Homo economicus’ Weblog

What will follow is an article by Hitchens on Mother Teresa, but reading it reminded me of something that happened to me in the USA last year which I shall start with linked to the otherwise obscure title of this blog. 

This was the first and hopefully last time I am ever accosted for my world view in a bar toilet. That convenience being a restroom in Virginia USA the evening of Hitchens talk at the Atheist Alliance International Conference in Crystal City. Naturally wearing my branded A t-shirt I did stand out. That it said Staff Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science meant that as part of the OUT campaign I was out there with a Red A to a bull in the Men’s Room.

Naturally I did not expect a conversation to start in a restroom with an American, let alone one wearing an Arsenal football top. But he noticed my T shirt and asked about what I was doing. Mentioned that I had just listened to Hitchens and then the fun began.

Because what was worst of all for this young man of catholic faith was the books that Hitchens had written on her -  The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa in Theory and Practice - was for him all out disrespect for a great person. Now being taken literally on the fly, I pointed out that letters she had written revealed that she did not actually have faith in the supernatural – her belief in belief actually drove her to take a stand which did not help the poverty of people, notably on birth control and safer sex. As a woman that happened to be a nun with a world platform she spoke against the social reform to end poverty – the emancipation of women on equal terms with men in the economic, social and political sphere.

No doubt charity, vaccinations, food, clothing and shelter do give much needed comfort to the poor. These things were much needed in Calcutta (Bengal). It seems less obvious that strict catholic dogma was what above all the poor needed; or that the only way the necessary aid was going to happen was through faith organisations that were promoting the tolerance of the social norms that allowed the poverty to fester.

As I washed my hands, noticing that in the Gents there were baby changing facilities and thinking how good that was he remonstrated with me that it did some good. As I used the hand dryer I pointed to the baby changing facilities pointing out that I had never seen that in England, but it seemed a good idea. I was open to better ways of doing things compared to rigidly defined social and gender norms.

He said well I guess that a heathen atheist would never understand the good people do because of god. I replied that someone wearing an Arsenal top could not be all that bad. I accept that being that close to Washington DC I was in a bubble that is perhaps a different experience to the rest of the USA. Having said that, where else can you get a discussion with a complete stranger in a toilet about Hitchens and Mother Teresa – pity it did not happen at the bar. Would have been more comfortable. Definitely more restful.

Below is the article that brought forth those memories by Hitchens entitled “Belief in Belief”. Enjoy.

A question that interests me very much (and always has) is this: I know that I do not believe in either any god or any religion, and I can give my reasons in a manner that the other side can at least understand, but can the same be said for those who claim that they do believe? A shorter way of putting this is to ask whether our antagonists in this ancient argument truly mean what they appear to say.

The recent disclosure that Mother Teresa had for almost half a century been unable to feel the presence of Christ in the Eucharist or the ear of God listening to her prayers, is of great importance here. (See the recent book of her despairing letters, Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light.) Not even her most fervent admirers regarded this woman in any sense as an intellectual, and she evidently struggled to combat her doubts in a highly traditional way—namely, by making ever-more extravagant and even masochistic professions of “faith.” This would be superb confirmation of Daniel Dennett’s hypothesis about “belief in belief”— the strange idea that, though faith itself may be ludicrous and incoherent, the mere assertion of it may possess some virtues of its own.

Even though I have sometimes described her as a fraud (for her collusion with rich oppressors of the poor like the Duvalier family in Haiti and for her other corrupt dealings), I would now hesitate to put Mother Teresa in the same category as a Falwell, a Haggard, a Sharpton, or a Robertson. These men have never done a day’s real work in their lives and are or were simple parasites who pinch themselves every morning at their good fortune at living the easy life of exploiting the gullible. For them, religion is nothing more than a trade, or a racket.

The same, I think, can be said of the numberless clerics convicted of child-rape (why on earth do we allow ourselves the silly euphemism of “abuse”?). Their foul crime is not one of hypocrisy. No priest who sincerely believed even for ten seconds in divine judgment could conceivably endanger his immortal soul in this way, and those in the hierarchy who helped protect such men from punishment in this world are equally and obviously guilty of a hardened and obscene cynicism.

But the racketeering and exploitative side of religion, as with its no-less-marked tendency to generate wars, atrocities, and repressions, isn’t the whole story. What of those who try their best to help others and lead a decent life, attributing this conduct to their belief in a Virgin, a Prophet, or to the story of Exodus, or any other such fabrication? I never cease to wonder, in dialogues with such people, whether they are really saying what they mean or meaning what they say.

To any humanist, for example, it’s perfectly obvious that the city of Cal­cutta would benefit from an influx of volunteer nurses, doctors, inoculators, sewage experts, and others, just as it would not benefit from the attentions of people who regard poverty and death as a secondhand share in the “mystery” of the Crucifixion. There are actually quite a good number of activists of the first type (I spent some time there once, watching the great Brazilian photographer Sebastiao Salgado do his work for UNICEF documenting the massive campaign for vaccination against polio), but for some weird reason the only person anyone can name is a woman who spent her entire life campaigning against birth control—a stupid campaign that Bengal most definitely did not and does not need.

Is it not possible that the missionaries of “faith” regard the objects of their charity as mere raw material—human subjects for a tortured experiment in their own psyches? It seems that, the more Mother Teresa lost conviction in the teachings of her religion, the more energetically she silenced her doubts by ostentatious crusades against divorce, abortion, and contraception using “the poorest of the poor” as her backdrop and her excuse. And does this not degrade such work as she actually did? For her, the helpless beggar was just that—helpless, to be sure, yet for that reason easily available for her own exhausting propaganda. The case for assisting starving Bengalis is complete on its own terms, but most of the money raised for the “Missionaries of Charity” went—as Mother Teresa herself happily admitted—to the building of convents that were consecrated, in effect, to her own ambition and her own very extreme teaching of Catholic dogma. These preachings went dead against the only certain cure for poverty—the emancipation of women from the status and condition of breeding machines—that the human race has ever discovered.

In other words, “faith” is at its most toxic and dangerous point not when it is insincere and hypocritical and corrupt but when it is genuine. At that point, its energy of certainty and self-righteousness can be used, not only to reinforce the Church but also (as Mother Teresa’s continuing reputation demonstrates) to impress even the secular. The evidence now is that this is how she and her confessors squared the circle. Repress your misgivings, overcome your despair, redouble your efforts, and we will make you a saint and later claim that you cured the sick even after your death. It’s at this point that the cynical loops round to meet the naïve and say in effect that anything is permissible as long as it keeps the illusion alive. Again, one has to stand amazed before a clergy who can use, as a recruiting sergeant, a wretched old lady whose own faith, as they well knew, had worn to a husk.

Realized that the best of the photos I had put on myspace but not on my blog. Rather a miss of me, but that shall be rectified now. Have great memories of the event in Washington DC as this blog will attest to. The blasphemy challenge in front of the White House and the march there from the Jefferson Memorial, and helping out the stall below and meeting up with others of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science that I had only spoken to via the internet before was truly a memorable experience. 

 In March 21-3 will be going back to the states for the American Atheists Conference in Minnesota. Looking forward to going back and maybe will see you there on the RDFRS stall!

 One question though perhaps is why would you go to a conference, spending a lot of money to fly over, stay over, when usually you can watch the thing free on the internet? The key thing is networking and socialising. This was not just about getting a chance to hear writers I admire but also to meet many activists that could inspire and give advice. To that end I am very grateful to Linda LaScola who when I told her I was being very star struck by it all grabbed me by the hand and introduced me to everyone. That led me to approaching Dawkins with the signed £10 note idea for the auction. The rest as they say is history which can be read on the AAI Conference 2007 (this will be the first blog and all the others after that in the category are the ones relating to AAI).

Thing is you have to be forward. It is not that you have to be great at socialising or witty, smart or anything like that. Socialising in the bar afterwards was an experience as we talked about ideas and controversies. I remember seeing the Mayor of San Diego reverse his decision on same sex civil partnerships and it was moving to watch with other delegates.

So the company, socialising makes it worth every penny (or nickle) in addition to being there.

Oh to have been a fly on the wall I thought, as we marched from Jefferson Memorial to the White house during the Atheist Alliance International Conference 2007, as I had got wind of this Round table discussion happening but kept my mouth shut sworn to secrecy. So it is with great delight that the discussion between Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens is now available to watch on the internet, and will be on DVD next month.

In many ways the Round table discussion is better than the talks. Because they are bouncing off ideas, anecdotes, and experiences between them back and forth – and dealing with the common criticisms that they have encountered. Do enjoy, about two hours split in two parts:

Part One

Part Two

I had the pleasure of meeting Ayaan Hirsi Ali at the AAI conference this year – and was fortunate to get a copy of her book Infidel which people were trying to buy off me as I went to queue up to get signed. I praised her for her courage and sincerity.

That courage is going to be called on once again. The Dutch government has refused to honour a previous commitment to protect her unless she lives in Holland. Paradoxical as the security costs would actually be more if she was in Holland (as the risk would be greater there).

The risk to her life is real, but she is having to look to others to finance her security. For those that value free speech and the empowerment of women now is the time to put your money where your mouth is.  

Below is an article that Sam Harris has recently written please support her:

 http://www.samharris.org/site/security_trust/

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is the most prominent advocate of free speech and women’s rights in the Muslim world, and for this she must live under perpetual armed guard, even in the West. Unfortunately, on October 1st of this year, the Dutch government officially rescinded its promise to protect her. Now, Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s friends, colleagues and admirers must come to her aid.

I have created a page on my website that links directly to the Ayaan Hirsi Ali Security Trust. The money raised by this trust will pay Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s security expenses. In the event that money remains after these costs have been met, it will be used to encourage and protect other dissidents in the Muslim world.

The ongoing protection of Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a moral obligation. It is also a strategic one: for here is a woman doing work that most of us cannot do–indeed, would be terrified to do if given the chance–and yet this work is essential for preserving the freedoms we take for granted in the West.

If every reader of this email simply pledged ten dollars a month to protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the costs of her security would be covered for as long as the threat to her life remains.

Thanks in advance for your support.

Sincerely,

Sam Harris

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
In 2005, TIME included Ayaan Hirsi Ali in its list of the World’s 100 Most Influential People. If you would like to know more about her, please read Christopher Caldwell’s fine profile in the New York Times Magazine. You can also read the essay that Salman Rushdie and I recently published in the Los Angeles Times, or the one that Christopher Hitchens wrote for Slate.

It has been brought to my attention that an article has been written by Michael Brendan Dougherty about Fundamentalist Secularists and the Atheist Alliance International Conference (my write ups on can be found here or on side bar).

 Now I like the way he goes for the argument. For example talking about Margaret Downey as the “dippy hostess”. I found her considerate and making time for delegates, keeping us informed and always approachable for ideas. Without her efforts Dawkins, Dennett, Harris and Hitchens would not  have been in the same venue. That of its own was worth the airfare.

I further find interesting his take that Harris being met by silence is an embarrassment for non believers. My blogs here demonstrate that I am all for Harris’ position – I understand were he is coming from. That we may have differences of opinions (unity of ideas proof that we are always right?).  The bumper stickers that were on sale did make me laugh – “Keep your theology off my biology” was one I bought. I find it amusing that he takes such seaside postcard humour seriously. Humour breakdown.

 Next he goes for Julia Sweeney. Shame he takes what she has to say as “I bet she must be fun on dates”. Well, you should be so lucky mate! If this was the argument that is meant to counter why AAI happened then really if only it was about good argument winning the day. For a reason why read my blogs on Jehovah’s Witnesses and Introduction.

 Mind you I like the thing where he mentions what would Harris say to his response if he sneezed. My line at the AAI conference was that we were becoming so puritanical that if someone sneezed we should say “May all be well with you!” Though I said that a few times I reserve the right to say “Oh god” when cycling in the pouring rain or when reaching the heights of orgasm – I know nothing in the English language comparable to reacting to those experiences. For me the expression is beyond belief – it is a lexicon that can be used.

 Then of course he says that come Sunday everyone is asleep, too tired. No mention of when Margaret Downey announced the tour (now called march but what the hell!) of Jefferson Memorial to the White House which we did after the conference. Ah well never mind pity he did not come with us and see us all in our A shirts standing OUT.

Am I a secularist fundamentalist? No I would not kill faith school teachers. I would not throw stones at children attending such schools. Nor would I wish those that want a christian political state to burn in hell nor would I wish their freedom to worship the way they wish impeded providing it did not infringe on my freedoms as a non believer. I will work on a Sunday and I am glad that I have had consensual sex before marriage (only in recent times in British law has rape within marriage even been recognised since 1994)  or else I would be approaching thirty a virgin.

Lifestyle? Well maybe we choose what we think will make us happy. Some of us may even choose what makes us smug. When it comes to choose what makes me want to live the life I want to lead I have forsaken obeying anything unquestionably, nor take things as an article of faith.

The fact that people found Harris’ speech uncomfortable should be an indication of the herding cats mentality. People will think for themselves when it comes to non-belief. We are freethinkers not fundamentalists.

As to his hair comment you may want to read this blog here. Please note this blogger does exhibit modern teenage language but he is the person in question in the Conservative article

Now I hate it when people show me photos of themselves having a good time. This largely is because my last holiday is a distant memory at the time, so the last thing I need is to see someone else having a good time. Not that I am envious, or anything but if I was hungry the last thing I would want to see is a friend tucking in to a Gourmet five course meal.

SO these photos here are not designed with that in mind. In reality it is more a way of seeing if I can actually do a slide show on here – but also share with you a moment in my life I will always treasure.

Healthyaddict has very kindly published a video of the march on Washington that we all did on the last day of the Atheist Alliance International Conference. Thank you so much for that. A big thank you to one and all who attended the march. The video is on you tube and one person asks why we would want to do something like that. It kind of stems from this attitude that George H. W. Bush stated:

Sherman: What will you do to win the votes of the Americans who are atheists?

Bush: I guess I’m pretty weak in the atheist community. Faith in God is important to me.

Sherman: Surely you recognize the equal citizenship and patriotism of Americans who are atheists?

Bush: Yes, I support the separation of church and state. I’m just not very high on atheists.

The OUT Campaign is about addressing this branding of atheists, hence the scarlet letter “A” on our shirts – it is an issue that needs addressing. When I was an infant I had an invisible friend, but I did not expect others to obey him. As a teenager I was prepared to die rather than defy the holy spirit.

Hence it being a big deal to deny the holy spirit in front of the White House.The reason for Jefferson’s wall of separation of church and state was not a simple issue of freedom of expression. It was about how religious fever when in positions of power divides the citizens of a populace resulting in liberty being stripped of groups that differ to those in power, where ideas and human life are under threat. To prevent that hideous corruption of the body politic was a secular nation born. So it seemed appropriate to start from his memorial onto the White House. It was good natured, talking to tourists, film crews, security guys and fellow conference delegates.

http://outcampaign.org/

It is ironic that one of the reasons I have not been blogging is that I am reading “Infidel” – and yet the Dutch government while I was reading this book have decided to remove the protection for the author Ayaan Hirsi Ali, without ensuring that there is adequate protection for her life.

While at the AAI Conference, as we were working on the RDFRS stall we were told of the concerns to her life, and indeed to us all by being there to listen to her. It really was a close call whether she would even speak. The security guys were worn because they took no chances, even searching me with my RDFRS staff T shirt escorting Hitchens, also checked, when it was time for him to talk. Some people were giving them a hard time when all they had done was popped to the bathroom. One of the reasons I dedicated the “Police Question Atheists!” blog to them. The threat was very real and those guys did a great job.

She was the next speaker after Hitchens. Her life and story is one that has to be shared, and her life one that has to be protected because what she talks about we all need to hear. Even those that want to silence her need to hear it. All of us must play a part in making sure it does not fall on death ears. That we believe in empowering women whatever someone’s “cultural tradition” may say.

If you do one thing, please sign the petition for her to get immediate security:

http://www.petitiononline.com/hirsiali/

If you do a second thing, read the article by Sam Harris and Salmon Rushdie:

http://richarddawkins.net/article,1729,Ayaan-Hirsi-Ali-abandoned-to-fanatics,Sam-Harris-and-Salman-Rushdie

Thirdly, at your leisure buy and read “Infidel” which was sold out at the AAI Conference and people wanted to buy my copy so she could sign it. Which is my most treasured book at the moment. And I know Dawkins, who wants to nominate her for the Noble Peace Prize, would not mind me saying that.

Often people wonder why there is hostility to religion. There is an idea that faith is noble, righteous – that some how devotion to god, even to the point of sacrifice of a child shows a piety that we can only wonder at of an ancient civilisation (think Abraham and Isaac). I do not count myself amongst such people. One reason is that in the modern age I was a child ready to die for such ancient superstition.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses have faith that runs thicker than water, which demands obedience to the doctrine of the current “Watchtower and Tract Society” which forbids having a blood transfusion or the use of blood products in surgery. In Acts 15:28, 29:

28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements:

29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.

Farewell indeed to reason, because this is based on this ancient of understandings as found in Leviticus 17:11, 12:

11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.

12 Therefore I say to the Israelites, “None of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.”

This infantile understanding of the human body is the reason why as a child I was prepared to refuse a blood transfusion. To be convincing if ever called upon before a court I had those bible quotes memorised. Ready to sacrifice my life as a personal choice to die by god’s word. Gladly laying down my own life before a “supreme” being that needed the flesh of the first born animals to be burnt to him.

Hitchens made the comment at the AAI that he did give blood and had not done so for sometime. Sadly I did not get a chance to tell him how even religion poisoned the idea of giving blood that could save life. That somehow a transfusion counted as being eaten, even if its absence meant death to someone.

I have started a pledge, http://www.pledgebank.com/againstjwdogma which has now ceased. By the time it ended it had 78 signatures (28 more than the 50 aimed for) by 30^th September 2007. 30 so far have carried out the pledge to give blood and when that reaches 50 then for the first time in my adult life I will give blood.

This has been made easier, in that with others outside the White House I renounced the Holy Spirit, a concept that theologically I was being asked by the Elders of my congregation to be prepared to lay down my life for.

So when people say to you that religion is a force for good in the world, and only evil people use it to further evil deeds please remember that that is not so. And that for a few scribbles by people who did not even know basic anatomic features, people in the 21^st Century will hold the life of a child to ransom. A child who lacks the cognitive ability to reason independent of their parents wishes. A child of Jehovah’s Witnesses – not a Jehovah’s Witness child that knows the consequences of death and the man made fabrication of ancient texts.

Do not label children, and do not let them die in the mistaken belief that religion promotes the best interests of people, or liberty requires the sacrifice of those not old enough to make an informed choice.

All the photos I took are now up on http://myspace.com/homo_economicus, but if you do not have or want a myspace account (or just do not like Rupert Murdoch) then the key photos are on my personal blog thread on the forum and start from here: http://www.richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=432796#p432796 

 I am very hopeful that soon we will have the official photos of the tour of Jefferson Memorial walk to White House in “A” OUT campaign shirts. When we do I promise to learn how to put photos on here and do an in depth blog of the event, which will include adventures with a banana and how Jesus saved my camera – which will make more sense when you look at the photos rather than imagine what I am on about!