Despite my resolution to write a regular blog. Time and work commitments, have stood against me. However, I have found a little time to go and see the Avengers movie and rather good it was too. Can say the plot was deep and meaningful. Any storyline in Marvel’s Ultimates offers more plot. But nonetheless it is entertaining, a probably the best of the Hulk films. The end, which I will not reveal offers potentially a good sequel. Plus Stan Lee’s cameo is a hoot. The cast were excellent, the dialogue was snappy. Yeah, it is a fun movie! Citizen Kane has nothing to worry about. I would put it up there with the reboots of Star Trek, Batman and James Bond. And it is a darn sight better than the Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. But even “New Year’s Day” was better than the PoP:SoT.
Malcolm Gardner in His Own Words
Working hard to make a difference
Budget
I
I guess there has not been a Chancellor last few decades that has not expected to be vilified by some parts of the media following the presentation of the budget in parliament. I also suspect that the Shadow Chancellor’s job of mocking the budget is never very easy either. Budgets are usually like the parson’s egg – good in places. There will always be winners and losers.
This Year’s budget was remarkable in two ways. Almost all parts of the budget had been leaked beforehand. With the noticeable exception of the impacts on the pensioners. The reasons were obvious, the Collation parties need to do damage limitation with their own backbenchers. It was very much a Collation Budget and that meant that there had been some horse-trading.
This, of course, allowed for the second most remarkable point, it gave the opportunity for the Opposition to score better points than just simply stating that it was all rubbish.
In many ways, this marks a change in the dynamics in the relationship between the Government and the Opposition. It will start to become a little more interesting. No longer can the Government talk about the “mess we have had to clear up” and “we are all in it together”. They have had plenty of time to clear up any mess and that has not really happened in the spectacular way in which they had hoped. The economy has not grown under austerity – which should not come as any great surprise to any economist or mathematician who understand how the numbers work. Only politicians, religious leaders, gamblers and the foolhardy have faith in the unproven theoretical notions of chance.
Will this budget secure a bright and bold future. Nah! It will, as all budgets before it impact on some social changes – more towards personal responsibility – but it will not much of a change on the economy. It was not the worst of budgets but neither was it the best of budgets. In truth it was as all budgets tend to be, tinkering at the edges.
Religion: Live and Let Live.
Recently, while teasing my good friend, Vaughan, about his somewhat strident views on religion, he rightfully challenged me on which “side I batted”. In other words, was I really an atheist or a closet man of faith. Vaughan did so because when I see such forthright views against the Godly coupled often with, what appears to me, a lack of sensitivity to those who may hold moderately different opinions, I tend to jump in and play Devil’s Advocate. I do not like to see bullying, even I it is intellectual and not physical.
To be clear, I hold, and have held for several decades strong atheist opinions and I have been a long-standing member of the British Humanist Society. When I was younger, I held different views and flirted, like many young people with Christian beliefs but as I got older those views changed. I have read the Bible (old and new testament) and the Koran on many an occasion. I appreciate the beauty and poetry of such important pieces of literature. However, for me they are simply that, literature and not factual tomes, or the word of any God. I enjoy them in the same way as I enjoy reading Homer’s Odyssey or Beowulf.
That is just me. I do not expect or even want that others should think the same way. My Grandfather went through life with a strongly held believe in the existence of fairies and goblins. He never once talked to me of God or Jesus. He did not make me go to Church. I loved my Grandfather but he did not persuade me to the idea that fairies live at the bottom of my garden or that goblin’s stole children. However, I would have done nothing to change him of his views, they were fast held and for him irrefutable. My Grandfather talked of a childhood friend who had been stolen by goblins and of the kind deeds he knew of that had been undertaken by the fairy folk. such as secretly supplying food for those he knew who were in poverty. He spoke about a pair of boots that magically appeared on the doorstep of a friend whose family who could not afford to buy any boots. And he claimed to have seen fairies in the glens near his home.
My Grandfather was born at the turn of the 20th Century in a small town on the Scottish West Coast and while such beliefs today seem childlike and silly they were commonly held by many people of my Grandfather’s generation. My, friend Vaughan, when reading this would be quick to explain why my Grandfather was misguided and start a long lecture on the scientific evidence to explain away those things my Grandfather believed to be true. Of course he was misguided but he was also a child of his time.
A J Ayers, the British philosopher, summed up truth in his book “Truth, Logic and Language”. In summary Ayers said there are two types of truth; Truth, that happened in fact and truth that is agreed upon by consensus. Ayers explained that we rarely experience the former and when we do it is fleeting and quickly forgotten but latter is the truth by which we all live.
I can honestly say, I have never been spoken to by any creature claiming to be a God! Even during my brief flirtation with Christianity I did not assume that God was tweeting me. When I hear, people say that God told them to do something as far as I am concerned this is just self-delusion. After all, if there were a God and he/she/it did speak to people it seems that effect on fictional characters is an outbreak of ark building, dragon slaying, lion taming and soothsaying while the effect on real people seems to be to turn them into a mass murderer.
That having been said I would not particularly want to dissuade people who make ordinary decisions by being moved by the Holy Spirit. They may use tarot or I-Ching but what does it matter? Frankly, if someone decides to become an accountant, join the boy’s brigade, run a marathon or any other such endeavour because thought God told them, then why not? It is only a way of internalising and justifying a decision. Some people make decisions through the intake of much alcohol or recreational drugs or on the advice of an online clairvoyant, so imbued by the Holy Spirit is not so bad.
You would hope if God was speaking directly with people he/she/it would have been far more forthcoming about the perils of smoking. Although the Mormon’s claim that he did mention something about it to them. On the other hand, scientist were none too quick off the mark about the risks of smoking either, waiting decades before being bold enough to point out that smoking or chewing tobacco might kill you. (I have often wondered why we spend so much time debating the ethics of assisted suicide while Tescos continue to sell fags – is that not assisted suicide?)
Which I guess brings me back to the very question that Vaughan asked. Who’s side am I on the Godly or the Ungodly?
I guess it comes down to this. I do not believe in God, so I am ungodly. However the arguments about the existence of a God are always fought on unequal grounds. Science is largely supported by evidenced facts, while religion is a question of belief without verifiable evidence. If the existence of could be verified by evidence then it would not be faith it would be fact. Most of the so called evidence produced by believers is still subjective. It is only fact in their eyes. In reality, it passes only the test for Ayers agreed on truth. To my mind though that is fine, but it faith and not fact, The trick for the believer is to get the non-believer to buy into the theory. If everyone is happy and no one is disadvantaged then what does it matter. Most conversations about politics and football work the same way.
The confusion in all of this is who has the upper hand when it comes to ethics. Another subjective subject (Smoking vicars and doctors who oppose assisted suicide take note). Both Science and religion along with any dogmatic thinking have laws. Laws are not made to be broken they are made to be obeyed, to create a form of order out of chaos. This does not necessarily result in good laws or justice but nonetheless it is how things work. The laws of science are mostly irrefutable. Other laws are open to interpretation.
I know that the law of gravity means that a stone can only roll down a hill. (let’s not get pedantic about the momentum carry it back up or we will be here all day). A Godly person may believe that through prayer or by the hand of God the stone could roll up to the top of the hill. I know that cannot happen but I see no reason for it to be my life’s ambition to force that believer to confess the error of their thinking. Would my Grandfather have had a happier life if he had known that fairies did not exist? I think not!
A scientist is not a person who would say “I accept the laws of gravity that stone will never be able to roll up a hill.” A scientist, like a person of religion, will be challenged by the idea that the law cannot be broken and seek out a way to make the impossible possible. The scientist will create a machine or a method of manipulating natural forces that will allow that stone to roll up the hill. Thanks to scientists, I know Schroeder’s cat is both alive and dead but more likely alive. Christians have not yet convinced me the same is true of Jesus.
My place is not one of side, clearly I am an atheist, but it about tolerance. Science does not teach us how to be tolerant. Religion is not the sole teacher of ethics. I want to live in a world where children are not taught as fact that God will make the stone roll up the hill. I want them to learn how science allows a stone to roll up a hill. I also want them to learn that some people believe different things and that thinking about different things opens up the mind to the possibilities that one day they may make that stone fly to the heavens.
When I hear strident atheist belittling and badgering those with faith, I become embarrassed at the lack of sensitivity and tolerance that they display on my behalf. That does not mean that I support the fanatical clergyman who condemns my gay friends or imam who sentences a woman to death for adultery. These are abhorrent ideas that have no place in civilised society. However, mocking someone because they believe that God told them to work in a soup kitchen at the weekend is not an act of a tolerant thoughtful person.
I believe there should be a proper separation between Church and State. There is no place for faith schools teaching creationism as fact. However, there is a place for Sunday schools. No one should be forced to believe in anything. The Christian tenet of personal choice is the right one it is a shame it is not practiced by those who preach it. I am an atheist because I chose not to believe in God. Not because some scientist proved that God does not exist but because the believers have not produced the evidence to convince me otherwise. I do not believe in fairies, either.
The problem is we Atheist treat everyone who has a gentle faith as though they are fanatical terrorist. Likewise there is a trend by Christians and Muslims to treat all atheists as neo-atheists (read neo-Nazis). I support a secular state one where everyone’s view are listen too and compromise is made. Where compromise cannot be reached then the greater good (and not the greater God) should trump everyone else. I call for tolerance and sensitivity by those of faith and those like me who are Humanist. And that is where I stand
