(Reposted from Freethought Fort Wayne)

London buses will soon be running an ad on the side that says “There’s probably no god. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.”

This is probably the best advice anyone can get, ever. See the article, here.

The British Humanist Association (BHA) is sponsoring the campaign, which was only intending to raised £5,500, with another £5,500 to be donated by Richard Dawkins. But through their own efforts, they’ve raised over £36,000 by themselves!

Sez Professor Dawkins:

“Religion is accustomed to getting a free ride — Automatic tax breaks, unearned respect and the right not to be offended, the right to brainwash children. Even on the buses, nobody thinks twice when they see a religious slogan plastered across the side. This campaign to put alternative slogans on London buses will make people think — and thinking is anathema to religion.”

Do you ever think we could get away with this here across the pond? I bet there isn’t a bus company out there that would accept this sort of contract.

May God bless America!

There was a little Michael Moore-ish grandstanding, like when he got tossed out of the Vatican for barging in with a camera and wanting to talk to the Pope, but those moments were mostly tongue-in-cheek side jokes (unlike a Moore film, where they carry the weight of the whole polemic). And the über-trendy canted camera angles, like it’s some MTV special where the host is so cool that we’re presumed to want to see camera shots of him talking to some other camera, were just jarring and dumb.

But there’s enough meat there to overshadow the sparse bits of egotism and amateurism. He’ll give subtitles exposing the lies of the opulently dressed megachurch megapastor as the guy speaks; he’ll interview Catholic priests (including the Vatican astronomer) who giggle at the idea of hell and Creation and all the stuff their flock is goaded into taking literally; he’ll get the Senator to equivocate on evolution, he’ll hammer at the Jesus actor, past all the “God-sized hole in your heart” rhetoric, until the guy pulls out Pascal’s Wager; he’ll show you the salesman for the crazy kosher workless wheelchair—and he’ll do it with that affable, I’m-on-your-side schtick that disarms his opponent.

He delivers the goods, and he’s honest enough to speak directly to his target audience at the end, telling you to get off the fence and actively oppose superstition if you’re smart enough to find the preceding hour and a half disturbing. The film is clever enough, and chooses its targets well enough, to be funny even to someone who’s already an atheist and well-versed in the issues and the players in the debate, while still summarizing those issues and players concisely for a moderately intelligent but apathetic fence-sitter. It’s the Michael Moore populist-polemic-documentary genre done right—which really shouldn’t be too hard, when your targets are this pathetically easy to pick apart. I’m glad he did it.

Me, I’ve always loved sacred choral music in the Western tradition. I was in school choirs from the age of ten; in high school, our mixed concert choir was given a variety of styles, and “classical” sacred works were often among them. One year (my junior year, I think), we, like lots of other high school choirs everywhere, did Mozart’s Ave Verum Corpus. It’s a short (only 46 measures) motet setting the hymn—part of the magic cracker sacrament—to a fairly chromatic melody, with accompaniment:
 

I wish I could credit the performers, but the info on the YouTube clip doesn’t say; it does, though, sound suspiciously like this performance of the Wiener Sängerknaben, the Chorus Viennensis, and the Vienna Radio Symphony Orchestra in 2006.

It’s a strange death cult of a religion, but it gave rise to (or perhaps just latched itself onto) some beautiful emotional expressions. I love how in this piece, Mozart is able to throw in accidentals, and use big leaps sparingly, to evoke this feeling that’s warm and joyous, but not romantically so—it’s a reverent and distant kind of joy.

I’ll find some other sacred music that I’ve enjoyed in church services and in choir, and post it on following Sundays.

People consider starlings pests, but I don’t. The avifauna around here would be poorer for having no enormous roadside flocks of shimmery black beauties swarming in the evening. (See this previous post for an example of the enormous proportions this phenomenon reaches in Europe.) And they can talk.

Until recently, I’ve stayed away from coffee, mostly because caffeine makes me jittery, and decaf tastes funny. But when you spend time with Butter, you drink coffee. So, the social butterfly that I am, I drink it too. Last week as we were working on The Enlightenment Show at the local public access station, I was a little chilly so I got a cup of coffee to stay warm.

I realized my tolerance to caffeine was markedly stronger. I attribute that to my recent social coffee-drinkings and to a pitcher of crazy-strong iced tea that you could cut with a knife. I stopped jumping around and realized that I could control this new burst of energy, and focus it into the job at hand.

Several external factors fell in line, like a increase in work at my place of employment, and the colder weather around here. I stopped by Starbucks one morrning, took it to work, and wow! I got so much work done!

So now I’m starting to set the timer on my coffeemaker at home to start brewing when I get up, and then I can take my 24-oz travel mug to work with me. Later this afternoon, I went to Target to pick up some things, and I bought a little cup of Starbucks.

I know that this is going to bite me in the ass eventually, since as my tolerance gets stronger, I’d have to start drinking more and more not to get the sudden drag when the caffeine wears off. But I guess I’ll cross that bridge when I get to it. If I don’t fall over first.

NOTE: This is a re-post from Freethought Fort Wayne.

I just heard Bill Maher interviewed on Fresh Air on NPR today. He, along with director Larry Charles, talked about Religulous, the controversial documentary documentary lampooning religionists and their beliefs. (Check out the trailer here.)

What I want to know is, as a social group trying to be good community members while communicating our message, does this documentary help or hinder our cause?

Personally, I think Bill Maher is an ass. Having occasionally watched Politically Incorrect, I never cared for his permanent sneering face and pseudo-intellectual speech. He’s a smart guy, yes, but he has a holier-than-thou attitude (ironic!) which just rubs me the wrong way.

I’m glad that he has taken on the mission to expose religion as the ultimate “hustle” as the website’s language puts it, but does he really need to do it by directly rediculing people and their beliefs?

I realize that many freethinkers would answer “yes” to this question. But doesn’t think just add fuel to Christians’ fire? They would have an easier time dismissing the atheist cause by just pointing out that this film is pointing fingers and laughing, a la six-year-old humor.

Now, granted, I haven’t seen this movie yet. There may be some intelligent debate, and some discourse with the theist community. But I think it is safe to say that the majority of the film kinda does a Jay Leno-style “man on the street” interview, where they get people to say rediculous things. At least that’s what the trailer says about the film, and what Terry Gross talked about.

I think the best way to further our cause is to have an open, friendly, line of communication with the theist community. Let them initiate debate, and then methodically counter their arguments, point by point. That’s how my deconversion happened (Well, that, and a natural distrust of what I was being taught).

Nevertheless, I do plan to see the film, and would like to know what others might thing about this. Please feel free to use the comments of this post as a forum.