For Certain Reasons

This morning, I led a discussion group at the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Fort Wayne. The topic was morality and ethics from an atheistic perspective. Especially here in the United States, a large majority of people claim a god or gods to be the source of morality, and religion to be the only method to understand it. Many American atheists were raised within this moral framework, and when they come to finally reject the religion into which they were born, they are forced to reconsider morality from the ground up.

For obvious reasons, this can be completely overwhelming. However, after the related search for meaning, it is one of the most important challenges an atheist must face. Thankfully, more and more writers, philosophers, and scientists are addressing the issue of establishing, in the most objective manner possible, a natural basis for morality. Here is a small sampling of the resources presently available:

A Guide for the Godless. This free e-book by professor Andrew Kernohan of Dalhousie University focuses on meaning more than morality, but I find the two to be inextricably linked, and this is a great place to start.

Life! This book by Martin Walker uses the laws of physics to consider how we might create a framework for objective morality.

The Moral Landscape. Prominent atheist writer Sam Harris discusses how the science and reason can be used to establish morality.

Sense and Goodness Without God. Historian Richard Carrier uses metaphysical naturalism to explain morality and other topics.

The Science of Good and Evil.  Skeptic Michael Shermer looks for natural sources of morality, focusing on evolution and the behavior of other primates.

Parenting Beyond Belief.  Dale McGowan's book gives advice on how to raise thoughtful, ethical children without indoctrination - not what to think, but how to think for themselves.


Again, this is just a small sampling. I'll try to update when new works become available. I would also recommend contacting groups like Freethought Fort Wayne, Center for Inquiry, and the American Humanist Association for further discussion.

To all who attended the discussion, thank you very much, and great thanks to UUCFW for having me. Please leave a comment here or contact me at mike_butler (at) freethoughtfortwayne (dot) org with any questions.

File this under, "Way to Not Be a Stereotype, Dan Coats Supporters."

Of course, if they knew how to write properly, they probably would know how to read properly, and then maybe they would become educated enough realize how fucking retarded it would be to move this douchebag straight from K street back into the senate.

I think if we created a $1,000 fine for misspelled political signs, we could put an end to the conservative movement inside of a week. 

"Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions."

~Thomas Jefferson

After weeks of wading through insane flat assertions from my work and social acquaintances and piles of batshit crazy on my (now defunct) facebook page, I think mockery is the only reasonable option left. Until the upcoming midterm elections are over, I will offer no serious political messages. Only ridicule. Let's see how this works.

It's been a while since I've posted about my continuing endeavor - or at all, for that matter - and there have been some substantial developments recently.

With child expenses, car expenses, and an upcoming trip to Costa Rica for my brother's wedding, I haven't exactly had the funds to grow my record collection lately, especially given my taste for rare albums.  However, I have been able to address an issue I didn't discuss in my first post:  once I get all of this vinyl, how am I going to listen to it?

Building a decent hi-fi turntable-receiver-speaker setup can be an expensive proposition on its own.  At the high end, there are items like this masterpiece turntable from Avid:

I've obviously neglected this blog for a few weeks now...I'm working on a lengthy post about vinyl, but for the time being I wanted to cover a few political notions I've been considering lately:

1. If you're arguing simultaneously for lower taxes, lower government spending, and lower unemployment, you fail it.  It being critical thinking.  The deficit is a big problem and will be for quite some time.  However, there is still a massive credit crunch.  In order for us to address unemployment, which is the most pressing issue, someone has to start spending.  The private sector still can't get the credit to do it right now, so the best available candidate is the government.  Another point that is lost amidst all of the rampant deficit-hawking is that if the government is in debt, more money has to be in private hands.  It's zero sum.  And China does not hold most of our debt, by the way - not even close.  While they hold the largest amount of our foreign debt, the lion's share of the national deficit is held in the United States itself, by the private sector.  Finally, concerning spending, the federal government is far and away the largest employer in the United States.  I don't think it's wise at this point for the country's largest employer, and the only one has the ability to counteract market irrationality, to cut jobs in the middle of a deep recession.  To summarize, anyone who is deficit-hawking right now has missed the point, and the ones who are simultaneously complaining about high unemployment are especially unhinged.

Here is a piece I wrote in February of '08, in case anyone was wondering why I despise Mr. Scandal-of-the-Moment so.

Ugh.

A few days ago I received a response to the email I sent to my jackassed representative about HR 888:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to affirming our nation's Judeo-Christian heritage. I appreciate hearing from you.

No, seriously - don't dilly-dally around. Just piss me off in the very first sentence with your pathetic attempt at sarcasm. Bag of douche.

As you know, Representative Randy Forbes of Virginia introduced H.Res. 888 on December 18, 2007. I have cosponsored this resolution, which would affirm the significant role that religion and faith have played in the establishment of our country. H.Res. 888 has been referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for further review.

I know what it is, asshat. That's why I wrote you in the first place. And no, it's not about "affirming the significant role that religion and faith have played in the establishment of our country." It's about revising history to insert christian influence where it never before existed, and ignoring the dominance of classical liberalism in creating a representative democratic republic.

I know the tagline of my blog is "Politics and Pop Culture," but in light of recent events, I'm going to shoehorn "and Sports" in momentarily.  My two favorite sports teams are Notre Dame in college football and Chelsea F.C. in England's top soccer division, the Barclay's Premier League.  For the past couple of years I've been playing around with a theory that borrows the organizational elements of English "football" to solve a longstanding problem in American college football:  crowning an undisputed champion.

Win-loss records presently matter in NCAA football, to be sure, but the methods used to basically settle ties when multiple teams are undefeated or have the same record are ultimately subjective.  Statisticians have composed detailed formulas for rankings and strength of schedule, but no matter how precise and scientific they seem, they will always leave something to be desired.  The best place to determine a champion is on the field of play, and I think I have come up with a system that will do exactly that.