Before I go on with a review, I must give a little bit of my religious background. I grew up in a protestant Christian family. I have a grandfather who preached his entire life, and eventually became a bishop of the church he belonged to. I also have an uncle, that grandfather’s son, that is a preacher. So, I grew up in a religious family.

Given that, I still have different religous views than my family. For one, I see the religion, the Bible, and spirituality/faith as three separate entities — you can have any of the three without the other two. Granted, without religion, there would be no Bible, but I won’t get into that. I also believe that organized religion creates much of the evil in this world, and can agree with much of what Dawkins has to say on that. I am by far not a nonbeliever though. That’s a little bit of my background so that you will know where I’m coming from as I review this book.

Basically, this book is Dawkins’ argument against religion and against the existence of God.

What might turn many readers who do believe in God away from this book is his immediate attack on religion. Using an almost child-like name-calling system throughout the first couple of chapters he hardly makes any points. The points may be hidden in there somewhere, but it would be hard for any believer to see past his attack on religion.

He starts hitting a stride when he gets into some of his arguments against the existence of God, but loses ground when he switches to more technical terms. At times, his wording would make a bad translation of Aristotle’s Nichomean Ethics read like a Stephen King novel. His argument of the “Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit” is sound however, as are many of his other arguments. Instead of staying with his more simplistic writing style, he veered, and that is essentially his downfall in a few of the chapters.

At about the midpoint of the book, his style is much easier to read. Whether this had to do with getting used to his style or a definite change in language use is hard to tell, but I felt I definitely understood him. He attacks religion on multiple angles, attacking the Old Testament (which isn’t hard to do), religious logic (or lack thereof), and childhood abuse.

He pulled verses of his choosing out from the Bible, much the same way a preacher would, and formed his arguments. He is knowledgeable of the Bible and the history of religion. The best argument he puts forth is how religion is bad for society. With religious wars, abortion clinic bombings, and Fred Phelps, making religion look bad is almost too easy.

The most important thing I carried away from this book is his view on children and religion, and I’ve never thought about it quite in the way he puts it. “If you hear anybody speak of a ‘Catholic child’, stop them and politely point out that children are too young to know where they stand on such issues, just as they are too young to know where they stand on economics or politics” (2). Call them “a child of Catholic parents” (2). He make further points on this issue in chapter 9.

Although it is an entertaining read, it’s definitely lacking what it needs to complete his overall argument. He’s lacking the evidence to prove God doesn’t exist, but he doesn’t have to actually prove that. If anything, believers have to prove God’s existence — you know, hypothesis, scientific process, etc. He does make a good argument against religion itself and what it’s doing to our society. He raises several key points by using what he calls conciousness-raisers.

I probably wouldn’t recommend this book to religious people because of the religious bashing. Dawkins wants to make himself sound smarter, but only seems childish at times. Although most of it is meant for laughs, he might want to reconsider if he wants to change believers’ minds. When you get past the verbal abuse, there are some sound arguments.

Overall, he uses reason to conclude most of his arguments, and that is one of his strong suits. I can only say this to believers who decide to read this book, “Check your religion at the door.” Otherwise you won’t make it through the first chapter, and see some the good this book offers in the later chapters.

I can honestly say my conciousness has been raised.

Here are the top 5 faiths that the quiz says most closely matches my beliefs:

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Reform Judaism (98%)
3. Neo-Pagan (97%)
4. Liberal Quakers (96%)
5. Liberal Christian Protestants (86%)

Remember, this is only a quiz. I don’t particularly hold to any of these faiths that are represented here. If anything, I might be more inclined to call myself a Liberal Christian Protestant. But, I can say that Unitarian Universalism does match many of beliefs because it allows for so much diversity according to the explanation the site gives.

The reason I took this quiz was because I was trying to decide what to provide as my religious views on my Facebook profile. I searched Google for a few key words and the quiz came up.

At least Facebook has “Unitarian Universalist” and “Christian Protestant” on their list of religious views. However, you can still type in whatever you want. Now, if they would only get rid of that drop-down list of political views. Maybe I could select something other than “Other.”

No matter what this quiz says, and whether I align myself with any particular religion, I do believe in God. I don’t take everything in the Bible as literal; I see it as a people trying to understand and explain the meaning of life. I think religion has been one of the major downfalls of human existence, and one of the most wonderful things in the world. Religion starts wars. Religion gives people hope.

I don’t want to start preaching about the good and evil of religion. Although, I do believe that religion has brought about more good than bad.

I’m going to stop writing about it now because it is one of the hardest things to write about, and I’ve got to finish homework. Maybe I’ll continue this another time, since what I’ve said here hardly covers my religious beliefs. Plus, it is a fascinating subject to me.

One final note: I put “Christian – Other” as my religious views on Facebook. So far, that’s the best I answer I can give.

He also said he was a “Christian,” and he “has to listen to loud-mouthed women every day.” That was Wednesday.

Today, he was shouting back at Auburn University students who were traveling between classes or ones that simply had nothing better to do than listen. He stood on his two-foot high wall just past the concourse (a place for hanging out and club recruitment and other stuff for you non-Auburn students). I would argue that he had more than a hundred students at several points during the day.

They were shouting back at him.

The highlight of the day? The The Gay Song (It’s Not Okay To Be Gay).

He is Micah Armstrong. He is the “Open Air Bible Thumper,” according to his website. He is radical. He is in your face.

He’s been on campus all week long, every day from around 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. He’s been preaching the “Word.” He’s been preaching against homosexuality, masturbation, and sex. Those are apparently our only sins.

Today, just after 2 p.m., he was escorted off the campus by police.

The crowd was riled up. Some were merely taunting the preacher bearing dark news (I like to think of him as the Dark Preacher). Others were preaching back at him. He was telling them about hell. Others were telling him about Jesus’ compassion, freely masturbating, and being openly gay.

“Every girl that has premarital sex with a guy is a W-H-O-R-E,” he shouted at the laughing young adults. “Every masturbator is a potential homosexual” because it is sex with the same sex.

He was there today to make sure we knew we were going to hell for the things we’re doing. He was there to tell us that Martin Luther King Jr. is in hell. That Ghandi and Mother Teresa were burning too. And, about the only person on campus today that wouldn’t burn would be himself.

The students took that message well.

Of course, there were a few opposers to stand on the wall with him.

This student reads an issue of Cosmopolitan. The story was something about how to gratify your partner sexually. “You can’t get your own audience,” Armstrong responds. The student then goes on to lead a group of students to another spot to read the issue, but they were few.

This is not an uncommon event. We usually get one radical preacher every semester who tries to scare the student body into religion, which is entirely the wrong approach. He was preaching against the Christians there that were trying to go with the Jesus’ love angle. No. That’s not allowed, that kind of preaching. It’s all fire and brimstone. That’s the only way to preach it.

My favorite person to take a stand against Armstrong is this guy, sporting a shirt that reads “Plays Well With Self” and an arrow pointed toward the man. This fit so well with Armstrong’s rampage against masturbation that you could not help but laugh. Well, and the t-shirt guy just looked funny.

“Your problem is not your testosterone or gender. You got a wicked, perverted heart. You’ve masturbated one too many times, you’ve watched one too many porno movies, you’ve had premarital sex,” continued Armstrong.

He never let up until the police arrived. I guess he was lucky he didn’t make a scene about “freedom of speech” at that moment. He was clearly harrassing those students who were gay, Muslim, Christian, women, and well…every one else. One seemingly devout Christian was near tears arguing back at him. This was what he was doing to his brothers in Christ.

Aside from the t-shirt guy and The Gay Song, the funniest scene of the day was when a student poked Armstrong in the butt with a stick. “Don’t turn your back on this guy,” Armstrong fired.

I’m not condoning this kind of childishness from grown people, but what Armstrong said incited an uproar of laughter.

It’s been a war all week. Christians vs. Armstrong. Muslims vs. Armstrong. Athiests vs. Armstrong. Students and Faculty vs. Armstrong.

I should make a Facebook group. I wonder what I’ll call it…

This in no way is an anti-Christian or anti-religion post. It is simply a post about a man who made a scene.

Here are some files I’ve uploaded for your viewing and listening pleasure. I would’ve uploaded the hour worth of recorded audio I got today, but it’s hard to hear since there was so much noise. Enjoy.

• The Gay Song Youtube Video – Link provided by Daniel Morgan
• The Gay Song (It’s Not Okay To Be Gay)
• Pictures from today’s events

Some were even saying it was wrong for him to take a knee.

What I don’t get is why are we suddenly (especially in the last few years) bashing religion. We shouldn’t force people to participate in religious acts if they don’t want to. However, isn’t telling someone they can’t practice their religion publicly the same as forcing someone who isn’t religious to perform these acts?

The Bill of Rights clearly states

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Why is the law even involved in this case if there isn’t anyone being forced to exercies religion? By telling Borden that he cannot freely practice his religion, the government is telling him that Amendment 1 doesn’t apply to him. As a coach at a high school, he has lost his freedom of religion.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

Maybe our country has perhaps forgotten the law our forefathers established, the law that many men died for.

In the last few years, a part of me has changed. Well, many parts of me have changed, but more particularly my Christian beliefs. As I was growing up I was always told, “the Bible means this” or “the Bible means that,” and I was to never question what I was told. Actually, I was never told I could question religion, or better yet, analyze the text as I would try to do now as an English major. It was something that was absolute. And that’s my problem. I consider myself a Christian, but I follow no religion now. To me, organized religion is part of the problem. Many teach certain doctrines that their members must follow, and every letter must be followed. There is no way around that. Now, don’t get me wrong, organized religion can be a very good thing. The Bible (or insert holy book here) is not something every one can drudge through and analyze their selves. People need organized religion to “help” teach them and give them guidelines to follow.

My small anecdote here will not portray the point where I turned away from organized religion or church as most of us would call it. However, I consider it one of those “stitching points” where we can see past the screen and view a part of Reality.

I recently came across an article in Time magazine titled “A Kiss for Judas” by David Van Biema. Basically, what has happened is the uncovering (and soon to be released in late April to the public, I believe) is “The Gospel of Judas.” I also remember Mckelly mentioning in class reading “The Gnostic Gospels,” which I would like to read some day. Anyway, back to where I was going with this story. After Epiphanius, fourth century bishop, argued against “The Gospel of Judas,” it disappeared. I thought that was somewhat odd. It wasn’t as if I didn’t know that kind of thing went on. “Important people” or some other higher-ups decided what we read in the collections of books that we call the Holy Bible.

This is the point where my mind wandered into the past, which is dangerous territory (especially down here in the Deep South, a place where you don’t question southern religion). I start thinking about what books were not included and which books some committee or some bishop included, what religious practices that were deemed necessary to belong to a church and when they were decided upon, and how and why someone gets to decide what “religion” is. For one reason, why do we have different denominations in the Christian world? Simply put, someone decided that they did not like certain teachings of another denomination and formed their own. Is this what religion is, rules and guidelines that people put together for other people to follow because they didn’t like what someone else said?

Moreover, what books were left out of the Bible? Should we not read those also? What about the books that we do have, are we truly reading those? Or are we letting others tell us what they mean, and blindly follow their “analysis” that was passed down from their preacher and the preacher before them and so on?

This is the point where I can see past the southern dogma that I have been taught all my life. I don’t have to read the “Gospel of Judas” to understand or to even look at Judas from another point of view. But to say, “Judas wasn’t guilty. He was necessary. Somebody had to betray Jesus. Judas was the victim of a design bigger than himself,” as Vittori Messori said would be to betray the religion that I was taught.

I want to get past, or to come to an understanding, the works of Christian religion (and a few other religions). However, religion itself has always been the screen that blinds me from the truth.

I did finish off a few more lines towards my longer project today. Here they are:

The greatest thing in this world is to have a purpose. A meaning to life. Most people walk around oblivious to the world around them. No, not the world you see here, but the deeper part of the world, that part of the world that holds truth.

“Do you wanna go to church with us Sunday?”
“Nope.”
“Why don’t you ever wanna go to church with us?”
“I just don’t want to go to church.” I pause for a moment, looking for the right words. “Since when did you become a…a Bible thumper anyways?”
“Since I went to church last Wednesday and I realized everything in life is meaningless without God in it?”
Those words would have usually sent a shiver down my spine, awakening millions of tiny hairs on my arms, but I felt nothing. I was cold. Empty.
House of Hypocrites.
I will not pray with you.

Anyways, that’s that. I guess I’m off to finish my reading and maybe look over that paper. So, until next time…

Scarlett Johansson escapes Cruise’s clutches
‘MI:3’ star reportedly wanted the starlet to embrace Scientology

Did Tom Cruise try to recruit Scarlett Johansson to Scientology?

The “Lost in Translation” star was expected to co-star with Cruise in “Mission: Impossible III” but was dropped because of “scheduling conflicts.” But it seems that there may have been other conflicts as well. Cruise invited Johansson to a Scientology center where he showed her literature about joining his controversial church, according to a report. “After two hours of proselytizing,” according to RadarMagazine.com, “Cruise opened a door to reveal a second room full of upper-level Scientologists who had been waiting to dine with the pair, at which point the cool-headed ingénue politely excused herself.”

The Scoop called Johansson’s mother/manager for comment and she declined, referring us to Johansson’s publicist, who didn’t return calls or emails. Cruise’s rep didn’t respond to requests for comment, but Rick Ross of CultNews.com told the Scoop: “Is this Tom Cruise’s version of a first date? It’s becoming increasingly difficult to make distinctions between his personal, professional and religious life. Tom Cruise and Scientology seem intent on recruiting a hot young star. Apparently, Scarlett Johansson flunked her test, but Katie Holmes passed.”
By Jeannette Walls
Link To Article

Giving the benefit of the doubt to Scientology and all Scientologists, (if that’s what they’re called) I checked out the website Scientology.com. I swear this thing is a book fair for L. Ron Hubbard. I clicked on the link What is Scientology? to see what this thing is all about. Here’s what I got:

What is Scientology?
The aims of Scientology are a world without insanity, without criminals, without war, where the able can prosper and where Man is free to rise to greater heights.

And if you were to ask any Scientologist they would tell you it is a practical religion, with practical answers — tools that can be applied to achieve greater awareness and purpose in the here and now.

Or, as we say it, when you have the answers to life’s questions — there is virtually no part of existence it cannot be applied to for the betterment of life itself.

What people need are real solutions, real tools to deal with and effectively overcome human problems.

Every one of us has experienced it.

Think back yourself and you’ll remember when you tried to help a grieving loved one, a struggling child, a friend overcome by addiction.

And where you have failed, it’s only because you lacked effective answers to accomplish what you desired.

Now, I know this isn’t supposed to explain their whole religion. I know that. But come on, that’s no real answer. If anything that’s skirting around a serious question that needs to be answered up front. So far, it’s my belief that Scientology is crap. Plain and simple. Crap. I’ve always thought that most other religions couldn’t give you real answers, but this just tops them off.
Just a few years after I really come to appreciate Tom Cruise as an actor, I’ve now come to think he is just a few french fries short of a happy meal (for lack of a better phrase). Hope War of the Worlds is good. I don’t want him to go off the deep end completely.

I’m sure I’ll read up a little more on Scientology before I write it off altogether, but it doesn’t look too promising at the moment.

In other news, I made my second new website theme this week. It’s just a random idea I came up with based off of the Yahoo website. So check it out if it’s not already loaded into your browser.

I guess that’s it for now. I think this is the longest post I’ve made since I downloaded Wordpress. Of course, if I took out all of the quotes, then it’d be shorter than some of the other posts.