What's the Point In Getting Married?

I have had this discussion on Twitter - is there any point in getting married? Personally, I would like to get married some day but I'm not in any way ready yet. I have been with my boyfriend for nearly 4 years but we're having to live apart because of work and studying etc. It's tough but we're doing alright and we still love each other.

I agree with people when they say "I don't need a piece of paper to prove I love someone" it's a completely valid point. You can have unhappily married couples and happily unmarried couples, marriage isn't a magic spell that suddenly makes your relationship much stronger. It's easy to see why people of religion see marriage as vital, it makes their relationship "official" and "right" in their God's eyes, so they are not living in sin. As an atheist I don't see marriage this way, I don't feel like I need to get married to make our relationship official and it certainly doesn't feel wrong not being married.

So why do I want to get married? My main reason is because marriage is like a celebration, it brings your families together, it's a big declaration of love and by law it gives you more rights as a couple. I also, admittedly like the tradition, the ceremony, the dress and the party afterwards. I wouldn't ever really have a properly traditional wedding, it certainly wouldn't be in a church as that wouldn't feel right. These days we have more freedom to make weddings more unique, some even choose to write their own vows. I understand if people still wouldn't want to get married, but personally I want to do the whole big day thing, but I wouldn't pay extortionate amounts! At the moment if I was given £20,000 right now, "wedding" won't be the first thing I think of.

Anyway, it's a long time away but I brought it up now because it was a recent discussion.

Redefining Spirituality

spir·it·u·al·i·ty

   [spir-i-choo-al-i-tee] Show IPA

noun, plural -ties.

1.

the quality or fact of being spiritual.

2.

incorporeal or immaterial nature.

3.

predominantly spiritual character as shown in thought, life,etc.; spiritual tendency or tone.

4.

Often, spiritualities. property or revenue of the church orof an ecclesiastic in his or her official capacity.

I hear a lot about people wanting to be spiritual or get to know their spirit. Of course as a monist I don't see humans as having a life outside the physical body, I don't believe that we have a separate spirit or soul or that our bodies are just a vessel. Does this prevent me from being what is essentially "spiritual"?

I find the second definition above the most interesting, spirituality is immaterial because it cannot be seen, it is essentially a thought process or a way we relate to our place in the cosmos. I don't believe to become spiritual you need to believe in God, spirits, ghosts or any other superstition to be able to think deeply about our place in the universe. Spirituality could also be an understanding of ourselves, there is nothing wrong with calmly meditating. Meditation is a practice we as atheists could take part in without the need to believe in anything.

I think to redefine spirituality is to take it away from religious doctrine and see it as a deep thought process. I hope this makes sense.

Why Gods Need Humans To Survive

Yesterday I tweeted Humans don't need God to exist but God needs humans to exist, once we stop believing he will disappear this was retweeted a few times and even compared to Terry Pratchett (I'm flattered, I must read his books now!) so I thought I would elaborate.

I can't help but think that nearly everything humans used to attribute to Gods in regards to our own existence has been explained by science. For example in his book Origin of the Species Charles Darwin was able to explain brilliantly how we evolved as a species and how we originated, the reason his work was so controversial is because he took away the need for God to explain our origins. There is also the big bang theory, which takes away the need for God when it comes to explaining the origins of our planet, solar system and universe. Of course, these theories don't disprove God, some theists argue that all this was part of God's plan, if you're a deist you would say God started this off then took a backseat. I agree with Stephen Hawkings when he says that God was not needed for any of these things to happen.

My theory about God is that he exists in the imagination of people, that's why there are so many interpretations of God and over 3,000 Gods that have been worshipped throughout history. This is why I believe that if people simply stopped believing in God he will die because humans are his lifeline, as for humans we will carry on living.

Do I Really Just Hate God?

In short the answer to that question is "No".

As an atheist I simply just don't believe in God, simple as that, yes I have other opinions that are related to being an atheist but the meaning of the word is simply "does not believe in any deities". If I do not believe in any deities then it is not possible to hate God, how can I hate something that is not there? I can no more hate God than I could hate an evil character in a book or film. For example I don't like the character the Childcatcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, I find him evil, deceitful and he's helping a king who is cruel to children, but can I actually have a direct genuine hatred and anger towards him when I know he is a fictional character? Of course not, I can hate the characteristics but not the actual person as the actual person doesn't exist, I can say the same of the God of the Old Testament.

I have had heard people of religion say that atheists are "just angry at God" or "they are rebelling against God" as I've already pointed out, you cannot hate a fictional being so what exactly are these atheists so angry about? One thing I could say is that atheists are not angry at a deity but rather some followers, the people who are enforcing their religious laws in to government, trying to stop things like gay marriages or the teaching if evolution in schools just because they believe that this God exists. I would also say that many atheists hate the divisions that religion causes, people simply hating each other just because they can't agree on which holy book to follow or how to interpret a piece of text and that wars are fought and lives lost just to spread their beliefs. Atheists are accused of lacking morals because they do not follow a God, despite many atheists out there who do good things for the society and community and are good, peaceful people (of course there are atheists out there who are bad people too, as with all people) but yet are still discriminated against. I think most of all we all just want to live in a society where people are free to believe what they want (or to not believe in anything), no religion has priveleges over another and laws are based on real morality not just religious dogma.

So whenever a religious person accuses me of "hating God", "being angry at God" or "rebelling against God" I simply ask how can I hate, be angry at or rebel against someone who I believe does not exist? It's like having a vendetta against Jafar from Alladin, it just doesn't make any sense!

Creationism: An Insult to the Amazing Reality of Nature?

Creationism versus Evolution is a debate that keeps on going, with many religious believers on the side of creationism trying to disprove and discredit evolution, using the "it's just a theory" line to its death. It's scientific fact that evolution is as much of a theory as gravity or electromagnetism, it's truth backed by mountains of evidence including DNA and fossil records. The history of evolution dates back millions of years, with species changing and adapting to their environments and the strongest genes surviving to pass on their genes to their offspring and so on. The whole story of evolution is both elegant and cruel, it's fascinating and explains where we as species come from.

In contrast creationism is a story deriving from the Book of Genesis from the Old Testament, saying that God created the heavens, the Earth, all the animals and then man from dirt and moulded him like clay, then made the woman from his rib and all in 6 days (some say it dates back 4,000-6,000 years ago). Of course, there is no real evidence to back this up just a story in a book and millions of people who have been brought up to believe it. Some creationists have tried to stop evolution being taught in schools, or at least have creationism taught along side evolution as equal theories. At first someone could be forgiven for suggesting the latter but creationism and evolution are NOT equal theories, not when one is backed by evidence and is scientifically established proof and the other is just subject to the faith of millions and was written about in an ancient book by people who did not know anything of modern science. It's much better to teach our children truth in schools and for science teacher to just teach science and not fairy tales. I find it an insult to our children to stop them learning about one of the most important discoveries in the last 200 years.

The story of creation does not explain anything, in fact I would argue that it raises more questions than it attempts to answer, such as "what was there before the world?", "did God create something out of nothing?", "where did God come from?" and "why did God create us only for us to fall?" and many more after that. The creation story does nothing to explain how we came to be, it's nothing more than a folk tale, that's why I would say it does insult the amazing reality of evolution and how nature became to be what it is today. I find it astounding when a creationist feels insulted when told that they share a common ancestor with apes but is happy to be told he is originally made from dirt.

Of course I am not suggesting that evolution disproves the existence of a God, whilst I am an atheist myself there are theists out there who understand that evolution is a fact and that creationism was just the go to hypothesis from a time where we had no knowledge of our origins. Is it so much to ask that creationists start to look at the world more objectively and read their holy books in the context of the time in which it was written? Creationism, it's an insult to our intelligence, knowledge and history whilst it belittles the amazing reality of nature.