Geometry and a Flat Earth

We're told that the sun disappears over the horizon for the same reason that airplane contrails reach the horizon (which ironically is due to them following the curvature of the earth).  So let's consider perspective at night.  According to a Flat Earther I asked, Australia is about 10k miles from the US in a Flat Earth model.

We know that:

• $ \theta_{ele} = atan(h/d) $ Where h is the height of the sun off the flat earth and d is the distance to the sun's nadir point (directly below the sun). 
• When the sun is over Australia, it's dark in the united states.
• It's 10,000 miles from US to Australia.

Flat Earthers generally report that the sun is 3000 to 4000 miles in elevation. This is probably because if you tried to triangulate the sun (at approximately infinity miles away) from a curved surface you erroneously believed to be flat, you'd find that it appears to be about $ r $  miles away.

But how can that be?! $  atan(3000/10000) = 16.7  \degree $ !!. That's a pretty good elevation. About one and a half fists above the horizon! That would be pretty obvious! 

Making the small-angle approximation, these angles and distances scale approximately linearly.  To get as low as half of a fist above the horizon, we need 1/3 the height (let's say 1000 miles!). To get as low as one degree (still 2 sun widths) above the horizon, we'd need to be just 100 miles up. That's just at the edge of space. The sun could be hit with an amateyr  rocket!! 

With that, I've got no way to try to rescue this theory. The angles don't make sense.  Anyone got a way to make this problem work?

Comparing Flat Earth Models to Reality

I finally found a video which helped me understand the flat-earther model of a sun circling a flat earth. Thanks to p-brain for helping me out here.

Setting aside his disastrous misunderstanding of perspective, he has a decent point regarding how distant points converge at long distances.  The "plane" that the sun would orbit within would indeed appear to approach (though never quite cross) the horizon.

I suspect this claim falls apart when we start examining distances necessary to accomplish this.  Clearly the Sun isn't flying along at 30,000 ft like the contrails p-brain uses as an example.  Rather, it would need to be flying a minimum of 2-3x higher. My intuition is that the angles will come closest to working if we set the sun at an altitude equal to the radius of the earth (4000 miles) .  

So let's compare the two approaches. For the sake of simplicity, I'll assume the curvature of the sun's path is so slight that we don't notice it curving northwards. That's right, I'm going to give the Flat  Earthers a pass on the fact that we don't see the sun curving to the north! No "Where's the curve?!" from me.  

So anyways, the distinction is really easy to make. If you believe in a Flat Earth, simply measure the angle to the sun throughout the day and compare the following plot of arctan(1/x): 

If it's straight, the angular rotation is constant, which matches the spherical earth model:

1. If the solar angle matches the plot of $ arctan(1/t) $, then it's a flat earth. 
2. If the solar angle is a straight line, it's a sphere.

Note: The angle you need to measure is called the "Right Ascension" (RA).  Align a pole to point to the North Star at night. Measure the angle to the sun about this pole.  This could be done with a protractor oriented perpendicular to the pole on the back side (away from the sun). Note the angle where the shadow is cast.  Here's my attempt to draw the experimental setup.

Authenticating God

1.0 Introduction

How many times have you heard a Christian, Muslim, or other theist say something like:

I know I'm right because my beliefs are grounded in the ultimate truth of the Word of God.

There are a couple assumptions implicit to this claim:

1. Identification: That the claimant has proven beyond any doubt that his particular "Word of God" are actually words of god. There's a long list things which people claim to be the word of a god:
1. The Torah
2. The Christian Bible
3. The Quran
4. The Book of Mormon
5. Personal Revelation
6. A wide range of ramblings from people suffering mental disorders
In my experience, most theists will look at this list and beam with pride over their book, yet scoff at or mock the others as though they're no different from option "f". In short I have yet to meet a theist who can address this problem.   Most don't even seem to understand the issue.
2. Honesty: That the particular god they've authenticated is incapable of lying or  for some reason will never chose to lie.
3. Knowledge: That the particular god they've authenticated possesses or defines "ultimate truth". For example, is it possible that their god resides within a universe governed by another god? Their god might be completely unaware of this fact.  It could be that it knows everything about our universe, but is limited in its knowledge of the god's super-universe.

Complex infrastructure is used to authenticate users
on the internet

Authentication methods have been studied extensively in recent years. It turns out it's not trivial to authenticate a user.  It requires a common trusted agent (the Certificate  Authority or CA), a Registration Authority, which is trusted to store the registered certificates, and complex mathematics. It relies on algorithms which are easy to run in one direction, but difficult to run in reverse.  Specifically, two very large prime numbers can be multiplied together to form the digital key. It's secure because factoring that key essentially requires checking every possible number -- computationally prohibitive at least for the next several centuries.

Authentication is not easy, but it's possible. And even absent a trusted certificate authority, there are plausible mechanisms by which a god could have given evidence that authenticated itself in a holy book. None are present.

2.0 Identification

There's not a long list of ways that a text could authenticate. The most common method theists point to is prophecy. There might be others.

2.1 Prophecy!

The theists among you are no-doubt shouting, "But there's prophecy! That's proof that the Bible is divine." It isn't.  Not even close.  

• Suppose I could successfully predict a set of 5 of two digit numbers that will be drawn at random from a set of two-digit numbers. Millions of people try to do this each day, motivated by the potential to win money and they nearly all fail, but I have succeeded and won the lottery. Is that prophecy?
  No. It's luck. It may seem to ME like it's a prophecy, but it happens to someone regularly.
• Suppose I said that in 2016, there would be wars and storms and floods around the world.  Is that prophecy?
  No. There have always been wars and storms and floods. A person could make this claim about any year in human history and be correct.
• Suppose I said that the country Israel would exist. Is that prophecy?
  No. Israel exists now, it has existed at many times in the past, and will likely continue to exist in varying forms throughout much of human future. (much like the book of Revelation)

But let's imagine that before it happened, I predicted that a meteor would strike Russia in the Winter of 2015. This is an unusual event, I had no means of fore-knowledge. It would sure seem that this is a prophecy.  If I had managed to make that prophecy, would you presume they're god-like? Or would you assume I just got lucky? Or maybe it's just a trick. Maybe I bribed people to say I made the claim earlier but actually made it AFTER. Regardless, does this one astonishing prediction in any imply that every word I say is true?

2.2 Other Options

We often seem to be confined in our thinking to methods which were available to barely-literate authors of the original Bible.  There are lots of other ways that a god could demonstrate its supernatural powers. These are:

• Properly and accurately explain the origins of species and the beginning of the observable universe long before it was knowable
• Be made of an unobtainable material (maybe even not atomic) and readable by all humans
• Be present in all cultures and tribes around the world
• Be unalterable, incorruptible, impossible to deface.
• Be objectively clear and consistent throughout
• Not endorse slavery or genocide.
• Teach a morality where people are responsible for their own actions.   Not their great-great-great-…-grandmother's actions, and not excused by third-party torture.
• Not borrow from earlier myths

These are just some examples I could easily think of.  (I know. The last couple are jabs at the Bible.)

]Finally, the best way that Yaweh could authenticate himself is simply by introducing himself. Now. To all humanity. Maybe a bit like the Vogons did in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

3.0 Honesty

In a relationship of approximately equal peers, it takes time to establish trust in honesty.  It's not something that can be simply declared by one party and accepted by the other. In the Abrahamic mythologies, we are expected to simply accept that Yaweh is always honest. No reason or justification for this is presented.  It's simply part of the traditional beliefs which people are expected to accept without cause.

4.0 Knowledge

The original claim was that god knows all things. This became problematic because if Yaweh knows the future, then it's not possible to do something he hasn't foreseen and free-will becomes an illusion. This result renders original sin even more problematic than it already was since Adam and Eve had essentially no other choice than to commit the sin God had foreseen. 

Worse still, there are problems like:

• Can god know all possible things about himself or just his creation? 
• Is it possible that god (who claims to have all knowledge) is simply deceived? A lot of people seem to fall into this category.

In the end, nobody I'm aware of has validated the claim that Yaweh is all-knowing. I'm not even sure such a thing is possible. If the god is NOT all-knowing, it's possible that this fact is not known to him.

5.0 Conclusion

It's  a long and up-hill battle to demonstrate the "divine and inerrant"  natures of the Bible. In the 2000 years of Christianity's existence no such demonstration has been shown. 

Help for Those who Struggle with Faith

Doubt

Are you "struggling with faith"? Trying to figure out how it is that Christianity seems to make sense to so many people?  The miracles and supernatural just doesn't ever happen in reality, and you can't help but notice that ancient cultures weren't the best at interpreting the things they saw happening around them.

I have great news. You don't have to struggle with it any more! There's an easy way to be done with the struggle for good.  What's more, by never struggling with your faith again, you can live a life that's even more free and fulfilling you ever imagined. You'll never wonder why bad things happen to good people or why God created cancer and malaria.

First, we need to carefully understand the problem itself.  "Struggling with faith" is negative language. It makes people feel shame and guilt over your reasonable doubts. A more neutral phrase might be "doubting your deeply held beliefs."   Put this way, it's not so negative, is it?

Doubts are a natural reaction when we're asked to believe something incredible without supporting evidence. There's nothing wrong with your doubts. In fact, they're very healthy. You would insist on reasonable evidence for any other belief in your life.  In fact, it would be unfair or dishonest to give your religious beliefs a free-pass.

Most people learn their religion as a young child.  They accepted stories as truthful before they had the critical thinking skills to fairly evaluate the claims. This isn't just true for Christianity. It's broadly true for all religious beliefs. Now that you're an adult and you've learned to evaluate things rationally, you're entitled to reevaluate.

So what will you find when you rethink things? What conclusions are you willing to accept? Can you give yourself permission to reach the scary conclusion? It's okay if you discover you were wrong all this time.  You're not bound to your religion by some kind of curse. You can change your mind and keep all the values that are important to you. You work ethic, love, and honesty aren't your religion's values. They're your values. You can keep them.

So how do you put an end to your struggles with faith? It's pretty simple. Stop struggling. Let go of the obligation to believe what your parents taught you. You have the right, even the obligation to figure out what's true for yourself. And it's okay if you reach a different conclusion.

So congratulations for your new-found doubt. Congratulations for bravely questioning the things you've always just assumed.  And congratulations for giving yourself permission to reach whatever conclusion is rational.

Towards an Objective Assessment of Scriptural Prophecy

Introduction

I want this neon sign!

I've poked at prophecy in the past. I assert that it's better explained as post-hoc favorable interpretation than as legitimate future-telling. A Christian asked me to expand on how we can apply Bayes' Theorem to prophecy.  On the surface, this seems like a trivial task, but it turns out to become pretty murky since the likelihoods of the various events are very hard to quantify. Nevertheless, I think it's instructive to consider.

Background

Bayes' Theorem is a theorem in probability and statistics which computes the likelihood of related events given some assumptions.  In its simplest form, it states:

$ P(A|B) = \frac{P(B|A) P(A)}{ P(B) }  $

Where P(x) is the probability of x being true, and P(x|y) is the probability of x being true, assuming that y is true.  x and y being events or observations.

Method

For starters, let's consider what I think is the meat of prophecies: That they support the claim of divine and infallible nature of a holy book. Let us ask Bayes, "What is the probability that a holy book is divine ($div$) given that a prophecy it contains is true ($pro$)." That is to say:

$ P(div|pro) = \frac{P(pro|div) P(div)}{ P(pro) }  $

I'm not sure if we'll be able to get very far, but let's dive in, shall we? 

Divinity Yields Accurate Prophecy?

$P(pro|div)$

What is the chance that a prophecy will be true in a divine book?  That depends on who you ask and what you assume for the nature of the divinity which inspired the book.  That being said, be careful what you apply to this probability.  Too low and the $ P(div|pro) $ approaches zero.  Too high and a failed prophecy will prove the Bible isn't divine.

Likelihood of Divinity

$P(div)$

What is the chance that a particular holy book is divine without any other assumptions?  Again, this depends dramatically on the incoming assumptions about the holy book in question. 

• Many presuppositionalists enter the discussion with $ P(div)  = 1 $. 
• If you assume that one book is divine among all titles ever written, your value for $ P(div) $ is very close to 0.  
• If you assume that of the four holy books (Torah, Bible, Quran, and Book of Mormon), one and only one is divine, you get $ P(div) = 0.25 $ 

To be honest, I'm not satisfied with any of these answers.  All of them are pretty arbitrary given that we have no way of knowing if or how often books are divine.  

Likelihood of Prophecy being True

$ P(pro) $ 

What is the likelihood of the prophecy coming true without any assumptions about the divinity of the book in question? In evaluating this likelihood, it's important to consider:

1. If people believing the book is divine will make the prophecy more or less likely to come true
2. The likelihood that the event would happen anyways

In other words, to determine if the prophecy is true, we must consider it in the context of the events we know to be true

$P(pro|evt) = \frac{P(evt|pro) P(pro)}{ P(evt) }  $

$P(evt)$ in the denominator means that if the event would be likely to happen anyways ("There will be wars and famine and disease!!!") then the prophecy isn't likely to be true.

$P(pro)$ in the numerator means you have to guess at the likelihood of the specific prophecy being true. I'm not sure how to estimate this value. Perhaps this could be done by comparing it to other prophecies in the book?

$ P(evt|pro) $ is the probability of the specific events, given that the prophecy is true. Again, this is very subjective, but it means you must clearly define what your "event" is and assess its likelihood given the prophecy being true.  If there are other ways of fulfilling the prophecy, they reduce this likelihood.

Discussion

I'm not going to drag you all the way through a specific example.  My intention in this post is to communicate the various terms that need to be considered when assessing the likelihood of a book's divinity given that a prophecy is true. Hope this helps.

Extra Credit

Suppose we believed that $P(div) = 1$ and $P(pro|div) = 1$. Show that $P(pro)$ must be equal to unity and that therefore ANY prophecy which can be shown to be false proves the assumptions are wrong -- either the Bible is not divine or the divine agent produces false prophecies.

If Bible stories were named like Aesop's fables

Now that I'm no longer in the Christian church, it seems so painfully obvious that Bible stories are simply attempts to explain the world around us, and rather juvenile ones of that.

My kids love reading Aesop's fables and "just so" stories so I thought it would be fun to remap some Bible story titles into Aesop's fables titles. So for a little fun, let's think up some new names for classic Bible stories that better fit the genre!

• Genesis 3 (The Fall of Man): 
• "How the Serpent lost his legs"
• "How Survival Became Hard"
• "Why Birth Hurts a Woman"
• Genesis 5-7 (Noah's Ark):
• "How the Rainbow got its Colors"
• "The Old Man and his Boat"
• Exodus 12 (Passover)
• "The Chosen People's Escape"
• "How the Red Sea got its Name"
• Exodus 20 (10 Commandments):
• "How Killing Turned Out to be Wrong"
• "The Twisted Morality of Jealous Inmortality"
• Book of Job: "Why Your Day Sometimes Sucks"

I'm sure there are other good examples. Or better names for the stories I've suggested. Leave some comments in your tweets or in the comments below. I'd love to hear your ideas. Thanks for reading!

Coming Out Atheist Message

I'm toying with the idea of a short & sweet coming out message to my friends, many of whom went to Christian youth group with me. This would probably come as a minor "huh" moment for most of them.
I'm not sure how serious I am about posting this on Facebook. Probably not very, because I'm not really the type to make a big stink about my beliefs. I thought this might be helpful as a Coming Out Atheist letter for others. Here's a draft:

About 20 years ago, I started sincerely exploring the reasons why I believed in God. True things withstand scrutiny, and it was important to me that I be consistent in the things I accept as true. I considered the strength of the foundations of my religious beliefs. The reasons I thought had for believing in a God were not at all convincing when examined honestly. 

Absent a defensible foundation for God belief, I considered the only honest conclusion would that God is not likely to exist. Looking across the history of human religions, the progression from polytheism to monarchy-polytheism to monotheism is all too clear. I'm quick to dismiss all those silly ancient beliefs like Roman and Greek pantheons. What objective evidence could I point to when asserting that Christianity is somehow different?

The magical beliefs surrounding Christianity fell as well. It's clear from our understanding of the brain that my consciousness resides there in. And that its demise will surely mean the end of my consciousness. There's no rational reason to believe that I will somehow survive the death of my brain. In short, it's wishful thinking that directly conflicts with everything we learned about consciousness.

This last realization took some time to come to grips with. I was raised to believe that my religion made me immortal. That loved ones lived on in a magical place where there was no pain or suffering. Where they were aware of the happenings here on earth. They could possibly even read my mind. I believe that such would be my fate as well, and coming to grips with my mortality was by no means trivial.

I've lived my last 20 years without any sort of God belief and couldn't be happier. My version of immortality is the influence I have on those around me. It's rewarding to realize that I can be inspirational to those around me and that they will carry forward my vision, my joy, and my curiosity to others.

 #NormalizeAtheism

Open Letter to Christians

Note: If you are a believer, you will naturally read it as a cynic. You'll look for quick opportunities to dismiss the things I say which make you uncomfortable. Be cognizant of this tendency within yourself. When you notice yourself thinking "That's ridiculous!" or "What an idiot!", use that as a cue to stop and consider the claim more carefully.

I was once a Christian. Just like you, I felt Jesus's love. I talked to him through my prayers. I believed he loved me personally. But knowing is more important than believing, so I explored the justifications for the beliefs I was taught as a child. This exploration of my core beliefs was both frightening and incredibly valuable for me. If you're ready to consider the same, I have some fundamental questions to ask you, or rather for you to ask yourself. I'll lay them out below.

How do you know it's real? 

If it's a feeling, have you considered that every religion has the same sorts of feelings about their particular incompatible beliefs? I occasionally attend secular services and have the same feelings of joy and love and awe I had in church.

If you know because the Bible is true, how did you learn that? Did you test it yourself? Or did you learn that from an authority figure as a child? What method could possibly confirm that  the entire Bible is accurate?  It's passed through so many human hands.  How would you know if some of them influenced it or even created it?

I've heard so many times that he Bible is true for one reason or another.  Here's a few and some questions about each:

• The Bible is true because the stories are confirmed by archaeologists and / or historians.
  This certainly can't be true in its entirety.  Many parts of the Bible stories couldn't be verified if the events happened yesterday.  Take for example the stories in Matthew 8, Healing people and driving demons into a herd of pigs. Such stories leave no historical or archaeological trace to be verified.  If someone told you this happened today, what evidence would you need to believe it?
• The Bible says all scripture is God-breathed.
  The Bible makes claims in its text, just like the Koran or the Odyssey. Its original authors or their intentions are lost to history. But make no mistake: The bible you hold in your hands is man made. Humans printed it. Before that, humans translated it. Before that, humans copied it. Before that, humans wrote it down. I could fabricate anything I want and call it a "bible." So could any of those other humans along the way. We would never know. Each of these steps is subject to human error or worse: deliberate misrepresentation. 
• If the Bible isn't true, the consequences would be bad
  By this logic, we should reject that the holocaust ever happened.  It's very negative, reflects poorly on humanity, and I'd very much prefer that it didn't exist. But it does. And pretending it doesn't just because I don't like it would be dishonest. For me, honesty is more important than happy outcomes. I hope that's true for everyone, but I'm not sure.

Would you believe it today?

You were most likely taught your religion as a child. The vast majority of religious people follow the religion of their parents or their local culture.  What do you think of other religions from other parts of the world which you learned about as an adult? Good examples might be Scientologists, Mormons, or Buddhists.  Did their beliefs like reincarnation or alien visitors seem silly or absurd? Are you able to take an outsider's perspective at your own beliefs? Seriously challenge the assumptions you've taken for granted since childhood. If you're Christian, consider this: 

• How does the death and suffering of Jesus pardon your own sins?  How is that moral or ethical to transfer guilt like that? We'd NEVER let someone else take the punishment for a criminal. Isn't that basically what God did with Jesus?
• Do you really believe that your faith is somehow different from the faith of other religions or sects? 
• It's plainly evident that people can firmly believe false things. You're a person. How do you keep from believing false things? 
• Do you apply the same kinds of skeptical and rational thinking to religion as you do to making a purchase or healthcare decisions? Why or why not? 

Conclusions

I believe that honesty in our beliefs requires us to treat all claims equally.  And in my personal experience, believers do not.  It's common to give one's own belief system a free pass on all the absurd claims while criticizing others for beliefs that to an outsider seem no more absurd. 

It's very hard to be objective about faith.  In fact, I believe the church tries to teach us not to.  But honesty demands objectivity, and true things stand up to scrutiny. Giving your personal faith a pass on scrutiny is tantamount to being dishonest with yourself. 

Why Souls Do Not Exist

Poem of the Soul by Louis Jammot

The idea of a "soul" was one of the last things I clung to as I drifted away form the Presbyterian religion. After I realized an ethical god couldn't torture someone for not believing when he's conspicuously absent, and a much more ethical judgement would be based on the values of a person's life, I began to question whether my consciousness would survive my own death. I now firmly believe such ideas are bogus myths for three main reasons:

• The idea originated in a time when thinking mechanical machines were unimaginable.  Today, cell phones are miniaturized, portable, and carried in most people's pocket.
• Any connection to a non-physical world must violate conservation of mass, momentum, or energy
• Studies of brain damage by injury and stroke show that all parts of your person can be affected: memory, emotion, cognition, personality, and values. 

It's easy to understand why someone would like to believe that their consciousness will continue beyond their own death -- even though it clearly didn't exist before their birth.  The problem with comforting or pleasant ideas is that we have a tendency not to question them. But upon a deliberate and rational review of what we know, it's clear that the concept of a soul is very unlikely to be true.  Below, I will discuss each of the three main points.

In the days of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, they believed it was not possible for something mechanical to think.  The psyche was conceived as a model which could explain the apparent problems. The psyche was split into three main parts to explain our ability to both desire and abhor something at the same time (e.g. stealing a toy).  With the advent of modern computers and information theory, it is becoming more and more clear that mechanical (or electrical) things can INDEED think. Modern pharmaceuticals can alter emotions, suggesting these parts of our "soul" are within our bodies.

Landauer's principle states that the minimum amount of energy necessary to erase a bit of information is kT ln 2, which is roughly 0.017 eV at room temperature. Recently, some have suggested that information could be created or destroyed by transfer of angular momentum without affecting energy.  Still, a conserved quantity must be altered.  Now, suddenly, if the "soul" is to convey information in the form of feelings or thoughts or actions, it must also alter our world, seemingly the laws of conservation in of physics to do so.

Finally, it's clear from the medical research into patients suffering brain damage that all parts traditionally thought of as "soul" are affected. What more is there to our consciousness than our memories, personality, emotions, and thinking abilities?  Yet each of these faculties are affected by brain damage int he right location.  I personally watched my Grandfather lose his mental faculties after his stroke. He didn't remember my name. He had been very conservative but was suddenly uninhibited.  He was definitely not thinking clearly, needing a lot of help.  

Medical researchers have also determined that a strong magnetic field can disrupt mental activities in a specific portion of the brain. Finally, functional MRI scans help confirm the linkage between brain damage and specific regions of the brain where aspects of our persona are handled. If our personality were somehow stored outside our bodies, how could it possibly interact with us? Why would loss of certain aspects of our "soul" map to particular areas of brain damage?

My Boy Scouts of America Survey Inputs

Boy Scouts of America asked me to take a survey.  Here are some of the comments I left:

I forget the exact question, but it's something like, "I enjoy participating with my son...".  I ranked it fairly high, but not the top and left this comment:

I've been Cubmaster of a large and successful Cub Scouts pack for over two years now. Many months into my service, I learned that as someone who happens to not believe any gods exist, I'm not technically welcome to serve.

Or maybe I am.  The policy is unclear. There's something about believing in things larger than ourselves. Like humanity? physics? The universe? I've not made an issue of it, but it's a lingering concern and it weighs heavily on my willingness to volunteer in the future.  I sincerely hope BSA can adopt a policy of non-discrimination soon.

If there was one thing that I would suggest to improve my Scouting experience, it would be. . .

End policies which discriminate based on beliefs and sexuality. Scouting SHOULD be a safe place for all, not another opportunity to exclude the out-group.  These policies must extend to all people: adult leaders, not just scouts.  Our kids see the bigotry wrapped in "family values".  They notice when an organization practices school-yard style exclusion.  

Discriminatory policies are a vestige of old cultural ignorance of beliefs and sexuality.  It's time to end them.

Why My Family Attends a Unitarian Universalist Fellowship

This is how I inoculate my children against the glittering false promise of eternal life and the frightening empty threat of eternal torture.

There's a lot of people in the atheist community who bristle at anything which resembles a church. And I can sympathize with those feelings. However, since my wife and I have different religious views, it's important that I remain at least a little respectful towards the "I believe it because it makes me feel good" perspective.

My wife wanted a community where our kids would learn about different religions, where acceptance of all people would be a standard value that's taught.

On our first visit, the minister Amy, approached us and welcomed us to the community. She asked what we were specifically looking for, and my wife described our differing religious views. When my wife mentioned that I am an atheist, Amy said that this particular service included some prayer from the Christian tradition, and she hoped it wouldn't be off-putting for me. The mere thought of receiving such a warm welcome at my parents' Presbyterian Church is laughable.

During social time after the service, I have met a great many welcoming people of a wide range of faith traditions. All Have been welcoming of my atheist / humanist views, and a significant fraction share them. This isn't the "welcome" I might get from my parents' Presbyterian church, which is more of a "your wrong beliefs are welcome so we can try to fix them". Rather a sincere welcome as I am. Without the slightest inference there's anything wrong or that needs to be changed. The Unitarian Universalist Fellowship is a small island where I can be open and honest about my views deep in the heart of the Ohio Bible belt.

When there was interest in volunteers to teach Sunday school, I was skeptical that out atheist such as myself would be welcome teaching religious education courses. My contributions were warmly welcomed, and I was pleasantly surprised by the particular curriculum being taught. There was no dogmatic "one true answer", rather there was a concerted effort to teach a broad range of different religious beliefs. This, in my view, it is one of the strongest defenses I can provide my children against the irrational beliefs of the various Christian (mostly) theologies that surround them here in Southwest Ohio.

After Sunday school, I discuss the lessons with my kids. We talk honestly about what was good and what wasn't. We talk about why some people believe and why other people don't. We talk about the failure of faith to result in consistent worldviews between the thousands of religions around the world and throughout time.