Ummm, maybe not.
I was going to save this post until everything got cleared up, but it's a Thursday morning, I am at work with nothing else to do, and in about eight hours all this will be taken care of. And I really do not expect anyone to read this before then (or at all...really?).
So one of our members this past weekend decided he really didn't like Christianity or CRU and went on a personal flier campaign bashing the two as much as is humanly possible (with the groups former name). The fliers (obviously) did not get approved to be distributed around campus so he opted for plastering our "free-speech wall" with them. Now I am all for free-speech, but I am also all for using such a freedom responsibly, and this was not responsible at all. Furthermore, it does something that I am all against happening not only in the group, but in the world as well:
Spreading hate.
Now don't get me wrong, I dislike religion as much as the next Atheist, but I also realize that every religion is made up of living, breathing, emotional, thinking human beings. While I secretly wish religion would disappear overnight to welcome an all-peaceful morning, I realize that any real attempt at doing so right now would require one thing that religions incorporate well, but really only makes matters worse.
Hate.
Now, what this member did was see a problem he wanted to fix, realized that it would take to long to make people tolerate us, see us as human beings, come to accept us, and eventually listen to us...well, lets paraphrase that into: "It would take to long to let nature run its course." So, he opted for the forceful approach. Let the Religious know how stupid and hypocritical they really are by rationalizing that the Religious will understand your approach and that the proverbial light bulb will light up and the world will instantly become a better place; NO MORE RELIGION! If only someone had thought of this approach before!
Yeah, that logic didn't strike me as revolutionary either. Actually, it struck me as exactly the type of mainstream religious thinking that I loathe. It reminded me of Fox "News" logic.
So what am I left to do? I am stuck with some of the blame, admittedly since I knew what was going on and did nothing to stop it until it was too late. I am not writing this to make excuses however, what happened will be fixed and this whole issue will hopefully be put behind us before too long, though I am left to help the group recover our "friendly" status with students on campus and hopefully make people forget about this whole thing.
But it did put into perspective the whole "oh, we're not 'that' type of [insert Religious person here]
But I suppose Atheism has no Dogma. I will just have to convey the importance of not hating as much as humanly possible within the group. And maybe find officers who agree with me...
TLDR; Is Atheism better than Religion if it mirrors it?
Casey: "I understand the life-form 'society' the living accumulation of every single endeavor is sprung forth by the interaction of each of us and our unique attributes that separate us. But don't misjudge when I group 'us' because it shapes us all. I am a romantic, and perhaps you find it to your distaste, or are even offended by this as a mere imitation of what I've learned, but there is no doubt in my mind that society is a curse to humanity as well as a way of life; there is strength in numbers but there is corruption in numbers; results from individuals grows exponentially with the results from a populous, and my only concern is the truths of this world, the wrongs of this world, and the calculable differences of this world will, in time, give way to precedents in history and follow suit to introduce new customs and ways of life, new ways of thinking that will undermine the everlasting means of our cognition, our perception, our altruism's, our sense of right and wrong, our sense of free will, and even humanity. I can't just be an individual when my contract with society is still existing, because no matter how I change I will not really change to my pleasure, but rather my discourse, because what really does change me? Myself, or the influences of my society? I will always subconsciously be at limbo by the unsatisfied opinion of a free society that is all but free for its people."
Casey: "The future of society has always been a decision of each individual, and it needs credit for surpassing the bonds of all other sentient beings on the planet; yet society and the individuals are one in the same, and I cannot say we shape society and society shapes us, it is a redundancy to me. We change how society works, but to say society changes us, is that not a synonym? We all work for a goal in a society, and although it is secondary to my theory that all humans were born to be greedy, it is paramount that we work to sustain the society. To deem society it's own entity is fine, but to deem it promotes attributes in people in too similar to me as to just say 'we shape society'. Now as for the sentiment of conscious, right and wrong, and the idea that morals are relative, and to be individual means to think individual on your own accord, I have to disagree. When a spirituality plays a role in a debate, I have but one option and that is to say there is a stature, there is a right and wrong, whether you know it in your heart while reading Call of the Wild, or when someone decides to be self-concerned and content while the poor suffer a little more without their assistance. But now the disclaimer; I say these things but I do not practice them. My interpretation of the situation is that when something is the regular, you can blame 'the village' for how the child is raised, because it does take fellowship to develop and you are not the lone decider. Altruism exists, but it is as hopeless as eternal life, to be practiced widely, because as I mentioned, I think all humans are greedy by nature. Back to spirituality, I do believe it better to let a culture survive than let it die with the coming of a gospel, simply because I am sentimental like that, and if I am to go to hell for not spreading the doctrine as it is professed, then be it so. Also, I've always had an overwhelming sense of tolerance for the differences of the world, so don't think me a mindless limb of an organized religion, but more of a human who possesses an idea of my origins that may broadly debunk many others."
Now, greed is not human nature. As there is no evident gene for greed that makes me believe it is. Greed is simply a popular, or strong social aspect, which is then taught through enculturation, or the process of gaining culture by ones "parents" and thus re-manifests itself; Another paradox. Why greed is such a strong social aspect is because it is taught to every person through enculturation. Who started it is unknown, and unimportant because we know it exists.
Furthermore, society is not an entity, but a force, to think of it as an entity is to give it a mind of it's own, which it simply does not have. It is a force created, maintained, tweaked, re-tweaked, destroyed, and then re-created by humans. Which is simply how we shape society, and how society shapes us. I'll give you another example of this if you'd like. In retrospect though, it's simply easier to say that society shapes us, because society is somewhat simply an extension of human ideas, so, again in retrospect, it's a matter of humans shaping humans.
Religion, or spirituality, is a cultural aspect. Culture shapes morals, the conscious, what is seen as right and wrong (which is why we have a type of crude Islam faith that believes 9/11 was a right thing to do). Religion is, among many other things, culturally and socially speaking, is a grouping of like minded people with like ideas that are socially strong for themselves. You call something right or wrong based on your religion or spirituality because that is what your current culture suggests to you, and it is the strongest idea that makes the most since to you. And before you say what about people who do not have a religion in there culture and end up following a religion, well, like I said, culture makes and remakes itself in a process known as agency (where the individual steps in and decides what is the best or strongest ideas for their culture).
Of course, these are my beliefs, and my knowledge based on a very society and culture based first semester...and lifetime of ideologies. And please do not take offense to if something seems offensive. Some people do not see religion as a cultural and social element, yet a divine one. I, as you know, am not one of those people and again am stating from my ideology."
Casey: "You will have to give me some break time; I've read some of it, I'll continue this later lol"