Children’s Movies Are Turning Our Kids into Democrats

Did you know children’s movies are turning our kids into Democrats? Well that is the recent claim by conservatives. Movie’s such as Happy Feet 2, Cars 2, and Monsters vs. Aliens are being attacked for having a liberal agenda. Happy Feet 2 is being attacked because it talks about global warming and feminism. Cars 2 is being pointed out because it is said to be attacking the oil industry and Monsters vs. Aliens for standing against torture. Conservatives are saying these movies are brainwashing children. So let’s take a look into what these movies are doing to our children and how it will affect them later in life.

Happy Feet 2, which is a movie based on penguins talks about global warming/climate change. It is a fact that glaciers are melting at a faster rate than in years past, and all credible scientist agree that climate change is happening. So this movie may cause our children to grow up with a respect for science and our world including the animals that it inhabits and may cause them to think about how their actions affect other animals even the ones that are out of sight and live in another part of the world. This movie is also said to promote feminism, which is basically the idea that women are equal to men and should be allowed to have the same rights. This message may cause boys to respect women. It will also give young girls the idea they should be respected just as much as men and like men they can be whatever and whoever they want if they work hard enough for it.

Cars 2 is said to be attacking the oil industry. Many conservatives will deny that the use of oil causes global warming, but no one denies that using oil pollutes our air making it dangerous to breathe. And no one questioned this use of oil in the past because we needed energy so badly that we were willing to pollute our air in exchange for energy. But now we have developed new clean ways to create energy, and because eventually we are going to run out of oil it is in our best interest to use this clean energy now and further develop it for the future. So conservatives are basically saying this movie will cause kids to value clean air and plan the future so generations after us have it better than today.

Lastly, Monsters vs. Aliens is being criticized for standing against torture. Torture of course has been thought to be a good way of extracting vital information from those who may have knowledge one needs. But this has been showed ineffective and for those who don’t have knowledge of what is being asked of them, they are tortured repeatedly for no reason and eventually give false information just to stop the torture. However, many conservatives disagree with this which is why they feel this movie is pushing a liberal agenda. So beware - if your kids watch this movie there is a chance they may grow up to be against torture and support more effective ways of gaining intelligence.

If these are things conservatives are against, then what does that make them for? Polluting the air and ruining our planet just because it is profitable? Telling women they aren’t as valuable as men and their ideas aren’t worth listening too? Torturing people even though there are better ways of gathering intelligence? Just because torture works in the movies doesn’t make it effective in real life.

It needs to be said that these ideas should not be considered an agenda if they are based on fact and reality. It is not the movies fault for being educated and aware of these issues. The only reason conservatives are claiming these movies push a liberal agenda is because it goes against their own agenda which is based on misinforming the public and is motivated by profit. Their agenda is not to improve the quality of life for humanity but simply what is best for their bank account. And if these are the kind of movies they don’t want our children watching, what does that say about their values? If these movies which incorporate real issues are turning our children into democrats, it is not the movies fault; it is the republicans fault for being on the wrong side of these issues.

Atheists and Protest Signs

Occasionally we see atheists protesting with signs that have an anti-religious message or even a sign mocking religion. The most recent sign I've seen said, “If Jesus returns, kill him again.” Maybe it is just me, but I’m not a fan of these signs. For many atheists these signs are just a joke, but they seem to give those who are religious reason to think atheists acknowledge the existence of God and are against him. This of course is not the case; atheist can’t be against or even kill someone they don’t believe exist.

This is not the message atheists should be trying to spread, it is no better than a Christian fundamentalist protesting with signs such as, “God Hates Fags” or “Pray for more dead soldiers”. They are both based on hate and intolerance (even though the atheists sign is just a joke).  Atheists are already falsely accused of being evil bloodthirsty Satanists, and signs such as this only fuel the fire for religious fear mongering.

If the goal of atheism is to get people to think critically and base their beliefs on evidence and reason then these signs do not help the cause. Those who read this sign that are religious already lack the ability to think critically on this issue and dislike atheists so they do not see it as a joke and it only causes more confusion about who atheists are and what they stand for.

It can be fun for atheists to create these kinds of signs for a joke, but atheists are so misunderstood that it only becomes an inside joke for atheists and their message is completely lost. If an atheist feels so strongly to protest then they must care about having their message be heard, but those signs only hurt their cause.

If atheists want to make a real impact they need to be careful not to use signs that can be misinterpreted and only use signs that will get people to think about their beliefs, signs that appear to be name calling or hateful are not effective. Atheists for the most part see religious belief as an extremely serious matter, and we need to put serious consideration into what we put on signs. If there is one thing atheists hate it is the absence of critical thinking, and these signs show just that. Surely we can do better then this, when there are so many issues in the world that are caused by religion we MUST do better than this. We need to ask ourselves, will it cause more confusion or aid in promoting critical thinking and reason. If it would cause more confusion, do the world and atheism a favor and just stay home.

What to Look for When Voting This Next Election

Everyone has their own views about how the country should be run and the fact we get to vote on this is one of the reasons our country has been so great. But unfortunately politicians have become very good at making the public think they hold a particular view and once in office their actions seem to no longer be consistent with that view. With the country facing so many critical issues right now it is important that America votes for candidates that are willing stick to the views that they run on and can work together to get the country moving in the right direction again. So here are five simple bi partisan things to look for when deciding how to best cast your vote this next election.

First, looking at who the candidate’s biggest campaign contributors are is a great way to see who that candidate will fight for once in office. For example if a politician receives large donations from the oil industry, that candidate will want to keep the oil industry happy and create laws which benefit them because politicians are always in need of campaign money, and the next time the politician needs money the oil industry will want to continue supporting that candidate since they are willing to help them out in return. Although just because a politician receives money from an oil company it does not mean they are automatically going to fight for their interest and are bought because of course people and corporations are free to donate to whoever they want. However, it should become a concern when that is where most of their funding comes from, and it is unlikely a company would give money to a candidate if they weren’t willing to support policies that benefited them. When a candidate receives donations from a mix array of people it is a good sign that they will fight for the best interests of everyone.

Second, pay attention to what a candidate says when talking to different groups, if they change their message based on who they are speaking to at the moment it should be a red flag. But, if they stick to the same message even when it is not what that particular group wants to hear it is a good sign they will stick to what they say they will do once in office. If they flip flop during the campaign, you can be sure they will flip flop after.

Third, look at what the candidate has supported or done in the past, what they have done in the past is typically a good indicator of what they will do in the future. Of course people are allowed to change their stance on an issue, and that can be a good sign that they are open-minded and willing to admit their previous stance was wrong. However, it can also be a sign they are a flip flopper and are just willing to say whatever they think is popular in order to win. It can be hard if not impossible to know their true stance on an issue sometimes, but when in question go back and look at how they have most recently voted, who they have endorsed, and who they are receiving campaign contributions from.

Fourth, while it is extremely important to look at the candidate’s or party’s stance and past achievements, remember politics can get ugly and strategically in order to make one administration look bad the other party with the right circumstances can block much of what they want to do in order to make them look incompetent. This is great politics, but terrible for the country and is a huge indicator that some politicians care more about who is in power rather than helping the country. These are also the candidates who are most likely to be bought by corporations because they care more about helping out their biggest contributors than they do about helping the country, and if they are not in control it becomes difficult to help the corporations who are donating large sums of money. Remember, if a certain policy is good for the country than corporations would not need to pay politicians to support it.

Lastly, try not to focus on the candidates label i.e. liberal, conservative, libertarian etc. Often people have negative connotations toward political labels for reasons such as their parents talked negatively against them when growing up, from hearing bias reports or simply misunderstanding what they actually stand for. It can be easy for people not to listen to what a candidate has to say if they have a negative view of their label. Often when people fill out a questionnaire that asks them about their personal views on various political issues to see what party they agree most with, they find their stance on those issues are more in line with a party other than the one they had originally identified themselves with. This is why it is important not to focus on labels and look at the candidate’s actual stance; otherwise one could vote for a candidate when there was another candidate that was more in line with their views. Many times people defend their parties’ stance on an issue because it is natural to defend things one believes and they can subconsciously feel it is an attack on them as a person. So it is important to be humble and not take arguments on an issue too personal, and instead realize it is better to admit when our current view is wrong and change it rather than hold on to a stance simply because we are too stubborn to change. By not focusing on labels it is easier to make a more informed decision without bias.

With this next election so critical to our country’s future let’s hope America puts a lot of thought and consideration into their vote and does not simply vote for a party because they have always voted that way. If that is how you plan to vote this next election, then please use these five tips to see if you would still vote for the candidate you originally intended on voting for. But however you decide to vote make sure that it is carefully thought out so we can get back to being the America the world expects us to be.

Is atheism a Religion?

There has been much confusion over whether atheism is a religion. With the recent population growth of atheists these days it important to understand what this group really believes. For those who are an atheist this is a silly question, but for others this seems to be very confusing. The hope of this post is to put this mystery and confusion to rest.

Terms and definitions are very important, and if a proper definition is not given to a term, then terms can mean something different for everyone and when this happens it obviously causes much confusion. It’s hard to imagine that in a time where information is so easily accessible this can happen, but it does happen when people who are ignorant or have an agenda define a word they know little about. The definition for atheism on the website Merriam-webster.com is:

1) archaic: ungodliness, wickedness

2) a: a disbelief in the existence of deity

    b: the doctrine that there is no deity

This definition is disturbing for many reasons, first – ungodliness is accurate but it assumes that it is a bad thing by adding wickedness. Assuming most people who aren’t atheist are a mono-theist, that is like a Jehovah’s witness telling a Mormon they are wicked for not believing as they do or vice versa, or insert any two religions of your choice. Until one religion is proven to be true, who is to say ungodliness is a bad thing? For those living in Greece but didn’t believe in Zeus, where they wicked? Back then many would say yes, but of course we would not say that today.

It is interesting that people who are religious have a bigger problem with atheists than they do with those who believe in a god other than their own. If not believing in a god makes someone wicked, than wouldn’t not believing in the “true God” and following a false god make them wicked as well? Some religious people would say yes, but since they are taking their belief on faith and can’t prove their god is real, they don’t want to point the finger at other religions since that would mean putting their own belief under the microscope as well. So until one of the many God’s is proven to be real, it is ridiculous to say those who don’t believe in a god are wicked.

The definition then says atheism is “a disbelief in the existence of deity”, while this is true the definition fails to mention the disbelief is due to a lack of evidence for believing. But to be fair, people can be atheist for reasons other than a lack of evidence such as simply not being interested. It is understandable that the definition doesn’t mention a lack of evidence being a reason for disbelief, but if it is going to use words such as "ungodliness" or "wickedness" to define atheism it should mention why most are atheist.

Definition 2) b: says, “the doctrine that there is no deity”, I’m unaware of any doctrine for atheist because there is no such doctrine. But let’s take a look at the definition of doctrine on Merriam-webster.com:

1) archaic: teaching, instruction

2) a: something that is taught

    b: a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief : dogma

    c: a principle of law established through past decisions

    d: a statement of fundamental government policy especially in international relations

    e: a military principle or set of strategies

I think we can all agree on this definition and I think particularly 2)b is a very accurate definition and is most likely how doctrine is being used when in the definition for atheism. However, atheism has no principles or position or body of principles in a branch of knowledge of system of belief. For those who don’t believe in UFO’s we don’t say they follow a doctrine, they simply just don’t believe in them due to lack of evidence. No one is born with knowledge of Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Scientology, Judaism etc. these are all taught. We are all born atheist, until indoctrinated with a religion. Therefore, atheism has no doctrine.

Now let’s look at the definition of religion as defined at Merriam-webster.com:

1) a: the state of a religious

     b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural

        (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2) a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

3) archaic: scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

4) a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

While it should be obvious that atheist do not worship a god or the supernatural, it can appear at times that they do have some sort of belief or practice that they follow since many do share the same views on a number of topics, but these shared views have nothing to do with atheism and is a reflection on how they make decisions and process claims. Since atheist do not normally take things on faith and base their understanding of reality on science and reason they tend to come to the same conclusions on many issues. It is because of these shared views that many assume they follow some form of doctrine.

It can be confusing since there is a label for the non-existence of a religious belief. When we see list labeling groups such as Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, Hindu, atheist etc., it appears atheist have their own belief system since lumped in with other religions. But think how we would label those who don’t fall into any of those religious categories if the word atheism didn’t exist. We would use words such as “non-believer” or “don’t follow a religion”. But religions such as Christianity call anyone who doesn’t believe as they do “non-believers”, so that term could be confusing as well and “don’t follow a religion” is wordy. So we use the word “atheism” to describe this group. However, the word "non-theist" is starting to be used more these days in hopes to reduce this confusion.

While that should be enough evidence that atheism is a lack of a certain belief and not a religion, I believe there is another reason why this simple fact continues to be misrepresented and misunderstood. Many religious leaders will say that those who have lost their faith in God and have turned to atheism are “being misled by the ways of atheism” or some various form of this statement in order to give the impression that atheism is its own belief. Whether they do this on purpose or it is their own ignorance of the word, it allows them to get around the real reason people become atheist which is the lack of evidence for the claims of a god. Religious leaders do not want to have that discussion because it brings up many difficult questions that they cannot answer, and it is easier to misrepresent atheism in order to avoid those tough issues.

An accurate definition of atheism for Merriam-webster.com could better been defined simply by “the lack of a belief in a god or the supernatural”. It really is that simple, the word atheism is not meant to describe what a person believes but answers the question, “do they follow or believe in any form of theism or a god?” If their answer is no, they are (a)theist, meaning not a theist.

How to Discuss Politics in an Effective Way

I’m often frustrated by people who don’t like to talk politics. I understand everyone has their own interests and hobbies and prefers to talk about those but if one votes in elections it is their responsibility to be knowledgeable about the issues so they can vote wisely. It seems that people don’t like discussing politics because they either don’t know much about the issues or they don’t want to discuss something that could challenge their current views. If this is their reasons should they really be voting in the first place?

The whole point of government and politics is to protect and lead the country to make it a better place to live. Think of the country as a country club, American citizens are all members of the club and the government is the board of directors who make decisions about what kind of club it will be. Our taxes are the dues we pay to enjoy the services the club provides us. Since we are all members of this club, we all have our own ideas of what kind of club we want to belong too and this is where all of our ideas and views come in when talking politics.

We should all care about what kind of country we live in, and it shouldn’t be a topic that is upsetting to talk about. If an engineer didn’t discuss plans for a bridge he was building it would put the strength of the bridge in jeopardy and lives would be at risk. It is in the engineer’s best interest to want to be proven wrong that his bridge will not be strong enough to support the weight. If he was to be against discussing the plans for fear of being shown they wouldn’t work then the bridge is likely to have some weaknesses and could have been designed stronger if his ego did not get in the way.

We should want our ideas and views to be proven wrong because it is a great way to discover better ideas and that is good for everyone. People should stop taking things so personal because it keeps them from discussing important issues in our country. It is okay to be wrong, we are all wrong about many issues but it is not okay to hold strong to ideas that we are not willing to discuss.

Just as discussing plans for a bridge makes for a better bridge discussing politics makes for a better country. If we live in this country and vote it is our responsibility to know the issues and discussing them is productive way to learn more so we can better decide how to vote. It is often said that it is our duty to vote but that is only half of it. It is also our duty to know the issues, voting alone does not move the country forward. Voting should only be encouraged if knowledgeable about the issues; it is not okay to be ignorant about issues yet still vote.

Sports is such a big part of our society it can be hard at times to not keep score of how many views one person has that are best and how many the other person has which are wrong. We might not be keeping score out loud but subconsciously many do and this is a big deterrent for people to want to engage in discussing politics because it can turn competitive very easily. When discussing these issues it is important to remember not to put it in people’s face when demonstrating that their view is wrong and yours is right, otherwise they won’t want to have any more discussions with you in the future.

If we want to see real change in this country we need to put our egos aside and be open to having our own views challenged. It is ignorant and arrogant for people to think they are right and everyone who disagrees with them is wrong if they aren’t willing to put those ideas up for discussion. People should want to discuss their political views in order to promote what they think is best for the country. It should not be about who is right or wrong, but instead about figuring out what policies are best for the country as a whole. If we want a better country people are going to have to stop looking at it as a competition and be humble enough to admit that maybe other policies would be better than they had previously thought. This is what we should strive for when discussing politics if we want what is best for the people and the country.

Why Atheists Could Be Going To Heaven

Many believe that their religion is the correct one and if they sincerely believe it they will be promised heaven after they die, but they may need to investigate this claim and reconsider. If only one religion can be true then billions of people are following a false god. Those who think there could be multiple paths to heaven and that many religions could be right must consider those same religions say there is only one path to heaven and that is through believing in their God - and not following means they will be sent to hell. So it could be eternally devastating to not follow the god of a religion other than their own. So it is important for one to learn about other religions so they can choose the one that makes the most sense and is more likely to be true - not just accept the one their parents taught them. However, there could be another option to consider. If a rational and moral god exists but has not yet revealed himself to humanity, He could be using current religions as a test to see who will follow a religion that has condoned slavery, oppression of women, violence, genocide, or anything else that is immoral.

A moral deity would not demand people to follow a harmful religion, but could be allowing them to exist to see who is willing to sacrifice their morality in order to get into heaven. It is much easier for one to follow the same religion or faith as their peers than it is to go against the majority and give up their chance of going to heaven. Standing up against a belief that is immoral should be rewarded. Risking eternity in hell for not following an immoral religion would be the ultimate sacrifice anyone could make. If a rational and moral God exists, He could not possibly throw a person in hell for standing up for what is right, but would send him to heaven for not following a religion and a god that has condoned so many horrific acts.

Morality is about doing the right thing no matter what one is told or how much peer pressure is put on them; religion is about doing what one is told whether it is moral or not. This only gives good people reasons to do bad things. A moral God would not condone this behavior.

It is extremely unlikely that a god does exist, but if there is a god - it would be better to follow what is rational and moral rather than follow a religion just because it promises great things. It resembles a pedophile with candy in a park looking for children, to the child it seems great but we all know how that ends. Unfortunately, that analogy is not a stretch considering what has taken place with priest and young boys in the church recently. This analogy will hopefully get one to think before jumping into a religion simply for the rewards it promises. One should read the fine print as with all things that sound too good to be true. As the saying goes, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

It is much more plausible that when one dies, we will all go to the same place, which is where we were before being born, nothingness. This doesn't mean that life is meaningless, but would argue it makes life even more valuable since it is the only life we get. It should be cherished and we should cherish the lives of others as well because we are all on this rare and exciting ride together. Those scared of what will happen if they do not follow a religion must ask - if a moral and rational God exists, would He be disappointed with us for standing up for what is moral? Let’s hope not, and let’s not follow a deity that would.

Religion - The Most Powerful Drug Ever Created

Often when life gets too hard, people turn to drugs and alcohol as a way to escape the hardships of life. It numbs them so they don’t have to worry about their problems, and no longer have to think about the trouble they might be in or how bad their life has become. But when you think about it, isn’t that exactly what religion offers?

Many times people turn to drugs and alcohol when scared, lost, or depressed, but people are turning to religion for the same reasons. Life can be hard and scary at times, and it is natural to want to find comfort and religion does just that. It is why there can be so many variations of religion and all work for the ones who believe it. It doesn’t work or improve their lives because it is true, it works because it numbs them from the pain and harshness of reality. We all are aware of our mortality and that can be a scary thing to think about. So in order to overcome that fear people prescribe to a religion. If we are taught a religion from an early age, we have been addicted ever since we have had the ability to think. (It is why many atheist say religious indoctrination of children is child abuse; it is basically addicting them to a drug at an early age that will cause delusions for the rest of their lives.)  

The pill people take every day called religion numbs them to reality. They don’t see how much suffering is going on in the world. For example, many know children are dying in Africa every day, but because they think God has a plan, they don’t realize how tragic it really is. They don’t have to think about the problems of the world because to them it is all God’s plan, and this life is just a test to see who deserves heaven and who deserves hell. It is sad to think how many people live the one life they will ever have addicted to this delusion.

It is extremely difficult for those who are addicted to this drug to quit. Just like with any addiction the best way to get rid of it is to replace it with something else. So in order to stop taking religions pill, they must have a good reason to do so. It is comforting to think there is a God in control and heaven is in our future, this delusion makes it extremely tough for anyone to even want to consider losing their belief. Since no religion is right and they all have their flaws, it is easy to stick with the one you have always known because it seems to work. The only way for addicts to quit is to introduce them to reason, logic, and science so they can determine if their beliefs are true. However, for those who don’t care whether their beliefs are true and just want to feel good, this will have little to no impact on them.

Drug users will deny they are addicted and come up with excuses for why they don’t have a problem. Religious people do the same when shown evidence of the harm their beliefs have caused, but many have no problem pointing out the problems in other religions. People become so blind and numb to the harm their beliefs have caused and make up excuses such as, “they weren’t a true believer”. Of course, many who follow a religion are good people and are a positive influence but it doesn’t mean their belief is true; it is their same belief that is giving others a reason to be hateful and violent toward others. The irony is that those who are not “true believers” actually just believe it more than they do. They are basically overdosing on their religion of choice, and it causes them to be completely irrational. If a belief is true, that does not happen. Just as the right amount of a drug can make you feel good, too much of a drug will kill you, and those who have overdosed on religion are the fundamentalist and religious terrorist.

So should religion be illegal? No, just as alcohol and other drugs are legal and the harmful drugs are illegal; the same should go for religions. For religions that are for the most part benign and help people cope with their fears should be allowed, but it doesn’t make them true. Just as someone who is prescribed a drug to feel better shouldn’t give it to their friends, religion shouldn’t be forced on anyone either. People who are drug free and eat healthy feel great, and it should be encouraged for people to eat healthy doses of reason, logic, and science in order to live better and more rational lives. Reality is much more fascinating than any religion, and because people will no longer have delusions, they will be amazed at the things they will learn and discover.

Religions which are obviously harmful such as Muslim extremists or the KKK should be illegal but will simply never go away even if it were because it is too powerful of a drug. Simply taking their religion away will only make them go crazier unless they are given something to replace it with. Just like those who don't stop doing illegal drugs because they are so strongly addicted. This is why religion should not be encouraged and instead we must encourage people to base their beliefs on reason and logic and not on what makes them feel good.

People shouldn’t stop believing their religion because Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris or anyone else tells them to. Instead, they should take an honest look at what they believe and decide for themselves if it is really true. The best way to examine our beliefs is by using the scientific method which is proven to work and because it works it has allowed us the ability to create amazing things such as airplanes, satellites, television and all the other countless things we enjoy today. People need to learn to think for themselves and not follow a belief because it makes them feel good. If we want to be right, we must be willing to be wrong. If we can do something as simple as that, our world would be a completely different place, and if we can’t, we should be extremely jealous of the generation that can.

How to Manipulate the Public so You Can Rule the World

For some, life is a game of who can gain the most power in order to acquire wealth or vice versa. To do this, they must gain followers to support their ideas and policies that benefit them. So for those of you who are pondering how to rule the world, this is a proven strategy that is guaranteed to be successful if you are willing to put in the work.

First, it is important to understand what people value most. Once you understand this you can begin to control people for your benefit through manipulation. You will want to threaten the thing you have decided is most valuable to them and it is encouraged to threaten the quality of their life since it is what the majority values most. However, do not do this with violence; instead you must appear to be doing it for their benefit so people will want to follow you. (plus, violence is illegal and your attempt at ruling the world will not last long) Instilling fear will get their attention and they will be more likely to listen. Tell them something terrible will happen to them if they do not listen to your message. It will make people feel you care about their well-being and will be thankful you are trying to help them.


The best way to do this is to come up with a belief system that will dictate how people should act and think, include a simple list of do's and don'ts. The key to getting people to believe your story is again by using fear. Fear is an extremely powerful emotion, and by getting people to be fearful you can manipulate their lives for your benefit. When creating this belief, make sure it includes as many true statements and good lessons as possible, this will give your belief system some credibility.

Be careful not to provide too much knowledge otherwise they will be able to figure out it is a lie. Tell them if they don’t believe you bad things will happen to them and not just on earth but also when they die they will experience some form of torture for eternity. (oh yeah, by the way, you may have to invent some sort of a life after this life, some call this invention the afterlife. I know it sounds crazy, but no one can prove it wrong and people will most likely be excited by this news since they already have a fear of death)

Fear will gain you a lot of followers, but in order to rule the world you are going to need as many followers as possible. So another great way to gain followers is by promising them good things. Tell them their lives will be improved if they believe you. Everyone wants a better life, so you are sure to gain a few followers this way. When something good happens to them, be sure to remind them it was due to them following your belief. This will help confirm to them that they made the right decision and that your belief really is true.

However, because this is just a lie you fabricated, many people’s lives will not get better and some will even get worse. When this happens, tell them they will receive their rewards after they die. (Another reason why inventing an afterlife will come in handy) You can promise them things they wish they had such as a mansion made of gold, beautiful women, a new attractive body with six pack abs, or even the ruler of their own planet, feel free to get as creative as you’d like on this one just make sure it is something they cannot refuse.

Another way to gain followers is to tell them they are bad people if they do not follow these beliefs. People are generally good and like being nice to others, so they will want to be associated with other people who have a label associated with being “good”. This will also make it difficult for those who do not follow your belief, because by creating a label that represents good, by default it will give the non-believers the label of “bad”. This will be difficult for many non-believers to handle and some will give in due to how your followers have treated them for not believing.

Labeling your followers as “good” is a really important part of the strategy because in order for people to be labeled that, they must adhere to your belief which is false, and for those who know the truth, your followers will not listen to them because they have the label “bad”. (absolutely brilliant, right) This is going to be extremely helpful and you won’t have to defend the non-believers logical arguments because reason and logic will seem negative to your followers. This will keep your believers stupid and they will continue believing. You will be able to control what they believe to be good/bad and fact/fiction. You are going to love this feature and it will come in handy often, trust me.

You will need to encourage your believers to meet up regularly in order to continually teach them more about this belief. This also helps reinforce to them that this belief is right. It is also highly encouraged to teach them when they are young before they develop critical thinking skills, if they grow up believing your teachings they are more likely to form an emotional attachment and are less likely to question its credibility. Of course you are bound to lose a few due to critical thinking and logic, but just tell everyone that they have simply lost their way due to their selfish nature (which you of course know all about, since you want to rule the world) or convince people they just didn’t understand it well enough and wasn’t able to grasp the importance of it.

When teaching this to others, be careful to not make any claims that can be tested otherwise people will test them and see it is not true. Give yourself plenty of wiggle room incase new discovers are found by the non-believers. This is sure to happen, so when it does it is helpful to somehow tie the new discovery into things you have been saying all along. It may take a bit of creativity and twisting of your previous statements but you’ll figure something out. If you can’t do this, just completely deny whatever it was they found or point back to your manuscript that shows differently as proof they are lying. You can also remind your followers that those non-believers are bad people and are just trying to deceive them.

If you run into a person who asks for evidence to prove what you are saying is true, tell them it must be taken on faith alone or they have to believe it first in order for them to see it is true or some kind of crap like that. If they continue to demand evidence, you are probably going after the wrong person and will not have much success. Avoid these types at all cost! They will only cause you headaches and most likely will go around telling your followers how deceived and stupid they are.

If people start to question the validity of your beliefs, you can say things such as, “well if you don’t believe this, what if you’re wrong and it is true?” This will get your followers to say to themselves, “oh yeah, I have nothing to lose by believing this and everything to gain”. But you of course know they are losing their ability to think for themselves, which is what makes it possible for you to rule the world. The fear you have instilled in them of torture after death will have an extremely tight grasp on them and they will be too scared not to believe it.

Always remember, it is easier to join the crowd than it is to be an outsider. For this reason you must encourage your followers to share this belief with others, if you don’t your belief system may see a drop in numbers and your followers will be the outsiders and can even appear delusional and all your hard work will have been for nothing. So encourage those you feel are knowledgeable and completely convinced of your false belief system so they can start their own groups and share the message with even more people. Once you are no longer the focal point and have other individuals teaching this belief, congratulations, it has now gone viral! You were successful and are well on your way to ruling the world.

Some of you may be thinking the public will never fall for such nonsense, but there are actually countless examples of how these strategies have been extremely successful in the past and still today. I won’t go into them here, since I’m trying to keep this fairly short, but you can do a simple Google search under “religion”, there are thousands of them which all claim to be true and people still fall for them today.

If you find yourself having troubling coming up with a belief that will manipulate people, try creating a spin-off of a current belief system people already follow. You will find many to choose from when doing the Google search. Just look for a weak point in a belief and replace it with something better. You can claim to have discovered new information or that you had an encounter with an important figure in that belief. People who are currently following the belief you are creating the spin-off from have already lost their ability to think for themselves so it shouldn't take too much convincing as long as you come up with a really good explanation for why your version is right and the other is wrong. This is an extremely popular way to gain followers in a short amount of time.

Of course I am not encouraging anyone to do this and hope you don’t. But if you decide to give it a try, I will warn you that there is still a lot of competition out there and it will take a lot of hard work. I also would not recommend you share this knowledge with others because it will make it that much harder for you to manipulate any future followers. But if you try, good luck in your quest for ruling the world! 

Clearing Up the Terms “Conservative” and “Liberal”

Everyday people discuss politics, and everyone wants to live in a country that allows them to have freedom and become prosperous. If that is our goal, why is it so hard for people to agree with what is best for the country? A large part of this disagreement may be due to misunderstanding of what each side really stands for and terms used today are not necessarily being used as they were originally intended and people have developed their own definition for these words. If you were to ask a conservative what it means to be conservative, you will most likely receive many different answers. This should concern not only the country but those who are conservative as well and is an example of why there is so much confusion in politics.

One term that can confuse people is "the right" and "the left" which refers to republicans/conservatives and democrats/liberals. Many do not know the origin of these terms, and unfortunately many assume "the right" means correct and "the left" means sinister or wrong. The terms "left and right" date back to 1789, when the French National Assembly was created to control issues such as taxation and inside the chamber nobles sat on the right side and revolutionaries sat on the left. Conservative comes from the Latin word conservare, which means "to preserve"; Nobles were conservatives because they already had much of the power and wealth and of course they wanted to preserve the current laws. Liberal comes from the Latin word liberalis, meaning "of freedom"; revolutionaries were liberals/progressives because they wanted society to progress so they could have freedom and equal rights. It would be silly to think that where a group of people sat in a room would determine whether they were correct or not, but this is what people are doing when they associate "the right" as correct.

In 1976, during the Carter administration, the evangelical Christians decided to support conservative republicans. Although Jimmy Carter was an evangelical Christian himself, he did not win re-election against republican Ronald Reagan who became President due to the support of evangelical Christians. Ever since the election of President Reagan, religion has played a large part in the Republican Party. The reason for this is hard to detect but one could speculate it is due to democrats being more incline to uphold the first amendment and Republicans ignoring that part of the constitution. Since Republicans are not afraid to mix politics with religion it may make it easier for Christians to vote for a president that is outspoken about following the same religion as them. The problem with this is it has allowed people to focus more on labels rather than what the candidate actually stands for. There is no doubt Reagan was a great president but it had nothing to do with the labels which were put on him and everything to do with his policies.

It is bizarre that evangelical Christians would support conservatives when there are many verses that suggest Jesus would be a liberal. Verses such as:

[Matthew 19:21] If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.

[Luke 12.15.] Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.

[Matthew 22:21] Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's.

[Matthew 7:12] So in everything, do to others as you would have them do to you.

These are just a few of the many verses that would suggest Jesus would have been a liberal. So why have evangelical Christians supported conservative republicans? There are two reasons why this could be. Reason one - religion was created in order to have power over others and this is another way the powerful and rich are controlling people. Reason two - people are confused on what the term conservative means and support it due to a misinterpretation. Of course it could be both, but it is up to everyone to decide that for themself. However, the point is that if one is a Christian and follows the teachings of Christ, it would make more sense for them to be liberal.

We can see people being manipulated today by these terms when looking at the Tea Party movement. It is marketed to attract and reach out to conservatives and anyone who wants lower taxes. Many believe the Tea Party was a grassroots movement started by the public who wanted a change in government, but it was really started by the billionaire Koch brothers and they have convinced the middle class to fight for policies that favor the super-rich and hurt everyone else including those in the Tea Party. The Koch brothers may not have created an elaborate plan to deceive voters but it is the lack of knowledge on the term conservative that has allowed them to take advantage of people in order to get them to support laws that only favor the rich. The reason it is hard to receive a consistent response to the question, "what does conservative mean," is because it does not benefit true conservatives to discuss it and is better to let people come up with what it means for them. The definitions people use who claim to be conservative are usually extracted from being Christian or religious because of the alignment the evangelical Christians and conservatives made in 1976, which obviously has nothing to do with the origin and definition of being conservative.

It is funny to think that the world could be so much different if nobles would have sat on the left side and liberals sat on the right. It is hard to believe that something like sitting on a certain side of the room can make a difference in people's political views. However, those who vote and are indifferent or uneducated on issues when voting, if a political party is known as "the right" it can play a large part psychologically on how that person will vote. They may feel it is a sign that they should vote for the candidate who is "right", and not vote for the candidate who is "left" because in ancient times being left handed was a sign of the devil. This is why it is important to know the issues and not rely on labels or "gut feelings" when voting.

To sum it up, for those who want the super-rich and those in power to preserve laws that benefit themselves, you are a conservative. For those who want to progress the country toward equal rights and freedom, you are a liberal.

How Religion Can Manipulate Voters

As we are currently in the early process of the GOP presidential nomination, it is hard not to notice how often the candidates speak about their religious views. If running for president they should be aware of our first amendment which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This is often known as "the separation between church and state," which is a simple way to say religion is to stay out of government and government out of religion. Of course we do have freedom of speech and are allowed to talk about our beliefs, but if the politician cannot make any laws based on religion should it even be an issue? It would be better to vote for a politician based on their records, ideas, and vision of the future for the county not because they claim to believe in the same God as the majority of the public.

America should be smart enough to know that politicians are aware the public heavily bases their vote on their religious views. When Americans vote this way it gives the politicians a way to manipulate voters by simply claiming to believe in the same God they do. This gives them instant credibility with voters and makes us feel their views are in line with ours and takes the public's attention away from the ideas and plans the candidate has for the country. We should not allow them to get away with this and demand they be elected based on their merits and ideas not their religion.

Fundamental Christians seem to vote based on religion because they are fearful that someone who advocates science, reason and logic is the anti-Christ, so what does that say about the candidate they are voting for? One can only guess the opposite which is anti-science, unreasonable, and illogical, otherwise what makes the voter so sure their candidate is not the anti-Christ? If those who want the end of the world to happen than they should vote for the candidate that bases their decisions on science, reason, and logic. If that is what the anti-Christ will promote then it will mean Christ will come back that much sooner, which is something Christians all look forward to.

It is sad ancient books can instill in people fear and cause them to behave irrationally. If our default position is to cause separation and fight over which religion is correct and a god doesn't exist, than what are we left with after all this destruction? We are left with the loss of lives for nothing, and a mess that a god will not be there to help us clean up. Our default position should be to strive and make the world a better place. For many who are religious this sounds very "worldly" and "Satan trying to deceive us," but we all strive for this in our own homes and communities, so why not extend this throughout the country and the world? If those who truly believe their God is in control, there is no need for them to assist him. He would be perfectly capable of destroying the world so He could come back all by Himself. If everything that sounds good and logical we believe to be "Satan" trying to deceive us, we are an extremely ignorant and sad race with no hope of ever getting along on this small planet that is our home.

The E-mail God Debate

The following is a debate that took place over email which was started over this video link below, watch then read and decide for yourself which the most reasonable view is. Would love to hear everyone’s comments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbgVV2ql5MM

Here is my take on it before you watch:

We have the first amendment as you know. Where government doesn't get involved in the church and church is to not get involved in government. The government has held up its end of the deal and allows churches the freedom to worship how they want no matter which religion that is. But the church is always pushing and forcing its views and ways on the government. (Which is why i respect Ron Paul, he is Christian but doesn't change how he wants the country to be run based on his personal beliefs.) This guy is not bashing Christians by the way, he is just calling out the ones who refuse to listen to facts and by them ignoring them and wanting our country to go in their direction they are putting everyone else at risk. Like the guy said, to them good things are bad and bad things are good. There is no way of dealing with people like that. If God was real, is that really how he would want people to act? And if he is not then what are you left with if these people get their way? Just like Harold Camping who said the rapture was going to happen and people spent their life savings on billboards to warn everyone, and when it didn't happen they were left with nothing! Some committed suicide, kid’s college savings were gone, and people lost their homes. This way of thinking that people have is going to get us nowhere. We have to strive for peace, not hope for destruction so we go to heaven. That is crazy!

So let me know what you think of it.

Christian Response:

I totally agree that we have a lot of crazy "Christians" and it causes a lot of confusion like causing people like you to just scrap the entire bible and Christianity in general.  Now if they were truly following Christ and His ways....would they be acting that way?  There is a difference between "Christians" and "believers or followers of Christ".  You may not see that difference but I do.  That's why I get stirred up too.  Some think they know it all and try then to push it on everybody else.  I don't see Christ that way...He did not push Himself on anyone but freely let them choose if they wanted to follow Him.

The whole world is full of crazies...if not from one side then the other.  I just want to live the simple life and love people and even that is quite more of a struggle than I'd like these days.

I see this...try to picture it...a big circle called the world.  Inside that is a smaller circle who are truly Christ followers who have received salvation and live simply by the red letters of the new testament...who love God and use their life to better others.  We can live in either circle.  Sometimes we are shoved around and get outside of our smaller circle and start acting like the world again...but we have to recognize that and move back into the safety of the smaller circle where we let God watch over us and fight our battles...resting in the Lord.

atheist Response:

First off it is not crazy Christians who have cause me to scrap the entire Bible; the Bible itself provides plenty of reason to do that on its own. I don't make decisions based on others actions, i base them on facts.

 

Second you make this claim that there are "Christians" and then "believers or followers of Christ" how do you make that distinction? You must know the answer if you see that, so look forward to hearing it.

Lastly I agree you said the whole world is full of crazies, I would suggest to you that it is religion that causes it. Religion brainwashes people’s minds and makes them think good is bad and bad is good. Fear is a very powerful emotion and religion takes advantage of it to get people to do crazy things. All you have to do is read the Bible to see that. 

Basically, if there is a God who wants to come back, he’s not going to need our help to do so, he would be perfectly capable of doing it on his own. So we don't need Christians and other religions to end the world for him. 

Look forward to hearing your answer for my second point.

Christian Response:

But are you looking at ALL the facts.

If you remember the Pharisees acted differently than Jesus and His followers.  Remember the story of Saul/Paul...who persecuted Christians and then was blinded on the road to Damascus?  Religious people believe with their head...those with a relationship with Jesus act with their heart.  It's clearly different.  Think men have more problems with this than women...cause we're made different.

But without the bible where do you get the guidelines to live that moral and good life?  It is the guidebook for humanity.  And where do those emotions come from...how did we get a mind to think clearly but God created us so?

Basically, if there is a God who wants to come back, he’s not going to need our help to do so, he would be perfectly capable of doing it on his own. So we don't need Christians and other religions to end the world for him.  That's so true.

atheist Response:

You say real Christians act with their heart, you do know that the heart is just a muscle that pumps blood right? It is a term used for emotions. Using emotions is no way to discover the truth. Emotions are what cause people to do irrational things, example killing, rape, suicide, flying a plane into a building. Is that really the way you want to make your decisions?

I think my last email proves the Bible is no moral guide, unless you think those things are moral, than we have a bigger problem to discuss. And obviously some of us didn't get a mind that thinks clearly or we wouldn't be having this discussion. We would all think much clearer if religion didn't have such a strong hold of people's emotions.

Oh and those red letters, you realize they were written 50-80 years after Jesus' death right? How accurate can you really expect them to be? It is very possible a man named Jesus existed, and even more possible that the stories throughout the years were embellished and once they became so extravagant to the point it was news worthy someone decided to write about it. And we don't even know who that was you wrote it. In most bibles I think NIV mostly; it even says something like “we are not sure who wrote the gospels." So believing that red letters are credible is crazy itself. A God would not play an awful trick on his creation and require them to be crazy and ignorant in order to believe in him. He would have been smart enough to know that people would question this, and Jesus could have wrote the whole new testament if he wanted, but he didn't write a single word. So if ignorance and gullibility are requirements for heaven no thank you.

I know you are going to have a hard time reading this and I'm sorry, but if it is true these facts wouldn't exist. If a God exists and he wants to punish me for standing up for what is right and not following a book that condones slavery, oppression of women, selling women as objects, slaughtering people simply because they don't follow a God that a group of people made up themselves in order to justify those actions, creating a law that if a man rapes a women he then must marry her because she is unclean to other men (think that women really wants to live the rest of her life with her rapist). If these are the things I have to say came from God, I'm not going to follow it. And a moral God wouldn't want me too either.

Christian Response:

So let's just say there IS a God who created everything and that man messed everything up and manipulated the world with writings...how then should we live in relationship to God and man?  What is the basis we use to know what is right and wrong?

atheist Response:

I think you already know this answer, I don't see you killing people who don't believe as you do. The Bible says that is ok. So if you get your morals from the Bible why aren't you doing this? Why do you think that women have a right to speak their voice in church? Bible doesn't allow that. Morals don't come from an authority, might does not make right. We get are morals based on how our actions affect others. If I don't want to be killed, I shouldn't kill anyone else. Read the Moral landscape by Sam Harris, (I have not read it myself but have listened to him speak in debates) if you have a hard time with understanding this. It is basically the same way libertarians think. We are allowed the freedom to do whatever we like as long as those actions don't affect others negatively.

Christian Response:

I believe you are not seeing the bible for what it is...you’re talking Old Testament but Christ came to redeem us from those curses. You truly need some men that are able to discuss this with you in great depth...I cannot.

atheist Response:

I'm reading the Bible for what it is, don't lie to yourself and keep saying it is moral. A God who is real couldn't possibly be that bad of a communicator. And if you remember I have talked to men who claim to know the Bible very well, and all of them had no response that was moral. I also have welcomed anyone to talk to me about it, including your friend who said he would be happy to talk to me, but still have not received a call. Use logic to determine your beliefs not emotions based on fear of an imaginary hell and the promises of heaven which prevents people from thinking clearly. Take those two things out of the equation and base your beliefs on logic. It is the same emotional pull of heaven and hell that causes all religions to convince people theirs is right.

And also, those curses you mentioned, guess who would have created those? If God is a consistent moral guide that is not possible. I realize you think what I am saying is worldly and Satan trying to use logic to take you away from God because that is what brainwashes people and is a way to keep them from leaving the church. Same tactic all cults use, this is just on a larger scale. If God is real he would be on the side of logic and reason and wouldn't make people believe the awful things in the Bible in order for them to get into heaven.

And many of those same immoral acts I mention are also found in the New Testament. I have shown them to you before but you forget about them on purpose so you can fool yourself into thinking they don't exist in order for you to continue believing. I suggest start making a list of these verses so you don't forget and I don't have to keep reminding you they are there.

Would love to hear everyone’s comments and/or argument for why you believe what you do. Thanks

Could Social Networking Result in the Extinction of Religion?

Religion has been part of mankind ever since we started questioning our existence. It is one of mankind's first inventions if not the first and has been reinvented over and over providing us with the various forms of religion we have today. These many religions have played an important role in unifying groups of people large and small for a cause. While it has been extremely successful at unifying people, it has been even more successful at dividing societies ever since its existence. Could we be the generation that witnesses the fall of religion due to social networking? Here are 9 ways social networking could eliminate religion.

1 - Social networking breaks down barriers for communication. It allows us to communicate with anyone in the world and share ideas free and freely. What once was a world where people only communicated within their own social circle; it is now a place where the entire world is at one's fingertips. In the past and unfortunately still today, the world has made decisions based on fear and the misunderstanding of others due to poor communication. This has caused countless wars, intolerance, racism, slavery, sexism, and oppression of minorities. While these still exist today, we have come a long way and made massive advances in each of these issues due to better communication. With social networking improving our ability to communicate we will only improve on these issues further, and religion could be the next on the list.

2 - Social networking/media gives us a platform to express ideas and beliefs, a platform which only the most powerful use to have. For those who care about the truth, sharing ideas will only help them discover what is rational and will help expose beliefs that are irrational. It must be emphasized that this only makes a difference if those in the discussion care about the truth, and makes no difference if they preach their dogmatic beliefs while they have their fingers in their ears (or in the case of social networking - their hands over their eyes). If there is a religion that is true, social networking will be the key to discovering which one is correct. So theists who care whether their beliefs are true should not be afraid of social networking, but instead should embrace it to see if their faith can hold up to scrutiny.

3 - Those that are religious can find it hard to proselytize in public. They may be embarrassed to approach someone and start a discussion about their beliefs. For many the only discussions they may have about religion are with those who agree with them. This only helps confirm their beliefs. However, now with social networking they are much more likely to engage in a debate when they can hide behind a computer. They do not have to face public humiliation in the case they get backed into a corner. Because of this, religious individuals are likely to engage in more debates than they would have previously. If the truth always prevails, there will be more people changing their beliefs, whether they are converting to another religion or losing religion entirely.

4 - Just like it can be hard for theists to proselytize their beliefs in public; it can be just as hard for atheists to speak up against religion in public. It may be even harder since in many countries they are the minority, and those who are religious perceive them to be immoral or even evil. No one wants to be perceived in that way. It is easier for people to speak up against something when not in person. Social networking makes this easier for atheists to express their views and could play a large role in eliminating religion and promoting reason.

5 - Not too long ago before the introduction of Google, when people had a hard question they went to the library to research it, this could take a person hours to find if they were even lucky enough to find the answer. Knowing how difficult it was to find answers, many would not put forth the effort and accept just not knowing. If it was a question about God, they would ask their priest and would get an answer based on the religion he followed. This was obviously an extremely bias answer, which is why those who grew up in a religion would tend stick to the same religion throughout their life. Today it is as simple as typing it into Google, if someone in the world has had a good answer for the question; one is likely to find it. Those using Google to answer a question about God may not get the same answer their priest would give them and could inspire them to do further research which could generate more discussions with others. Anything that promotes discussion and allows us to discover answers without bias is a path to truth.

6 - The population of atheists is increasing each year, this also means fewer children are being indoctrinated with their parents religious views since less are being taken to church. But those children who are being taken to church have something us adults didn't have when we were young. That of course being social networking and the internet, children with questions about God will not just have their parents or Sunday school teacher to ask, but will have the internet to use to find their answers. The internet is nothing new to them and will be the easiest way they know how to find answers, meaning they are less likely to ask someone who will give them a bias answer. This will most likely expose them to the truth at a very young age.

7 - For some, church has always been a tool to network and make friends rather than a place to follow their religion, but now with social networking and websites like Meetup they can find groups outside the church for networking resulting in a reduction in attendance at church. Theists may argue these individuals were not believers in the first place so it doesn't matter. However, they were still a member and could have brought some value to the church whether they were fully committed to God or not. Social networking groups could even take "true" believers attention away from the church causing attendance to drop further.

8 - If less people are following a religion and not attending church due to social networking, this means there will be less money in the offering plate each Sunday. It could make it difficult for churches to pay their bills and reduce their ability to do mission work. This could even discourage individuals from joining the ministry and may lure them into other lines of work in search for higher pay. These changes might seem small and insignificant, but if reason is winning through social networking and the promotion of religion is slowly dying than atheists and reason will increase in growth.

9 - With atheism growing in numbers due to social networking, there will be less of a stigma attached to the name than there is currently. This will make it even easier for people to lose faith in their religion. Because there is comfort in numbers, it is easy for people to follow whatever the majority believes in. Once it becomes difficult to determine the majority's view, it will become easier for people to choose reason.

Better communication is always good and something we should constantly strive to improve on. For now social networking seems to be the best tool available to accomplish this and we should take advantage of it and share our views. There are already many pages and groups on Facebook where one can share their beliefs or lack of beliefs openly. Let's encourage people to engage in these debates while still respecting the views of those who differ. Cursing and raising one's voice does not help an argument, it just shows that the argument has weaknesses and cannot stand on its own. Comedian Demetri Martin said it well with this slogan, "Raising your voice, the next best thing to being right." Remember, the truth can stand on its own merits. We must ask ourselves, is it best live in a world with religion where communication is discouraged and we fear others or in a world without religion where communication is encouraged and there is less violence? So participate in these discussions and put your beliefs and views to the test and let reason and logic determine the truth.

Are Religious Leaders Given Too Much Credit for Their Knowledge on God

Leaders are publicly asked tough questions on a regular basis. School teachers are asked questions by their students, public companies are questioned by consumers, and Presidents of countries are constantly being questioned by the press and citizens, this is a valuable way of communicating and allows us to communicate openly in order to learn more. However, religious leaders such as priest, bishops, prophets, or imams etc. are rarely questioned if ever publicly. Are we putting our religious figures on a pedestal so high that we are not questioning them enough on their own knowledge of God?

Every religion claims to be right and says that other religions are false. Often, people who follow a belief in God do not like to call their belief a religion because it puts them in the same category as the beliefs they say are false. Instead they will claim to have a personal relationship with God which gives them the feeling they are not believing a religion like everyone else. Webster’s dictionary defines religion as, “the service and worship of God or the supernatural.” Whether or not someone has a personal relationship with God it would still be considered a religion by definition. The redefining of the word religion that is happening is evidence that they believe religions other than their own are false, and are trying to distance themselves from other religions by changing the definition of their own belief because they do not want to have the same label. But just changing the definition does not change the fact that it is still a religion.

So with everyone claiming their religion is correct, how do we put our beliefs to the test in order to discover which one is true? One way to solve this problem would be to publicly question these religious figures and decided which is the most rational and meets its burden of proof. However, in the United States our first amendment which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This amendment is often known as “the separation between church and state,” which is a simple way to say religion is to stay out of government and government out of religion. Because of this amendment, the government cannot publicly question the teachings of a religion, however the members of the church can.

Let’s encourage churches to start having services that are Q&A, these services could be bi-monthly or as little or as often as the members wanted. If members of the church care whether their beliefs are true, they will want to implement this into their church. Asking questions is a great way to learn for both those asking the question and those sitting in the pew listening. This is a proven method for learning; this is how all schools learn whether it is kindergarten or a college university. We know it works because there is only one proven way to do math, there are not countless views on what 4+5 equals. So for those interested in whether their beliefs are true, they should highly encourage their church to have these services. And for those churches against it, this should be a red flag to everyone.

Of course those against this idea will say, “this is not necessary since we are right.” If this is the case, by implementing a Q&A service it will help those with questions better understand, and for those who do not share the same beliefs as the church will discover that their belief or lack of was wrong. This gives atheists a reason to attend so they can ask the questions which have aided in them losing their faith, and if they find a church that can answer those questions they will become a follower of God. Since the goal is to lead unbelievers and false believers to God, there is no reason not to have these services. This will also reduce the amount of religious leaders who are knowingly teaching a false religion since they will now be questioned on it.

Just as presidents do not always get to choose what they discuss; religious leaders shouldn’t get to always choose either. Their mission should be to answer questions not only for those who already agree with them but for those who do not. If they are claiming to teach the truth they should have no objection to being asked questions publicly in church. Those who claim to be right also claim to have a direct line of communication to God, because of this they should have no problem answering any questions one could ask.

For as many false religions in the world, there is the same amount of false teachers. We should not assume our leaders know everything about God or even more than ourselves, they are fallible just as anyone else and like anyone else can also be deceived. It is in the best interest of the world to implement this simple change. There is absolutely no valid reason not to; it even gives church leaders a break since it saves them from preparing a new sermon. If the members of the church want publicly open communication so those following a false religion can discover the truth, the members will have to suggest this change and implement it. This sets a great example for other churches and would be immoral for a church to deny this, since it would mean individuals that could have been saved will not be. Implementing a Q&A service is not only a benefit to the members but is a benefit to a leader teaching a false belief, as it will expose the weakness and lead them to truth as well. If discovering the truth is the goal, this must be implemented within every congregation. On an issue that claims to be the most important one a person can make, the church cannot afford not to.