Anti-Religionism vs. Agnosticism

Lately I've cyberfallen in with a crowd that is all too suspiciously eager to proclaim what a crock religion is in order to fly the flag of atheism, which even Richard Dawkins notes can only really be agnosticism. While I am an agnostic, I see no reason for triumphalism or hatred of religion, merely to proclaim one's position.

To be agnostic one need not replicate churches, crusades or -- Universe's Echo help us! -- an inquisition, with the variable "God" merely assigned a negative value. Nor need one feel too superior to religious people who, after all, put on their pants one leg at a time just like everyone else.

Yet this is what I often find.

In "real time," of course, plenty of agnostics go to Unitarian churches, Ethical societies and the like, which have bake sales and bazaars just like Our Lady of Mercedes or St. Elfric the Tasteful, only they don't have crosses anywhere. And they don't dare even whisper G-o-d.

Online, life is more polemical -- this is mostly about words, after all -- and it takes the form of ye olde high schoole "hate" clubs. We Hate Unfair Criticism has evolved into We Don't Thank Deities for the Deeds of Humans.

My suspicion is that these agnostics are just as religious (and illiterate about religion) as most religious people. They're just religious about their agnosticism. This is not to say that religion "wins" or religionists are better. Far from it.

My only contention, as someone who knows a thing or three about the Judaeo-Christian religious tradition and its foundational books and thinkers, is that it is not necessarily unreasonable to believe, and most real believers should experience doubts every now and then, just as it is not unreasonable not to believe.

Not believing is not a new thing to be, it's merely little more than simply not managing to wrap one's mind around notions such as a man-god, prayer, not to mention an invisible being of whom there is no direct evidence.

When one doesn't believe, one still is left with doubt, inquiry, tentativeness and the uncertainties of real science. Trust me. I know about this.

Why can't "VIPs" be regular people?

The heads of state and senior officials of 46 nations gathered here in Washington to discuss nukes turned up to be a major traffic and aural nuisance, not to mention hazardous to the woman cyclist who was killed by a Humvee in one of the 46 motorcades. Why can't VIPs travel like regular guys and gals?

Very Important People? In this day and age? When the only absolute monarch in the world resides in the Vatican and not even he is immune from well-deserved criticism? Pull-ease!

If these guys (and they are guys) were to get on the subway, who the hell would know who they are? Would you recognize Jans Balkende or Syed Yousuf Raza Gilan, let alone which countries they are from? Guys in suits, like every other man in Washington.

It would really be so much safer for these folks to travel like regular guys.

Suppose some deadly Canadian "terrorist" is following Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Isn't Harper much more of a target in a motorcade than, say, traveling in a beat-up Toyota? Who's going to believe such a car is carrying Canada's top elected official?

They could even wear typical American tourist gear as disguises. Imagine Crown Prince Sheikh Mohamed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan of Abu Dhabi wearing a National's cap, a Hawaiian shirt, shorts and sneakers. What Abu Dhabian (is that how they are called?) is going to recognize his excellency in that get up?

They could even have a private moment of fun at the summit: a contest to see who's getup is the funniest, the sharpest, the most unexpected. "Hey, isn't that Lee Myung-bak in that joggers outfit?" "Wow, Nursultan, you can really carry cameras, can't you?"

And what a relief to drivers and pedestrians with hearing! Just a thought.

Smallest, easiest writing tool in the world

While I don't usually post about computers and software, since there are gazillions of techie blogs, I really want to plug the software adaptation by my good cyberfriend Little Girl, called Book on a Stick.

It's a tiny file you can run on any operating system on any computer capable of connecting to the Internet with a browser. If you're reading this, you can use it. What's it for? Writing.

Why get it?

• It's totally free.
• It runs very simply on your browser (Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari, etc.) in any operating system (Linux, OS X or other Mac systems, Windows and more ...).
• The files it produces can be read in any computer with any system.
  

Little Girl admits it's based on on a similar tool called Wiki on a Stick.


"I liked the program so much that I wanted to get inside it and mess with its nuts and bolts to customize it," she wrote me. "After fiddling with it and changing some things, I liked my version(s) of it better."

It's your choice. I'm just passing this on.

UPDATE: Little Girl informs me that Book on a Stick now lives here:

http://bookonastick.wordpress.com