Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Here are some of my more favorite and some of my more recent videos I've found with the topic. Most are short, if interested I'd recommend coming back when you have time to watch them, or to 'fav' them on youtube to watch later. These videos help to explain why being an atheism is not only awesome, but hip!
Here's the link to the first one cause embedding is disabled, it's from that survey where atheists and agnostics did best.
And then an interesting statistical video from a while back.
A personal favorite. This has been taken down and reposted in the last two years so if it doesn't show up just Google the title (Atheist Statistics) and hopefully you'll find it.
Now I will state why these videos show that atheism is awesome:
Vid #1 - We are smarter than all religious people in every way.
Vid #2 - We're growing quickly.
Vid #3 - Simply cause the video used ''Clubbed to Death'' as the 'soundtrack.'
I'm so hoping that someone comments on how ridiculous and stupid I am and my logic is messed up. Cause then they have no knack for understanding sarcasm, or any patience to read the rest of this post.
I'd like to make some comments on what these videos actually tell us. First, the religious survey is definitely an interesting find. But it really shouldn't be that surprising. In a related video Penn Jillette points out that atheists just tend to be smarter, this has been proven in many surveys, the last video said 39 out of 43 studies done in the last few decades. As atheists or agnostics tend to be smarter we can assume they would also be above average for religious knowledge, as this survey proves.
But not only that, generally those who doubt the existence of a personal God do so because they have studied religions. The non-religious generally have a wide knowledge of other religions because before they stopped believing they generally had a desire to really know the truth and studied the hell out of the world religions, or at least their own, before realizing that they are all, for the most part, very similar in the area of 'faith.' It shouldn't come as a surprise that not only would they know their former religion very well, but some basic things about many other religions. The first video also answers as to why most Americans simply don't know much period. Not necessarily a religious issue, at least in the world arena, but most likely an American cultural phenomena.
The second video does a good job of showing how Christianity (over 70% of the American population at least 2 years ago) is shrinking and how the non-religious population is growing. This indicates people losing faith. You can't say people are becoming non-religious because Christianity is shrinking, or that atheism is literally growing because more people report being non-religious. These statistics alone could be answered for by population changes or movements. But put together they show a decent connection between the two.
The third video is very good. It has changed in minor ways over the years, usually with more concise wording and updated statistics. I actually used this video in a paper and therefore looked up a lot of the studies and searched for correlating studies. I can back up nearly all the statistics given. It would seem that studies average out to about 20% of 19-30 year-old persons being non-religious, and for teens to be around 25%. And this is only in America! The prison statistics are also true, and as far as I know it was an anonymous study so they should be representative. However there is the chance that someone would lie to fit in with a prison gang, or that maybe atheist criminals are generally smarter and less likely to get caught. I don't know if this actually hurts any claims by atheists that we're better than the average religious person.
What these videos are not saying is that atheism will take over. Most studies say that America will reach 25% secular/non-religious within 15-20 years but level out. Atheism doesn't mean solving the worlds problems, countries with high levels of atheism do have crime rates, just much lower than highly religious countries, and generally much less amounts of serious crimes, such as rape or murder. It isn't saying that religion makes you dumb either, though I think in some cases it does. It also isn't saying that atheism actually is 'hip' but this could be possible. So maybe atheism is the new 'emo.' Let's all be different by being and dressing the same! Kind of.
Lastly, these videos don't "prove" atheism is right. Most atheists acknowledge a level of agnosticism, so most don't even say atheism is 100% correct anyways. But often atheists are condemned for being more 'dogmatic' than theists. Well, atheists are more dogmatic than agnostics, but not in any way more than the average theists. Also, atheism has a way of de-converting even people who don't want to be atheists, so I think it has such a strong foothold that often people will doubt their former God more than they had believed in him/her.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
And I ask that sincerely. I believe some do, that some don't, and that most believe they do but do not act in such a way as to show compassion, but merely to uphold their religious views and beliefs and then force it on others.
I say this because lately people in the group are getting scared. There's always a 'scare phase' every couple months or so, but being that the group is a lot bigger and with recent events, I think it is getting worse for some.
See, the Facebook group is pretty secure. People feel safe enough to at least make fake profiles if necessary, but some are still afraid of bringing in a 'Judas' so to say. And I think I can agree. I receive emails from people and I assume everyone to be a person out on a mission to turn me in. Having been on a mission, working with bishoprics at home and abroad, and studying creationism in general, I have a deep understanding of what it means to ''lie for Jesus,'' and for every person who emails me I assume that you would lie to my face because 1.) I'm an agnostic atheist so I deserve it, 2.) I'm ex-Mormon so I'm evil, and 3.) you would do anything for your God, even if it meant lying. A simple quote of Paul wouldn't even change your mind, maybe most Mormons don't know which one I'm talking about.
I bring this up because a couple members recently spammed Reddit and it drew a lot of attention. Possibly reached out to some lonely atheists or ex-mormons, but it also drew attention from our faithful opposition. I get several emails a week from new people, who generally stop replying before I'm ready to actually give them any true information. Being an evil atheist I have no qualms about lying to protect who I really am when possible snitches are threatening me with thousands of dollars lost, being kicked out ahead of schedule, and then causing shame on my parents, one of which is dying. Members of our group grow suspicious of random people we can't vouch for who want in, of students on campus speaking about some ''underground atheist group" and of the general attention that has been coming up from comedy sketches to letters to the editor.
So my question is, for my lurkers, does BYU actually care about us, as an institution and as a body of fellow students? Cause many in the group go to BYU, and many of them follow the Honor Code except on one level - they don't believe in Mormonism anymore. Which is the norm, mind you, most people don't believe in Mormonism, not even all of BYU.
(yes, these cute cats are supposed to make everybody feel sorry for us, enemy or not)
I think there is a genuine fear that BYU will screw us over. I'm dismayed when I hear new people in the group say that they don't want to lie about God anymore to their bishops and will tell them they don't believe. This means that those of us in the 'know' have to inform them that it will mean they will be kicked out. I'm dismayed when I go back to the online Honor Code and see the phrasing that if you stop believing you do get kicked out. I'm dismayed when I hear students on campus speaking in hushed tones about an atheist group and that they should be gotten rid of. No thought on the unnecessary trouble and pain it would cause on so many more people than the one 'non-believer.'
So, does BYU have compassion? My guess is no. So far BYU and the related LDS church have been very cold and intolerant to those who differ in 'doctrines' and those who leave the fold. Homosexuals is an all-to-clear example of this, and I'm not merely talking about Prop 8, but it's still continuing use of deadly psychological ''help'' that has damaged the church's and even BYU's psychology department's image in front of the APA. It seems that the LDS religion is one of the last strongholds for reorientation therapies for homosexuals in hetero marriages who still aren't cured. 70% of these patients attempt suicide during the therapies because they don't work. They don't, and the patient is told it is their fault.
Point is, with a history like the LDS church I would've expected them to have more compassion. But it seems that a rough historical life has made the church less tolerant, more bigoted, more hateful, and ambivalent in damaging people's lives, such as kicking out students who's only 'flaw' by their standards, is that they stopped believing in the religion and then had the gall to be honest about it. The church was bullied and in response it has become a bully itself.
Friday, March 25, 2011
NOTCIE: the BBQ tomorrow is canceled since the weather forecast is getting worse and worse. Sorry peeps who were plannin ta go.
This is a guest post I am doing for the Atheists of Utah Valley. Most likely I will put some extra work into a post about every week and then post it on my blog and their's. I wish to put forth that the credit for the AoUV blog lies with ‘Horus’ who also happens to be the one who has kept the FB group going. Cheers.
And now the post.
This post deals with this article: “Why are religious people happier?” Now, the podcast “Reasonable Doubts” approached this question in their “Profiles of the Godless” episode which I highly recommend to everyone; it was a very good presentation. Following the link to this article it becomes clear right away that social bonding seems to give more quality to life, as proven by other studies and in other podcasts than Reasonable Doubts.
It does not take too much critical thinking to look at this study and see that the correlations may not be a line up between A and B (the believer and their beliefs) but rather A and C (the believer and their fellow believers). This study claims that “forging close bonds with people over mutually shared and meaningful interests might boost quality of life for anyone, religious or not.” The article continues to say that a church offers a special type of community that other groups have a hard time being able to compare to.
Friendships and support do help people to help others more. It seems that religious groups may still have a upper hand on secular groups, but the difference has been found to be minimal in several studies, at least not statistically significant. But this is beginning to wander off topic.
Getting back to the article, the question comes up whether church makes people happy or whether happy people go to church? Certainly if people are not happy they most likely won’t go to church, or if they feel guilty due to doubts they probably also won’t be going to church that regularly. Often happy people will go to the places that at least ‘should’ make them happy.
The study had a large sample, and reports to having a large questionnaire. It is interesting to note that the study reported that personal health had more influence on their happiness than church attendance making the top two areas that promote happiness (at least in this study) health and community. So far it could be twisted to say that their beliefs had major influence but this is where the article moves on to the pertinent point I am looking for.
"People who say they go to church every week but say they have no close friends there are not any happier than people who never go to church.” Now, to help make sense of this when you have two different points of interest in a statistical survey and there is no difference between two points you can say that the correlation is extremely high. Correlation does not mean causation, but high correlation means there is a strong relation between the two, even if inversely.
The article ends with the prospective comment that ‘trust’ and a sense of ‘belonging’ may be what people look for in a community, and in that community people will generally feel more happiness and rewarded from those relationships. This won’t be true for all people, but it is true of the general population, and we all shouldn’t think we’re so unique as to not be in that general population.
Point is; religious people are not happier than non-religious people in any significant way. Many sample studies show that religious people who attend church will be slightly higher on the scale, but not in all cases. This study shows that the cause does not seem to be beliefs, but rather community, and atheists do not have the same type of community. Obviously community of some kind has a major affect on how you view life, and, in general, the number of friendships you have also has an effect.
This post, without any forethought, can probably be looked at in two specific ways – as a call to anyone who may wish to meet more like-minded people who you can talk openly with, especially if you are surrounded by friends who you no longer agree with or consistently have to bite your tongue while around. Second, it should point out that you should be careful how you approach psychological and social studies. They are full of generalizations that may only apply to you in differing levels of influence than the next person. Also that results can be twisted to mean other things, especially when you say A causes B without considering that C may in fact cause both.
Thursday, March 24, 2011
So I have had 100 posts and that means it is time for a review of my most favorite pictures from posts 51-100. I'll probably also do another Bi-annually, or wtv, Statistical Report here in a month or so. And patriarchal blessings, and my exit story, blablabla, I know, I'm horrible at keeping up with my promises.
Also, I will give you avid readers a sneak peak at our "Atheist of Utah Valley Logo Competition!!!" We have a lot of good submissions so far, including the one at the top of this post which was designed by mgghfurrrgheeted and is certainly of high quality, making this competition very intense. Okay, it's not that big of a deal, but people have been using their creativity to bring us some good ideas and I'm sad we will only be able to use one as the groups logo. For now though let's say they are all winners and enjoy their art. First though here are some funny pictures.
And now some personal favs:
And here is one that makes a great background for you desktop, discovered by Heretic:
And now to show all of you ''some'' of our amazing contributions for Atheists of Utah Valley. May the best heathen win.
That last one obviously proves that all are not created with equal artistic prowess. And yes, that is an atheist, with a goatee, flipping you off while eating a baby that is smiling.
Unfortunately I can't post the ones that are coming up with covert logos that we could possibly wear on shirts since I know you BYU dogs/sheep are lurking here and would love to keep an eye out for atheists on campus to kick us out cause for some reason you feel like you have to. Much like how someone on campus felt a need to slash Eric's tires for having a pro-gay bumper sticker. Till next time.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Let's have another little post about Mormonism! I compiled this little list last night around 3am and I briefly looked over it again just now ... and I think it's all okay. Lol. I tried to be as open as possible being that I don't really collect books or works on ''anti-Mormon'' literature, but this is the stuff that seems about right in my mind, so here goes:
Reasons to doubt Mormonism:
Book of Abraham
1 – Joseph Smith used the old incorrect version of translating hieroglyphs. He thought one figure was a word or phrase or even sentence or paragraph. Hieroglyphs are phonetic sounds, such as “ph.”
2 – We have proofs of this in Times and Seasons (Nauvoo newspaper) and/or his personal notes where he shows the hieroglyphs and his translation, proven false by scholars for years.
3 – We have the original papyrus scrolls which show us what he was using leaving little to doubt, though the scrolls are damaged and some parts missing.
4 – Scholars said that the facsimile of Abraham is actually a burial scroll, a common and cheap gift to the dead, and stated which parts were possibly drawn in by Joseph Smith – namely the head, hands, and part of the bird. Needless to say these areas were damaged or torn out of the original scrolls so Joseph did draw them in.
5 – Given these things many of the possible theories are thrown out at the onset due to the evidence being in our possession or available to the public. Joseph Smith either never believed people would translate these or never got the chance to get rid of the scrolls.
6 – In fact all the facsimiles have been viewed and researched by scholars and not one thing Joseph Smith did with them lines up with what they really are, such as the last one being a deceased person going to hell, not Abraham on the Pharaoh’s throne.
1 – The church and apologetics say we just don’t know enough history, or have scattered accounts, etc…. and cannot make any decisions. Sometimes these are outright lies.
2 – Brigham Young did teach this once at General Conference, and then many more times. He taught the Adam-God theory for nearly three decades.
3 – It was part of the Temple ceremony.
4 – Many apostles did not agree with the theory, and some stood up against Brigham and said it was heresy or blasphemy. This doctrine was removed with Brigham’s death.
1 – It may be a marriage “style” still practiced today and even more in history, but should raise an eyebrow and some inquisitive inquiry.
2 – The church never followed the declaration of 1890, and didn’t fully follow the 2nd declaration in the 1900s. It wasn’t till two apostles were excommunicated that the church officially stopped practicing polygamy around 1910.
3 – The church “stopped” when the government stepped in.
4 – The church generally leaves out the more odd circumstances with polygamy, probably following the rule of the truth not always being useful.
5 – 14 y-o girls getting married was not uncommon, but was to 70+ y-o men, which was far more common in Mormonism than other cultures at that time period.
6 – Joseph began polygamy with Fanny Alger in Kirtland, but no one seems to have known except him and her till they were caught. Oliver Cowdery said Joseph was a fallen prophet because he was committing adultery with Fanny. This eventually led to Oliver leaving the church.
7 – Joseph regularly started polygamous marriages without Emma’s knowledge, and sometimes telling his wives to not let her or others know. One being Emma’s friend, Eliza R. Snow.
8 – Polyandry was practiced at least by Joseph Smith to multiple women, meaning he married other men’s wives, such as Orson’s wife while he was away on a mission. Brigham Young and other authorities eventually took on polyandrous marriages as well, not just Joseph Smith.
9 – Brigham Young said the church would fall if it stopped practicing polygamy.
Blacks and the Priesthood
1 – Brigham Young also said the church would fall if blacks received the priesthood.
2 – Blacks received the priesthood once the government stepped in (again) and parades/protests were on the streets of SLC in support of civil equality.
3 – Many church leaders had many bad things to say about blacks, such as the Blood Atonement ‘practice,’ interracial marriage, Martin Luther King being a pawn of communism, and that blacks would always be servants.
4 – 33 years later and there still are no black apostles or presidents of the 70?
Book of Mormon
1 – Still no concrete evidence for the Book of Mormon.
2 – Different authors seem to have written different books or sections. This would agree with Mormonism except linguistic and writing style studies show that different writers authored different books together, or sections out of different books. A possible example of what this is would be the first half of Alma and 2nd Nephi being the same author. This is merely a possible example, not a recorded one.
3 – As a minor note, Joseph Smith did not take 60-70 days to translate but ‘had’ the plates for over a year and a half, making it roughly only a couple hours a week worth of work to write the whole Book of Mormon if they were simply translating at a small fraction of the average reading speed. The time ratio allows for a lot more work being done on the book.
4 – Joseph Smith did say that events took place in North America and later said Central America could be the location as well. Regardless he kept going with the best possible locations but after he made definite claims such as the white Lamanite being from the Midwest.
5 – Many inconsistencies and oddities that apologists have answers for, however, these pile up on each other.
1 - Just about everything. May have been good originally, but it has gone way off kilter.
2 - Okay, don't wish to look like I'm being lazy on the women - First women gave blessings and took part in baby blessings an such, but no longer do so.
3 - Many callings were made in priesthood only callings within the last 80 years, therefore removing women from most callings in the church.
4 - Women are more pure and spiritual than men ... yet don't have any authority? Vice-versa men are just pigs and dogs and unspiritual and look at porn, the sexism is going both ways now from the same old men.
5 - The church almost exclusively does not believe porn or masturbation is a problem for women at all. Sadly (if you believe these things are possibly good) they are right in many cases since many women in the LDS faith show much less interest in sex than there fellow age category peers.
6 - Women should stay in the home, and fathers who do are 'odd.' It is beneficial for a parent to be home for the kids, but studies show it isn't always all that important especially once the kids are out of the toddler age.
1 - Noticed I had put the 1st vision pic up in an earlier post and was like, "Hey, I should add this in, so ..." - Usually people embellish stories over the years, the folklore episode on Mormon Expression talks about this a lot. Joseph Smith did just the same thing.
2 - Like the picture says, there's some odd differences. One account I read about recently said that is was an angel, and possibly one of the characters in the BoM.
3 - At first it was simply one heavenly messenger and it didn't deal with a restoration, even after 'restoring' the church.
4 - Then it was two, but maybe not God and Jesus, then it was Father and Jesus.
5 - The age differences are a little fishy.
6 - Satan was only mentioned later I believe.
7 - Point is that the accounts get more and more extravagant just like any folklore piece, or myth, or made-up story.
I immensely enjoyed choosing the pictures.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Okay, so I avoid posting twice in one day but I couldn't resist this. There are videos up advertising my blog! I think.
I mean, it is my blog, and I think he's advertising, but I can't be sure. Either way, here are the vids, thank you for doing them. The guy (who kinda looks like Jesus ... very suspicious indeed) seems to have lots of Mormonism things on his page, regardless, thanks.
I mean, it is my blog, and I think he's advertising, but I can't be sure. Either way, here are the vids, thank you for doing them. The guy (who kinda looks like Jesus ... very suspicious indeed) seems to have lots of Mormonism things on his page, regardless, thanks.
Well, some quick updates with life. I'm officially back to going to UofU this fall, accepted again, the coffee group had a new record of 60+ ppl if we count half of the communists group who almost all are atheists and in our group, lol. Who also might be just using our group to advertise, but I don't really care. There is a letter to the editor at the Daily Universe from a couple weeks ago talking about the religious discrimination BYU has towards postmos and that's good that it's getting out there.
In fact here's some links to it from postmo. and redditt as two examples.
I also found out BYU finally did block my blog, and now there are some students talking about my blog and trying to find me to kick some ass. I'll probably do a post on this at some point. As it talks about me and I'm so vain I can guarantee this one will happen in less than 3 months.
A Student Secular Alliance will begin at UVU sometime this summer. We now have enough people in the Utah Valley Atheists group that are current students that are interested and a professor will support it so that will be going. With that we could fund bringing in secular speakers an such so that our evil and terrible goals can spread like wild-fire. Also, U-COR (Utah Coalition of Reason) is getting in contact with some of us 'head honchos' with the group so we'll see what it means to become part of this "Umbrella Organization."
This whole post is just to throw out updates and to make you feel like I am writing something. I wish some of my TBM lurkers would make comments or send me emails or something to make my life more interesting. All I get is emails from people professing to be interested in meeting up and half of which never come out or stop replying. Maybe those are Honor Code spies who wish to catch me but then realize how nice and sweet a guy I am that they can't keep up their lying for Jesus. Or maybe when they realize I am actually a girl they begin to get very confused.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Agnostic atheism is the way to go, with a touch of openess towards deism. That's where my bets lay. And probably should include a fictional/sci-fi interest in pantheism, or where all matter/energy in the universe has some kind of intelligent aspect. like Gaia, where Everything could be considered God.
I think when something is unknown or not answered yet, and you fill in that hole with 'god' or even a deistic god, then you are attributing an occurrence to, or answering the unknown, with an aspect of something equally unknown. Just because we don't know everything there is to know does not mean a god 'did it.' To assert that because we can't yet explain how life got started (though we know how it evolved) that it must mean there is a god is simply wishful thinking, and reflects the same kind of thinking that our ancestors did by explaining how children were born, or how the sun rotated around the earth, or where lightning came from, or why people were sick. They attributed it to a god or gods.
Nowadays polytheists are pretty rare, but the questions and answers are generally the same. And the path is also generally the same in where the actual answers come to light. Religion gives an answer, tries to support it with facts, often cherry-picking or focusing on the hits and ignoring the misses, while science comes along, offers an answer, proves it, and give-or-take a hundred years and it will rework and revise and expand it's answer. Usually through many different people, sometimes competing but arriving at the same answers, while religious people generally get their answers from one person in authority (be it a book, or a prophet, or a preacher). We haven't yet thrown out a natural law to replace it with a supernatural law. We have done the reverse countless times.
I'm not sure where this comes from, maybe all the stuff with Japan and in the background my atheist gears are working. I now get extremely annoyed with statements such as "yay, my family was saved so praise God," or "all the missionaries are okay, none of them died, God protected them," while many also believe that God caused or at least allowed the disaster to take place which killed so many others. I want to see these people go to the families of those who are dead and tell them how God saved their missionary sons and daughters and how great he is. Actually, no, cause some people might considering some statements or videos made by people who think this is one of the best things to happen in these end times.
In this sense religion is pretty sick. I've seen a decent amount of support from China, while some South Koreans are evilly antagonistic as they are raised to hate Japan due to history. This is to say that culture is the biggest influence, but I think the biggest crowd of people who are overall pleased with what happened are religious folks who either think Japan deserved it, or that this is another sign that Jesus is comin' back right quick and boy is he pissed.
Also, let me say like so many others - stop forming prayer groups and spending money on these things. If you must spend a little time and money on some prayer for Japan then just send the money over there through some religious/service group. Seriously.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
I'd like to say that I am deeply sorry for not posting anything lately. In the words of one famous man ....
I have been busy like normal, probably more so right now though, or lately, than normal, but still no excuse for posting. I do have a couple of things to say though.
First, Leighton from Irreligiosophy (which has been linked on my blogroll for ages so if you haven't gone to see it, or even know who Leighton and Chuck are than you're a dumb@$$) has gotten in contact with me through my blog, and a friend through the atheists of Utah Valley group. Hopefully he will come out to party and then give all of us down here a shot-out on the podcast. I've promised him plenty of 18-22 y-o fresh, jubilant, probably virgin college chicks who may or may not have just recently left Mormonism and are itching to have wild orgy sex in front of TVs playing pornos while snorting crack off each others' backs. I hope this means he'll turn out.
Second, my blog (even though I've posted little in the last two months) still is pulling local people who feel a need to comment or send me emails. That is great guys and girls. And I like the people who send me emails who are at BYU giving me the thumbs up and telling me they are glad they found a post. But, being that I'm in a prickish mood right now I need to segue into a thought I've been having lately, which is this:
For all of you people who say "No, thanks I don't need community" ... f*** you! Not really, cause I understand, but I hope you realize that is dickish. Usually in person or through emails I offer to invite people to the group so they can laugh at all the funny pics and videos we've gathered, meet like-minded people that they can talk to openly and debate with openly without the fear of being turned in to bishops or losing friends. Also, just the fact that you could make new friends, like me, cause I never have people who want to hang out with me and I'm lonely.
So, the f u from a moment ago is not universal, just how I feel when I'm like "hey, I'd like to talk to you, debate some things, hang out, wanna be in the group or come to the next party?" and then you say "No, I don't need community" usually with some implied distaste which sometimes I take to mean "No, it sounds like you're a militant atheist or just trying to start a new religion." I did tell one person I thought he was ignorant if he thought being in the group meant you were a militant atheist, but oh well. Doesn't mean I hate these people, but I just think it's kind of lame.
Besides those people there are some who have made some friends and with the group so big now I think little cliques are forming. Oh! Status update!!! Over a 100 now. Yes, after having added the large and sturdy E**** our gay community has exploded and I think the group is actually over 50% from BYU now. Not that BYU would have any problem kicking out 50 people though. There is some slight progress being made with trying to figure out things with the Honor Code office, but I'll write on that later. Just like the Patriarchal blessings. Again, thank you to the dozen or so that submitted, I'll do that at some point, but lately I've stopped watching movies, reading books, and posting on my blog. Don't know why, but I expect my energy will be redirected back soon.
Also from my email section I got a guy trying to advertise through me ... and I'm fine with that, so long as he does a shout-out for all the atheists/agnostics/post-mos at BYU telling them that groups are forming underground. I discovered another small group of people who don't believe at BYU but haven't contacted them, it's on some discussion wall where I have to make an account blablabla and I'm too lazy for that. In fact I did make an account for another discussion board that had 3-5 ppl talking and told them to contact me and they didn't so ....
Anyways, I watched some of the vids and they are pretty funny. Here's the one on the Mormons that he did. I think I'll invest in some of those golden plates myself. I already have the toilet paper. I'll need to email him back and see where he's from ... possibly Idaho, just a guess, maybe ... but I should invite him out to things if he ever comes to Utah.
Lastly, I am quitting BYU and going to UofU. I don't know if I'll keep the blog going, I might have to change the title or something if I do. But being that people generally migrate to UofU from BYU and I have plenty of friends down there I think I'll still be involved enough to keep this going for another year.
Which, to that, I do have to thank everyone for the support and 'cheers' I sometimes get for having this half-rate blog, even you ... you people who tell me you don't wanna hang out or meet awesome people. I think some people don't need more friends than they have so they just don't care, or some don't wish to be a part of an atheist group even though they are non-believers ... which I don't get but okay, or maybe some are afraid of having their names associated with it, or going to the Coffee pod with 40 some loud militant atheists planning which church to burn. I miss one friend though, I posted his blog up on my bloglist as well, No Answers, and I wish he'd come back and hang out with us!
Till next folks ... and I won't be gone for 2 weeks this time.