Is Heaven For Real?

 

Heaven - heven, himinn, Himmel, hemel, Mitt Romney's guestroom.

Heaven's the heart of any religion. The source of good, the House of God, the achievement of nirvana, the inevitable future for those that attest to the correct set of laws, beliefs, and moral codes. The transcendental, cosmological, and metaphysical issues with heaven seem irrelevant to believers, as are all things based on faith. Believers need not reference Gödel to arrogantly condemn the quest for the knowledge of such things as futile at best. Any attempt at discrediting a belief in something such as heaven is first met with inscrutable defense, then invalidated by the held understanding that unlike all other postulations, deductions, or theories, matters of faith are beyond scientific inquiry. In contrast, if there ever comes a shred of evidence seemingly in support of such a fanciful conjecture, regardless of the speculative nature, improbability, or hyperbolic interpretation of the evidence, those that pledge allegiance to the belief hold onto the arisal of such information as indisputable fact with a certainty that would make Heisenberg blush. What would you expect, they do believe science is out to get them.

The religious opposition to science is very understandable, however. There is a very distinct difference between science and religion. Matters of science are based on facts, evidence, scrutiny by peers, often extremely rigorous testing, constant disproval and revisal, and ultimately with the acceptance that "we don't know yet, but that's okay until we have more information." In high contrast, matters of religion are based on faith. Faith that what we know now is what we will always know and nothing can either prove or disprove what we believe. One can easily see the problem of rationally debating an individual with this mindset, and the ostentatious arrogance that often accompanies such beliefs. Science is an incredibly humbling field. Your best friends are your greatest critics and the chance of your theory becoming fact is about as likely as finding the Higg's Boson when a Mark McGwire (pharmaceutically-enhanced) swing hits a 100mph fastball.
In the past, and even in the present, religious phenomonen have often been undermined by scientific discovery. This isn't purposeful, but if you believe in something without evidence, eventually evidence will contradict what you believe. That is not at the fault of scientific inquiry, but rather the factual basis and authenticity of what it is you herald as true. We mustn't merely reject religion as always in perpetual disagreement with science, however. Religion has served its purpose, and failed, as scientific theory.

I briefly digress to emphasize this. Don't hold on to the notion that you DO NOT have to provide proof for what you believe in, why you treat people a certain way, why you act this way or that way. Why not? Is that total and complete detest of reason somehow a favorable attribute? DO NOT feel bad because you accept something with evidence, proof, or reason. You should not be the one who is ashamed. Those that hold a belief system merely because it was passed on to them by their parents, or culture, without any justification or evidence-those are the ones who should be ashamed. There a lot of assholes out there. Selfish, resource hoarding, malignant human beings like Ayn Rand have existed do exist today. You can argue with someone who that you disagree with if they hold an opposing ideology based on findings, personal philosophy, and examples. You CAN NOT reason with someone who simply believes something because that's what they're told and they've never thought to question how it may affect their life or the lives of the people chastized and ostracized by what they believe. I can deal with an asshole, but not an idiot.

For example: Before the 19th century, nearly all cases of dissociative identity disorder and schizophrenia were believed to be demonic possession. In the 18th century, before the pioneering of adequate facilities and humane treatment of mentally ill by Pinel, atrocious things were done to patients to facilitate the removal of so-called "demons." Even into the 1960s prefrontal lobotomies were being performed (although that had to do with the infancy of neuroscience, which was very well held back by the advocacy of religious theory in medicine).

Speaking in tongues, or glossolalia, is still rampant in the U.S. Believers proclaiming the love of Christ with meaningless syllables sounds more like a Bob Dylan song than a prayer. Nonetheless, neuroscience thought giving it a look would be fun and uncovered the underlying mechanisms in many regions of the brain, such as the decrease of activity in the prefrontal cortex, caudate nucleus, and temporal lobe. The experience and brain activity interestingly mirrored that of some of the patients Michael Pensinger worked with in the 80s regarding temporal lobe epilepsy and religious experience.

The most recent, heartwarming story of ridiculous religious validation was the experience and subsequent release of a New York Times bestseller based on the story of Colton Burpo. His father, ironically, is a pastor. Colton had a burst appendix, ended up having life-saving surgery, and had a near death experience. Among some of his visions were meetings with his miscarried sister he had never known about and the great grandfather he had never met. Despite the fact that he was 4 at the time and the book was released many years later, followers of Christianity accepted this as absolute proof that there is a heaven out there, somewhere. In another dimension, universe, or quite possibly separate "spiritual world" to hard Cartesian dualists, there lies a place in which you are judged and either sent to a life of eternal joy or pain.

I wrote the following paper for a Limits of Consciousness class briefly discussing Heaven Is For Real and possible less-than-otherwordly explanations of near death experiences. Faith is science of the gaps which are becoming less and less every day.

First, since the paper is a little lengthy for a blog, I want to outline my problems with the story of Todd and Colton Burpo.

Incentives:

1. Christians don't like to hear this, but there have been plenty of scandals in their religion, even from its official birth in 325 A.D. The Burpos made a shit-ton of money off of this project. If you think that a pastor is above reproach just because he's an ordained speaker on behalf of The Big Man, take into consideration: Tony Alamo was involved in kiddie porn, Joe Barron saw Megan's Law as a dare, Ted Haggard traded bread and wine for meth and escorts, and the Pope has more money than an oil sheik with connections to the CIA.

2. Validation of faith. The Burpos sat on this story for years. Why? Did Jesus not call on his followers to "Go and make disciples of all nations?" When the flower pot is broken and only you and your kid are at home, do you automatically believe his elaborate story of how the Archangel Michael came and knocked it over?

Inaccuracy of testimony:
1. Colton Burpo was 4-years-old. That should be enough, but I know you won't believe it is. Sparling et al. conducted a wonderful study on how uncertainty and requestioning easily thwarts the accuracy of a child's testimony (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21941387). Also, how wording of questions are highly influential in the testimony of children has been discussed. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16634977).

2. What we know is eyewtiness testimony just isn't very reliable. Variables such as reconstructive memory, stress, cognitive dissonance, interviewer leading, etc. make it a highly suspect form of evidence. The Innocence Project has exonerated hundreds of people, many of whom were proven guilty by the help of eyewitness testimony.

Content of Near Death Experience:

1. As with religion, although there are similarities between experiences, the content, the deities or spirits seen, the description of persons met, etc., are highly subjective based on the culture of the person who experienced the NDE. Christians see God or Jesus and relatives, Hindus see the Yamdoots, etc.

2. There are physiologic explanations for NDEs. Cortical chaos in the stress of death could cause sporadic firing of the brain in the visiual cortex which often produces rings or circular anomalies in the visual field, chemicals such as agmatine or DMT that may be released in situations close to death, and even the release of endorphins and encephalins that are released from the limbic system in times of stress could all play a part, without the need for some sort of higher entity intervening in the process of death.

3. Not everyone who almost dies, or clinically dies, experiences an NDE. In the U.S. a 30-month study of 1,595 patients admitted to a cardiac care unit discovered only 10% of those who had cardiac arrest experienced an NDE. If this was a transcendental experience involving leaving the physical world for a more spiritual destination, why does it only occur to certain people?

Here is a more throrough, but still very brief discussion of NDEs and the religious experience:

"A live body and a dead body contain the same number of particles. Structurally there's no discernible difference. Life and Death are unquantifiable abstracts. Why should I be concerned?" – Dr. Manhattan in Alan Moore’s The Watchmen

As sentient beings, even the more rational of us have a difficult time imagining the expiration of our subjective experience. From the emergence of our conscious long-term memories until we grow old in age, we are in a constant state of perception and experience. Death walks among us daily, whether it is the squirrel you hit with your Buick, the flower wilting in your vase, or the skin cells you shed as you scrub yourself with a washcloth in the shower. However, with the exception of our furry friend in the first example, most of us don’t think twice about the loss of these. We don’t neglect scientific inquiry to invent a special place in another dimension that skin cells go to depending on whether they were benign or malignant. In the Book of Genesis, the fruit that Eve ingested was not condemned to inevitable death, nor was it allocated a place in heaven if its seeds eventually grew another tree that bore more fruit. However, the mass majority of our country believes that humans, specifically, survive death at some conscious level. The implications of this notion are telling of the state of both our views on consciousness and dedication to scientific honesty. Ultimately, despite religious connation, belief in an “afterlife” directly correlates to one’s belief in what consciousness is, its function, and its basis in the brain, quantum “weirdness,” or another dimension.

Belief in afterlife is most commonly accompanied by the judgment of an omnipotent, reportedly benevolent deity or “life force” that determines whether your afterlife is destined to be spent roasting marshmallows, cloud surfing, as an eagle soaring in the sky, or as a termite in a state of perpetual toiling.  This tells us a few things about the public belief of consciousness (whether they’ve seriously considered the implications of their beliefs or not). First, free will is imperative for judgement and therefore must be a reality.  Determinism would undoubtedly leave the idea of judgment wanting. Interestingly enough though, the concept of compatibilism actually contradicts the biblical concept of predestination. An issue even with compatibilism is that we aren't all cast equal lots in the world; many of our victims of circumstance that could potentially lead to criminal activity or even disbelief if you're born in a primarly Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist country.  However, in Luke14:27, the Gospel author states, “And anyone who does not bear his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.” This is a catch-all of sorts for any problem or plight one is thrust into. Despite whatever seemingly unfair situation you’ve been plagued by, it is merely, “your cross to bear.” Second, it means that dualism must be a reality. There exists either a spiritual world or dimension undetectable by our current technological prowess or understanding of physics. Finally, biological evolution is baseless. If life were merely a testing ground for human belief,  adaptive mutations and natural selection would be unnecessary, especially when considering the end of days is predetermined.Sure, it could have somehow been added by an omnipotent being at the universe's creation for some divine purpose unbeknownst to us, but about 40% of America believes that all of the species were created in their current state at the birth of the world.

So what corroborating evidence is their outside of religious texts for the fantastic belief in the human survival of death? If nothing else from this class has been bludgeoned into my head, it is that any seemingly conclusive evidence of theories of self and consciousness are fleeting and unanimous agreement inside the community discussing this evidence would be easier to come by at the next GOP primary debate. So what could either substantiate or refute such an idea with as much scientific, philosophical, and spiritual significance? As Carl Sagan brilliantly asserted, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

Using Christianity as an example solely because I am most familiarized with the text, despite God’s opposition of the human acquisition of knowledge of the Universe from the first Book of the Bible, followers of Christianity have used near death experiences (NDEs) as indisputable evidence of an afterlife (Burpo, Heaven is For Real).  The recent book by Pastor Todd Burpo, Heaven Is For Real, chronicles the apparent astral adventures of his 4-year-old son, Colton. Colton had a ruptured appendix that went undetected for some time and required emergency surgery. During the surgery, Colton purportedly arrived in heaven, was in contact with his great grandfather whom he had never met, and also his miscarried sister he had never heard of.  After the book was published in 2010, it quickly rose to the top of the New York Times bestseller list. Many people who I’ve spoken with take the word of a pastor as uncontestable and truly believe this story is true. However, obvious skepticism arises when taking into consideration the monetary benefits of authoring such a book and how easily it is to evoke inaccuracies in children’s stories by an interviewer (Sparling et al. 2011). Not that evangelists have been involved in scandals before.

            In the end, there are three ways of interpreting such a book. The first involves the acceptance that all of what Colton and Todd is inherently true. There is a heaven, your relatives go there when they die, Colton visited this place, and it is all outlined in a book for $5.00 on your Kindle. The second is that everything in the book is false. Todd Burpo convinced Colton that he had a profound experience, the memories were constructed, and the Burpo family rides off into the sunset in a platinum chariot full of fan mail. The third, and most likely, is that something happened during Colton’s surgery. Some phenomenon in the neurochemical environment created grandiose visions in the experience of Colton Burpo, his meeting with his lost relatives was either suggested  by his parents or he unconsciously acquired information about his sister and grandfather, these experiences shouldn’t be all that uncommon , and they are, in all likelihood, subjective.

            It appears there are ways to give validity to the statements of not only Colton Burpo, but also the many other people with NDEs without challenging consciousness arising from physical processes within the brain. Neither dualism nor a quantum view of consciousness is required to account for the experiences of those who have had apparent brushes with death.  In order for us to strictly maintain that NDEs do not occur in a conscious state void of corresponding brain activity, we must assume that the experience takes place prior to the cessation of brain activity. There appears to be no evidence contradicting this claim (Blackmore 2004).

            To understand what could be going on in the brain to create the experience, we must first consolidate some of the attributes of the typical NDE. Visions of tunnels in lights, entire life flashing before one’s eyes, visions of spiritual entities that are usually hereditary of one’s cultural upbringing, and occasionally more insidious visions of hell are all common themes in a typical NDE (Blackmore 2004). It should also be noted that the majority of those that have had these experiences reported increased belief in an afterlife, less fear of death, and a greater interest in spirituality and increased love and acceptance of others, which will be important later in the paper (Blackmore 2004). Out of body experiences do not readily accompany NDEs (Blackmore 2004) and their explanation and even propagation don’t share the same mystique of an NDE (Blackmore 2004).

In Dying to Live , Susan Blackmore introduces and provides information that supports her hypothesis that severe stress and fear, as well as anoxia in the brain, cause inhibition and uncontrolled neural firing which produce the mental states described by those experiencing a NDE (1993). First, she introduces the consistency argument. This argument underlines that NDEs around the world are often very similar in their nature. Next, these experiences are “just like hallucinations.” If this is the case, NDEs should be reproducible under conditions other than near-death.  

There are obvious ethical barriers to inducing near-death states and studying them emperically, but there are also limitations and obvious improbabilities of “being in the right place at the right time” to study NDEs on a large-scale in a hospital setting. So can we induce a hallucination that causes the same lasting change to one’s view on life, spirituality, and the treatment of others? The Harbor-UCLA medical center recently conducted a study on how the moderate use of hallucinogenic psilocybin affected the anxiety and fear of death of cancer patients. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, there were no clinically adverse side effects detected. The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory trait anxiety subscale showed significant improvement in anxiety among patients at 1 and 3 months (2011). Although we can demonstrate how a hallucinogen can reproduce a similar event resulting in similar psychological changes as someone who experiences an NDE, it doesn’t solve the problem of an adaptive advantage. Why would a strong hallucinatory experience near death be conducive to our survival or functioning?

Another interesting candidate in the induction of NDEs in susceptible individuals is the novel neurotransmitter agmatine. Ketamine has shown to be capable of inducing near-death experiences (Jansen 1996). We know that ketamine is an NMDA antagonist, so we would be led to reason that possibly an endogenous neurotransmitter that antagonizes NMDA receptors could be the culprit in the search for the propagator of NDEs. This supported by the finding that certain conditions that induce NDEs (hypoxia, low blood flow, hypoglycemic conditions, temporal lobe epilepsy, etc.) also cause excess extracellular levels of glutamate in the brain (Jansen 1996). Agmatine was shown to exert a neuroprotective effect against excess glutamate in cultured hippocampal neurons as well as in ischemic conditions (Gilad et al. 1996). Since most NDEs are associated with cardiac arrest, it is also important to notice agmatine’s favorable effects on vascular health (Huynh & Chin-Dusting 2006). Ultimately, if the brain releases an excess amount of agmatine to combat the possible excitotoxic effects of excess glutamate and damage to the cardiovascular system, its antagonization of the NMDA receptors could potentially produce an NDE in susceptible individuals. If this is the case, further research should delve deeper into the health of individuals who reported an NDE versus those who did not. Also, if agmatine is safe and neuroprotective, is there a human dose than we could administer to reproduce an NDE?

            One of the most frustrating, and in some ways rewarding aspects of studying consciousness is the constant reminder of what you don’t know and cannot prove. I am one to believe that we must not merely dismiss the Rupert Sheldrakes, Dean Radins, or even Todd Burpos of the world, but instead, scientifically examine their testimonies and findings. It sounds corny for me to align myself with Eagleman “Possibilianism,” but the humbling nature studying consciousness leaves me with few options. However, I believe that the possibility of an omnipotent, personal, deity judging subjects and designating an eternal homestead has had ample time to produce evidence. I don’t feel that NDEs are evidence of that stance, so as a reasonable individual I must conclude that no, Heaven Isn’t For Real.

Bibliography

           

Burpo, T. (2010). Heaven is for real. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. Blackmore, S. (2004). Consciousness: An Introduction. (Second ed.)New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.     Blackmore, S. (1993). Dying to live. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus.     Gilad GM, Salame K, Rabey JM, Gilad VH. Agmatine treatment is neuroprotective in rodent brain injury models. Life Sci. 1996;58(2):PL 41-6     Grob CS, Danforth AL, Chopra GS, Hagerty M, McKay CR, Halberstadt AL, Greer GR. Pilot study of psilocybin treatment for anxiety in patients with advanced-stage cancer. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011 Jan;68(1):71-8   Huynh NN, Chin-Dusting J. Amino acids, arginase and nitric oxide in vascular health. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2006 Jan-Feb;33(1-2):1-8. Jansen, K. L. R. (1996) Using ketamine to induce the near -death experience: mechanism of action and therapeutic potential. Yearbook for Ethnomedicine and the Study of Consciousness Issue 4, 1995 (Ed.s C. Ratsch; J. R. Baker); VWB, Berlin, pp55-81.   Sparling J, Wilder DA, Kondash J, Boyle M, Compton M. Effects of interviewer behavior on accuracy of children's responses. J Appl Behav Anal. 2011 Fall;44(3):587-92

Imagine She's White

 Imagine She's White


It was hot today. Hotter than usual. Maybe it really isn't as hot as I think; it could be that I'm just nervous. My mom told me it was going to make me a real woman. I won't want to do bad things anymore and I'll be able to find a husband and raise children like her. One day I'll be able to share this with my daughters, at least I hope that is my destiny. My grandmother will be here today. She hasn't been feeling good lately, but she told me this is so important that she'd be here no matter what.

I've been looking forward to this day for so long, I can't believe it's actually here. My house has never looked so big, and I've never felt so small. They told me it would hurt just a little, but I would be clean from all the sins of my body that would hurt me more if I didn't do it. As I walk up the stairs, I feel myself start to cry. I'm getting really scared now. My grandma is holding something sharp and I'm trying to run back down the stairs. My mom catches me and tells me I better shape up if I want to have a family someday. I can hear my dad downstairs putting groceries away like he usually does on Sunday afternoon. I scream for him, but all I can hear are cupboards opening and shutting.

My aunt walks in. She and my mom hold me down on the bed while my grandma cleans the sharp thing. It still has some orange dust on it, but I know she would never do anything to hurt me. As they spread my legs, I pretend I'm in a better place. A place I'll be in someday. I have a husband and he's showing our son how to throw a football. I'm braiding my daughter's hair while she watches cartoons.

Pain. I've scraped my knees playing outside before, but nothing like this. Nothing down there. Pain. My screams are met with a pillow in my face. Why is this taking so long? I think forward to my wedding. They said I'd have to do this again at that time, but I don't know why, yet. Pain. I try to go farther into the future and think about having my first baby. Again, they said I'd have to do this then, too, but I just don't know why. Why do I have to do this at all? Why would I do this to my daughter?

It's over. My mom ties my feet together so I can get better. I'm sure they would only do what's best for me. 

In Africa, 92 million girls have undergone female genital mutilation from ages 10 and up. What if she was white?

God--Employee of the Month--My Turn

Prayer before Nebraska-Penn State Game

After the atrocities that had allegedly occurred in State College, PA, emotions ran high as the Nebraska Cornhuskers came to play the Penn State Nittany Lions. Jerry Sandusky, justifiably demonized as a modern-day Werewolf of Wysteria, purportedly committed the unthinkable. The establishment of an endless supply of children to victimize under the guise of a benevolent organization. How could something like this happen? Not only because it was at a university with a squeaky clean reputation, but in the world today at all? I addressed some of the hypocrisy of asking yourself this question in a previous post: The Cowardly Lion, however, it still remains unimaginable that people are so naive and egocentric to become disillusioned with the state of human evolution. Where were these sudden, "child rights activists" when the stat came out that 53% of black fourth grade boys couldn't read at the appropriate reading level? Did they throw their arms up in protest knowing 15 million children die each year of hunger? Did they boycott a buffet because 29,000 Somalian children under age 5 died in a 90-day period of famine? Did any of them send letters to Yingluck Shinawatra, Pratibha Patil, or Dilma Rousseff, to crack down harder on child sex tourism, considering 2 million children succumb to it? Are they begging Congress to address the 15 million children living in poverty in America? Did these child rights activists stop going to mass after 11,000 cases of child molestation were brought to light?

No, none of them did. However, few of these children are Americans. None of these children are fetuses. In the words of the late George Carlin, "If you're pre-born you're good, if you're pre-school, you're fucked."

You can't say that these people clamoring and calling for Jerry Sandusky's blood to flood the streets of Pennsylvania like a more morbid and less black Hurricane Katrina didn't do anything for the plight of children. They, above all, prayed for the victims of Jerry Sandusky. And what would be more fitting?

Before the players took the field on November 12, 2011, a scene that not even Pat Robertson could imagine emerged (hopefully none of the players were gay). The players locked hands, and Ron Brown released an impassioned, heartfelt speech to the Christian god about protecting the students, players, and townspeople involved in the game following the events that defaced so many. That there were,"...little boys around the country trying to find the definition of what manhood is all about." He paraphrased John 1:14, exclaiming that Jesus is the source of grace and truth. And finally, almost drowned out by the wild excitement of the crowd, Ron Brown asked for forgiveness for all of those involved in the scandal as the crowd erupted in a cathartic explosion. What an entrancing series of events.

One need not be a Christian to experience goosebumps with the rest of the spectators. The feelings of guilt, empathy, and fear replaced by comradery, release, anticipation. One also need not be an atheist to painfully endure the hypocrisy, inaccuracy, and trepidation of not only in Ron Brown's diction, but in what both the words spoken and apparent necessity of the prayer reveal about our society in America.

Wait....so attempting to think positively about the events that happened and hoping for the best for all those involved is a bad thing? Absolutely not. However, that's not what this is. That may be the pretense under which this event took place, collectively showing support for victims and insisting on restoring justice, but that's not what this became.

Many of us were ridiculing news stations by turning off the conversation of Sandusky and covering the status of Joe Paterno. We believed that even though Paterno showed immense cowardice in effectively saying he "may have done more in hindsight," it was still evading the issue of the assault on Jerry Sandusky. Maybe the media, like us, was so disgusted by what happened that dismissing Sandusky was merely a defense mechanism preventing them from addressing the intense emotional and cognitive turmoil involved in the case. Regardless, many of us were still upset.

On that powerful November day in State College, nobody seemed upset about detracting from the mythological Empusa Jerry Sandusky to come together, say a prayer, thank God, and pray for his strength, justice, and above all, forgiveness. So why does God get a break?

God, omnipotent, omniscient, and just created not just the children he claims to love perfectly, but also the monster that preys on those children, completely ravishing any chance of a normal life. We, his creation, in search for the acquisition of knowledge by either literally or metaphorically eating a piece of fruit, were thrust into eternal damnation until God, who by the way makes all the rules, was forced sacrifice his Son so that we could again achieve eternal life. How benevolent. Trading theft for murder. The fact of the matter is, God doesn't live up to the moral code of humanity in the 21st century let alone of a boundlessly good being. We praise God through thick and thin, whether we like his will or not, however mysterious it may be. God need not plead the 5th, all he needs to do is plead "mystery." Well I for one don't think there is anything mysterious about an adult  playing "pin the dick on a child." We, for the most part, can collectively agree that's fucking horseshit. Why do we give God a pass?

The truth is, god is a construct. Somewhere in our evolution the concept of a god or gods served an adaptive purpose, whether it be in uniting groups or satisfying our psychological predisposition to predict our environment or a natural reaction to the necessity to fulfill social needs. In any event, as Nietszche suggested, God is a reflection of his believers. So if you can justify worshiping a being that loves children, yet leaves room for their victimization in his 6,000 year plan, if you serve a god that allows people to even evolve a sexual taste for children, if you don't question that the Bible calls for bigotry, xenophobia, genocide, refusing to allow the lame to approach the altar, burning a preacher's daughter at the stake if she commits a sexual deviant act, if you don't throw your arms up in dismay because Jesus loves the little children, but they can't get any state money because their mom failed a piss test, if you put all your trust in a God that felt there was no better way to exonerate his "perfect" creations from the most atrocious act of trying to ascertain the knowledge of the universe than the torture of an innocent man...maybe you should take a long, hard look at yourself.

Nonetheless, most of us still praise god when things are going great, then are rebuked by our peers by questioning his will when we aren't sure about him when things go wrong. Like that asshole in the cubicle next to you that gets employee-of-the-month despite you putting twice as many hours in, god always comes out on top.

Here's why I think I should be employee-of-the-month over god this time around:

1. Janice stole my fruit salad out of the refrigerator and I didn't kill her or go home and kill my kid. (Genesis 3:3)

2. Glenn came and said that he didn't approve of my work on the Whistler account. I didn't go murder his family. (Deuteronomy 7:2)

3. Herm always masturbates in the handicapped stall, I am yet to strike him dead on the spot for spilling his seed outside of a vagina.  (Genesis 38:9)

4. My boss has a mule on his farm...I'm actually cool with it. (Leviticus 19:19)

5. I'm cool with subordinates spending their holidays with families instead of me. (Matthew 10:34-29)

6. I actively encourage people to maintain stable relationships and reject infidelity in the workplace. (1 King 11:1-3)

7. I'm not friends with Rick Perry.

The Sexual Cult of Tebow

Timothy Richard Tebow. He's been a media Christ-figure, a role model to millions, all while being subject to the ridicule of as many keyboard warriors as Michael Vick. What does this all mean? What is it about this man in particular that inspires, and conversely, infuriates so many people?

We could talk all day about his lack of proper mechanics, quarterback IQ, and ability to avoid getting put on his back. We could talk all day about how, despite these flaws, he's become the starting quarterback of a surprising dark horse in the AFC West. We could discuss his work ethic, drive, and apparent unfailing resilience to criticism. However, none of those things are what Tebow is known for, are they?


The sexual exploits and morality of Tebow rival his athletic prowess in drawing media attention. He's a devout Christian, an admitted virgin, and hence, the model citizen for parents of children across America to support and to inspire their children with.

What does this say about how we define morality in America? Pre-marital sex, that must be bad. Christianity, well that HAS to be a good thing, right? I mean, from where else could you possibly draw moral aptitude?

I never fail to mention that I believe the moral code of Jesus, as written about in the New Testament, is valid, progressive, and applicable to life today. However, that's really not what Christianity is in this country is it? Forget, the morality of the Old Testament God (who ironically is the same person as Jesus even though their moral code are completely paradoxical). That guy, well, to say that he doesn't live up to the moral code of Garfield, let alone humanity. When reading the OT, one struggles to find any difference between God and the girlfriend you had at 15 that demanded worship, calling every day, and if you didn't blindly neglect your search for knowledge and follow everything she said would damn you eternally to hell, but loved you deeply. Well, maybe that last part detaches them a bit. However, the moral code of Christianity today isn't that of the Old or New Testament, is it?

In America, in contrast to the Old Testament, you can approach the altar of God if you're lame, you don't get burned at the stake if you are a preacher's daughter and have sex, you can eat pork and shellfish, you can wear clothes of more than one fabric, you are actually encouraged to shave and cut your hair (when it's not November), homosexuality is becoming more widely accepted with the introduction of the public to biology (albeit slow), genocide is usually frowned upon, and having 700 wives and 300 concubines isn't acceptable, even for the most prominent public figures. Just ask Tiger.

In America, in contrast to the New Testament, again, homosexuality is becoming more accepted (although Jesus never spoke on it and Paul, or shall I say those claiming to be Paul, referred to "indecent acts with other men," which apparently included homosexual relations but not slavery), women's suffrage began the end of sexual oppression, blatant slavery is now condemned, etc.

It has become clear that the moral Zeitgeist in this age has surpassed that of the Bible. So, one must in good reason deduce that morality is inherent in our evolution, not given to us by a higher power. If God was an American in these days, he would undoubtedly be in prison. If Paul lived in America, well, he'd probably live in Texas and fit in just fine.

However, the Christian monopoly the founding fathers vehemently opposed has reared it's ugly head and now not only affects legislation, but what morals we attribute to a "good person." Sexual restriction (which supports the theory that infers religion has become a mating strategy), going to Church, conservatism, humility, etc. To me this isn't all bad, like I said, Jesus seemed like a pretty alright dude. So are these things really good? Is the Christian lifestyle really formulated by a sentient, omnipotent, omniscient, being that knows best?

I, obviously don't believe so.

Good Christians? Evil Atheists?

First, and by far the most telling display of the hypocrisy of the myth of the "good Christian" is defined in he U.S. prison population. Christians make up roughly 75% of the country based on some polls and that is reflected in the prison population. Conversely, atheists make up somewhere between 10% and 20% of the American population, and less than 1% of the prison population. Listen, I know what you're going to say, "Well, those people are in jail, they're not real Christians." However, please also note how hypocritical that sounds when you are clamoring about forgiveness, second chances, and accepting Jesus in your life. In my opinion, this data is more reflective of the evolutionary success of liberals in generally being able to avoid growing up in high poverty areas without an appropriate education or job opportunities which makes these areas breeding grounds for both crime and religion (coincidence?).


Sexual Liberalism?

Alan Moore once said, "Sexually progressive cultures gave us mathematics, literature, philosophy, civilization and the rest, while sexually restrictive cultures gave us the Dark Ages and the Holocaust."

Why is open sexuality so frowned upon by Christians. Is their religion a mating strategy? Is it because of the spread of disease? Is it because abstinence is the best method of preventing teen pregnancies? Is it because the Bible says, "NO!" to any pre- or extramarital sexual exploits?

Well let's address all of those.

1. Religion as a mating strategy: In a study by Kenrick, Weeden, and Cohen of 902 students at 4 American Universities published in Evolution and Human Behavior, when controlling for sexual and family values, other values related to morality such as stealing, lying, etc., were not correlated to religious attendance. Expanding on this study, another study was done published in The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology finding that piety, in both men in women, was linked to the perception of a large amount of attractive same-sex fellow students.

So what could this mean?


Well, this means that conservative views on sexuality and family are fundamental in religiosity. More importantly, this suggests that conservative sexual values may be what influences people to seek out religious affiliation, rather than religious participation instilling a conservative sexual ideology. Think, if you knew you were a small fish in a big pond, would it not be most beneficial to bind a mate down with condemning sexual frivolity and endorsing marriage, children, etc.? This would also help to explain the religious aversion to drugs, which are interpreted as increasing sexual experimentation. Beneath the surface, you see how silly this hostility towards sexuality really is.

2. Spread of Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Surely we must avoid sexual promiscuity because of the prevalence of STDs in our country. A large-scale, global study of sexuality was conducted by Professor Kaye Wellings of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and her colleagues. In the study, STDs were not found to be more prevalent in responders that reported having multiple partners. However, the spread of STDs was more prevalent in Africa, where sexual promiscuity isn't the culprit. It suggested that lack of education and adequate healthcare, as well as poverty are much better predictors of STD prevalence than is sexual promiscuity.

3. Abstinence Only!: Republicans in Wisconsin and other states across America continue to push for sexual education that is based solely on abstinence training. As if that isn't in direct disagreement with the separation of Church and State. Recent statistics show that the teenage pregnancy rate is as low as it has been in two decades. At 410,000 girls from age 15-19 in 2009, this is down 37% from 1991. This is in discord with the dogmatic belief that sexual responsibility lies only in rejecting it altogether. The amount of students using two forms of contraception increase from 5% to 9% and teens having sex without any form of contraception decreased from 16% to 12%.

In the Netherlands, where teen pregnancy and abortion rates are low, parents are much more likely to allow their teenagers to 'sleepover' with their significant others. The Dutch are much more open, rational, and less dramatic about sexuality, allowing teens to make informed decisions on whether they are ready without being stigmatized in an open forum with their parents. In short, just like as in drugs and alcohol, you cannot regulate what you prohibit.  

4. Sexuality in the Bible: One could spend a year trying to make sense of sexuality in the Bible, especially when including its pagan origins, as well as the beginning of Christianity riddled with numerous cults. However, there are some interesting points to bring up.

In the Old Testament: Lot, to prevent angels from being raped, offers up two virgin daughters instead. Lot had sex with his daughters. Solomon, the wisest king, had 700 wives and 300 concubines. It's hard to fathom how two people could populate the entire world without multiple cases of incest. Ham butt-raped Noah. Judah had casual sex with a Canaanite.

In the New Testament, although Paul talks more about sexual immorality than Herman Cain says, "999," he never really outlines what exact acts are condemned. Certainly, he never said if you have sex before marriage it's wrong. What he does allude to is that sexual immorality can be avoided by marriage. He basically said that there are so many sexual temptations out there: sex with the same sex, animals, leather couches,  that the only way to keep yourselves pure is to get married. And hey, that makes sense--married people do have more sex than non-married people.

This also helps to explain the conception of marriage in the Old Testament. Why would getting married be so important if not to prevent "sexual immorality?" Well, as we now know through sociological studies, there is an evolutionary reason. Marriage leads to a stable family environment (well, not always) which is the best setting for a child to grow up healthily and perpetuate your genetic code. However, there is no magic "favor switch" that God turns on when you say "I do." All that means is that a low-stress, supportive, financially adequate environment is conducive to healthy children. It has nothing to do with sexual preference or marriage.

Furthermore, like I've mentioned in previous posts, remember both Testaments were conceived to emancipate these religions from pagan rituals and customs that were their origins. Monotheism became the new, hot thing, and it wasn't long before everyone jumped on the train (or on the tracks).



There are many reasons to like Tim Tebow. He's a guy that doesn't have the most talent, instincts, or ability, but he has a good attitude, works hard, and finds a way to win. However, the notion that he's a virgin isn't one of those attributes that warrant exultation. So even though Newt Gingrich blames all America's problems on secularism and says we can't trust a president that doesn't pray, even though 80% of Republicans would not vote for an atheist president, even though more people won't vote for Mitt Romney because he's a Mormon than because he's a indecisive, bandwagoning corporate whore, maybe you should start considering whether your held beliefs are truly righteous. The world is progressing, with or without you. 

The Cowardly Lion and Hypocrisy of the Critics at Penn State

As I sit waiting for the press conference by the Board of Trustees, I open with a line from the beginning of Boondock Saints: "We must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil we must all fear most, and that is the indifference of good men."

Let's be honest. This is an atrocity. Sexual abuse in childhood makes a child more vulnerable to nearly every single psychological disorder in adulthood. There is no excuse for the action, or lack of action, by the Penn State staff, including Joe Paterno. How could a respected member of one of them most squeaky clean universities establish a program for young boys primarily to satisfy is insidious urges? Well, there is an evolutionary explanation for pedophilia, but that's not needed here. We all had the same twist in our stomach when we read the 23 page report. We all felt a little more helpless when we heard the words of one of of the victim's mother. We were all equally enraged when a confident Jerry Sandusky redirected questions to his attorney.

But this hasn't been about Jerry Sandusky has it? Sure, it's in part because JoePa has become synonymous with Penn State football and nobody really knew who Sandusky was anymore off of campus. The plight of Sandusky, the culprit in the matter, has been overshadowed by uncertainty over the role and future of Joe Paterno. How could a man of such incredible integrity possibly let this go unreported, even if he was informed the a proper investigation had been undertaken by his "superiors." For those that are angry that Paterno hasn't issued a true statement yet, this is first a legal proceeding and any statement that could potentially implicate his colleagues, the university, or even himself, will not be allowed. The issue of Paterno's legacy being entirely obliterated relies on two things:

1. What McQueary really relayed to Paterno. And without reveling too much in the cowardice of McQueary, what adult man walks in on a child being raped, does nothing, then calls his father? I cannot comprehend the miniscule stature of McQueary's genitalia, but the events following this 2002 incident could have all been avoided if ONE person would have done the right thing. This chain could have been broken that easily.

2. If Paterno, fully aware of the gross nature of the events merely reported the incident to the next in command was satisfied with the investigation, or lack thereof.

However, what none of the facts will suffice in explaining to me is that Paterno, aware that SOMETHING happened, whether rape, molestation, or playing swords, continued to have good faith in Jerry Sandusky without a strained relationship. Speaking subjectively, if any of my friends or colleagues was implicated in a child sex abuse case, I could not, with good conscience, allow them to continue to act in an institution that served as a model of integrity. Moreso, I could never allow that person to continue to work SPECIFICALLY with more young boys.

The legacy is tainted. We'll hear it again and again: "Paterno acted correct legally, but failed to live up to the moral standard attribtued to him." I agree. I think that anyone who is a true model of honor and principle should be held to a higher moral standard than what they are merely legally binded by. From the little we've heard from Paterno, we know he, "wished he would have done more." Paterno dropped the ball either way, that's what we're sure of.

The Board just made the decision, he's gone. I feel that they made the right decision, and if JoePa truly cares about the reputation and future of this university, no matter what role he truly played, he needs to be the scapegoat. We've seen that Jerry Sandusky isn't going to be it, certainly McQueary isn't going to be it. There is no separation between Joe Paterno and Penn State football, so if Penn State football takes a hit, he has to know Joe Paterno takes the same blow. The university cleaned house so they could move forward. Despite the rioting of the student body, it is imperative so that the players, students, and good, innocent people of this university can start to rebuild a tarnished identity. Joe Paterno would have been that last ruin, residual of a nefarious past. As long as he was on the sidelines, there would be no moving on.

I am in NO way condoning, nor justifying any of the actions of those involved in this cover-up, and don't hold the illusion that this wasn't at some level just that. But before you get self-righteous, before you crucify Joe Paterno, please don't fail to think objectively. Don't underestimate the power of groupthink. Joe Paterno's life was Penn State. If you truly can't fathom how such a "great" man could fail to report such an atrocity, you fail to imagine the power and investment Joe Paterno had in the university. You truly have no idea what you would have done in his position. Almost ANY program would internalize this, control the damage, try to pay off the victims, and if possible, move away from it without media attention. That is the disgusting reality of the way these corporations (and tha'ts what they are) operate. The most inexcusable part (if you can allocate that to any one) is that they continued to allow Jerry Sandusky to be involved with the program and have access to children. To stand in confusion of how this event happened is to stand in oblivion of the nature of humanity in our current evolutionary state.

But please... if you don't take anything I say into consideration, don't continue to be a hypocrite. Stop blaming the players and program for the gross negligence of a few men. Stop saying you feel sick to your stomach that his happened to a child. Why?

Do you feel sick to your stomach when you eat a buffet knowing 15 million children die each year of food shortage? Do you get indigestion from the canned food sitting in your pantry, or from the 29,000 Somalian children under age 5 that died of famine in a 90 day period recently?

You can't possibly watch a Penn State football game without throwing up? Between 1950 and 2002 nearly 11,000 instances of sexual abuse by nearly 5,000 priests were brought to attention, many of the priests being merely moved to another parish after the assault had been validated. Do you throw up every time you take Communion?

Solon, one of the Athenian fathers of democracy, mandated the protection of the rite of pederasty. Do you want to throw up every time you vote?


In America, 1 in 4 children live in poverty, but you want their parents to be drug-tested before they qualify for welfare because y'know they should get their parents straight, right? Or what about the fact you think that adequate funding for these children's schools and teachers isn't worth a small tax surtax on 0.2% of the richest in this country? How about that preschoolers with a step parent are 100x more likely to die by homicide? At least they don't have gay parents because it's those homosexuals that are ruining the sanctity of marriage and family, not Kim Kardashian.

How many children died in the Middle East in drone strikes? Wait, that doesn't matter because those aren't good, Christian, American children, right? They grow up and become terrorists (although 94% of terrorists aren't Muslim).

This year, Anders Breivik mercilessly gunned down 69 people, mostly cihldren, to restore "European Christendom." Are you beside yourself with anger? Did you riot in the streets about political extremism and bipartisan detachment?

You can be disgusted by what went on at Penn State, but don't pretend you don't directly and indirectly support children getting the shaft (literally and figuratively). Hey, maybe they'd have things a little bit easier if they all just stayed fetuses.

Pulling a Boehner--Jobs and Income Inequality

I'm so completely disenchanted, annoyed, pissed off, Rush Limbaugh-purple-with-rage at McConnell, Cantor, Ryan, Boehner, Republican primary presidential field, et. al. in their dogmatic devotion to Job Creators. Dum duh nuh nuh! We can't raise taxes on a bunch of people that pay the 2nd lowest corporate tax rate after breaks and loopholes have been accounted for.

What have these Job Creators done with their record profit margins, bailout money, tax breaks, and subsidies? Well Goldman Sachs sent 1,000 jobs to Singapore, Nike paid another 400 children $0.50 an hour in Indonesia, and nobody created a single goddamn thing in August of 2011. Listen, I'm fully aware that anybody who has read anything about anything knows this Tea Party philosophy bullshit doesn't work. I know it, Clinton knows it, Obama knows it, you know it, your wife, your kids, Antoine Dodson fucking knows it. Hell, the GOP and Congress even know it.

I know we all know why the Cantors and Boehners of the world defend the interest of these poor, billion dollar companies ("people" if you're into that Romney rhetoric). Lobbbbyying. Yes. Like you've never heard that before. The GOP has no interest in bettering this country. Do you really think that the richest 0.2% of households in the U.S. would have noticed a 0.5% surtax for $35 billion to save jobs for teachers and first responders? Oh wait, sorry that's the public sector, so that doesn't count. Do you think any millionaires will notice a 0.7% on adjusted gross income over $1 million? We may never even fucking know.

This is the difference between the Tea Party and GOP, "I've got a corporate dildo in my ass moving my mouth up and down like a gay sex puppet" philosopy and the Democrat proposals and American Jobs Act. We have the lowest revenue in 60 years. Corporate profits are sky high, so much so that they're sitting on a couple trillion dollars for shits and gigs. Taxes are lower than under the Republican second coming of Christ, Reagan. Why are there no jobs? Well, unfortunately, the canon of capitalism has never been to create jobs or hand out benefits to workers has it?. It is about unrestricted profit increase. Again. And again. And again. That's why since 2009, 88% of income growth has gone to corporate profits while 1% has gone to workers' wages. That's why 95% of the country is getting poorer every year. That's why 37% of young families in this country are in poverty. That's why in the last 32 years, the top 1% of the country saw after tax income grow by 275% while the bottom 20% saw it grow by a mere 18%. That's why 1% of America controls 40% of the wealth (depending on the interpretation of several statitsics).

The billions of dollars they spend on lobbying each year is why the richest 400 Americans' wealth has nearly quadrupled with their taxes nearly being halved. That's why when the Tea Party has been clamoring about "No new taxes!" they meant for the CEOs of their companies. That's why 1400 millionaires paid no federal income tax last year. That's why 25% of millionaires in this country pay less taxes than middle America. That's why Warren Buffet paid a lower tax rate than his secretary. And finally, that's why we won't see what a measly 5.6% surtax on millionaries would do to fund the entire $447 billion American Jobs Act.

I've said it once, I've said it a million times. At this point in our evolution, we still have these residual Darwinian evolutionary mechanisms to hoard resources and power. By "we" I mean our fellow human beings occupying public office and corporate scum, the least evolved of us all, whose time on this planet is winding down. Capitalism is not necessarily the problem. It works because it is driven by our own competitive nature. However, when it goes unchecked, unregulated, this is what happens. The wealth is held by a few and benefits are not extended to the rest. Trickle down economics is, and will always be a fallacy, created by the rich that have controlled Washington for the last 30 years, preaching this great chain of being, Calvanistic bullshit to keep us down. Pretending  like we don't all drive a Mercedes because we don't try hard enough or it must be God's will. Pelting us with the Beattitudes and patronizing being poor and out of work as a war of attrition in realizing this phantasm we call American Exceptionalism. This is why we are occupying all these cities. Adam Smith's "invisible hand" must have been out whacking off because it never showed up. That's why we needed unions to create our middle class and make sure workers could make enough just to put food on the table and not have to worry if one of their family members got sick without health insurance.

To create jobs, we need incentives for altruism. These people don't do the right thing without reward. That's just the cold, hard, Clint Eastwood stare, truth. $9,600 tax credits for hiring wounded veterans out of work for 6 months or longer. Payroll tax holidays for new hires and worker benefits. Money to rebuild infrastructure. Saving the jobs of teachers and first responders, you know, those people that raise our kids for us and save our asses when we're in a bind without asking for any reciprocation? $4,000 tax credits for hiring the unemployed. Allowing families to refinance mortgages at a lower rate. Tax cuts for working American families. That fucking socialist we have running our country is at it again! What do we do?

These assholes who caused and are now exacerbating this collapse and recession shouldn't be rewarded preemptively and begged, "Oh please, pretty please create some jobs now?" They should be watched like Commies on the turf of the Wolverines and given incentives for doing the right thing, not just for us, but for themselves. I don't recall electing Goldman Sachs, or Chase, or Pfizer.

Out of 21 developed countries, when taking social problems into consideration, the U.S. ranked dead last followed by Portugal and the U.K. in quality of life. All of this spurred by income inequality. If this is the American Dream, when the fuck are we going to wake up?

10 Reasons why Marijuana is better than Jesus

Let's be honest. Jesus is a motherfucker. Jesus=God=Holy Spirit who impregnated Mary, Jesus's mother=Jesus. Jesus is a motherfucker. But that has nothing to do with this post at all, does it? I actually think Jesus was a pretty chill cat, y'know. He sort of ironically reminds me of Tommy Chong mixed with the Dos Equis guy and late John Lennon. However, some pretty un-rad things have been done in he name of Jesus and as Herman Cain recently reinforced, there's a demographic that aligns him with the conservative movement that undermines everything he taught. The God of the Bible on the other hand, Jesus's sidekick, pappy, subordinate, and superior, was kind of a dick. He was just like my last 13-year-old girlfriend. Jealous, you have to call him every day, greedy, gold-digger, if you don't worship him he eternally damns you to torture and combustion. You know, standard 13-year-old girl stuff.

Christians have developed an uncanny ability to ignorantly spew hatred and disgust without reason. I blame Kirk Cameron. In thousands of years of use, marijuana has never been directly linked to any deaths by overdose. Even when adjusted for possible related deaths such as use in car accidents that number is well below 50 in America. This pales in comparison to acetaminophen (Tylenol): ~450, heroin: ~8,000, alcohol: ~75,000, prescription drugs: ~100,000, tobacco: ~450,000, medical mistakes: ~750,000, or seeing Nancy Grace's boob pop out on DWTS: ~27,000,000. 

However, Christian conservatives don't attack any of those other, dramatically more deadly compounds or problems. Well, I want to avoid getting political and into why weed is illegal: originally because it threatened the timber industry, how it today threatens the pharmaceutical, alcohol, and tobacco industries, how there are an array of federal agencies that wouldn't be able to maintain funding without marijuana being illegal, or the mass amount of wealth and influence drug cartels have accrued. However, outside of being illegal, there isn't a logical explanation why conservative Christians directly attack illegal drugs, in particular marijuana, but advocate the use of alcohol in moderation. I assume they're okay with alcohol; Jesus turned water into Four Lokos or something like that.

Evolutionarily, religiosity may very well be a detailed mating strategy that is upset by recreational drug use. This is still hypocritical considering the advocacy of alcohol use, even in religious ceremonies. Especially considering alcohol is associated more with reduced inhibitions and hedonism. I'm not aware of any mainstream religions using psychedelics in rituals, either.....anymore.


Anyway, it becomes apparent that if you want to be a good Christian, you have an ultimatum. You either have to choose drugs or God (although judging by his hair, beard, progressive ideology and those he associated with, I think Jesus may have chosen drugs---if he wasn't  the personification of a sacred mushroom himself). Marijuana is the easiest drug to condemn due to its availability, widespread use, and association with the expansion of the mind and questioning established social constructs. Here are 10 reasons I think you should choose weed over God :

1. Weed burns itself, not you.

2. Weed is a plant that makes you feel good; God makes you feel bad because some chick ate a plant.

3. Millions have been killed under the influence of God, damaging the free market. Millions of Cheetos have been bought under the influence of weed, fueling the capitalist economy.

4. It took God 6 days to create the universe. It takes weed 5 minutes for you to doubt that.

5. For God you have to pick up your cross and follow him. For weed, you roll it into a cross and get twice as high.

6. God encourages you to fast. Weed convinces you that might not be the best idea.

7. To God, Communion is crappy wine and yeastless bread. To weed, it's a 40 and a box of Dunkaroos.

8. God tells you to clothe the homeless. Weed goes the extra step and can actually be made into clothes for the homeless.

9. God condemns your sins, including pre-marital sex, homosexuality, indulgence, eating pork and shellfish, adultery, envy, and hating your asshole neighbor. Weed is okay with all of those things. The only sin against weed is not sharing.

10. God flies you into building, weed flies you to the nearest White Castle.