Sometime in the last few weeks, I jumped on the offensive. I’m not sure why.
Julie Ferwerda recently asked me if I had my period. George W. recently emailed me to ask why I am so acerbic lately.
A couple weeks ago, I attacked a self-described atheist blogger for a poorly-considered post. Then I subscribed to Christian John Barron’s blog out of morbid curiosity for his topics and responses. I jumped in on one of the conversations, and I’ve been following it as new comments roll in.
Throw a little John Shore and Chuck Balsamic Vinegar and Ranch dressing in the mix, and you have a recipe that has spelled certain antagonism from yours truly.
I apologize for the last two references without links. Just move on if you don’t get it.
For all that’s good in the world, at first I thought John Barron was the worst blogger and the worst thinker ever. Lately, I’ve read positive responses to his post, and I’m shocked that these people really exist somewhere in the blogosphere.
I mean, really? I expect disputes over ideas. But the lack of reason and decent representation among the believing bloggers in the world needs incredible amelioration.
I read a lot of blogs, and I never respond to them. I may respond here, but I rarely take my views off the blog. So, yes, I have strayed from my regular demeanor lately.
This morning I was reading through comments again at John Barron’s blog, and in a bout of disillusion, I wondered if John Barron is a gigantic poe. But then even Barron was eclipsed by another person.
There’s a guy named Neil responding on that thread who has apparently escaped from an asylum, and he wants to take as many gullible minds back into his prison as soon as possible.
Neil will write and repeat just about anything he can find in the whiniest tone you’ve ever read, and then load his blog with support for Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and any other Christian (or Mormon) mind who represents the Divisive Crew. He quotes editorials from the Wall Street Journal’s notoriously conservative ideas that I didn’t think anyone took seriously. These are editorials to get their liberal readers bent out of shape and to keep them reading.
If Neil is not a poe, he is great PR for the atheist movement. Thank you, Neil for blogging and commenting on blogs. You make my perspective much more attractive.
Siding with that guy would be like eating a thorn bush and pretending to like it as you bleed from your mouth, esophagus and eventually your rectum as you pass that fibrous material through.
Squeezing Familial Cheeks.
Only a few of you read my blog post that attacked my dad’s fondness of Michele Bachmann. A couple of you sent me messages with your thoughts, and I solicited a few responses as well.
I don’t feel great about the blog post, but it was what it was. I edited the hell out of it. I read it to Tina a few times before finally deciding on the version I would publish.
What I wanted to write and what I published are two very different things. My original drafts were much longer and much more acerbic than the post I ended up with.
Believe it or not, it was toned down. Way down.
But what do you care?
What sucks is that I wrote a lot during the early days of the blog about not self-editing. And in the bitchiest, most mind-numbingly weepy voice, I am crying to myself that my blog has become what I didn’t want it to be.
Cry me a river.
I don’t intend for this blog to be taken seriously. I really don’t intend for you to take me seriously. I post a lot of jokes, and almost everything I write is tongue in cheek or honks-a-licious. Even when I’m attacking someone, I’m not squirting flames from my eye sockets.
I can’t tell you what to think. You interpret these things the way you want.
In “real” life, my tone is almost always sarcastic. I hide behind sarcasm, because lots of people never hear a disruptive word in their life from a real person.
Or maybe they do.
If you like peanut butter, I can make fun of you for it.
Is it out of character to be acerbic?
I am in an bitter, ill-tempered phase. It happens every so often. I have gone through periods of attack before. Take the Pullmans WA for example. Hell, I wrote some great pieces on my family back in the day that I’ve tried to stop, because I worry about offending them at every turn.
My tone might reflect that my stance as an atheist has been weakened by the sheer fact that others who are jumping on this bandwagon are doing it for much the same reason Michele Bachmann became a Republican … it was the only other option.
I don’t believe that atheism is an alter call of whimsical choice. It’s not a fairy whispering in your ear. I took a road to atheism through the thickest, strident, most educated Christianity that money, research, and environment can give a person.
I resent when people arrive at a place without enough thought. I resent when someone calls himself a former atheist turned Christian, because not worshiping Jesus for 3 months equals “atheism”.
That’s why I resent Christianity. Most Christians only arrive at Christianity because they were born in that environment, and then they stay there for the rest of their lives, because it’s comfortable. They may falter, or slip from their beliefs, but they never lose it, because it’s way too engrained in their psyches.
Calling myself an atheist is difficult. Stopping myself from praying, almost impossible. Admitting it to strangers like climbing Mount Impossible. I’m a chicken shit. I don’t tell everyone I’m an atheist. Just like I don’t think everyone has the right to call himself a Christian or a follower of Christ, or whatever PR trend the Jesus Christ movement is aiming for right now.
Perhaps if more people started from scratch, we’d have much better dialogue. What if “born again” was taken seriously? Instead of thousands of delusional “born again” experiences into the SAME mindset. How about giving research, oppositional views, and other ideas a fair shake? How about only aligning oneself with a “worldview” after shedding as much of the propaganda they were handed as kids as possible?
I was bred to be a Christian. I call myself an atheist. I am not settled on atheism. I am constantly researching, because I haven’t closed down the possibility of ANYthing being wrong.
Are you open or are you deadset that your belief is the way, the truth and the light? Why do you call yourself what you call yourself? Did you arrive there because of a shallow, lazy search? Did you strip off the ideas your parents gave you as a child?
Do you look at the world and because of guilt and anguish want other people to live by a standard you found completely impossible to live by?
If you don’t strip yourself of your ideas, how can you live with your decision?
Whatever your conclusion is, have you considered it’s wrong?