Kevin DeGraaf’s Blog

I said I was leaving, but I’ve changed my mind (for now). Lisa and I, as a newly-married couple, bought a house in Ypsilanti, MI.

We moved most of our furniture and possessions last weekend, and we’re cleaning up the last of our junk over the course of this month.

Lisa and I became husband and wife on Saturday.  Heck yeah!

I was hit hard by the flu this week. I spent Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday stuck at home, hanging on for dear life as my body took radical steps to rid itself of these wonderful little guests. Many of my extended family members have had the flu recently, and as one of them aptly put it, “you want to DIE but can’t!”. I was able to return to work today and confront the mountain of tasks that had piled up, but if past illnesses are any guide, I won’t be at 100% for another week or so.

I thought it would be fitting to use part of my illness-induced downtime to start reading a new book: The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design by Richard Dawkins (yes, that Dawkins).

Can any cdesign proponentsists explain to me why any intelligent engineer would create bodies that are vulnerable to viruses, or that defend against them in such grotesque ways as vomiting, diarrhea, fever and malaise (preferably without any cop-outs that involve talking snakes and naked ladies)?

Also, today being “Good” Friday, I would like to bring to your attention this post at The Learned Pig.  Excerpt:

What’s so “good” about a Friday that commemorates someone being nailed to a piece of wood and left to die?

I proposed to Lisa tonight, and we’re engaged! 

One of our most fundamental rights as Americans, codified in the Second Amendment to our Constitution, is the freedom to “keep and bear arms”. While it would certainly be nice to live in an environment in which there was never any need to defend ourselves against violent threats, those of us who live in the real world must accept the harsh reality of the situation and deal with it accordingly.

Muggings, home invasions, rapes and murders happen every day, and while the risk of being the victim of one of these crimes is low and can be further minimized through smart decision-making, it can never be eliminated. So we are faced with a question: do we want to rely on the police to protect us, or should we be proactive and be prepared to respond to threats of violence ourselves?

The importance of the right to bear arms becomes even more clear when we remember the circumstances under which the Bill of Rights was ratified. Our country’s freedom was won only after a lengthy war against a brutal, unreasonable, tyrannical government, and the Founding Fathers correctly realized that firearm ownership was an important protection against the new federal government turning into the very type of oppressive regime that had just been violently thrown off.

Make no mistake, I am not advocating the overthrow of our government; I am simply pointing out that if we continue to head down the path of secret prisons, sanctioned torture, surveillance without oversight, the suspension of habeus corpus, and supreme executive power in general, it would be nice to have a way to press a political “reset button” and restore our cherished American liberties.

So, in order to protect myself and those around me, I chose to take a concealed-carry course back in October. Michigan is a “shall-issue” state, meaning that as long as a person meets a stringent list of criteria, the state shall issue him/her a permit to carry a concealed pistol in public. I received my concealed pistol license (CPL) last week, and then purchased a .40-caliber Glock 23 semiautomatic handgun (info, specs).

Those of us with civilian CPLs (as opposed to the CPLs issued to retired police officers) may carry our pistols anywhere in the state, except in the following “gun-free” zones:

• Per state law: schools, day-care centers, sports arenas, bars, houses of delusion worship (unless the presiding official approves), entertainment facilities with 2,500+ seats, hospitals, colleges, casinos, and courthouses.
• Per federal law: federal buildings and Post Offices.

These restrictions are ludicrous and exist only to pacify sheeple who would rather feel safe than actually be safe.

We CPL holders are at least 21 years of age, have been subjected to detailed background checks (no felonies, mental illnesses, restraining orders, dishonorable discharges, DUIs, etc.), have passed training courses covering safe firearm handling, marksmanship and the justifiable use of lethal force, and are legally bound to register our weapons and completely abstain from alcohol while carrying them.

In other words, we are exactly the sort of people who should be carrying firearms in schools, day care centers, arenas and the like. We, as responsible, law-abiding, armed citizens, serve as a useful adjunct to the police. When some deranged nutcase opens fire in a crowded building, having CPL holders around means that the bad guy can be neutralized without waiting for the police to arrive. Where concealed carry is banned, the innocent-bystander body count can soar.

Do proponents of gun control really think that criminals willing to use firearms to commit theft, rape and murder are going to give a second’s thought to laws preventing them from possessing guns in these locations in the first place? As nice as that would be, this isn’t utopia and we can’t stop criminal gun usage by simple legislative fiat. These restrictions simply increase the asymmetry between the good guys (who are shackled by the law) and the bad guys (who aren’t).

In closing, I’d like to quote from this blog post. I disagree with a fair number of the author’s positions, but he’s correct when he says:

I don’t carry a gun to kill people. I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don’t carry a gun to scare people. I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid. I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil. I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government. I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry. I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don’t carry a gun because my sex organs are too small. I carry a gun because I want to continue to use those sex organs for the purpose for which they were intended for a good long time to come.

I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone. I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m a cowboy. I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.

I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man. I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate. I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don’t carry a gun because I love it. I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Since I have previously commented disparagingly about religion on this blog, this announcement shouldn’t be too surprising…

After over two decades of unanswered questions and two years of serious study, I have completely rejected not only Christianity but faith itself.

I wholeheartedly embrace the position of atheism. My mind is finally free of the burden of delusion!

Following are the contents of three emails that I have recently sent. The first is my initial announcement, and the second and third are responses to a family member and a former pastor, respectively.

---

Am I hearing right that you have turned [atheist]? May I ask you what brought you to this decision?

That is correct, and I’d be happy to explain.

After a period of doubt and a great deal of reading and thinking, I came to the conclusion that there is no reliable, specific evidence to support a belief in the existence of a god or gods. Furthermore, there is plenty of solid evidence against such a belief.

I didn’t want to “de-convert”. As I struggled with ever-increasing doubt and tried to find answers to a wide variety of tough questions, I read plenty of Christian apologetics books and websites, trying to figure out how to remain a believer in light of all the problems and contradictions inherent in theism in general, and Christianity in particular.

Ultimately, I found all of the pro-God arguments to be unsatisfying rationalizations. I finally realized that the notion of “faith” itself is without merit — saying that something must be taken on faith is an admission that it can’t be supported with evidence and reason.

If you are interested, I will be glad to provide a slew of concrete examples and recommend some books and websites. However, it is not my intention to push atheism onto anyone against their will; I will understand if you don’t want to hear more.

I realize that this is a difficult thing to hear, because, as far as I am aware, you all take Christianity very seriously. Rest assured that my rejection of faith was based on analytical reason, not anger or bitterness of any kind.

I very much hope that all of my family relationships will remain intact and as un-stressed as possible. Lisa’s family all but turned their back on her when they initially heard about her decision (made about the same time as mine), and that was a very painful experience.

P.S. I suspect that you are going to worry that I am in danger of Hell. I realize that this would be a terrible feeling. The only consolation I can offer is that if you really think about it, the idea of a loving God damning people to eternal torture for the “crime” of thinking logically about religion is, to put it gently, absurd and barbaric.

Feel free to respond with any questions or comments.

---

Kevin, what about your entire family?

As I said, I sincerely hope that my decision won’t negatively impact my family relationships. I’m still just as happy to visit you, attend family parties, help you with computer questions, etc. as I was before.

My faith in the Lord has been proven over and over again during my lifetime.

You are perfectly free to believe that, but unfortunately, that’s not evidence, and evidence is the only thing that will change my mind.

I do not believe faith has to be proven, the Lord said come unto me with child like faith, did you not have faith in you earthly Father to take care of you, so how much more your Heavenly Father loves and takes care of you I just cannot accept your reasoming, you are thinking much too deep. The Lord wants you to take Him on simple faith

Plenty of other religions (Islam, for example) have holy books that say that you should have faith in their god. Why do you reject Islam and Allah? It’s because you realize that there’s no evidence for their beliefs, and there’s a large amount of evidence disproving them. We can easily agree that Muslims have delusional beliefs.

All I’m doing is applying the same standard of logic and reason to Christianity.

Your own Scriptures claim that your god provided plenty of evidence for his existence back in ancient times. Why would it be so hard for an all-powerful deity to continue to provide solid evidence?

For example (and these are just a few of the many possible examples), one scientifically-observable pillar of fire, talking burning bush, or resurrection of a dead person, here in the modern age, would be far more than enough evidence to convince every atheist on the planet to convert.

I don’t understand why you think that I’m “thinking much too deep[ly]“. If Christianity were true, it would have nothing to fear from deep, probing, critical inquiry and analysis.

can you see the wind blow?

No. I’m not sure what that has to do with the subject at hand. My guess is that you’re trying to say that we know that wind exists even though it’s invisible.

My response would be that we know that wind exists because it’s very easy to see its direct effects (e.g. moving leaves, breeze on your skin, etc.) and to explain it scientifically (differences in air temperature).

We can agree that wind exists not because of blind faith, but because of evidence and reason.

I am praying that you will listen for His Holy Spirit and pray the day will soon come that that your entire generations cannot be wrong,Kevin I love you so much, Yes He is a God of Judgement and there is a heaven and hell

A belief is not automatically true just because it has been around for a long time or has been accepted by many people.

For a long time, it was widely accepted that lightning was produced by the imaginary god Zeus whenever he was angry. We now know, despite a large number of people believing that for a long time, that that is completely absurd.

This knowledge came to us through science. Rather than the blind-faith Zeus explanation, evidence and logic allowed us to study lightning and figure out what’s really behind it (electrical charges).

I am sorry but I must share my strong. strong faith in My Lord.

Thank you for sharing it. I don’t agree with it, but I’m glad that we can have a discussion nonetheless.

---

Pastor (name withheld for his privacy):Thanks for your reply. I would like to address the points that you have made.

Wow! You took me by surprise with this note! I wish that you had spoken with me about your struggles with your faith in God before committing yourself to the path on which you are now travelling.

I should clarify for the record that I have not committed myself to atheism per se, but rather to the position that my worldview must be founded on logic, reason, and evidence. (Atheism is simply the inevitable result.)

This worldview is hardly indefensible. We all use logic, reason and evidence every day. We observe the world around us, gather knowledge from these observations, and put that knowledge to work in positive ways. All I’ve decided is to apply rational thinking to all aspects of my life; there is no longer any room for unproven superstition.

If you or any other religious apologist could provide a compelling rational (non-faith-based) case for a particular theistic belief system, I would gladly convert, as would, I suspect, virtually every other atheist on the planet.

It appears that you have fallen for the oldest trick in the book — subjecting God to the very limited resources of your (and my) puny mind. Do you really think that if God were small enough for our minds to understand fully or if he were governed by the very limited confines of human “rationality” that he would be a God worthy of our worship? Please. Satan used this trick on Adam and Eve long ago and has used it successfully with you and Lisa.

You are entitled to your opinion that I have fallen for a trick. I am equally entitled to my opinion, which is that religion is a delusion and that its existence can be explained through psychology and sociology.

(Please understand that I do not mean any disrespect when I use the word “delusion”. I am aware of its connotations, but I request that my usage
of that word be interpreted in the strictly denotative sense: a firm belief held in the face of contradictory evidence.)

The “God’s-ways-are-beyond-our-comprehension” argument is merely a rationalization.

Why do you reject Islam (or any other non-Christian religion)? Isn’t it because that belief system is not supported by evidence? Would you
accept a Muslim’s argument that a lack of evidence for Islam is not a bar to accepting it because Allah is too great or holy to be understood
by the “puny mind[s]” of mere mortals?

To quote a wise man: “Please.”

I invite you to consider the following: “I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” - Stephen Roberts

Put more simply: why do you reject Allah, Zeus, Thor, Baal, and the tooth fairy? There’s no more evidence to support their existence than there is to support the existence of Yahweh.

Kevin, there are lots of things that you and Lisa and others who call themselves “atheists” still believe that are completely irrational.

Such as?

Let me defuse one popular anti-atheist argument right away: that we claim to know with absolute certainty that gods (Judeo-Christian or otherwise) do not exist. If I (or any other atheist) claimed any such thing, you would be justified in calling my worldview irrational.

However, that’s a particularly egregious straw man argument (a logical fallacy). The only safe generalization about atheists is that we lack theistic beliefs, principally (though not exclusively) because we are thoroughly unconvinced of their veracity. This is wholly different from claiming that deities absolutely do not exist.

(You might reply that I have described agnosticism, not atheism. This is a common misconception — atheism is a matter of belief, while
agnosticism is a matter of knowledge. I will be glad to elaborate further and/or provide references upon request.)

I don’t think that you are prepared to think about that just now but someday you might be. Give me a call when that day comes. I don’t mean to sound dismissive. You are sincere in your beliefs, I’m sure. It sounds like you’ve done some limited research and study. But if you’re serious about getting at the heart of the matter you will subject “atheism” to the same irrational criteria to which you have subjected theism.

I am very serious about “getting at the heart of the matter” and I’m somewhat rankled by your allegations that I am not “prepared to think about” these issues, or that my research and study have been “limited”.

I gladly welcome a discussion. I would prefer that it take place via email. Thank you for your time.

Happy 21st birthday, Lisa!

Only three more work days until Vacation 2007!

As is our family’s tradition, we’re staying in Cedarville, MI (map, weather, site). Lisa and I are driving up on Friday (after celebrating her 21st birthday on Thursday).

Look for updates, pictures, etc. on this blog.