Recovery from Atheists of Utah

Thoughts on recovery from Atheists of Utah, and similar "secular," "humanist," and "naturalist" groups.

A new religion is born, and as with all religion there are de facto elders, priests, doctrines, dogmas, belief maintenance, heresy trials, and excommunications. With the new religion of atheism things are a bit more subtle, but not by much.

Recently in the very exclusive ultra-leftist-atheists-only closed facebook group for A of U I had the audacity to state that I thought Duck Dynasty was provocative, useful, and mostly ok. That was heresy for the group leader.

Here's an expanded version of a response I posted in their closed exclusive de facto ultra-leftie-atheist group:

You're already well on your way to becoming an anti-normal-family religion.

Here's one recent example of the leftist hatred for the normal productive family:

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/stfu

The common stance of your membership falls along similar lines to the STFU-Parents-woman who'd prefer that normal families just shut up about the joys of having children.

In response to my expression of appreciation for Duck Dynasty, your group has given religious responses thus far, straight from the latest human religion.

Belief maintenance. Heresy trials. 

I don't wish to belong to the religion of atheism plus or similar dogmatic faiths.

The founder of your church hooked up with a pro-life atheist and had a kid with her. But she was never welcome at SLVA (Salt Lake Valley Atheists) because of her views. SLVA was decidedly pro-ultra-left.

The fruit of the founder's outreach work has resulted in an ultra-Stonewall focus for your group. That's just the way it is. But it's a bit ironic that the founder of A of U ended up having a kid with a woman forcibly excluded from SLVA because of her social conservative views.

Hmmm. As the world (or stomach) turns. I would have expected better, but it's all rather par for the course in the long history of human religion.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled mirrored echo chamber of unquestioned newly dominant paradigms.

Is the judgement of the church court in now? Sounds like it may be.

Yes I like Duck Dynasty. 

Heresy for A of U.

If you want to have a discussion that's one thing. But if you're just a priest of a church, who pulls every tool out for discounting an argument other than possibly reasonable ones, then I'm not particularly obliged to respond - any more than I am to the leader of any other religion.

---

Atheists of Utah was recently named the "best Religious Group" and a runner up for the Best Social Group, as awarded by Q Salt Lake. Apt & appropriate awards. But being at the pinnacle of appreciation for the ultra-left is not all it's cracked up to be. An ultra-leftist cult. That's what Atheists of Utah has become in my view - and so I don't wish to be a member.

Were a group to be founded to help people recover from this new destructive cult of the left, here's draft short & long descriptions for such a hopeful recovery group:

Short description:

At Recovery from Atheists of Utah we help you recover from recovery from religion, particularly the religion known as Atheists of Utah.

Long description:

Did you leave one cult just to find you'd jumped right into another? Atheists claim their beliefs are falsifiable - unless you question the social-agenda aspects of their views. THEN the de facto heresy & excommunication trials begin.

Here at Recovery from Atheists of Utah we recover from the ultra-leftist side of atheism. The extreme-cultist left. Yes the right has their problems, but the left can be just as dogmatic and abusive.

An open exchange of ideas is welcome here. We don't resort to unwarranted name-calling as a means of shutting people up or belief maintenance!

Humans have in and out group morality.

Our in group morality is expanding, and that's a good thing.

But human nature DOES naturally include shaming for certain activities which are otherwise destructive. A damn hard thing for an ex-conservative religionist to realize is that SOME of that shaming actually is a damn good thing for the future of humanity.

Speaking the truth. Liberal cultists don't like it any more than conservative cultists do.

We didn't leave one religion just to join another.

Atheists of Utah, in the view of the author of this description, has become a leftist cult. Just as abusive as cults on the right.

But it's worse in my view: It's a part of the LDC - the Liberal Death Cult, a cult which does not value life & survival - again in the view of the author.

Does this description go too far? Maybe. My beliefs may be falsifiable. I'm willing to listen to evidence. They however, apparently, are not.

Recover from the dogmatism of the left. Avoid politically correct destructive whirlpools of consensus, mirrored echo chambers, and unquestioned newly-dominant paradigms.

Does the right have a point, at least on some issues? It's heresy amongst liberals to say: YES!

But again, we didn't leave one fucking cult just to join another.

Recover, from Atheists of Utah, and similar destructive leftist cults. How? Through honesty, and avoiding affiliation with all de-facto ultra-leftist new-cults. Cults & religions, on the left & the right. We need to find a new way to be human than these petty shallow infantile first-attempts: Through science, honesty, honest history, and being willing to listen to ALL sides.

Does the other side have a point? For example, the guys on Duck Dynasty? What if they do? What if the right is right on at least some points? Heresy, heresy, heresy to admit this. But the LDC is stuck in their own narcissistic hole.

These are all the views of the author - after a lot of observation & seeing what happens on all sides - PLUS after taking a step back from America and seeing what happens in other countries. Come to find out social-conservatvism, aspects of it, DOES actually help humanity survive, thrive, and be happy. Whodathunkit?

The TBMs (True Believing Mormons) don't like my blog. AND the TBULAs (True Believing Ultra Liberal Atheists) don't like it either. Maybe that means I'm making progress!

It's also worth noting that we may need recovery from the Exmoron Foundation. That's another story.

---

Related blog posts:

The Atheist Movement needs move laxative - Making room for social & political conservatives!
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-atheist-movement-needs-move.html

Advice for Social Conservatives & Moderates, from a Family Values Atheist
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/2014/05/advice-for-social-conservatives.html

http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/atheism
http://jonathanshome.blogspot.com/search/label/homosexuality

response to: 'Porn site claims attack by LDS Church servers' and questioning sex with 'boys' in gay culture

Story in "Q Salt Lake:"
Porn site claims attack by LDS Church servers

"The owner of the pornographic site, MormonBoyz.com, says their site was under a denial of service attack late Sunday night and that the IP addresses of the servers being used to implement the attack were traced to being housed in a ZIP code that only contains the blocks of Temple Square, the LDS Church Office Building and the LDS Conference Center."
...as from
http://gaysaltlake.com/news/2013/08/05/porn-site-claims-attack-by-lds-church-servers

Taking a step back, the verbiage reportedly used on the site in question is a bit disconcerting.

...as from the story, where they quote from the site MormonBoyz.com:

"These guys are every bit as sexual as other boys their age, but are also wonderfully innocent and wholesome. And actually, you might even say that because of their deprivation, these boys are pent up and starved for release, and that makes them even more sexual...”

...Sounds like 11 or 12 year olds to me. What do you think?

The use of the term "boys" may be popular in homosexual culture & circles, but I wonder if it's really appropriate or useful - or telling? I have a homosexual nephew and have been to homosexual bars and parties. So I'm quite familiar with what goes on.

I have no special allegiance, and I don't particularly care about being "blacklisted" by fellow homosexuals since I'm not one. So, let me say that while it's a bit strange that they received a denial of service attack possibly from Mormon HQ, the use of the term "boys" is also strange. How about sexymormonmen, or mormonmen. But the use of the boy term tempts me to assume that sex with underage children is more associated with homosexual culture than some would otherwise like to admit.

Try to excommunicate me for saying so, but there is a crappy creepy underside to "gay culture" which is not politically correct (in "progressive" circles) to talk about.

For example, the man referenced in the following page was readily accepted back into the "gay community" after serving prison time for child rape (I was a first hand witness to this acceptance):

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/695261750/Secret-shame-Predator-was-coach-Scout-chief.html?pg=all

The propensity for my own nephew to constantly post near naked pictures of himself in his underwear on facebook, while at the same time being supposedly "involved" or somewhat committed relationship to another man is telling, don't you think? And the use of the term "boy" this and "boy" that as homosexual men ogle other "men," or dare we say, "boys," in gay bars & parties is also telling.

Maybe there is biological exuberance in the human form of sexual expression known as homosexuality. But on the other hand just because something is "natural" doesn't mean we have to accept 100% of all that goes on. We don't. There's all sorts of human activities which we could be described as natural but which should nevertheless be curtailed. It's a balancing act and everyone draws the line somewhere. I would just like to suggest that people who engage or advocate for, explicitly, or implicitly, sex with underage children, deserved to be called out for what they are: child rapists & apologists for such.

Are Catholic priests who rape young boys "straight?" Doesn't sound like it to me, not according to the verbiage used by the owners of MormonBoyz.com, and not according to verbiage frequently used in gay bars and parties.

I know there's men who are rather highly genetically predisposed to be homosexual. Perhaps the shallow and childish nature of my own nephew was a misnomer? I imagine there are some "family values" homosexuals out there who don't spend 100% of their free time ogling "the boys" at bars & parties, and parading around in front of each other near naked on forums like facebook. Certainly there's slutty crazy straight people who're also selfish & largely a bunch of wastrels (particularly those who choose to not have kids & be "child free").

But again, one thing about straight sex is that it naturally leads to responsibility and growing up. Gay sex doesn't, and the results are sometimes a near permanent petty childhood state. I've observed this state first hand, and I believe it deserves to be commented on, particularly when convicted child rapists are not directly ostracized and confronted in the "gay community" when they get out of prison.