules rules of conduct that we can co exist and succeed as a society.

This also helps us understand that the Golden Rule is not something new, something that just exists in a world dominated by Christian behavior or beliefs.  The Golden Rule states that we should do unto others as we would have them do unto us.  This rule is a basic code for survival of any society.  I do not want to be killed, therefore I don't kill.  I don't want somebody to steal my stuff or sleep with my wife, therefore I will not steal or commit adultery.  We even invented a name for it, karma.  If we cheat on our spouse then at some level we are not surprised when our spouse cheats on us.  We understand this and while we may not always enjoy karma or even accept it we do comprehend that one turn deserves another, whether it be a good or bad turn.

I would answer the question then as no, morality does not originate with a divine being but rather originates in the self interest of human social development as basic rules of survival and co-existence.  The real question that I must ask, with as minimal amount of sarcasm as I can, do you really need a Divine being to tell you that killing somebody is wrong and is probably not a good behavior to participate in?  Do we do what is right only because there is a God that tells us to?  Is it possible to do what is right just because it makes sense to?  Every code of conduct, ethics and laws can be traced to basic rules of social interaction and do not require a religious overtone in order to follow them.  Where it gets complicated are the rules that religion in and of itself imposes as a form of control, something we will discuss further down.

Are the Ten Commandments original in their demands?

The Ten Commandments are often pointed to as the foundation of Western Civilization's laws.  The Christian culture in our country points to this as clear "proof" that this is a Christian nation and ultimately it gives them, their religion and their views preeminence.  But do the Ten Commandments, and more importantly the moral standard they represent, actually originate with the Judeo-Christian story of Moses and Mt. Sinai?  Were the Ten Commandments given exclusively to the Hebrew people?  For that matter, were they divinely given to the Hebrew people at all?

There is an interesting book by Stanley Arthur Cook named "The Laws of Moses and the Code of Hammurabi" in which the author covers the history of the Code of Hammurabi of ancient Assyria.  It is interesting to read that the Ten Commandments can all be found in the Code of Hammurabi.  Furthermore, the ancient Assyrian empire covered Canaan, the area where Hebrew legends and history says that Abraham, the Father of Israel, lived and sojourned.  Many ancient codes, predating the Ten Commandments, existed that had all of the same content as the Ten Commandments.  As such it can hardly be argued that the Ten Commandments are the foundation of Western Civilization or the beginning and end of moral laws.  In the final analysis it can only be concluded that the moral laws imposed by the Ten Commandments and other codes of ancient civilization were basic laws that simply make sense for a society to successfully thrive and co exist.

Are morality codes absolute?

This is where moral codes get a little sticky and contentious.  Take a look at the Ten Commandments.  If you break it down to its basic tenets there are really only six of them that have any application to moral behavior:

5. Honour thy father and thy mother

6. Thou shalt not kill

7. Thou shalt not commit adultery

8. Thou shalt not steal

9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour

10. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbour's.

The first four commandments are strictly religious in nature and are clear references to Judaistic laws and religious codes.  The final six are laws that affect social behavior.  Notice a couple of things about these commandments.  First, the fifth commandment places importance on the basic family unit of society.  Parents mold their children into the citizens that will make up the next generation of a society.  It is therefore important to place a requirement on the child to heed the parent.  The next four have to do with basic rules of social coexistence that make society a safe place to reside in, namely, no killing, no adultery, no theft and no libel or perjury.  The final commandment has to do with motive: greed.  It is interesting to note that the only moral commandment that is alluded to more than once is adultery, in commandments seven and ten.

The structure of the ten commandments is interesting as well.  The structure of the ten commandments mirrors the contemporary codes of its time.  First you establish a divine being with power to enforce them, you establish how you regard that deity and how you treat that deity, then you set forth the laws of behavior that your deity requires you to follow.

But are all moral codes absolute?  The Ten Commandments are far from the only commandments in the moral code of the early Hebrew people.  There are more then six hundred commandments in the vaunted Books of Moses.  These laws covered dietary laws, moral codes and even details on the type of clothes you could wear.  The Bible quite clearly, for example, condemns homosexuality as a moral crime punishable by death.  This is a "moral" law that is not necessarily included in all of ancient codes.  The Code of Hammurabi and the Laws of Eshunna do not include this provision while it appears that Assyrian Law added it much later in their history. (H.W.F. Saggs,The Greatest that was Babylon, New York: Hawthorn, 1962).  We can therefore conclude that not all moral codes are the same and therefore not absolute.  Moral laws should be accompanied by the basic understanding that the purpose for moral laws is the mutual self interest of the participants in a successful and safe society.  Laws that do not affect the self preservation of the individuals  protected by it are not morally absolute.  In other words, if the behavior does not affect my health, safety and or economic well being, then any laws against it cannot be considered absolute.

What is different in an Atheist and a Christian where morality is concerned?

So what difference does it make if I do what is morally right because it is logical and is clearly in the mutual interest of myself and my fellow participants in society or if I do what is right because a divine being tells me too do it?  In all practicality, nothing.  It does not matter why you do what is "right" as long as you do it.  However, personally, for me, I would rather do what is right simply because it is right, and not because I require some powerful being to push me, either with guilt or with threats, to do what is right.  I have said it before, if you require belief in a divine being to refrain from killing my children for yelling and screaming to loud while playing in the back yard, then please, by all means, believe in whatever divine being that facilitates your good behavior.

In conclusion I want to make two closing points.  First, atheists are not amoral or immoral.  Atheists are just moral for a different reason.  Second, not every Christian is moral.  I have known many Christians that committed adultery, stole and even killed.  Belief in God does not give you a corner on the market of morality.  Just because you profess to be a Christian does not mean that you will always choose to do the right thing, just like my not being a Christian does not mean that I do not care what my behavior is.  I hold to my vows to my wife, not because I have to or I will go to some place of eternal damnation, but rather because I love her and I want her in my life for the duration and because losing her would be hell in and of itself. I do what is right simply because it is right.

Finding Direction...

I have spent sometime lately thinking about the direction I should take with my blog.  Up until now my blog has been fairly random covering all kinds of topics from the concerned to the comedic.  I have discussed zombies and politicians...not much of a difference there I guess.  I have discussed my family, sports, movies and religion.  As of late (I guess in the last 3-4 months) I have blogged less mostly because I have not had a lot to say about a lot of things.  I have felt the need to back off from a lot of things just because I was taking them to personal.  In particular the subject of politics became a sore subject for me.  I am a liberal and growing up in the south it has felt many times like I am enemy #1 and the best thing I can do is either shut up and not take sides thus appearing to be more intellectual and "balanced" or follow my heart and become just part of the problem.

I am a passionate person.  That is who I am.  I do not know how to be silent and reserved.  I feel deeply and hold to my ideals firmly.  I am not a liberal just to be contrary.  I truly believe in the ideals I uphold and I defend them vigorously.  Unfortunately this is not considered a virtue these days so I have bit my tongue and am learning to just ignore the game of politics.  Those proponents of tolerance, understanding and not taking sides only hold to that belief until it is something THEY are passionate about so I have tired of trying to keep up with them.

I see the world in black and white.  Also another character trait of mine that has gotten me in trouble.  I know there are grays in the world around me but I am also aware that without black and white there would be no grays.  I believe there are absolutes and there are absolute truths.  Two opposing opinions on definitive topics are rarely both right.  They may often both be wrong, but rarely are they both right.  I don't like grays.  I don't like middle of the road.  I don't like indefinite answers.  I know that there are some of all of the above but quite frankly I don't like them and I rarely hold to a "gray" answer.  Those that want to see everything in gray may accuse me of being dogmatic and close minded while I might accuse them of being too afraid to take a stand for something and too shallow to think through to the logical conclusions of the facts that are before them.  I cannot stand on middle ground.  It feels wrong in the depth of my heart.

I am aware that my upbringing has a lot to do with both of these character traits (or flaws as you might see them).  I am aware that growing up in an old fashion home made me see the world in black and white.  I am aware that early training as a preacher and a pastor made me very passionate about what I believe in.  I acknowledge that I am not always right and that I am still growing and progressing in this journey but I also know that some things will probably never change in the way I view the world around me.

After much thought on my blog, and even at one point considering just closing it down, I have decided that I am going to go in a particular direction from now on.  I have tried the "cutsey" "feely" approach, I have tried the passionate approach in politics and I have sort of bounced all over the board in between.  However, upon deeper thought I have felt more and more a need to defend my lack of faith.  I have come a long way in my thinking on the topic of religion and living in the south you often find yourself as almost an enemy if you are not one of the drones professing your trust in God and your belief in a deity of some kind.

I have had all kinds of reactions to my secular beliefs and the fact that I do not accept as fact, based on blind faith alone, the superstitions that completely engulf the world around me.  I have had pity "bless your heart", I have had anger "how dare you question my faith" and I have had everything in between.   Some I find more offensive than others but all show a lack of understanding of what I believe and how obvious the ideals and facts I hold as truth are, at least to me.

In light of this I have decided to take this blog and use it to speak in defense of secular atheism.  I am sure at some point I will still have the random blogs about family or politics but overall the direction I will take, for now, will be about what I believe, how I respond to the questions, arguments and overall reactions to, not only what I believe, but also the arguments of those that have faith and religious beliefs.  I have written this post more as a heads up, if you don't like this direction then maybe this is not the blog for you.  I say this with a shake of my head since probably nobody reads this blog anymore anyway and I am therefore just speaking to the wind