Atheists vs Believers: The Third Period

So Who will it be? Weeks have gone by with no clear resolution, but tonight the metaphysical hockey game will come to a close and we will finally know the truth.

As the players start their march from their dressing rooms, the fans in the stadium are out of their minds with excitement. The arena has become possessed by the game at hand and the enormity of the stake.

The players are also clearly affected by the atmosphere and the animosity between the teams is palpable. Dawkins in jawing with Aquinas while St. Anselm stares down Phillip Pullman. Yet there is one player who stands outside the fever pitch. As goaltenders usually are, the Believers goalie is quieter and more reserved than the other players. As the others head out to the ice, he remains in the dressing room focussing on the game at hand.

After a peaceful moment he pulls on his glove and blocker, picks up his stick and walks into the electric arena.

At puck drop the players stare each other down like and line up like soldiers on a battlefield. The sounds is deafening, yet the lonely Believer's goalie crouches quietly in his crease.

Referee Kant drops the puck and the players spring into action. Play moves into the Believers end and the puck rolls into the corner. It's hard to say exactly what happened next but an agressive Pullman collided with an equally spirited Anselm while battling over whether religion was important or not. Both players ended up lying on the ice, intertwined and unable to get up. The other players immediatly forgot about the puck and began pushing and shoving in the corner. Quickly things escalated from a normal hockey scrum to a full-out Donniebrook as the benches emptied and even Atheist goalie Karl Marx skated the length of the ice to join in.

Yet while the players on both sides tried to decapitate one another, the Believers goaltender remained an outside, watching what had been a good hockey game deteriorate into chaos. He knew right then there was only one thing to do.

He turned and skated towards the fighting players and threw down his gloves and stick, tossed his hemet away and skated into the crowd of swinging saints and dualing deniers, yet instead of joining in the battle he skated past them and knelt down beside the injured players on the ice. He asked them questions to find out how badly they were hurt and listened to what they had to say.

Meanwhile, the other players slowly stopped fighting, turned towards the 3 men on the ice and for the first time realized Pullman and Anselm had been hurt. But they were puzzled by what they saw. Of all they had heard about Jesus, Believers and Atheists alike, they expected to see something miraculous...an instant healing or divine intervention. Instead what they saw was the image of a man on his knees, listening intently to what both the Atheist and Believer had to say. What they saw was nothing other-worldly but something each and every one of them would have been cabable of doing if they hadn't been too busy fighting and arguing about who was right and who was to blame.

Now, at this moment the entire arena had become silent, with all eyes pointing at Jesus. With all the flashy plays, big saves and uppercuts thrown, it was a simple act of kindness that had captivated the audience and put the spotlight on the Believers goaltender who, given this opportunity, delivered a message as simple as the act that had stopped the fighting:

"For those of you that care to hear, God is here for God is love alone. To love one another as I have loved you was, and still is, the only truth there is. Your life is yours to live, and life is so important, but nothing is more important than being ready when you are called to be of service. Love is not religious, or scientific, but life itself and being open to living and loving is the only way true life can ever be experienced, otherwise you are only fighters, battling your way throuh life, blind to both the needs of others and yourselves."

With that, Jesus turned and skated towards centre ice. For a moment, the other players stood still, and then followed suit. When the players had lined up at centre ice, the shook hands and congratulated each other on a game well played and then headed for their respective dressing rooms with 19 minutes still left on the clock.

And so with that, the game ends decidedly undecided, ready perhaps to be continued a different day in a different place, but not here, not now. Although it may not feel as if anything has been resolved, the general feeling is that the premise for the game was all wrong anyways; that the question of God's existence was somehow less important than the result; that the message of peace and love delivered by Jesus was more important than anything else.

Will Grassby

Another One About Buses

Apparently I like to write blogs about buses, with this one following previous discussions on increased safety on the Greyhound and the OC Transpo strike in Ottawa. I think there’s something simple and communal about the bus. Driving from A to B with an evolving flow of strangers getting where they need to be. I haven’t actually taken a bus in months, which had nothing to do with the transit strike, but I guess I just like the idea of them. But I digress.

Today’s post is about the atheist bus ads which have been taking the country by storm (or at least a discussion or two on CBC radio and the odd newspaper article…). For those who haven’t heard, the Freethought Association of Canada has decided to bring an ad campaign that started in Britain over to Canada. They plan to plaster the message: “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life” on buses across the country. The ads have been approved in Toronto and Calgary, and have begun to appear on TTC vehicles. They have, however, been rejected by Halifax, Ottawa, London, Vancouver, Victoria, and Kelowna. The Halifax Metro has refused to meet with the organization, and London and the British Columbia three have quoted general policy guidelines rejecting ads that “promote or oppose a specific theology or religious ethic, point of view, policy or action.”

In Ottawa it’s a little bit stickier. They have said: “The Advertising Standards section of our contract specifically excludes religious advertising which might be offensive to transit users, so we cannot approve this ad.” This has not stopped them from approving not-yet-released ads for Bus Stop Bible Studies, which quotes scripture and asks ‘big questions.’ It has also not stopped them from plastering pictures of glum pregnant young women ironing, with a slogan suggesting fathers should lock up their daughters because a certain radio station is bringing back the Gods of Rock. (I do not believe in God, therefore I do not believe in Gods of Rock. I find this offensive.)
By including the intangible phrase ‘offensive,’ OC Transpo has left itself room for criticism. Not that the decision in the end is any better than in London or Kelowna, but at least there the intolerance is all-encompassing, and maintains ad space as a way to hock unnecessary junk. Even the founder of Bus Stop Bible Studies is dumbfounded, asking with an Obama-y level cooperation why OC Transpo approved his ads but not the atheist ones. David Harrison asked: “Why would they approve ours and not theirs? If we don’t stand up for (the atheists’) rights, ours will be trampled too.”

I am not going to sit here and spew outrage at OC Transpo’s decision. It was clearly a misguided decision, and likely one that will be overturned. Maybe they’ll even make it a two-fer, and cover up misogyny with discourse. I suspect the Freethought Association would even have been disappointed had the ads not been barred in some cities. Much like PETA’s naked broccoli banned Superbowl ads, they get lots of sympathy and free publicity this way, and will still likely see their message on a number of buses.

Whether or not the ads will strike somebody and make them realize that they don’t actually believe in God and therefore they are atheists (it’s true), the ads have still already accomplished much of what they were attempting to do, which is stir up healthy debate. Most ads are aimed at exploiting people and subtly maintaining a culture of consumerism anyways, so let’s not hold them with too high an esteem. Had the slogan read something like: “God doesn’t exist, you moron,” then I could see some people being upset. But as they stand, they are nothing but an attempt to open debate, and get a rise out of people who take life too seriously. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.

Russel MacDonald

Special Edition: The Speech Heard Around the World

Due to the extraordinary happenings in Washington today The Blog Journalists are publishing in advance of their ordinary Wednesday slot in order to provide up-to-the-minute coverage of President Barack Obama's inaugural speech. Enjoy!

The Speech Heard Around the World

Just having listened to Barack Obama’s inaugural speech I felt the need to put in writing the feelings roused during the roughly 20 minutes where the world stood still to listen this afternoon. I left the room before any analysis came on or talking to anyone else in order to give my own impressions without the influence of any outside sources.

Addressing a wide variety of issues, Obama had the undivided attention of millions and did not disappoint. His slip during the oath was soon forgotten as he dazzled with unrivalled charisma and poise. Highlights for myself were the moments where he reached out to the nations of the world and addressed both subtly and explicitly America’s adversaries saying “We will reach out our hand to you if you will unclench your fist.”

Without naming any names (Bush, Bush, Bush) Obama sounded at times apologetic for America’s recent behaviour and urged Americans and the world to look forward to a future of change but change based on the beliefs of the American forefathers such as honesty, integrity, hard-work and determination. This sense of moving forward while relying on traditional and enduring virtues was a powerful one, especially in the face of the present economic, environmental and international turmoil.

Most powerful was the way Obama chose to incorporate equality into his time at the podium. His assertion that it is only because of “the giving our all to a difficult task… why a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath...” was extremely significant but perhaps surpassed by the way he took that notion forward and extended it to the world citing “the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.”

Whether one attributes the virtue of equality to a God, a moral code or a simple sense of justice, the sentiment expressed by Obama is both clear and needed. The dream of Martin Luther King Jr. lives on; a dream not just of equality for African-Americans but for humanity as a whole. That, in Obama’s words “…men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration.” This unifying image of hope and equality gives purpose to the struggle of both Americans and the human race as a whole.

Obama even touched on the metaphysical, acknowledging that “God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.” Despite potentially alienating a meaningful group of population, Obama touches on something that even the non-believer can agree to; this being the mystery of life and the uncertainty we experience each and everyday. Obama did his best on this day to address these uncertainties and inject hope into the American society in a time where it is most needed. His message? “With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end…”

Now it is up to Obama to follow his own advice and steer both America and the world through those icy currents; a task many see as being the most difficult any president has ever faced.

After seeing Obama today and hearing him speak I don’t know anyone better for the job.

Will Grassby

To the Glory of...Reason? Response to "To Reason"

Interesting post Russ. I have now read Ms. Lakritz's original article and agree with your assessment. It is a one-sided article that simply breaths of reactionaryism.

Her attack on reason is of course laugable. Ironically it is her own reason (even if one disagrees with this reason) that motivates her to respond to the athiest students of the University of Alberta. The way she tries to make her point would be unacceptable in an elementary school.

All knee-jerk reactions aside, I think the place where she truly went wrong was where she decided to seperate God and reason from one another (despite her misinformed attempt to reference him, St. Thomas Aquinas would be spinning in his grave.)

In fact her characterization of reason as 'malleable' and a source of entitlement is a claim that, if taken seriously, would set the world of philosophy back somewhere in the neighbourhood of several thousand years.God is a concept that, despite what Christians, Jews, Hinduists or probably even the Scientologists would say, is itself malleable. The word God is merely a word and depending on who is doing the defining, it could mean any number of things. To one person God could be the creator of all things but to another it could be a less definable concept, something more abstract such as a code of morals the idea of perfection. Even the athiest must admit they have some sort of concept of God; after all, how could an athiest deny God without first having some sort of idea of what they are denying?

As a final note, I went to the University of Alberta website and stumbled across the university's motto which is proudly displayed on the university's crest. The Latin reads 'Quaecumque Vera' or 'whatsoever things true.' Personal beliefs aside, truth is the main goal. Reason is the tool we have to reach this goal. No matter what truths we come to as individuals, reason is the road there. Lakritz undermines the truth of her own article by ripping up this road.

Will Grassby

To Reason

A controversy has been brewing at the secular University of Alberta regarding their convocation speech, in which graduates were urged to use their degrees "for the glory of God and country."

This, of course, worked the university's Atheists and Agnostics society into a tizzy (what those Atheists are doing hanging out with the wishy-washy Agnostics in the first place I'm not sure). Rightly or wrongly, that debate has raged on.

This prompted input for Calgary Herald writer Naomi Lakritz, which was reprinted in today's Ottawa Citizen. [Oct 29] She defends the institution's inclusion of God by asking how atheists would prefer the line be rewritten, mockingly suggesting 'for the glory of reason.' (How about 'for the betterment of humanity', or some other relatively inclusive, happy-Utopian phrase?)

Ms. Lakritz goes on to mock reason (I kid you not), saying: "Reason is the altar on which (atheists) worship -- a narcissistic, no-stress, do-it-yourself approach, since everyone is free to put his or her own spin on how reason is defined. Reason is, in fact, so malleable that it's the ideal religion for these members of the Entitlement Generation who think the world ought to be rewritten in their own images."I may be wrong, but doesn't Christianity teach us that God created humans in His own self-image? That in the entire Universe, amongst all the stars and planets and lifeforms, human beings are the chosen ones by the Supreme Creator?

That to me seems more narcissistic than worshiping at the altar of Reason (Reason, I know! "The ability to think and understand and draw conclusions;" "Sanity;" "Good sense or judgement; what is right, practical, or possible!")I realize and fully appreciate that none of you may share Ms. Lakritz's views on narcissistic atheists or the Entitlement Generation, or her disregard for Reason (does that make her unreasonable?), regardless of your varying religious leanings, and for that I am grateful. I don't mean for this to be an attack on any one religion or expression thereof, or even the University of Alberta's speech, but rather just me venting about one individual's inflammatory bigotry, which I thought I'd share. Thanks for reading.

Russ MacDonald