The Need for Punishment.

Recently I watched this video:

Now this is not a particularly good video in itself, but it did get me thinking on one point. The hosts of the show get asked by the caller if Hitler gets punished for his evil deeds. Initially both of the hosts try to say that yes he did in his death but the caller then makes a great point that everyone dies so how does that work as a punishment? I think that this is something that a lot of people feel they want – someone who has done wrong should be made to regret that action, they should suffer. However, I really liked what the female host of this show said instead in that the punishment did not matter, what mattered was that the evil that he did stopped. This really struck me. I do think that someone who commits violence against another person should be removed from society so that the can be prevented from hurting others but I think that this idea of punishment is unnecessary. Prison is often seen as a punishment and a way to make criminals suffer, and I do not think that it needs to be seen that way – this should just be a space to remove dangerous people to. Do we really think that making a criminal suffer is going to change anything? It will not undo what was done. It will not make them change how they as a criminal are. So what is the point? Many times criminals who are supposed to spend this time suffering to develop feelings of guilt or sorrow actually end up feeling just the opposite. Many criminals come out of the system worse and more angry.

While it may make some people feel better for a moment to see someone that hurt them getting hurt this is not a beneficial reaction. The idea of justice seems synonymous with revenge, people want to get justice for the families or the victims that were hurt by hurting the criminal. While listening to this caller this also struck me as another central idea in religion. Many bad people or bad actions do not get punished in life, these people will live the violent way that they are and they will not regret it and some may not even get caught at all. The idea that God is watching and he will know is comforting and it removes the responsibility of doing something about these actions from people who are alive. The idea of “they will get what is coming” does two things. First it approves of the revenge and punishment idea as an acceptable way to react. Second it shifts that responsibility to be not our problem. Sadly, Violence and crime in the real world is everyone’s problem and perhaps rather than worry about punishment we should worry about prevention. Instead of worrying about how to make the bad people suffer, worry about how to make the good people heal.

Strength in Disbelief.

I am always amused when I tell someone that I am an Atheist and they immediately ask if I am sad that this life is all we get and if I am not strong enough to handle the truth of God. To this I always laugh, because I believe the opposite.

That is not to say that I am not sad or afraid about death, of course I am. Only an Atheist can grasp the true terror that is death, the knowledge that there is nothing and this beautiful gift of consciousness and experience will be gone and unless you do something truly great (or horrible) in a short time there will be no memory of you, no impact, nothing. Thinking about this too long is utterly terrifying but at the same time it can be inspirational. If no one else will remember you and there will be little impact then there is all the more reason to make your experiences count and to impact those around you while you can so that in some way there will be a lingering effect. (This also plays a part in my feelings about Atheist morality and where that comes from, but that is another post.)

As for this disbelief and fear playing into being not strong enough to handle God, well this is what really makes me laugh. It is clear that religions originally came about to explain things that people did not understand. It was common for people to attribute everything like the sun and rain to deities and to try to influence the out come by praying or offering. As people moved on and learned about the world around them these beliefs fell away and were replaced by knowledge and new belief systems emerged. However still, there is no explanation or comfort for the idea of death (and I think that this is because there isn’t one) so modern religions remain. A good look at Judea-Christian religions will reveal an absolute obsession with death. In fact the entire belief is the way you should get through life in order to get to a good death and afterlife. The emphasis and rules for living is only so that there can be an even bigger emphasis on dying. Christianity even takes this a step further and worships death in the story of Jesus. To me this shows that those who cling so strongly to faith, even when there is so much evidence against it, are clinging because they are afraid of what life without it would mean. Many believers will say that they feel sorry for an Atheist because the life “must be so empty and sad” and for me this shows that they are unable to grasp what it means to face the harsh and frightening realities so they cling to the comfort of faith.

Now in the theme of my blog, while I think that clinging to something that is false just for comfort is silly I also have a deeper problem with this. Many believers are convinced that Jesus is going to return while they are alive and so they have very little concern about what this world looks like and what the current generations will be leaving to the future. If the focus is on struggle and getting to the next life then there is no reason to have real world concerns that will have any impact on things like medicine or the environment and this is very scary to consider when reasoning non believers try to improve the state of the world against the inaction of those that are waiting for the next world.

The Dreaded Gun Post.

Yes, I am going to make a post about gun control. I am not however, going to belabor the pro or con arguments since that has been done to death – a quick Google search will be enough to satisfy that in excess. What I would like to talk about is my issues with the arguments themselves and the turn they seem to have taken. Of course I do have a stance on the issue, and yes that is going to affect my feelings.

My first problem with the arguments are the “slippery slope” argument. This basically boils down to people saying that the current legislation is mostly o.k, that guns are not being banned entirely BUT this will lead to…  and this is where the problems begin. It does not make sense to argue against something because it may later possibly lead to something that will not be good. By this logic everything is a slippery slope, waking up in the morning can lead to all sorts of nasty things, but we still do it don’t we? Why do we still do it? Well because everyone knows that worrying endlessly about “what if” is a disaster, most of the time these eventualities do not come true, and why worry about something that you can not yet control? Worry about it (or better yet do something about it) when the time comes.

My second problem with the gun debate is that it is absolutely EVERYWHERE!!! Perhaps this is enhanced by the fact that I live in Arizona but every day, everywhere I am confronted by this issue. A few examples: Facebook is first, I cant peruse and keep up with friends without being bombarded by angry rants from both sides about this issue. This issue is also all over the media, TV, radio and magazines. If you happen to be a Facebook ranter you should STOP. RIGHT NOW. SERIOUSLY. No one likes the Facebook ranter, this may come as a surprise to some but when people peruse Facebook they want to relax, maybe chit chat or just pass the time, no one really wants to argue with friends and family. Get a blog (they are free!!).

However the media and Facebook are only part of the problem. There are also the people who take this everywhere with them. Just yesterday at work I was sitting in the break room eating lunch and another employee walks in to get coffee. Instead of “Hi” or “How is everyone” the first thing he says is “Well, he’s doing it, Obama is taking all the guns”. Of course right away the break room deteriorates into “I’d like to see him try!” and “It’s about time!” Break ruined. Along the same lines of the break room jerk is the random jerk, for example I was in line at a gas station today and a guy I do not know gets in line behind me and immediately says “can you believe Obama and this gun control ban?” I ignored this guy with just a shrug, but it made me so mad! Either he is arrogant enough to think that everyone he encounters has the same beliefs he does or he is looking for an argument. I am inclined to believe the latter. I think that these random people want to fight, they are hoping someone will disagree with them and they can yell. I think this is a way to feel powerful and to feel like they can do something – they can’t really and they probably have friends who agree with them so all this pent up anger needs an outlet and so they try to pick on everyone they see hoping that someone will engage them. This is stupid and irritating –  if your going to be an angry asshole please leave me out of it.

My next problem with the gun debate can be tied back to Facebook, but it mostly has to do with mis-information and fear mongering. My issue is with things like this:

I have seen this image shared several times and it really bothers me. This image has no information, no facts, no arguments. This image is relying purely on racism and fear to get across an agenda. This image takes no thought to make, just find a picture of a rapper with a gun and yell killer. The more I have thought about this image and any like it I have decided that anyone who perpetuates this sort of thing should be labeled a terrorist. Now hold on, calm down – I know that terrorist is a harsh word, but what does a terrorist do? Spreads terror with mis-information in order to accomplish what they want. You do not have to kill people to be a terrorist, you just have to perpetuate and use fear. However images like this are also wrong they are trying just as hard to use knee jerk emotion and faulty information based on zero facts to make someone agree with them.

In this same vein is the Sandy Hook truther movement. These people should be ashamed, very very ashamed. I will not state if I believe any of this or not, but I will say that it doesn’t matter – if anyone actually died (and everyone agrees that people died) that grief should be left alone and not used to propel an agenda. If this event starts a conversation then there should be an effort made to be respectful to the event itself and to those grieving, trying to pick apart the lives of the victims or examining if they seem to be grieving enough is plain wrong. Should everyone believe what the media tells you? No, of course not. They have an agenda and they have to present the best and fastest story and so this is not reliable. However, to believe the opposite story entirely is just as dumb, they also have an agenda and will be presenting it. The truth is often likely somewhere in the middle of the two stories.

This also only presents two potential ideas, and that is also usually not the case either. Once the event is over, once the shooting was over there is the debate over the legislation, and if for some reason there needs to be a conspiracy debate it should center around the afterwards and leave the grieving families alone. Look at the legislation that the government is passing or barring and talk about that. Look at the statements from the NRA and consider the positive gun sales that this fear has lead to and talk about that instead. (Has anyone driven by a gun store lately they are packed!!)  Talk about laws from country to country. Debate about anything else, trust me there is plenty else that could be focused on. I know that some people need a conspiracy, they can not believe in cause and effect – but if you must then can we not be decent people and find a less painful and dis respectful conspiracy?

Lastly, since this is an Atheist blog, is the argument of a God given right. This argument (like most religious based arguments) is meaningless for several reasons. This argument usually means “I have not thoroughly thought this idea through, and we have reached the limits of what I can actually argue”. This is juvenile, and rather than strengthening an argument it renders it void.

The Bible does talk about violence, people kill others with rocks or fire or swords ect. but there is actually no mention of guns because they didn’t exist back then. Although doesn’t it seem strange that the all knowing God wouldn’t mention such an important weapon since he would anticipate it coming? Well he didn’t so this argument is void and should not be allowed in a secular government debate anyways.

Just my thoughts, and I think that whether you are all for guns or totally against them I think that it would benefit everyone to decide to argue more intelligently and more respectfully. It would benefit everyone to stop forcing this issue on everyone, everywhere and only engage those that want to engage (this generally does not include people that you do not know.) I know that these are difficult ideas for most, but it is something to consider.