Abstinence, atheism, and you
Offline Who wants to discuss everyone's favorite topic? So yesterday I had a thought..since abstinence is a largely Abrahamic concept, are atheists who subscribe to it basically following christian ( or abrahamic) doctrine? Now I did not say religious doctrine as I am sure there are rellgions that encourage sexual behaviour ( ie paganism)
Of course many people would say you could abstain from pre-martial sex for personal reasons, regardless of religious views. But is this just because of centuries of christian and conservative thinking? It is interesting to note that in my 2+ years of atheism, abstinence remains the hardest teaching or concept for me to overcome. It is drilled into one that pre-martial sex is one of the worst things you can do, or that virginity is so amazingly special one should never risk it improperly. Even when I tell myself we are just evolved primates, and no one gets up in arms about monkeys having sex. Marriage is a man made and largely religious institution, a concept that realitically makes no difference to you intimate physical actions. Why then is it so hard to think past?
What are your thought on atheist abstinence, pre-martial sex, and marriage in general?
Sorry if it doesn't make much since, just trying to organise my thoughts.
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
- Login to post comments
Haha you definitely misunderstand me.
Sex could be a reward? You mean for women? You mean for little girls who just hit puberty? haha
I didn't even MENTION religion, but now that you bring it up, isn't feeling obligated to have sex because it's biological as soon as puberty hits sort of the same as feeling obligated to abstain?
Look, I've been a teenage girl. I KNOW them. I know that having sex isn't "bad" for you emotionally, but in our culture there's this pressure to have sex so young and when you don't feel ready, causing girls to jump into things and end up feeling used or unhappy. I'm not saying this happens with every girl or all girls, but there's a definite difference between CHOOSING to have sex (which is fine) and feeling PRESSURED to have sex, thus going for it cause the guy whines about blue balls, feeling pressured to "mature" and be "womanly" faster than the others, ETC
Dude, I'm not saying that sex CAUSES anything (well, except potentially pregnancy/disease), BUT it can be USED as an unhealthy mechanism for perceived "social mobility" or "maturing". I'm simply promoting people to make a healthy decision based on when THEY feel ready, not when our culture dictates for them to be so.
Driving a car is not exactly having a guy stick his dick in you. Sex is very much a psychological act. If sex were so simple, we wouldn't be discussing this.
Let me make myself absolutely clear: I don't think it's bad to have sex. I think people should feel free to do what they want when they want and be comfortable with their bodies and sexuality. HOWEVER, it's not that simplistic when it comes to human nature. People are going to be idiots. They're going to spread AIDs because they don't feel like using a condom or because they feel ashamed to, or whatever. They're going to knock each other up at 13. They're going to get smashed, fuck each other and potentially cause a misunderstanding (such as whether or not they've raped the person)
You're right, abstinence doesn't help anyone emotionally. It doesn't DO anything. That's my point. It's a personal choice that I respect of people (usually a temporary choice until someone feels ready). My point is that people should FEEL ready so they best enjoy it and don't potentially end up feeling used, dissapointed or sick.
*Our world is far more complex than the rigid structure we want to assign to it, and we will probably never fully understand it.*
"Those believers who are sophisticated enough to understand the paradox have found exciting ways to bend logic into pretzel shapes in order to defend the indefensible." - Hamby
You raise excellent points Hamby, and I don't disagree with you. But I do understand teenage girls, and I've seen them go through enough bullshit to worry for their physical/psychological safety. That's not to say they shouldn't be sexually active or feel scared/ashamed of it. But I think anyone, male or female, deserves to feel comfortable and ready.
Ideally being "in love" would be nice, but I guess what I was trying to say is that one should feel comfortable, ready and open, not pressured, forced or uncomfortable. Nasty consequences arise from the latter. And I mean that for ANY sexual activity.
Things like rape, for instance, are so hard to concretely pin down that I feel it's essential people be educated and aware of what sex really entails. The AIDs epidemic in Africa is partly due to a deeply culturally ingrained notion that a woman who uses a condom is a "whore", people should be able to have multiple partners even when married, and parents shouldn't discuss sex with children. THIS is why sex is so complex. Not because of the act itself, but because of the cultural and physical dangers, including ones we didn't face 30 years ago such as AIDs.
*Our world is far more complex than the rigid structure we want to assign to it, and we will probably never fully understand it.*
"Those believers who are sophisticated enough to understand the paradox have found exciting ways to bend logic into pretzel shapes in order to defend the indefensible." - Hamby
Probably much so more for men. This is one thing many women don't understand about men, that women can use their sexuality to get men to behave in ways that are beneficial to them and to society. This is another reason why preaching abstinence to women is not good for them or society.
Yes you are right pressure is wrong.
But for teenagers any new experience can be scary. So I think a lot of young people that practice 'abstinence' are either scared of sex or lack self confidence to find a sex partner. It should be up to parents and society to remove this fear of the unknown with facts and counseling to give young people self confidence to pursue sex partners.
Well there's pressure to have sex and pressure to not have sex. Both are problems for me.
I think a lot of the disappointment young women feel is from disinformation they receive. Girls are given the 'Prince Charming' myth instead of the men are not naturally monogamous scientific fact. Also not explaining how sex and attraction work from a scientific perspective but only a romantic(i.e. delusional )point of view.
But young people should feel ready when the hormones kick in. The only reason not to feel ready is dysfunctional, unhealthy environmental factors such as religious indoctrination, abuse, neglect and misinformation about sex.
True. But the abstainence promoters claim that sex is always dangerous and therefore avoided. With proper instruction, equipment and practice it is way safer than driving. So this 'sex is so dangerous' argument is BS.
Fair enough. We can agree that if people decide to not have sex, it is best done for rational reasons and not because of religious guilt and misinformation.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
I wouldn't call a week of keeping it in your pants abstinence. I was going to say that once a person is no longer a virgin I don't consider them abstinent, but at further thought that doesn't make much sense. I think alot of people have a classical idea that abstinence is waiting until marriage, or being a monk. I battling to even define what I think abstinence is now.
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
I take the word literally (like that's a surprise to anyone). To abstain is simply to not do something by one's own will.
Abstinence until marriage I can't defend. Teen-hood and young adulthood are periods where people are exploring and defining themselves, and their sexuality is clearly part of that exploration. It seems important to be able to make mistakes in the sexual arena while still supported by parents, and guided by education.
Abstinence as celibacy I really have no way of defending. No one gains anything tangible from denying something so basic from their lives. And if the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church is an example of the results of celibacy, well, obviously it's a bad idea.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
True, but when it comes to sexual abstinence I don't think the people that teach abstinence only mean for one week
Is it so terrible to go through the teens with no sexual contact? Again,this is just me, but I don't see the need for 16 year olds to engage in it, let alone the 13 year olds that do these days.
I don't think most parents would be that supportive of their teens having sex.
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
There does not appear to be any objective reason for teens to abstain from sexual contact. I suggest that there may be objective reason for teens to engage in such contact while it's still a matter of exploration of self and relationships while still under the care of adults, so no "crisis" goes unguided or unsupported - producing a greater number of adults with workable, healthy attitudes toward sex.
Current attitudes are emotionally driven ideologies. Bleh.
"Anyone can repress a woman, but you need 'dictated' scriptures to feel you're really right in repressing her. In the same way, homophobes thrive everywhere. But you must feel you've got scripture on your side to come up with the tedious 'Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve' style arguments instead of just recognising that some people are different." - Douglas Murray
People are sexual and they become entirely aware of this at around the age of 13. That you don't 'see the need' for 16 year olds or 13 year olds to engage in sexual activity is your own failing. And it's a big failing. Perhaps you don't recall being a horny teenager? Maybe you were a castrate? It isn't so much a need as it is a very strongly driven biological imperative, never mind the social aspects of sexuality and sexual exploration in humans. In fact, it would be wrong to preclude the possibility of teens from exploring sex since it would undoubtedly prove detrimental to their over all sexual development.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
I have yet to collect on all that swinging sex I thought I had coming to me when I became an atheist at age 14 (in 1974); much less the polyamorous versions I thought we'd have by now from all the science fiction (like Robert Heinlein's novels) I read as a youngster. Ironically it looks like the guys in those fringe Mormon sects who pick up additional teenage wives every couple of years have all the fun.
Unfortunately, atheism in itself doesn't make you a swinging bachelor. It's a shame, I guess. It would be a lot easier sell if we could promise teenage guys all the sex they wanted in exchange for ditching the idea of a god who doesn't even want them to masturbate.
Once again, I will offer my syllogistic explanation of why atheism doesn't do anything at all, and why it literally doesn't lead to anything at all:
1. There probably is no god.
2. ???
3. Therefore, ???
Without a second premise, nothing follows at all. I know your post was kind of tongue in cheek, and I'm not trying to go all serious on you, but a lot of people think of atheists as being sex obsessed playboys and loose women who shun marriage. In fact, atheists with no social skills, poor hiegene, self esteem problems, and gigantic warts on their noses do just as poorly at getting laid if they were theists. (That's a general statement, and not directed at you, AA. I have no idea about your warts or self esteem. ) The only real difference I see consistently between atheists and theists is how they feel about having sex -- not how they practice sex.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
I went the first 19 years of my life without so much as holding a girls hand, yet I lived to tell the tale.
I am a teenager
Again,I guess you don't know what you're missing until you try it. Now I'm not trying to argue with, you are in fact right. Now that I have a girlfriend to err..explore with, I'm having a hard time shaking my previous religious teachings
Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible
Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.
What if the hormones kick in at age 10?
Is it really *rational* to expect children to have sex with each other at an age known for impulsiveness and naitivity? I say this because there really are "dangers" to having sex in this "day and age"...
And I definitely disagree with your blanket reasoning about the ONLY reasons not to feel ready. What if someone simply doesn't WANT to make sex part of their life right away, especially when there is so much that comes with it? Sex isn't just bang and go for everyone. If that were the case, people would never find a mate. Having sex typically DOES increase feelings of intimacy and closeness between two people. It can make a friendship feel awkward. This isn't about society or religion. It's about human social behavior and human nature.
I just finished a memoir written by a girl who did exactly what you said. She slept around since age 14 and had sex with multiple partners. She didn't care about her reputation; in fact, it only made her feel more "special". She found a boyfriend that took her out at night and had sex with her very intimately. She felt loved and happy, until she found out that he had a girlfriend on the side. She convinced herself that she didn't care, but the truth was she was in love with this guy. The guy comes to a house she's babysitting at one night drunk and practically destroys it, scaring the children. The police are called and she turns him in unwillingly. He and his friends "consensually" gang rape her, although the consensus is very meak and she is crying during the ordeal.
Where were her parents? Worried, upset but mostly absent from her life because she pushed them away. In reality, not every parent is always there for their kids to help them, guide them and teach them, especially during adolescent years. Sex blurs the line between care and use. It can be a tool or a weapon. It's not just happy humping..
*Our world is far more complex than the rigid structure we want to assign to it, and we will probably never fully understand it.*
"Those believers who are sophisticated enough to understand the paradox have found exciting ways to bend logic into pretzel shapes in order to defend the indefensible." - Hamby
Peppermint, you raise some really great points. I guess I should be really clear about the beliefs I hold with regard to teens and sex:
I hold that there is nothing inherent in human sexuality that can be used as a basis for a blanket prohibition on teens having sex. That is, there's nothing about sex itself that indicates that if two teens are emotionally ready, they shouldn't have sex. IIRC, more than half of pretty much eveybody has had sex by the time they turn 20, and I don't see anything inherently wrong with that.
As you say, sex is not without emotional consequence, and any comprehensive sex education ought to make that abundantly clear without trying to make it scary. Women are more prone to emotional attachment from sex initially, and teenage girls should ask themselves whether they're ready for a full-blown committed relationship. If they're not, it is absolutely reasonable for them to restrict sex to petting or other less intense activities. (For that matter, it's perfectly reasonable for adults to do the same thing.)
Likewise, young men should be taught that even if they're capable of having sex without emotional attachment (and a lot of them are) they should take into account that their partner may not be so capable, and if there isn't a clear understanding between them, they should proceed with caution, and might want to consider putting off intercourse. After all, there aren't many things to put a crimp in a teenage boy's life like two or three hormonal girls all stalking him at once.
Another thing to consider is that before a girl is old enough to legally make her own decisions, she might have real trouble on her hands if she gets pregnant. It's one thing for an adult woman to make decisions about her own body, but in states that have... ahem... interesting laws about parental consent for abortions, an accidental pregnancy could be a very big deal.
While I'm on that topic, if a girl is not virtually 100% certain that she is not prepared to be a mother, and would opt for abortion should an accidental pregnancy occur, young men would be very, very well advised to confine their penises to mouths and hands. Likewise for the girls... there are lots of teenage boys who would be thrilled to get blowjobs as opposed to nothing.
In short, there are no evolutionary reasons why we should discourage teens from intercourse, but there are often very good cultural or legal reasons for doing so. I recommend a case by case approach, not a blanket statement, though.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Wait, you have a girlfriend again, Loc? When did the good news happen - and for Pete's sake, why didn't you share on Skype?
Eff that Jesus crap. Sex is good for you (not to mention her)!
You've got a whole cave full of treasure in front of you, Loc. Get spelunking!
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
One of my ex girlfriends used to say she was spelunking when she gave me a blow job. That always puzzled me. Seems like it would only apply to playing with a woman.
Erm... well, actually, I guess some men are into the whole prostate thing... not me.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Well I'm not in favor of pressuring anyone. But I don't believe in demonizing or avoiding it and I believe if they are trained and given accurate information it can be made safe. It's only because society and parents tell kids sex is this big traumatic event that it is a big traumatic event. You can prepare kids for puberty by educating them about sex, so it's not a big when it happens. Or you can not talk about it and make it very scary, then when a girl has her first period it is very traumatic.
Well why do we let 10 year olds snow ski, ride bikes on city streets and 16 year olds drive cars? Why are these activities not too dangerous for impulsive youngsters to do? Because we can teach children to do them safely, and make them use safety equipment. But sex has all this cultural and religious baggage, so we don't instruct children about it.
Maybe for many people a lot doesn't have to come with it.
If you remember high school, the people that didn't date or express an interest in the opposite sex where usually shy and insecure. If they had been counseled and educated properly, dating and sex could have helped them overcome their problems.
The reason nature gave us hormones is to make us ready for sex. Sure people have different sex drives. But if a child of say 15+ years has no interest in exploring the possibility of sex, I'd say they have a psychological or physical abnormality that should be treated.
It's like your saying intimacy and sex is so great it should be avoided. I say it should be prepared for.
Children pick up on societies and families attitudes toward sex. A big part of the problem is children especially girls are given the romantic view of sex not the scientific understanding. So they make the mistake of picking a bad partner or becoming too dependent on the other person so when the relationship ends they are hurt. In a sexually liberated society this would not happen, children would be properly educated.
A ski area that takes a rational approach to safety is a good place to go and enjoy. And children can do it when they are physically ready, trained properly and prepared. Why is sex so different to you? Are teenagers incapable of learning to do it without getting hurt?
What if a child was too shy and afraid to leave the house and socialize? Do we tell them just to wait till they're 25 to leave the house and make friends? Avoid all the things that can hurt you with friendship and socializing, or do they need education and counseling to help them get in the game?
I'm not encouraging this behavior unless this something she wants and understands the implications. Typically these girls come from dysfunctional homes where they look for love from a guy because they didn't get it from parents(especially dads). Because we have dysfunctional families is hardly a reason to take an irrational or prudish attitude toward sex.
But some girls have a high sex drive and like to see what sex is like with different guys. It's possible they could come from a loving home and be properly educated to do it in a healthy way. This girl obviously needed life coaching and better science instruction about dating and sex before she was ready. She was ill prepared because of prudish/unscientific attitudes about sex.
Obviously she never read Hamby's essays on sex before she got started. She was given the fairy tales and romance novels view of sexuality and not a scientific understanding of what sex is and how men behave. This is a great cultural problem. I don't understand why all the feminist don't address the problem of girls not being taught to think rationally especially when it comes to men, sex and babies.
Obviously she was not trained on how to pick the right guy or taught to dump a guy a soon a she sees signs that he's a jerk. But this happens to 24, 34, 44, 54... year old women. Sure we get better at picking a partner with experience. But life often teaches us lessons the hard way. This is not a reason to avoid living.
That's why we need education in the schools and libraries as well as social workers and counselors to help people out. The bottom line is her problem was ignorance and not having a place to get good information and counsel. But this will never happen with the religious puritans around.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
That's what I was saying.
*Our world is far more complex than the rigid structure we want to assign to it, and we will probably never fully understand it.*
"Those believers who are sophisticated enough to understand the paradox have found exciting ways to bend logic into pretzel shapes in order to defend the indefensible." - Hamby
But the culture and laws never change if everyone just goes along with status quo. So we're stuck in a society with a very unhealthy attitude toward sex. The same could be said of atheism "there are good cultural and legal reasons to discourage teens from becoming free thinking atheists".
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
I think that was slightly vague, but I guess I´d have to say I have some interest. But I´m 15, and that interest is pretty mild at the time. I´m very focused right now on learning what I can about mathematics and physics.
''Black Holes result from God dividing the universe by zero.''
What a great thread. I don't visit this forum enough.
As a lifestyle educator who coaches people on their relationship alternatives I am really impressed with the insights and perspectives employed by so many of the posters here. I don't mean to come across like a condescending ass, but sexuality is a subject that otherwise rational people can lose their objectivity over.
Idealistically speaking...Once consenting adults who are aware of the implications of their actions make a choice as to the nature, the manner and the frequency they decide to engage in conjugation, they should be able to do so without fear of a "moralistic" backlash from sex-o-phobic conservatives who would impose religion based ethics that they feel must be unilatterally apllied to everyone. If only it were the case.
Between religion and the Self Help industry, they have made it extremely difficult to enagage in sexual activity without enduring guilt on some level...I am presently writing a book on the harmful effects of the self help industry on contemporary marriage.
Our government has actually composed an "Absitinence Education Standard"...and if you haven't yet seen it, let me tell ya, it's quite a hoot. It suggest (among many other things) that sex outside the confines of marriage can pose seriously harmful psychological effects (although it doesn't mention the effects of being sexually frustrated)...and that as Americans, we should all abstain from sex until we are married, and then have sex with only that person until death do you part...
One can reasonably assume that the religious political lobby has had some impact on how we educate our children about sexuality...and how we have come to deny our natural inclinations, and view tham as something to be ashamed of... The parasites in the self help industry has expertly taken advantage of these perceptions... Apparently, that god fella isn't to fond of us having sex, unless its with one person for our entire lives, with the lights out in the missionary position.
Sorry if this amounts to non-sensical rambling...I am caffiene deprived
www.RichWoodsBlog.com
A self-help guide for breaking the addiction the self-help books? Sounds like holding an AA meeting in a bar.
If one buys a 'self-help' book, isn't it know longer self-help?
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
I don't write "self-help" books....so the answer to your question is: Yes.
www.RichWoodsBlog.com
Of course, before we condemn the industry, we must ask: Are self help books harmful because self help books are inherently harmful, or because the ones that are out there are wrong?
Is it possible that there is a yet-to-be-written self help book that would be right?
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
The problem is you can't make any money off the message. Just like atheism, you can't make any money by promoting it. Just like religion, 'self-help' perpetuates itself by promising insecure, dependant people with answers that it never delivers on.
The book would basically say 'stop looking outside yourself for meaning, morality and answers.' The message would be too short to make a book and it would basically say stop looking for books for answers. Like a psychiatrist that could cure people with one session, they don't exist cause they don't make money fixing the problem.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
I dunno. This is something I've been thinking about off and on for a couple of years. There are atheists who understand their insignificance perfectly well and still live happy lives. Granted, their explanations of their own happiness are usually unsatisfactory because they don't make any promises to anybody else that it'll work for them, too.
I guess I just believe that a good marketer can sell ice to an eskimo. I'm thinking of this ad I used to hear on the local radio for some cough remedy. The motto was, "It tastes terrible. And it works." Rational materialism has a lot steeper hill to climb since it's not an immediate fifteen minute fix like cough medicine, and there are a lot of prejudices against it. Even so, there's a market -- and I believe you, EXC, are a part of it -- who are kind of turned on by the idea that you are doing something that's more intellectually honest, or physically tougher, than what everybody else is doing. If someone can sell you on the idea that you're a better person for taking the hard road, I think you're likely to want to do it.
Maybe that's an approach that will work: "Science -- It's really hard, but it works." "Materialism -- It takes a lot of thinking, but at least you'll be right and they'll be wrong."
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
I get your point Hamby...I think that anything, (self help or not) written about seeking truth & honesty will ultimately help the person reading it. I like to think that is what we are all in search of here... I think Dr Keith Ablow is set apart from most of the self help industry in that he is neither small minded, nor judgmental.
My problem with the self-help business is that (with few exceptions) they are myopic, self serving scumbags akin to drug dealers in your schoolyard who will sell whatever drivel they can as long as it coincides with their business models (Dr Phil in particular is a vapid jizzbucket) ,....regardless of whether or not it is based in honesty...
They tend to deal in absolutes rather than employ reasonable sensibilities...no where is this more true than with Absinence, and sexuality...where they preach traditional monogamy as the singular standard to achieve marital happiness, and sumarily bash any secular or variant lifestyle or marital practice that falls outside or their narrow minded comfort zones..
They reley on marital discontent to perpetuate their business... Being hard up, sexless cohabitants rather than interdependant lover consorts and best friends is what puts money in their pockets. Christ they suck donkey cock.
www.RichWoodsBlog.com
You have a gift for language. Also, I can't disagree with anything you've said.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
My problem with the self help industry is that after someone reads a single book that doesn't even address 1% of 1% of life, these idiots think they suddenly have all the answers to work with. It isn't necessarily the material that's the problem, it's the people using it.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.