How did I get here? Pt. 1

As most of you know, I originally came out as an atheist on my other blog channel in which I am keeping folks up to date, week by week, on my pregnancy. To read the post, click here. But I've also decided that for my followers to truly understand why I believe the way I do, I'll have to let them into my life, slowly. 

Some of these posts will get personal, and some of them, such as this one, maybe not so much. But they will all let you a little further into my mind, and maybe make my feelings a little easier to comprehend. So the overlying question for all of these posts is going to be, "How did I get here?"

Get where? Well to my line of thinking. Today we're going to start with answer number one to that question.

I got fed up with the actions of the 'Christians' in my life.

I know not all Christians act the same, but people can only put up with so much shit before they turn away from something for good. I don't want to make some terrible analogy here, but it's like eating.. you can only put so much into your mouth, chew, and swallow, before your stomach becomes full and you have to walk away. That's exactly what happened. I listened and watched the people around me who called themselves "Christians," and I realized I had enough of their drama, hatred, cruel judgments.. It was time for me to walk away.

So I guess it's example time...

A: A man walks into Hardee's, every single day. He walks to every single unoccupied table and places a note card. On that note card, the Bible verse of the day. He walks into the men's restroom, pulls out his scotch tape, and tapes a note card above each urinal, then one to the inside of the bathroom stall.He then exits the restroom and finds the occupied tables he missed earlier, and goes to the people. "Have you found Jesus?" (person answers) If no, "Let me help you..." If yes, conversation about how great Jesus is begins. 
This man goes to church the following Sunday and proceeds to tell the pastor what happened. He tells a tale of how no one is following the word of God, and how the world will surely become condemned to Hell because of the amount of disbelief. What did his pastor say? "YOU ARE NOT GOD, AND NEED TO QUIT TRYING TO ACT LIKE YOU ARE. People are free to believe as they want, and trying to force them to believe in the Lord is not going to make them want to. If someone comes to you with questions, by all means, bring them to the Lord, but until then, you cannot make them believe." The man wouldn't have this, he leaves that church.

This same man, he's a family member, arrives with his wife to Thanksgiving dinner at my house. The television in the living room is on, but dinner is ready. All the men in the living room seem to be talking to one another, and not paying much attention to the television. My mother shuts it off after announcing that the food was ready. There was one person watching that TV. He now insists that our house is filled with the spirit of the devil, because my mom turned the TV off while he was watching it.This insistence continued for SIX years.

Keep in mind, this is only my FIRST example. This man is the first Christian I actually remember in my life, who went to church everyday and read the Bible everyday. He followed the Christian laws, and tried to promote Christianity. But he was also the first person who showed me that if you believed differently than he did, you were WRONG, you were going to hell, and there was no saving you. There was no middle ground, it was his way or he highway, and for the most part humanity didn't deserve to be in God's kingdom, unless they were exactly like him.

B: Open up my computer and log into Facebook.Start scrolling through my newsfeed, laughing at all the pictures, reading the witty updates and song lyrics, then I hit a very, very long update. I decide, well, why the hell not, I'm gonna read it. In the update a "Christian" man calls out a handful of other people for their actions and how they are ungodly, especially from people who "claim to be Christians." He quotes the Bible, showing how he's right. Some of the quotes are out of context, and he's breaking a few bible passage lessons himself. The post makes me want to scream. I comment, calling him out on how his behavior is ungodly, and he flips shit. "This doesn't concern you, stay out of it, blah, blah, blah." 

First and foremost, a lesson to all: IF YOU POST SOMETHING ON FACEBOOK, IN A PUBLIC WAY (IE: STATUS UPDATE, GROUP POST, WHATEVER), YOU MAKE IT OTHER PEOPLES' BUSINESS. THERE ARE PRIVATE MESSAGES FOR A REASON! This was the first time I was shown how people misuse, misinterpret, and twist the facts of the Bible to suit their needs. He called these other people hypocrites, because they claim to be Christian then act another way. Yet, after he lived with us for years, I know for a fact that he lies, then turns around and calls himself a Christian. He does other "ungodly" things as well, but it doesn't matter. Just breaking one commandment once will condemn you to Hell (see my blog post from yesterday). The Bible also says not to judge, yet there he was, judging others in an open forum.

C: I'm really trying to believe, to figure out why others believe, and to be a 'Christian' like my mom. I'm going to church every Sunday, and I've finally a found a church that feels like a family. I've bragged to my boyfriend about how great it is, gotten him to help with the Easter play. And I've talked him into to going with me to a service. We walk in with my mom, and along with the program a pamphlet is thrust into my hands. I take my seat, and open it up. I almost get up and walk out. The pamphlet was sent out by MassResistance, a Massachusetts group against the legalization of homosexual marriage. They are listing all the ways it effects everyone in society. Some of the points are straight up dumb, and I'm getting more and more frustrated by the second.
To see the pamphlet, click here.

My two best friends are homosexual. I see no problem with people loving who they want. I don't care if homosexual couples are referred to as normal. I don't care if the Bible states that homosexuality is a sin, it also states that judging others is a sin. But that's what this church was doing! Blatantly and in the open. What the hell does it matter if that person over there is gay? If you yourself are not gay, and aren't judging the person for being gay.. you aren't breaking the rules of the Bible. So what the hell does it matter?!?! Why are you forcing this pamphlet on me? Am I incapable of reading the title and deciding for myself? No, that's not it. This was the first time that I had a body of religious people try to force their agenda and beliefs onto myself, and I didn't like it. This was also the first time, I openly told my mother, I would not be returning to the church.

D: My fiance and I move in together, I become pregnant. We're not yet married. An openly "christian" man then refuses to be our friend because "he doesn't agree with our actions." Yet, he is also openly gay and that's perfectly fine. 

That was my last straw. I'm not even going to explain why, because I think it's fairly simple why this kind of behavior would piss me off.

That's not all of them, but I don't feel the need to go into anymore detail. I don't want to constantly repeat myself as to why the actions pissed me off, when they are more-or-less the same, just committed by different people. 

Anywho.
Have a great day! And stay tuned for part 2. I've already got an idea brewing so it may be posted sooner than you think. <3

So wait, who's going to hell?

Okay, I'm going to probably be blogging twice today. I was originally going to be blogging once, but I found this gem and thought I would do a single blog about it because the original was getting extremely long.

After checking out Ray Comfort's Facebook page (if you haven't been banned check it out, or read the blog that will be following soon), I found a site listed in his websites. It's called NeedGod. What's it do? Well, you take a simple 8 question test and it provides the answers to two questions:

Are you a good person according to God's standards?
And if so, are you good enough to go to Heaven?

The questions:
1. Have you ever told a lie? Yes, I have told at least one lie or No, I have never told a lie.
2. Have you given money to charity? Yes, I have given money to charity, or No, I have not given money to charity.
3. Have you gone to church regularly? Yes, I have gone to church regularly, or No, I have not gone to church regularly.
4. Have you ever stolen anything (no matter how small)? Yes, I have stolen at least once in my life, or No, I have never stolen anything in my life.
5. Have you ever used "God," "Jesus," or "Christ" as a curse word (ex: 'Oh my G-d!')? Yes, I have used God's name in vain at least once in my life, or No, I have never, even once, used God's name in vain.
6. Have you made it a practice to read the Bible regularly? Yes, I read the Bible regularly, or No, I do not read the Bible regularly.
7. Have you ever looked at someone and had lustful thoughts? Yes, I have lusted at least once in my life, or No, I have never lusted in my life.
8. Have you ever broken the first commandment? (Don't worry there's a link you can follow on the test if you don't know what that it is). Yes, I have broken the first commandment, or No, I have not broken the first commandment.

The first time I took the test, I used my honest answers: Yes, Yes, No, Yes, Yes, No, Yes, and No.
After taking the test you get your "score." With almost every question (not in order) they give you a little paragraph about your answer and what the Bible says about it.

My scoring.
1: Have you ever told a lie?
  -The ninth of the ten commandments is "You shall not lie." According to the God's standards, I am a liar. Revelation 21:8 says, "...and all liars - their fate is in the fiery lake of burning sulfur" (NLT). 
7: Have you ever looked at someone and had lustful thoughts?
  -The seventh of ten commandments is "You shall not commit adultery." According to God's standards, I am an adulterer. "But I say, anyone who anyone who even looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matthew 5:28, NLT). They also quote 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10, "Those who... commit adultery... -none of these will inherit the kingdom of God" (NLT).
5: Have you ever used "God," "Jesus," Or "Christ" as a curse word?
This one had some really good stuff in it! So here we go, some of it will be word-for-word because it was too good to pass up!
  -If you have ever used these as a curse word "what you've done is take the name of the God who gave you life, and you've used it as if it were a "four-letter" filth word to express disgust." According to God's standards, I am a blasphemer. Here they quote Leviticus, "Anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel" (24:16, NLT).
2,3,6: Have you given money to charity, gone to church regularly, read the bible regularly?
  -"When we display our righteous deeds, they are nothing but filthy rags. Like autumn leaves, we wither and fall, and our sins sweep us away like the wind" (Isaiah 64:6, NLT). The site then goes on to say, what this verse pretty much says. The "good deeds" of reading the Bible, going to church, or donating to charity does not make up for the commandments that I have broken. PERIOD. 

There is one more, but I'll save that one for later, because it ties in with my main point.
So anyways, according to the site, which says it's according to God's standards, I am guilty. Then you are asked if you believe you would go to Heaven or Hell, I put Hell, because naturally if you're found guilty.. odds are you're going to Hell. I was correct! WOOHOO! I'm going to Hell. I was then asked if that concerned me. Answering honestly, I chose No. This is where they call out the atheists and any other non-believer.

"Perhaps you feel safe because you don't believe in Hell. This can be likened to standing in the middle of a busy highway and shouting, "I don't believe in trucks!" Your belief or disbelief in trucks will not change reality. The same applies here. Your disbelief in Hell will not cause it to cease to exist."

So, for shits and giggles I decided I would go back and retake the test, only this time, I would give the answers dutiful Christians would give (damn near the opposite of EVERY ONE OF MY ANSWERS).
They would be: No, Yes, Yes, No, No, Yes, No, No 
And the score?
I'm going to skip over the spiels for the ones I've already covered, and skip to number 8.
8. Have you ever broken the first commandment?
The first commandment is "You shall have no other gods before me." Though they didn't quote scripture (yet) I found a passage that mimics what they said, "You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind" (Matthew 22:37, NLT). They added in strength. Now, is when they quote the scripture.  "The Lord looks down from Heaven on the entire human race; He looks to see if anyone is truly wise, if anyone seeks God. But no, all have turned away; all have become corrupt. Not one does good, not a single one" (Psalm 14: 2-3, NLT)! The site says, that this passage says NO ONE has kept the first commandment, and by stating that I have not broken the first commandment, I am a liar. 

Now based on the previous spiels about the answers, do you think I'm going to be found innocent or guilty? Well, I thought innocent... I was wrong. Even though I kept 9 commandments thus far throughout my entire life (false), I didn't keep the first one, so I'm guilty! Now, how about Heaven or Hell? Going with guilty, I picked Hell... And guess what.. I'm still going to HELL!

So, I did it one more time, but I changed the last answer to Yes, I have broken this commandment. And guess what, I'm still guilty. So, for recap: I have kept 9 of the 10 commandments, and admitted my fault in breaking the other. But I'm still guilty. And I would still go to Hell.

This time, since I apparently cannot win, and reaching Heaven is unattainable, I picked Yes, going to hell concerns me. And you know what site said.. IT SHOULD CONCERN ME!
"Hell is so horrible that you would be better off tearing out your own eyes than ending up there for all eternity..." (See Mark 9:43-48). Then it asks if I know what God did so I wouldn't have to spend an eternity in Hell. Just for some more shits and giggles, I picked no.

The start by giving us some very good imagery, of an event that, in our society, would NEVER happen (my imagery will not be as good)!
-You're in court, you've been found guilty of serious crimes, you either pay $500,000 or you go to prison. You're broke, you're going to prison. A random stranger runs up, gives a $500,000 check to the judge, and you are free. 
It then goes on to say that this is what God did by sending Jesus to the cross. And that if you repent (CONFESS your sins), you will be allowed into Heaven. Now wait a minute... the last time I took that damn test, I confessed to breaking the first commandment, and I still got sent to Hell? 
Then they go on to tell you how to pray. Psalm 51 is supposed to be your model.
It then says that you need to start reading the Bible, everyday. But wait another damn minute... didn't it say earlier that those "good deeds" such as reading the Bible don't matter? Then why do I have to do it?

So my point?
I feel like this test justifies my disbelief. Why would I believe in Christianity when I'm always being told that according to God's standards I'm no-good? I'm a liar, a thief, a blasphemer, my good-deeds don't matter, an adulterer, "illegitimate."  Why should I believe in something that constantly tells me I'm guilty? Why should I believe in an afterlife in paradise, when apparently, that afterlife is unobtainable? I don't see any reasons for it. 
The "illegitimate part does not come from this test. After some research of my own, I found other ways I would not be "up to God's standards." I was born to a teenage slut, quite literally. She didn't even know what race I was going to be, to this day she doesn't know who my father is. I was, obviously, born out of wedlock, making me "illegitimate." My womb-donor (I was adopted at 5 weeks old) and sperm-donor, will NEVER be married. I will always be "illegitimate." Deuteronomy 23:2 states that any illegitimate child cannot be admitted to the assembly of the Lord, nor can their descendants. 

Now before any, possible, Christians reading this jump off the handle about how the test must be rigged, or was probably by some atheist trying to prove a point, scroll down and look at who the test is really by. 

Living Waters
In other words: Ray Comfort. You have one of your own to thank for making people feel that Christianity isn't worth the effort, because no matter what they do they can never win.

Does their religion really matter?

So, I was supposed to be continuing on today with part 2 of my previous post, but instead I found something more interesting that I would like to cover. Also, after looking into a few other people who have responded, I found some really great videos and figured you could watch those instead. The Amazing Atheist's video is my favorite.

So what am I going to post on today? Well this morning I found a Facebook post and I shared it on the Cult of Dusty page. If you don't know who or what that is, please check it out here. Anyways, the post sparked a lot of comments and a lot of debate, plus some name-calling, and other things. So I figured, why the hell not? I'll blog about it.

So in the original post, which you can read fully here, Janice Galloway stated a man (Wendell Kelley) came into her front yard and shot her golden lab. She stated that her 13-year-old daughter, who was home sick from school, ran outside after hearing the first shot and was screaming, begging the man not kill her dog. The man then stopped, looked at the child, and shot three more times. She also included that this man was "suppose ably a Christian church goer." In my opinion, his religion DOES NOT matter.

Then in another post she said her daughter was standing next to the dog as the man shot the last three rounds.

I'll admit, I didn't really do my research before posting this to the Cult of Dusty page, but I was more interested in other people's opinions on that matter. 

Someone posted a link to an actual news article of the incident, in which all parties were interviewed. After I looked at both posts by Ms. Galloway, and the news article I found some discrepancies. 

In the news article, by Andy Cordan of News 2, Kelley says that lab approached him and he tapped the dog in the face to get him to move. He was pressured into his truck in his driveway.

*This word, "tapped" really bothers me. It is a very subjective word. What I think of as a tap, and what Mr. Kelley thinks of as a tap could be two very different things. In fact, his version of a "tap" could be my version of "slap."*

He then says he went into his home...

*Okay, so Mr. Kelley did something right. He's being pestered by a neighbor's dog, who is showing hostile attitudes.. so he enters his home. Good choice, or was it?*

...and got his semi-automatic rifle, then exited to check the mail.

*Let me make sure I have this right.. There is a dog, showing hostile attitudes outside your house. You make it safely inside, and instead of just calling animal control, and getting your mail AFTER they have done their job. You grab a gun, and go check your damn mail? It couldn't wait?*

Mr. Kelley said the dog approached him again with his ears laid back. He also said the dog was snarling, making him feel unsafe. The dog was 8 feet away when Mr. Kelley says he fired a "few" shots. He also says he saw the child, AFTER he fired the last shot, and when he saw her, he stopped shooting.

*That paints a very different picture than the one Mrs. Galloway did. She said that this man, stared straight at her daughter as he fired the last 3 round into the family dog. He says, he stopped shooting as soon as he saw her. So, what did the 13-year-old say?*

In the interview with Andy Cordan, Peggy Galloway said she exited the house after she heard the first shot...

*Janice got that part right.*

She was half-way up the driveway when Mr. Kelley fired the second shot, at the top of the road when he fired the third, and running to him when he fired the fourth. AFTER the fourth shot, Peggy said she screamed "Please, don't shoot my dog."

*Now, if she didn't scream until AFTER the fourth shot, isn't it logical to assume that Mr. Kelley had no clue that she was even there? Also, if Peggy had to run down the driveway and to the road before she was near the shooting, isn't it logical to assume that the dog was NOT in his own front yard?*

Now that I've analyzed the articles, and found the problems with the posts made my the victim, it's easy to see that this case is one big.. he said/she said case and both sides did break Tennessee Laws. There was supposedly a witness, that contacted Janice and told her what had happened, but he/she was not interviewed for the article, so I don't know what they saw.  

Animal Laws

On the Cult of Dusty page, a user commented:

"The owner failed at her responsibility to her pet. The shoot everything in the neighborhood neighbor, is questionable, wish we had his side. He's probably a psycho, but we don't know."

The person got a lot of grief for this comment, and the rest that she posted, but she was 100% correct. 

In §44-8-408 part A. "owner" is defined as a person who, at the time of the offense, regularly harbors, keeps, or exercises control over the dog. Part B: states that they have committed an offense if the animal goes on the premises of another without consent or on a highway, public road, street, or any place generally open to the public.

In §44-8-413 Part a1 says that the owner has a duty to keep their dog under reasonable control and from running at large at ALL TIMES.

*In my opinion, if Peggy had to come running out of the house when she heard the first shot, her dog was NOT under reasonable control. Yes, dogs can be trained to stay in the yard when let out to go potty, but the animal should still be watched, especially if there are other people outside.*
Part a2 says that if the animal causes injury to another person that the owner is held liable, regardless of whether the dog has shown any dangerous tendencies before.

*This goes back to Mr. Kelley stating that he was acting in self-defense. Mrs. Galloway tried to say that wasn’t true, because the dog was good with kids, but based on this part of the statute, that doesn’t matter.*
Part b5 says the owner of the animal is NOT liable if: the injured person was enticing, disturbing, alarming, harassing, or otherwise provoking the situation.

*In my opinion, Mr. Kelley did provoke the situation. He didn’t need to “tap” the dog on the nose, nor did he need to re-exit his house. He could have simply called authorities.*

This is probably the biggest one for this case though:
§39-14-205 states that it is an offense to knowingly or unlawfully kill the animal of another without the owner’s effective consent.
HOWEVER, killing an animal without consent is justifiable if the person acted under reasonable belief that the animal was creating an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury to him/herself or others.
*Now, as stated before, just because Mrs. Galloway says that her dog is friendly and good with kids, does not mean that her dog did not growl, snarl, or act menacingly toward Mr. Kelley, and based on this statute, if the dog did any of these things and Mr. Kelley felt endangered, he was legally justified to kill the animal.*

It is NOT JUSTIFIABLE to kill an animal without the owner’s permission, regardless of the animal’s actions, if the person is trespassing on the property of the owner of the animal.
*Statements made by Peggy Galloway herself, revealed that the man was not on the owner’s property.*

The liability of the shooter falls under §44-17-403, which states that if a pet is killed or injured to the point of death by unlawful and intentional, or negligent acts by another they can be fined up to $5,000. It also says, that the act MUST occur on the property of the deceased pet’s owner or caretaker or while under their control or supervision.

Handgun Laws

In the state of Tennessee, carrying a firearm is only an offense if the person carries with “the intent to go armed.”
*Mr. Kelley, entered and got his firearm, then exited again to get his mail. Based on these actions, in my opinion, he had the intent of using the gun.*

However, the person is not charged or convicted if they possessed, displayed, or employed a handgun in justifiable self-defense.

§39-17-1311 states that it is unlawful to possess or carry a firearm on the grounds of a public park, playground, civic center, or other building facility, area, or property of any municipal, county, or state government.
*If the dog was in a public road, it is very likely that the road was owned by the government. This statute means that regardless of where the event took place, Mr. Kelley could be in trouble with the law, whether that trouble be for shooting the dog, or simply carrying the fire arm.*

My opinions on the matter have been intermingled throughout this post, and can be seen in italics, but there is more to it.

Do I agree with what the man did?
NO! I think it would have been just as easy to WAIT to get the mail, and call the authorities after re-entering the house. As the child was home, it would have been better for everyone involved for animal control to return the dog to the house (if it had tags), or take it to the pound, where the owner would have had to pay a fine for breaking the leash law.

Do I agree with the woman posting these things on Facebook?

No, I feel she should have posted the story just as the reported did, and actually talked to her daughter first, considering she was “taking her husband to work” when the incident occurred. It really bothers me, that her own daughter’s story of events is so different than her own. I feel that she is trying to make the man look even more heartless than he already does, so that she can play the sympathy card.

Do I think it was pre-meditated?

The woman had stated that the man watched their house and waited until she and her husband were gone, unaware of the fact that their daughter was home. I’m not sure how the man could have been unaware that the daughter was home, unless it’s a normal habit to leave the dog outside, unleashed, when no one is around. So, from her story… No, I didn’t think it was premeditated. However; after reading the news article in which he stated he had made it back to his house safely, then grabbed his firearm and exited again, I do think it was premeditated. I mean really, you know a hostile animal is outside your house, you come out with a loaded gun. Are you seriously going to try to tell me you have no intentions of using it?

Is Mrs. Galloway to blame for the incident?
No! Just because her dog was unleashed, does not mean the man needed to shoot it. Again, he made it back to the safety of his house before he even had the firearm in hand. SHE IS NOT TO BLAME!

Does his religion matter?
In her original post, Mrs. Galloway found it was necessary to add that Mr. Kelley was “suppose ably a Christian church goer.” In this case, I don’t think that matters. I feel that she is just trying to slander all Christian’s names by comparing them to this one man, and that I’m not okay with. Just because someone is a Christian, doesn’t mean there aren’t going to be some crazies, or that they won’t protect themselves when they need to.

Anyways, I’ve now told you all about my opinions, and the laws I’ve found surrounding this topic. Please feel free to share your opinions and share this post. Subscribe to my blog for the latest updates on new posts, and if you have Facebook, check out the Cult of Dusty page. I post there frequently. (:

Creationism V. Logic Part 1.

Okay, so as most of you reading this know, a couple days ago Bill Nye the Science Guy debated with Ken Ham about Creationism.
To watch the video, click here. 

In light of this debate, 22 pictures of Creationists holding up their messages to Evolutionists went viral. For the original post, click here. After being up for a few days, someone decided to DEFINE these posts. To see that, click here.

Now, I know this has been done before, but I'm coming from a side of strictly logic here, so I'm going to post my responses to these messages. I've numbered the slides, 1-22, but my post will jump around. So you may have to reference back. All of my other references will be hyper-linked, like those above. Any questions? Let me know!

Key to this blog post:
Original Question
Translation from secondary post.
Just information I found, or feel.
My questions to these people.

1. Bill Nye, are you influencing the minds of children in a positive way?
Have you ever seen Bill's website? No? Then I suggest you check it out for yourself! He has two missions: 1. To help foster a scientifically literate society and 2. To make people everywhere understand and appreciate the science that makes our world work.
Now, Sir, regardless of whether you want to believe it or not, the children of the world are going to encounter some sort of science on a day to day basis, so don't you think giving them a general knowledge is a good influence?
"I'm worried that kids who think won't take 'Because I said so' as an answer."
In my opinion, kids need to be able to think! Most parents, and I do want to say most, have dreams of their children going into a career field in which they make a lot of money. Whether those dreams be because they simply want what's best for their child, or because (like my dad says) they want their children to take care of them when they turn old and gray and can't do it anymore, they have these dreams. How do you expect your child to make it though the schooling necessary if they don't know how to think? Regardless of whether or not, their own thinking leads them to beliefs other than your own, this is a valuable skill, and in my opinion, Bill Nye teaches kids how to think on their own.
So, are you positively influencing the minds of children?

2. Are you scared of a divine creator?
How can I be scared of something I don't believe in? Oh, sorry.. answered the question with a question.. simply, NO!
Are you scared of the possibility of there being no divine creator?

14. If evolution is a theory (like creationism or the bible) why then is Evolution taught as fact?
and 15. Because science, by definition is a "theory" -not testable, observable, or repeatable. Why do you object to creationism or intelligent design being taught in school?
Please, just give me a minute to get over the stupidity...

*phew* Okay, so where to begin? The definition of science maybe. Science: the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment
Wait a minute... I thought science wasn't testable, or observable, or repeatable... oops, got my facts mixed up apparently.
Now, let me define creationism: the BELIEF that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes
So, Why don't we allow creationism to be taught in schools?
THE FIRST AMENDMENT, specifically, The Establishment Clause.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
Now, let's look at the rulings of some cases in which religious practices were brought into school systems.
1: McCollum V. Board of Education Dist. 71
"The Court held that the use of tax-supported property for religious instruction... violated the establishment clause."
2: Edward V. Aguillar
The Court said that mandating the teaching of "creation science" beside the theory of evolution is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
This law failed the 3 prong Lemon Test.
A: "...not enacted to further a clear secular purpose."
B: "...primary effect of the law was to advance the viewpoint that a "supernatural being created humankind.""
C: "...law significantly entangled the interests of church and state by seeking "the symbolic and financial support of government to achieve a religious purpose.""

Now, for both of them, let me define theory: "an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena."
So for #15: Though we've already seen that science in itself is NOT defined as a theory, we can see here that even if it was, science would still be "testable, observable, and repeatable."
For #14: Do you believe in gravity? Gravity is a theory, yet it is widely accepted as fact, and has been proven as such, therefore; your argument is invalid.

I'm not even going to bother posting what these were said to mean, but I do have a question for these two:
Do you even have any idea what you are talking about?

Okay, so this got really long, really fast, and there are a few of the topics I need to research. Being a college student, I try to make time to post these blogs and keep up with my school work. So, I'm cutting this one off here. Stay tuned for part 2, hope you enjoyed, and please, comment/share/like, whatever!

Born Again Virgin? I don't think so...

Okay, so as most of you reading this know.. I just recently came out as an atheist on the blog channel I'm running to keep folks updated on my pregnancy. For those of you who didn't read it, and want to, you can find it here. I outline some of the reasons why I've come to believe that there is no supreme being, but mostly it's just a general post.

This new blog channel, however, is going to be used strictly for my thoughts on religion. 

I do want to point out a few rules, and these are important, so listen up! 
1. THESE ARE MY THOUGHTS! 
2. IF YOU DISAGREE, FINE. IF YOU WANT TO TELL ME WHY POLITELY, FINE. 
3. ANY RUDE COMMENTS (telling me why my beliefs are dumb/wrong/etc, preaching, trolling, etc.) WILL BE DELETED AND USERS BLOCKED. 

I am going to be pointing out why I disagree with certain things I have found, that seem to be within the religious realm, that I just think are well.. dumb.
Now, I know that not ever Christian (or other religious affiliate) thinks/believes/acts 100% the same, and I'm not generalizing. I will be pointing out the specific cases that have brought me to the point I am making.

So, enjoy!

Born Again Virgin? I Don't Think So...

Okay, so earlier today on the Cult of Dusty Facebook page, I was commenting on a photo posted by another user. The user and I got on the topic of Born Again Virgins, and alas, a blog post idea was born.

A quick search on Google brought me to the Born Again Virgin homepage. I read the homepage. One of the first things I noticed on the homepage was that the author had quoted a Bible passage:

"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." 1 Peter 2:9 (KJV)

She then says, "It states that we are PECULIAR people. What does this mean? We are to be different! We are to stand out!"

Another quick Google search, and the first thing we find, is that though peculiar can mean "odd or strange", that is not not what it means in this context! Peculiar, in this context, means "belonging exclusively to." To make the passage easier to understand, and ensure I had the right idea, I looked it up again, on biblepassageway.com using the New Living Translation. In place of "...a peculiar people..." the NLT says "...a people for his own possession..." (to read the whole passage, click the excerpt). 

I decided to look past this, what should we call it, error in interpretation, and continue on through the site. The next page I visited was the About page. The first thing I read was "The New Breed of Singles." I'm pretty sure when I saw this, my eyes widened, but I continued. "Born again VIRGINS is the new breed of Singles in today's society. Purity is what every soul desires after." I had to stop here and make sure I read that correctly.

Yep, I did. It says PURITY is what every soul desires after. Isn't marriage proposed in the bible because sexual gratification is what every soul desires?

To quote 1 Corinthians 7: " But because there is so much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman should have her own husband. 3 The husband should fulfill his wife’s sexual needs, and the wife should fulfill her husband’s needs...5 Do not deprive each other of sexual relations, unless you both agree to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time so you can give yourselves more completely to prayer. Afterward, you should come together again so that Satan won’t be able to tempt you because of your lack of self-control." (NLT)

I feel the need to point out here: one aspect of sexual immorality is fornication. Fornication is sexual intercourse between people who are not married.

So, right there, it points out that if one's husband or wife does not (for lack of better terms) put out enough, THEIR LACK OF SELF CONTROL will send them astray. I'm sorry, but that to me, does not point to PURITY being what every soul desires after.

Even after this, I kept on reading. The next portion said, "However, it is never too late to re-establish your virtue. It is possible to become a virgin again."

Alright, next definition: VIRGIN: a person, typically a woman, who has never had sexual intercourse

Now, in my opinion, if that is the definition of VIRGIN, then the only way for someone to "become a virgin again" would be for them to get in the time machine with Doc Brown, go back to the day they lost their virginity, and stop themselves from losing their virginity. But, at this point in time, that is not possible, and therefore; it is too late to 're-establish your virtue' and it is NOT possible to become a virgin again.

Now, looking at it from a biblical standpoint. It still.. IS NOT POSSIBLE. 1: The punishment for sexual immorality is laid out in black and white in Leviticus 20. As it says on ChristiaNet, punishment for sexual intercourse outside of marriage (as well as other sexually deviant acts) was stoning. That means DEATH. Now, please, tell me.. how are you to become a virgin again, if you are dead for your previous sexual immorality?

The site goes onto define a born-again virgin. The definition says, "A Born-Again Virgin is a child of God that is free from impurity or stain." 

They threw in "Children of God." Now, I cannot say these people were 'children of God' before they took the vow to be 'Born-Again Virgins,' but if they weren't then they are now because they know they messed up when they had that one-night stand, or slept with that married guy, what have you. However if they were, I bring forth, Hebrews 6: 4-6.

"4 For it is impossible to bring back to repentance those who were once enlightened—those who have experienced the good things of heaven and shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the power of the age to come— 6 and who then turn away from God. It is impossible to bring such people back to repentance; by rejecting the Son of God, they themselves are nailing him to the cross once again and holding him up to public shame." (NLT).

So, if these people were followers BEFORE their sexual deviance, this passage says it is IMPOSSIBLE to bring them back to repentance (sincere regret or remorse), because they have shamed God. Let's look at the word sincere for a moment. The word means: proceeding from genuine feelings. As a female, who is sexually active (yep, I know, I'm going to hell), I can genuinely tell you, the only way I'm going to be SINCERELY sorry for my sexual delinquency.. is if the man I have sex with is ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE! 

The last part of the site I'm going to quote, well I guess there are two, are the ending of the definition portion. The site says, "Everyone make mistakes. But when you choose to become a Born-Again Virgin, God will wash away your wrongdoings (sins) and this will make you clean again... Furthermore, it is recapturing a life of purity and self-dignity that God wants you to have." 

Okay. So we know that as humans, we make mistakes. And one of the biggest things that Christians like to push is that those mistakes will be forgiven! Now, though I'm atheist, I have gone to church before, and I have been told, that the only way your sins are forgiven, is if you are truly (sincerely) sorry for what you have done. As you just read, that does not always happen, especially when our world is ruled by our desire to have sex and our lack of self control. Also, if you're dead (let's face it, the punishment (in a biblical sense) for sexual immorality is death) you can't ask for forgiveness, therefore; you can't be washed away of your sins. 

Now, I can honestly say that I'm not married. I can honestly say (as was stated at the very beginning) I'm pregnant. I can say that the baby was conceived out of wedlock, and I can say I lost my virginity as a teen. Sure, I wish I hadn't lost my virginity to who I did, I wish I had waited until a more suitable time. BUT: My wishes, DO NOT change the fact that I had sex, that I am no longer a virgin. And I cannot go back with Doc Brown (though it would be freaking epic) and change the decisions I made then, nor would I want to. These decisions made me who I am, and I like 'me.' 

Do these people honestly not realize, that all of the consequences that there are in their lives are going to be the same after they become "Born-Again Virgins" as they are now? Do they even see the consequences this could have in the future, in their love life (assuming they don't have children)?

Tom: "So, are you a virgin?"
Mary: "Yeah, I'm a virgin. Well... I wasn't, but I talked to Jesus and now I am."
Tom: "So, you've had sex?"
Mary: "Yeah, but I repented for that, so now I'm a virgin."

Yeah, I can't see that ending well, can you?

My last point is, well it's actually a question... if these people's self-dignity and purity was so important to them in the first place... and purity is what every soul desires... wouldn't they have abstained from sexual delinquency in the first place?

* Just a note * Okay. So I think I linked all of the pages I went to for my information, hence why you see so many hyper-linked phrases. I just want to throw it out there, I will ALWAYS use the New Living Translation when quoting the Bible, unless the quote is not my own. I like that one, it's easy to understand.

Anyways,
Have a great day/night, whatever! (: