R. Elisabeth Cornwell – We Are Atheism

17

This short video was shot in February 2013 for the We Are Atheism project.

 


The We Are Atheism project will:

  • Provide an outlet for atheists to feel comfortable to come out of the closet.
  • Always let visitors know there are other people out there that are non-believers just like them.
  • Help people find other atheists in their state, city, and even neighborhood.
  • Give access to local, national, and international organizations to become involved in the secular community.
  • Empower people to start their own organizations in areas that do not already have them.

 

Written By: RDFRS
continue to source article at youtube.com

17 COMMENTS

  1. In reply to #1 by maria melo:

    God coursing Eve with the pain of giving birth disgusted me strongly.

    This reminds me of being forced to attend Sunday school for years on end. That whole situation with Adam and Eve and the talking snake and hiding their nakedness from God is about the lamest excuse for a creation story I had ever heard of. Even as a teen I thought it lacked any attempt at creativity. I never believed any part of it to be true and the blunt attempt to blame Eve for what was obviously a sexual awakening between the two of them, and shame and punish those two for that behavior was indeed disgusting as you say.

    Why have women put up with this crap for all these centuries?

    • In reply to #2 by LaurieB:

      In reply to #1 by maria melo:

      God coursing Eve with the pain of giving birth disgusted me strongly.

      This reminds me of being forced to attend Sunday school for years on end. That whole situation with Adam and Eve and the talking snake and hiding their nakedness from God is about the lamest excuse…

      I agree Laurie. But it’s worse than you think, Adam and Eve are a lot older than the Bible or monotheism, so women have put up with it a much longer than that. I suppose it dates to the time when land became owned and the men had to make sure that it passed to their progeny, so you had to make women feel guilty about sex. Pity really, I wonder if we’ll ever get over it!

  2. Maria, that’s very nice for you. So I think it must be very helpful to have teachers who let it be known that they disagreed with what they were teaching. At least you probably didn’t feel completely alone in your rejection of those misogynistic stories. But what I want to know is why don’t more women react in the same way that we both did?

    • In reply to #4 by LaurieB:

      Maria, that’s very nice for you. So I think it must be very helpful to have teachers who let it be known that they disagreed with what they were teaching. At least you probably didn’t feel completely alone in your rejection of those misogynistic stories. But what I want to know is why don’t more wom…

      When told something young enough kids will take it on trust. In tests human children, young enough will believe an adult more the the evidence of their own eyes and reason. (Chimp kids by contrast seem to have no such problems!) Without the initial rejection, habituation to the lie over the next few years will embed it for good in most cases.

      Keep kids away from wooish nonsense until say puberty and religion would die in a generation.

      • In reply to #5 by phil rimmer:

        Keep kids away from wooish nonsense until say puberty and religion would die in a generation.

        Yes, and that’s why I’m always encouraged when I read stats that indicate more and more families are “un-churched”. Granted, plenty of indoctrination goes on in homes with young children being threatened hideous hell imagery, but delivering children to the Church every Sunday for hours of intensive brainwashing sessions must have a very strong reinforcing effect for installation of the mind virus called religion. The Sunday school teachers and Priests/Pastors represent to me the equivalent of aggressive vectors like Malaria ridden mosquitoes, driven toward their victims in a mindless, parasitic way. If the un-churching effect continues and increases, I’m optimistic about the current generation of 20 somethings and teens finding a way to overcome the effect you described above of children believing everything their parents say.

  3. I agree with your questioning but I also face the fact that I live on a world that believed many ideas up to the ideas we know today. What scares me is not just religious text but the ideas of us humans who seem to have followed a path of accept all religions or we are bad. I come from a background where I loved history (I used to buy many books on history) I ended up doing art, from that I did physics and philosophy. Thought out all of this I was religious, my learning made be understand that there was much I did not know, and that a higher being may not be able to show me the truth, but that I may have to not only believe but also to suffer to end evil, as I can never understand the truth as my brain allows me to understand. My worry with all of this is that no one has give me a good reason to do what is right beyond the ideas given by the selfish gene, the very ideas which RD bases our whole idea framework on.

  4. In reply to #7 by maria melo:

    The Cosmos was really important for me along with some movies for kids (much more than to read the bible).

    Plenty of commenters here have credited the show Cosmos as being a positive influence on their path to rational thinking and rejection of religious indoctrination. Thank goodness for that! But oddly enough, i’ve never seen the show. This needs to be addressed of course. What I had instead was Star Trek, the original show and ST Next Generation and this show did more to teach me humanistic values and inspire me to love science than years of Sunday School and dusty dull mediocre public education could ever do.

    Something that made me very happy was when I would tune in to STNG and the episode would feature a character named Q. He was, for all intents and purposes, a god. He was omnipotent and omniscient, capricious, mischievous, excessively concerned with behavior and thoughts of us puny humans, haughty and insulting toward our primitive culture, and he was all in all, a first class AH. I love those shows because for all his extraordinary advantages in any situation, Q always comes off looking like an ass while the superior humanist values of our Captain Picard and his exemplary crew shine clear and true like brilliant diamonds of goodness. :-) If those shows aren’t a slam against the stupidity of religion then I’ll eat my hat!

    Now I just need to figure out why I find Q to be such an attractive character despite my description of him above. When I figure it out I will be closer to understanding why some women love the Abrahamic God and his proxy here on earth, Jesus. I fear it will go something like this: Identify the Alpha male, create close relationship with him (whatever that takes to accomplish it) and reap the benefits of that relationship. Whether it’s Q in Star Trek or getting down on our knees for Jesus, what’s the difference? There actually is a female character in STNG who dumped Captain Picard for the omnipotent character Q. I think her name was Vache or something like that and she was an ambitious, saucy woman who did what it took to get what she wanted. She had the attention of one Alpha male and then traded up for a much more powerful one. What this has to say about the social maneuvering of human females makes me uneasy and there isn’t a feminist out there who isn’t frowning as they read this, but caught between feminism and science as some of us are, I’ve learned to accept certain disturbing truths and make peace with them. sigh.

    • In reply to #10 by LaurieB:

      Q was awesome. It helped that the actor who played the part was so good. My favorite NG episode of all time is Deja Q where Q loses his powers but the captain thinks (at least for a while) that its just some elaborate joke. Favorite line: “I will be eternally grateful… which I admit doesn’t mean as much now that I’m no longer immortal”

      In defense of Picard, he made it pretty clear to Vache that the Enterprise was his first love anyway. And also Vache later dumps Q (and almost destroys a solar system as a result) on a Deep Space Nine episode.

      • In reply to #11 by Red Dog:

        In defense of Picard, he made it pretty clear to Vache that the Enterprise was his first love anyway. And also Vache later dumps Q (and almost destroys a solar system as a result) on a Deep Space Nine episode.

        haha. Did vache dump Q? I didn’t know that. How’d he take it? And now that I think about it, I always wondered why Captain Picard never capitalized on his alpha male status with the ladies in his domain as I’m very sure he could have. Should we give him credit for that or maybe wonder about the state of his libido? He was always in close contact with Beverly Crusher and Deana Troy but was immune to their substantial charms. Your explanation please…

        • In reply to #13 by LaurieB:

          Did vache dump Q?

          Yes, absolutely. It was in a fairly early Deep Space 9 episode, I think perhaps season three. The two of them ended up at DS9 and since Vache had gotten what she wanted from Q (he took her to places she could loot… I mean do archeological research at… that she could never get to otherwise) and since he was being kind of clingy she dumped him. He handled it with more grace then I would have if I had been omnipotent the many times I’ve been dumped :) which is why it was only a solar system that almost got blown up rather than the whole galaxy.

          • In reply to #14 by Red Dog:

            Yes, the looting opportunity was made very clear in the NG episode where they met. Oh how I envy Vache! Some of my fondest memories of my favorite travels involves mucking around in old ruins left behind by ancient cultures. I’m so very lucky I had the opportunity to crawl around in the Peruvian Inca ruins to my heart’s content. I was sad to leave there, and also I had three years of living in N. Africa where there is no shortage of Roman ruins just sitting there ignored. They are endlessly enthralling. So of course I just love the character of Vache and even though she found a common interest with Picard in their love of old ruins, it would have been completely unbelievable if she had declined the offer that Q made to her regarding her goal of looting artifacts for her own financial gain.

            Disclosure number one: I never looted one single artifact ever. Looting is very, very wrong indeed!

            That having been said, I love the character of Vache and have sometimes wondered if I would like to be friends with another woman who was so impetuous and smart and aggressive like she is and sometimes I think yes and other times I think she’s too dangerous to have around the place, even for a female friend. You can’t trust her whatsoever.

            Disclosure number two: I am fully cognizant of the fact that Star Trek is fiction. Trekies don’t take kindly to non-Trekies bluntly informing of the fact that it’s fiction. We know it.

  5. In reply to #9 by Kevin Murrell:

    so you had to make women feel guilty about sex. Pity really, I wonder if we’ll ever get over it!

    No kidding! You’re not the only one wondering that same thing. When I think about the progress that was made on this issue in the 60′s and 70′s here in the States, and then I think of what is happening here now with our reproductive rights sliding backward into the dark ages, I just can’t believe we are still dealing with this.

    On the bright side, I am encouraged by the 20-something women who speak out against what they call “slut shaming” and I hope I am right when I say that they are more free to act on their desires than women of my generation ever were. Not that we didn’t act on desires but it must be true that we had to hide what we wanted and what we did where I sense that young women may not be so adversely effected by puritanical forces as their moms and grandmothers before them were. I hope I’m right about this. I have defended the concept of friends with benefits and polyamory when some of my friends lapsed into apoplexy over it. There have been discussions online about how monogamy stifles the natural state of female sexuality and I just finished reading a very interesting book called What Do Women Want, that takes on this issue in a forthright manner that I appreciated very much.

    Also, what the rabid, frothing at the mouth religious right doesn’t seem to perceive is that when they make attempts to strangle women’s reproductive rights and force all of us to participate in their horrific puritanical utopia, they are actually galvanizing the liberal progressive women to take a good look at that agenda and face the fact that if we don’t organize and take strong decisive action, then the reactionaries will have their way with us. It’s only as an adult in the past few years that I came to realize the full extent of the long history of this society level fight that has existed between reactionary forces of puritanical oppression and the secular, progressive humanists, and this has been a very alarming conclusion indeed. When I talk to young women about reproductive rights I make a point of explaining that we can never let down our guard on this because the people who would like to impose their idiotic version of “normal” on us are operating with a virulent mind virus that forces them to act in this way and who have no concept of leaving other people alone to do what they want for themselves. It’s our duty to push them back forcefully and constantly if we want to have any control over our own lives in general and our own sexuality specifically.

  6. This is not meant as a criticism, but rather an observation–and I am happy to be corrected or have some perspective sent my way. I left the religion I was part of (raised in) because I didn’t believe. It has been lonely and difficult to come out. However, I worry that the We Are Atheism Project will form a religion in and of itself. It is a formal organization and ascribes to labeling, logos, communities, etc. I found it so liberating to move away from a label. Religions separate themselves with their ideologies, titles, exclusionist activities, membership (baptism, tithing), etc. I think support groups are wonderful, but instead of breaking the destructive architecture religion tends to have, I fear the model of this project will only perpetuate the clique mentality of religious groups (and perhaps with an even greater chip on the shoulder–one of the “persecuted’). I think it’s ok for Atheists to stand up for their beliefs, but instead of creating an “us against them” group of victims, wouldn’t it be better to say, “People believe what they believe. We may have been forced to try believe those things, but we didn’t agree and that’s not for us.” But “empowering” people to start Atheist organizations feels like the all too familiar factions of faiths.

    Anyway, I will end there before I risk getting cheesy and asking something ridiculous like, “Why can’t we all just get along?” Non-existent Heaven forbid! ;-)

    • In reply to #16 by Kaela:

      I think it’s ok for Atheists to stand up for their beliefs, but instead of creating an “us against them” group of victims, wouldn’t it be better to say, “People believe what they believe. We may have been forced to try believe those things, but we didn’t agree and that’s not for us.” But “empowering” people to start Atheist organizations feels like the all too familiar factions of faiths.

      I agree absolutely.

      • In reply to #17 by Red Dog:
        Completely off topic here Red Dog, but you seem to be the expert…..when I press “like” I manage to subtract from the “likes” rather than adding to their number. What’s happening? Is it me, or have you done something fiendish to the system?

        • In reply to #18 by Nitya:

          In reply to #17 by Red Dog:
          Completely off topic here Red Dog, but you seem to be the expert…..when I press “like” I manage to subtract from the “likes” rather than adding to their number. What’s happening? Is it me, or have you done something fiendish to the system?

          Thanks for the vote of confidence, but that’s not my work :) Its possible you’ve found another bug but I think what it might be is the “Like” function works as a toggle. If you have liked the comment already and you hit “Like” after that it thinks you changed your mind and unlikes it (so the count will go down but its subtracting the “Like” vote you added earlier and forgot). Try hitting “Like” one more time and if I’m right this time it will re-like it and the count will go up again.

          • In reply to #19 by Red Dog:

            In reply to #18 by Nitya:

            In reply to #17 by Red Dog:
            Completely off topic here Red Dog, but you seem to be the expert…..when I press “like” I manage to subtract from the “likes” rather than adding to their number. What’s happening? Is it me, or have you done something fiendish to the system?

            Th…

            No…that’s not it. I tried it on a couple of posts to check whether that could have happened. The problem could be on my end, but I’d say there is a bug somewhere.

Leave a Reply