The Analyzed Atheist
It’s not that I don’t like atheists

atheistme:

smallgovernment:

But I hate when they tell everyone they’re wrong. Like shut the hell up, youre just as bad as the Christians who damn the gays to hell. You should just let people live their own lives..

how? 

When was the last time bullying from a bunch of atheists caused massive amounts of gay teens to commit suicide?

Your average loud mouth atheist is generally loud mouthing for human rights, not against them. 

The difference is huge. 

"Huge" doesn’t even begin to describe the difference.  By telling and showing someone they’re wrong about something, I am showing them respect by not pandering to their beliefs and views.  How do people think progress is made?  By having open discourse and discussion whereby people inform each other of the facts and evidence that exist in the real world.

I think that we know enough about human flourishing to know that information and “evidence” that promotes hate and bigotry and eventuallly to suicides is probably not the “path to truth.”  I will not be silenced.  I will not stand by and allow others to spread prejudice and hate speech.  I will be pro-human rights.  I will be an atheist and humanist and do my part to make the world a better place.  AATS

kagrwe:

kohenari:

Today is World Day Against the Death Penalty. If you’re not working to change people’s minds about this issue, what are you doing?

As Human Rights Watch astutely notes:

October 10, 2011 is the ninth annual World Day against the Death Penalty, and this year marks 35 years since the United States reinstated capital punishment in 1976. In that time, 1,271 people have been electrocuted, shot, hanged, gassed, or put to death by lethal injection.

I’ve posted these next few sentences before, but they bear repeating today:

I know what death row looks like, I’ve talked with condemned men, and because of my interaction with the death penalty in this country I’ve been given a good look at the privileged life I lead.

There is nothing to applaud when people die. There is nothing to applaud when people fail to examine their own lives and the good fortune they have had. There is nothing to applaud when our leaders do not understand the difference between justice and vengeance. There is nothing to applaud when people believe that the only thing our government can do properly is inject some citizens full of poison.

And also these sentences:

[W]e cannot organize an opposition to the culture of death that seems so powerful in this country at the moment by looking for individual cases that inflame our passion. This is reactive; time and time again, the bulk of our organizing happens at the last moment, once a death warrant has been signed, and so all of our effort seems to go into last-ditch efforts like calling the Pardon Board, hoping for the Supreme Court to step in, and holding a rally or vigil late into the night while someone is strapped down and injected with poison.

It’s today that we need to organize; it’s today that we should begin to put one foot in front of the other and do the difficult work that will be required to rid ourselves of the death penalty for good, not simply to stave off one particular execution or another. There are organizations or coalitions of organizations in every state that are dedicated to legislatively eliminating the death penalty.

To sum up: It is both legal and proper in more than half of the states in this country for agents of the government to strap someone down and inject him full of poison in revenge for something terrible he did many years earlier. You can tell your legislators that this is an attack on human dignity; you can change that law.

I find it horrifically ironic that this year, Columbus Day and World Day Against the Death Penalty fall on the same day.

We’re such a fickle culture, aren’t we. We exalt a terrorist when it was done for “our benefit” yet proclaim to be anti-terrorism when we are the potential victims. We celebrate the systematic oppression and eventual slaughter of almost an entire race of people, as well as the theft of their land and way of life, yet on the same day fight out against the murder of people in the name of “justice.” We celebrate the man who has been the catalyst to the deaths of the population of an entire continent, yet besmirch those who support the deaths of those perceived to be “threats to society,” but may not even be guilty.

Maybe it’s just an indicator that times are changing, and people are starting to realize that we haven’t any authority to dictate who does and does not have a right to life, especially since I see more and more people condemning what Columbus Day represents. Because, as it says in the article, “there is nothing to applaud when people die.”

Reblogging for the commentary…and for the record, I am against capital punishment, and the celebration of killing and death in general. It really makes me sick. AATS

No. Health care and dental care are not ‘human’ rights. You exist. That is it. You don’t get some special treatment because you exist. You work to be able to have that privilege to be healthy and get proper medical care. I will never be okay with paying for medical care for you. Ever. If you get fucked over in this world, no matter how hard you try, that is life. Sorry to say, but that’s what it is. I so strongly believe that if you TRULY want something so badly, you WILL get it. But only through hard work and determination, and to me that includes medical care, education and all the other government programs out there that provide something that isn’t the military.

That is what religion is supposed to be a bout [sic]. If you have a shitty life here, it’s not as big of a deal because what happens on this earth is temporary. We are not supposed to live for ourselves in a selfish manner. Even in pain. The afterlife is supposed to be granted by how we act here in this temporary place, and that any pain we may feel is nothing compared to our reward for doing the right thing later on.

Granted, I am not at all a religious person. I barely believe in the afterlife myself. But even without it, I don’t believe in paying for someone elses [sic] health care, living expenses or anything else using my tax dollars. It’s not supposed to be that way.

*drumroll* And the heartless comment of the week award goes to…

burnthestatic for this comment above on a link I posted, “Man Dies From Toothache, Couldn’t Afford Meds”

Last week’s award was on the same story. This comment is especially terrible though.

So health care isn’t a human right? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations in 1948, would beg to differ. Article 25 of the declaration states:

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

I would like to point out that the author of this comment is 17. So I’m sure she’s paid quite a bit in taxes, no? Whatever she’s paid, she wants them back.

As for me, I would love for my tax dollars to pay for those who can’t afford health care or dental care. I prefer that versus paying for the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of people in Afghanistan and Iraq. I would love to pay for higher education for my fellow citizens in this country instead of paying for further weapons development and deployment by private contractors. 

You point to the military as a specific example as a government program that’s somehow A-ok. Did you know that your tax dollars completely subsidize the medical and dental care of military members, their families and veterans? The best access to medical care I have ever had was when I was in the military.

Being healthy is a privilege? Well, here’s where you’re getting closer to correct, though not for the reasons you think. There’s many, many people who work hard, yet can’t afford treatment of any kind because they don’t make enough money. There’s a direct correlation between health, quality of live, and income level. The more cash money you have, the more likely you are to be healthy and able to have access to medical and dental care. So only the privileged are assured of being healthy. 

Thomas Jefferson compared individual heath to a society’s liberty, writing, “Liberty is to the collective body, what health is to every individual body. Without health no pleasure can be tasted by man; without liberty, no happiness can be enjoyed by society.” Thomas Jefferson would be disappointed in you, I imagine.

However, Karl Marx would not be shocked by your callousness. Marx wrote, “Capital is reckless of the health or length of life of the laborer, unless under compulsion from society.” It’s probably folks with similar beliefs to yours that inspired Marx.

You’re only 17. You have time to for your bubble to burst. And it’s fairly likely it will.

(via cognitivedissonance) THIS^^ aats

Hey, I hope you don’t mind me throwing my two cents in here. I’m not getting my claws out or anything, ready to tear you limb from limb, just my two cents. The way I see it, the right to have children is a human right.

I’m in Canada, so I will reference our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but if you head over there you will see that there is a bit that says:

"7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."

To me, while subtle, one of the implications of this clause is the right to have children. One could argue that some people shouldn’t be allowed to have children, either because they’re only doing it for a government “incentive” or they’re just careless and eventually neglectful parents who will mistreat and abuse their children, but these people are not the norm.

There is one idea, antigovernment, that I can completely agree with: the world is overpopulated. Is this a problem? Yes. What do we do about it? Educate people about responsible child-bearing and birth control. Do we want them to stop having children altogether? No, of course not. While the problem of overpopulation is very pertinent and relevant to us earthlings right now, to stop having children altogether would be disastrous. While you can make the argument that we have soooo many children in foster homes, not to mention starving all over the world, that could be adopted or raised in place of “new” children, this is wholly impractical, and to deny this would be dishonest. So, what about only allowing some people to have children. Now we’ve stepped onto a slippery slope. Just how are we going to decide who gets to have children? It is an ethical dilemma of enormous proportions.

So, if we were to stop having children, then who would take care of the future? We absolutely have to keep having children and educating them if we want a future at all. Children are the biological embodiment of the future. Without them, we don’t have one.

Now, on to maternity leave. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms also says:

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

You might be wondering how it is relevant to the maternity leave discussion. Well, consider this situation: You are conducting interviews for your company. You come down to two female candidates that are absolutely equal in every respect except for one thing: one is young and newly married, the other is older, married with young children, and is unlikely to be having children any time soon. Who do you hire? And why?

If you are quick to say that it doesn’t matter, if either of them has a child, you’ll keep them on, they just won’t get paid maternity leave, then think about this: Say you hire the older woman and shortly after starting work her young child falls deathly ill with some disease. Will she get paid leave to care for her child? If not, then that is extremely cruel. If so, then what is the difference between granting her paid family related leave and granting maternity leave? If you think there is a difference, think again.

A child, in its infancy, is in dire need of care around the clock. This is common knowledge, you might say, and what about a babysitter or a family member? Well, the earliest months of life are crucial for the bonding of a child to its parents, and it can have a profound impact on a child’s development.

The following link is an article about attachment of young children to parents and it’s perceived possible effect on the sociability of those children:

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/dev/17/3/326/

Now, I am not contending that one article proves anything or even that the one article is an excellent study, but if you can find studies that say that there is no effect of infant attachment to parents on later development, then go for it, surprise me! I am open to being proven wrong, as always.

Alright, so where are we? Oh right, maternity leave. To deny it, I believe is to discriminate against an employee for their enacting of a basic human right: to bear children. The likelyhood of a person desiring children merely to take advantage of their employer or the government is, I believe, extremely small, and absolutely a straw-man argument.

In addition, there is very little evidence to suggest that having work benefits like maternity leave will put a burden on the economy. This is where the link in this post comes in. Read it. I can speak from experience because I live Canada, where we have maternity leave, along with a huge host of workplace benefits and social programs (like universal healthcare!), and though we are in a recession, like much of the rest of the world, we didn’t experience as much economic fallout as the U.S., and I believe that it has to do with our excellent social programs.

Anyway, to sum up, as an atheist, I am a HUGE human rights advocate. First, and above all else, we are all human. It’s the biggest in-group there is, and we need to get it together as a family and start looking out for each other’s basic rights. Then and only then can we move forward as a species, and continue to progress towards our full potential.

AATS