We had to do our best to 'turn the other cheek' to religious folk telling us that we were going to hell (oh, how nice of them), the Phytoplankton cancer cure woo woo promoters and the mirrorless christian reflection tent.
The coffee was bad, the canteen only sold meat and all the raffles were for stuff we didn't want.
But we soldiered on and ended up raising $463 for the cause, which was to fund research into the minimisation of the immunological problems that people suffer when going through chemotherapy, which can cause further complications through infections etc.
All up we had 14 atheists walking for the cause, all of whom deserve congratulation for all the work they have put in. (remember this when you see us at the next pub meeting).
Once again the Sydney Atheists have helped to spread positive atheism and have lived up to our motto 'Good Without God'
The next charity event will be another blood donation in a month or so, we hope to see some more people then!
We will be raising money to help fund cancer research, whilst also raising awareness of the need for cancer research.
Over the weekend we will be sending live updates to the blog (if I can get online, it is in the sticks), to let you know how we're doing. We only have a small team, so it's going to be a bit of a slog to be able to walk continuously for 24hrs, but we'll do our best.
Last night, a group of nine Sydney Atheists visited Theology on Tap, a monthly Catholic get together with a talk and chat format, where a speaker presents on a particular theological issue, followed by some QnA, then everybody mingles and chats afterwards.
The guests on this night were ‘The Priests’, a three-piece a-capella group who sing religious classics in a warbly baritone. Needless to say, we were somewhat underwhelmed. We were expecting a night of theology, and were given a performance. After singing a few songs, the Priests each gave a bit of a talk, then opened up the floor for QnA. One of the people near us, who had figured out that we were a group of atheists (thanks to Jason’s ‘covert’ wearing of his Sydney Atheists t-shirt) turned around and said “Go on, ask something”. But there wasn’t really anything to say. The priests hadn’t really said anything objectionable and it was pretty much all about their music, leaving us without any real pressing questions. One person asked how their music was received by the secular audience, which led to a listing of all of the bands that they had worked with, including U2 and Manic Street Preachers.
During the talk, I was surprisingly noticed as ‘that guy from the Kerr-Anne show’, which led to a group in front of us all whispering and gesturing ‘inconspicuously’ over their shoulders at us. By the end of the night, it was quite obvious that the fact that we were there had spread around the whole crowd (about 200 people!). One guy overheard Jason saying ‘ooh, I’d like another beer’ and bought one for him before spending most of the night on the balcony chatting with a group of atheists.
After the Priests, there was the obligatory ‘dash for cash’, where it was subtly explained to us that merchandise was available upstairs, that their CD would make the ultimate Mothers Day present, and that the ATM was located through the door to the left.
When the sales pitch was over, the crowd started milling about and chatting amongst themselves, but nobody was initiating conversations with us, so I decided that we should be a bit less subtle and start to make our presence known a little more. We started by all getting our photos with a cut-out of the Pope and when Jason, in his Sydney Atheists t-shirt, was getting his picture taken, there was a great deal of pointing and whispering, but still no interactions. So we started to walk about the room with Jason until we were noticed. One of the photographers started taking photos of Jason’s shirt, then took some pictures of the whole group. After this we started to get into conversations left, right and centre.
The guy that had recognised me from the telly came up and introduced himself, then introduced me to Father Richard, a philosophy lecturer and priest from Notre Dame. Not long after that, another philosophy student was introduced to us and a few other people started to ask us all sorts of questions, from ‘so, what’s your group all about’ to ‘do you come across many Satanists in the Sydney Atheists?’
I had a good time talking to people about sex ed, biology, origins, and lots of dispelling the many myths that people have about atheists. From the sounds of it, pretty much everyone that was there had a good time. The vibe of the night was constructive, fair and inquisitive conversation, rather than arguing and finger waggling. We had a really good time and will definitely be back again. Look out for our report on critical mass podcast #7
Once again, the Sydney Atheists have been out showing how we can be 'Good Without God'. Our third blood drive was yesterday and was another successful charity event for us.
I was unable to make it because I've been a bit ill lately, but it looks like everyone had a good time doing good, without gods. You can see the whole set here
Also at the mardi gras were nuns (1, 2), Jews, devils, angels, and of courde, the Raelians. It looks like they had a lot of fun and it was a good opportunity to reach out to a portion of the population which is generally frowned upon by organised religion.
Basically, with over 22 million African people infected with AIDS, it is criminal to be putting forward such unfounded crap. I agree with the 'experts' quoted in the video below, who say "People really just need to listen to the healthcare workers and experts of the community leaders on how to avoid HIV infection."
Listen to religious experts for religious advice, listen to health experts for health advice.
I came across this little Jesus and Mo 'toon which helps to unearth the real problem. But I guess things could be worse... this guy probably just needs a good shag! (the xtian gay-fixer, not Sascha Baron Cohen)
We arrived about 45 minutes early, which gave us a chance to check out the books that were on sale before the stand was swarmed by other attendees. I bought a copy of ‘Animal Liberation’.
Everyone from our group (about 10 people, I think. Maybe a few more) arrived and we went and got some pretty good seats up near the front. Margaret, whose birthday it was (happy birthday, Margaret!) was sitting next to one of the cameramen, who got into a discussion about the origins of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and explained that the talk was being taped for ‘ABC 2 Forum’, so keep an eye out for it (I’ll post it on the blog if I find it).
Singer started by explaining that this book has been 30 years in the making, as it pulls together a variety of ideas that have been discussed in part in the article ‘Famine, Affluence and Morality’, and in bits and pieces across many of his other books, but it was a topic that, to comprehensively cover it, would require a full book of it’s own.
Over the time that has passed since his article on Famine, Affluence and Morality, Singer noted that the percentage of people in the world living in ‘Extreme Poverty’ (under $1US a day) has dropped from approximately 40% to around 25%. This is an encouraging statistic, no matter how you look at it!
Singer then explained the pond dilemma. If you see a child drowning in a shallow pond, almost all people would jump in and save them. Now imagine that you are wearing a brand new pair of nice business shoes, worth a couple of hundred dollars. Now would you save the child, at the cost of ruining your shoes? Again the answer is an almost unanimous YES!
This is the basic moral argument of the book. It is, in most cases, worth paying a small personal cost for a large social gain.
There are, Singer explained, 27000 children under 5 dying every day. Would it not be worth a little of your money, which you probably would have spent on something you didn’t need, to make a difference in that statistic?
Singer explained that there is a strange attitude towards focused tragedy, such as the September 11 attack, when more children are dying each day than the number of people killed in that single act. By supplying the funding to provide mosquito nets, immunisation and health care clinics, we (those of us lucky enough to live comfortably in the first world) have the ability to actually save lives!
Singer made a point that you have to be sceptical bout the statistics given to you. For example, for the cost of a single mosquito net, you will not be saving a child’s life. Not all children with out nets die, not all children with nets are fully protected. Instead of the, as advertised, ‘$10 to save a life’, the cost per life saved is actually in the hundreds of dollars, once you crunch the numbers, which brings you back to the pond analogy and saving a life for the price of a pair of shoes.
Where the real world poverty problem diverts from the pond analogy is that there is only one child to be saved in a pond, whereas there are millions of children to be saved from poverty, so how much can you be expected to give away without causing your own economic problems?
The practicality of giving away all but the absolute necessities doesn’t work. There are a few people (1 in a million or more) who live this kind of existence and give everything that they don’t immediately require, but you are never going to expect the wider population to share this ethic. It’s unrealistic. Singer’s solution is that by gradually raising communities’ standards, so that many people are giving a small amount each, we will actually be making a bigger difference than a small number of people giving everything.
Singer then described the different minimum standard donations that he prescribes for different income brackets.
For those earning up to
$100k, a 5% donation will suffice (up to $5k a year donated)
$100k- $1M- a 10-15% donation should be possible
$1M plus, a 30% donation should be made.
I’m sure this is the part that most people are going to have difficulty with. I’m thinking, at this stage, that for me to give up a few thousand dollars per year to charity is an unrealistic ask! (however, after thinking about it, I have decided that I will try to give a respectable amount to charities that I can be sure are spending the money wisely, and not using it to further any peripheral goals)
And so ended Singer’s talk. You can find out more about what you can do to help minimise poverty by getting a copy of Singer’s book.
There followed a QnA session.
Eran, a regular at the atheist meetings, and a member of the Australian Skeptics, asked about the mismanagement of funds and the problems inherent in giving money to a corrupt regime.
Singer’s response was that there are many charities that are fairly reliable and trustworthy in disseminating donated funds to where it will make the most difference, such as Oxfam, Unicef and the Gates foundation. He admits that the occasional scandal does happen, but that does not mean that withholding donations totally is the correct response. Also, it is advisable to donate to charities that give money to NGOs, who generally distribute the funds more appropriately than a ‘regime’ might.
Then, a man asked about the ‘superogatory ethico-moral duties privileged nations to provide not only funds, but sustainable means of selfperpetuatalising pericombobulations. (I think it was an arts major)
Singer then explained that sustainability must be considered whenever developing and providing resources to the third world. How he understood the question, I’ll never know!
Someone got up and proposed that a more fitting conclusion to the pond analogy would be that after saving the child, the protagonist then goes about his job as a shallow pond digger! Singer seemed to like this analogy and suggested that there would be a more in-depth explanation of such issues in his book.
Perhaps the most interesting question (to the nature of this blog and the Sydney Atheists in general) was “Do you believe in a god and if so, do you believe that you should have been consulted in the creation?” To which Singer’s response was “I think that the second part of the question answers the first. If there was a god, then we wouldn’t be in the situation we are now.” “All life can be best explained through the process of evolution [sic]”
After the talk, we had a chance to meet him (as did everyone else in attendance, if you waited in line long enough!), he signed our books and we spoke to him about the influence that his book “The Ethics of what we eat” has had on our recent decision to become vegan. He was really accommodating and despite there being a huge crowd waiting to get their books signed, was happy to have a discussion with us. We were very happy and, by all accounts had a wonderful night!
If you’re interested in Peter Singer and are in the Sydney area, Nathan and myself will be giving a talk about Peter Singer’s career and most influential ideas (ethics and consumption) at this weekend’s Sydney Atheists meetup. It’s bound to be a good night and we hope that people will all be a little challenged by the content.
BONUS VIDEO!
Peter Singer debating Dinesh D’Souza
Also, Phillip Adams interviewed Singer on the day of this talk. Listen to it here.
This time last week, I was getting ready to go to church. Yes, an atheist, getting ready to attend church. I attended with four other members of the Sydney Atheists. We attended a presentation at Toongabbie Anglican church, a talk entitled "Does God Exist".
Upon arrival, we affixed our compulsory name tags, and were greeted by many friendly, smiling Christians, many of whom were complaining about the intense heat. Thank god for the air conditioning in the church!
The evening opened with a few prayers and some jesus themed music from the band. Donny Kwan then began his topical talk. He opened with a brief outline of the four main arguments: cosmological, ontological, teleological and the moral argument. One of my favourite annecdoetes was a discussion between an "atheist" and a Christian. It went something like this:
Christian: So Mr Atheist, can you see god? Atheist: No... Christian: Can you smell god? Atheist: No... Christian: Can you see your own brain? Atheist: No... Christian: Can you smell your own brain? Atheist: No... Christian: Aha! But you know you have a brain! This is the same way we know god exists.
Seriously. I really did have to bite down hard on my tongue to stop the laughter. Afterwards, we asked Donny if he had ever heard of an MRI scan? This allows us to see our own brains! Hooray for medical science! As hard as we have been trying though, none of us have yet had a whiff of our own brains...
Other examples he used to argue for the existence of a god were "clues in creation". "The skies proclaim the work of his hands," he said. No, the sky is a completely natural phenomenon and is the atmosphere around the earth. The existence of the sky is in no way any evidence for the existence of god.
Donny likened "clues in creation" to a game of Cluedo, where by investigating all the clues of the crime you can come to a conclusion about whodunnit. This metaphor it similar to the watchmaker argument, likening the fact that a murder case has a murderer, the universe has a designer. This is one of the worst argements for the existence of a god, and is often used by the credulous Ray Comfort. It is a faulty analogy, debunked so well by Richard Dawkins in "The Blind Watchmaker". As an aside, Donny quirked (in regard to the game Cluedo) "I've never understood how you could kill someone with a candlestick!". You beat them Donny. A candlestick made of metal will do a lot of damage if you constantly beat someone over the head with it.
The rest of the talk was filled with arguments from the bible, such as "god speaks to us through the bible, so therefore he exists...". I was really hoping for some interesting arguments, but when all you talk about is "evidence" from the bible, it is completely unstimulating and boring.
The bass player from the band then got up at the end to say a prayer that he had written. He started by expressing his absolute sadness and dismay that in these modern times we would need to even be asking a question such as "does god exist". He then went on about how atheists are spreading hateful messages, and that we need to pray that Richard Dawkins stop spreading his disgusting messages. At this point I got the giggles and really had to exercise some self control. The hilarity factor was going off the scale.
Before the talk we were given a pamphlet encouraging us to take notes throughout the talk, on which the pamphlet says "take notes to raise a question for future discussion." However there was no Q & A at the end. We had many, many questions and points we wanted to clarify, which would have been useful for the congregation to hear, but no one was asked if they had a question. At the end of the pamphlet is a box that says "Do you believe in this God who exists?". I find this question rather odd in the way it is worded. It assumes that the god is a who and that it exists. If you answer no, then they would argue that you are denying god, because he does exist, rather than asking the question "do you believe in a god?".
We then had some very interesting discussions with Donny, and a few others who were interested in what we had to say. It was very friendly and I was pleased that they welcomed us and these discussions. We discussed topics such as contradictions in the bible, to which we were constantly told "but you have to consider the context!". Yes, in some cases this maybe so, but I suspect that most of their points of reference consist of christian apologetics. I was recommended to watch Tim Keller's Authors at Google talk, as he is "one of the best apologetics and difficult to refute". I watched it, and it was pretty bad. In fact, it was truly awful. (I will blog about that talk another time). Honestly, if that is the best they've seen, then they have some serious researching to do.
We do thank Toongabbie Anglican church for welcoming and being so friendly to us, and we had some great conversations, which were stimulating and interesting. We would love to have any of them come to our meetups, or even give a talk. Details can be found at www.sydneyatheists.org.
It's time again to embody the message 'good without god' by giving one of the most precious and important things that we can give.
Blood. It's one thing to raise money for charities, volunteer for charitable means, but when you give blood you can actually save the lives of 3 people!
Blood reserves are always lower than they could be, which means that people in need may miss out.
Please come along and donate with us, you'll be making a real difference at very little cost (a bit of a pinch and a lie down)
Posts
