Part One – Realisation
A few years ago, I decided that I was an atheist. I say decided, it’s more like I realised because that’s usually what happens when you “stop believing” as Journey once warned us against. The thing is, there comes a point in your life where you have to stop lying to yourself. I know I don’t believe in God, so do I just pretend to just in-case there really is a Hell? Isn’t that the most dishonest thing you can do? To be a Christian I presume you have to literally believe God exists don’t you? So, if you don’t believe it, do you just wait around until you eventually do? What if you get hit by a car before then and die? If theres a Hell do you go to it? Because that hardly seems fair.
I think ultimately, that was my main problem with Religion. I could go into a typical argument like “If God exists, why do new born babies die?” but for me, non belief is actually easier just on the basis of in-continuity. Shit just doesn’t add up, to phrase it like a cool youth. But something I’ve always been uncomfortable with is being called an Atheist. Not because Im agnostic. I’m definitely not. Theres no time to sit on the fence, choose a side and defend it. It’s because at the moment its hailed as a belief structure all in itself and I dont like it. I actively avoided reading “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins for years just so I could think about Religion for myself with an open mind and not let his opinions influence me. Eventually I did get around to reading it though and found that we were in agreement on many a subject, so it worked out okay. The thing is, the right wing media is trying to pin us all down as dedicated Dawkins worshippers and I’m not comfortable with that. The point of atheism in my opinion is, is that it isn’t a belief structure but is actually more of a belief breakdown. It’s not a weird club where all the atheists meet up on a Sunday and throw darts at a photo of the Pope while kicking a flaming bible around in the car park, its just the encouragement of conversation and expanding ideas about the world, not sticking to one set regimentation. It’s about coming to moral conclusions based on logic and your own opinions, and most importantly debate. Vicars can pretend that they are capable of debate, but it’s only within the circle of God’s existence so it’s ultimately pointless. A vicar and his cronies can argue about the morals of homosexuality, just as long as it concludes on the basis that everyone agrees being gay is still a sin, but I’ll go into that whole other kettle of fish another day.
Thats all for now though, but yeah next time I’m talking about the gays so get your flags ready.
No comments:
Post a Comment