Friday, August 29, 2014

A Common Bullying Tactic (And The Magic Words To Counter It)

There was a commentary by Christian writer Ben S. Carson, regarding the removal and return of bibles to U.S. Navy Lodge rooms, published about a week ago in The Washington Times, which I believe beautifully illustrates one of the most common bullying tactics I have seen. Though I don't know that he was trying to shut down arguments using this tactic, I have seen this same strategy often used in such a way, in verbal arguments especially.
The very common bullying tactic was this: He simply stated as fact what should rightfully be called an opinion, implying that to disagree was to be wrong.
The author of this article flat-out asserts that atheism is a religion (in spite of the fact that I have never seen an atheist say this), that it is the belief there is no god, and that it requires strong convictions. He then compares bibles to something as innocuous and non-controversial as bottled water, and even says that removing bibles would impose atheists' "religion" on everyone else. He calls atheists "whiners" and says that they need to be given "big-boy pants" (because apparently all atheists are male; I know I was issued a penis when I stopped believing).
My main problem with this article is that, without asking atheists about their own "religion," Carson states his opinions as facts, as if to disagree with him is to deny reality. That is not what I, and many others, believe. And while I think that he was not trying to bully anyone, merely trying to please his Christian readers, the addition of two simple words, "I believe..." would have made him look far less arrogant, less confrontational, and would have made it much easier for me to respectfully consider his points. Arrogant certainty is potentially hurtful to those who disagree, and therefore makes enemies.
This article made me feel rather emotional, as I have been on the receiving end of tactics like his, used to put me back in line or bully me into agreeing, before. I have even occasionally used this strategy myself, though I now know how wrong and futile it is and try not to do so. In any kind of argument, whether atheists are talking about Christians, or the other way around, or if either side is talking about God or even a different topic entirely, it is much more respectful to others to preface at least your first statement with the words, "I believe..." or "I think..." or "in my experience..." etc.

Here is an example of what it looks like if both sides refuse to do this:

Believer: "Atheism is a religion."
Unbeliever: "No, atheism is a lack of religion."
"No, it's not."
"Yes, it is."
Believer: "Atheists hate Christians."
Unbeliever: "No they don't."
"Yes, they do. The bible says the world will hate us."
"The bible's wrong."
"No, it's not."
"Yes, it is."

This creates a stalemate or shouting match. Neither will be convinced by the other, and they are probably too emotional by this point to agree to disagree (after all, they both probably have hurt feelings from being flat-out told they were wrong).
Some people actually enjoy this process, and will do it all day long. I do not, and I believe it is destructive to relationships. If there are people in my life who are angry enough to enjoy a good shouting match, and I want to maintain peace with them without pretending to agree, I will have to "go around" their anger rather than confront it head-on.

What You Can Say:

"I don't believe that."

They may claim to know all the facts, but they would sound ridiculous trying to tell you what you believe. This can go one of two ways:

Something like this:

"I don't believe that."
"Yes you do!"
"Well, I don't think I do!"
 "You know it deep down."
"Well, I guess I'm not in touch with my 'deep down.' I may be wrong, but I always try to find the truth."
"You're lying. You just want to sin." (Or "You just don't want to accept reality.")
"I certainly hope not."

Or maybe it goes something like this:

"I don't believe that."
"Well, it's the truth."
"Well, maybe I'm wrong, but I always try to find the truth, and I don't believe this is it."
"It is."
"Okay. I know you believe that. That's okay with me."

These are just snatches of imaginary conversations, and I don't hope to represent real people or real arguments here, just possibilities.  I think that these tactics are much more likely to diffuse an emotional situation without someone having to capitulate or "lose." Both parties can walk away feeling like they have won something, if nothing more than peace or respect.
The real challenge is to remember to shift into this mode when you're in the midst of using confrontational tactics, returning them, or having them used on you. A quick explanation often works as well as an apology in helping to cool down a battle (and doesn't give the impression that you're apologizing for "being wrong"). "This is just what I believe," you can explain, "I know it's not your beliefs." Even acknowledging that they have different beliefs than you goes a long way towards being accepted by and making clear that you accept the other person, or at least towards a grudging truce.
It is especially hard to control one's emotions when someone close to you is making accusations about your character, but this tactic can also be used in that situation. I have far fewer fights with those I love now that I know not to speculate upon their character or motives, but I think that one will eventually forget and that some of that is inevitable. Stating what you think or believe can be used effectively if they are questioning your character.

For example:

"You only care about yourself!"
"I don't think that that's true. I try not to be selfish."

This will hopefully lead to them explaining why they believe you are acting selfishly, disrespectfully, etc. If not, you can repeat this mantra, that you try not to be whatever horrible thing, and ask them to explain why they think you are being that way.They will probably think that you are not in touch with reality, but they will not have an excuse to think badly of your character. If they do, that is no longer your problem; you've tried to make yourself clear.

It also works for unwanted psychological evaluations:

"You always do this! You always sabotage yourself!"
"I'm not trying to do it. If I am, I don't know it."
Or, "You're depressed."
(If you don't feel that way) "I don't think that I am. Why do you think so?"

This will turn the conversation onto the reasons for their diagnoses or solutions to the problem, rather than labels.
Of course sometimes this bullying tactic, stating an opinion as a fact, is not used maliciously or intentionally, as those who employ it do not realize that they are doing anything wrong. It may still be hurtful, but it becomes bullying only when it is used aggressively or intentionally to shut down and intimidate the opposition.
By using this one phrase, "I don't believe that," or "That's not what I believe," in a respectful manner, the conversation turns back onto beliefs, not "facts," which is actually where it was all along, though now both parties agree that this is so. While you cannot turn every bully into a friend, and you should by all means avoid physically dangerous situations (in which case this tactic may not be effective, and you shouldn't risk it), this will help to diffuse an emotional situation and calm things down a bit. By being sincere but firm, you will ensure that the worst that they can rightfully conclude about you or accuse you of is that you are well-intentioned but stupid, and I would take that label any day; after all, God can't throw me in hell if I'm just stupid.

What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Response To A Concerned Christian

This is a response to Gianni De Micco, a Christian writer who, through a series of Twitter conversations, has tried recently to convince me of the existence of a god. After a couple of interesting and respectful exchanges (August 23rd through 25th), he generously offered to send me a copy of his book, wherein he recounts his experiences and the "miracles" he has witnessed. This is my response to him. I will put links to his blog and Twitter here. If you wish to tweet him, please be as respectful as possible, as I've probably caused him enough headache already.


Hello Mr. De Micco,

Sorry I took a day or so to respond, as I was trying to compose my thoughts properly. I'm sure you understand that I needed a bit of time to think about what you've said and give it due consideration.
Thank you for your generous offer to send me a copy of your book. I really do appreciate your concern for me and I know you're just trying to save my soul. As for the book, I will have to think about it, because I live with my parents, who do not know I have my blog, and I live in a small town where there are almost no atheists.
A lot of people have differing definitions of what atheists are or what they believe. Believers even have their own definitions, sometimes to manipulate us or make it seem like we subscribe to beliefs that we really don't. I'm not sure what you might have been told by pastors or speakers, but here is my definition of atheism: I believe that God is less likely to exist than he is to be nonexistent. In other words, I believe it is more likely that a god does not exist, than that one does. That is why I believe the label of "atheist" is appropriate to describe myself. I have not heard other atheists use this definition, but this is my take on the subject.
You said that reading your book would tell me of your experiences and make me understand everything about your message. I'm not sure, though, that someone else's experience of Jesus is going to convince me. Like I said before, there was a time that I begged God to show Himself to me, or even just comfort me with the sense that things were going to be okay, which didn't happen.
I am convinced now that there are some people who are inclined to be spiritual, and some who are not, and that I fall into the latter category. I trust that a god would not condemn me for that. I know that I have tried everything I could think of to get close to God, without apparent success. I have a bit of closure in knowing that.
You speak of God's love; but I presume you believe, as most Christians do, that unbelievers will burn in hell? I have thought about this extensively, and even though hell was supposedly not made for humans, I simply can't see how it could be a just punishment even for Satan and his angels, as never-ending torture seems grossly excessive even for a celestial coup d'etat. The concept of "infinite punishment for finite crimes" seems to apply even for the devil.
But let's assume for a minute that God is as loving as you say and that hell is not an issue. Does God supposedly loving me make Him more likely to exist? I would have to know He exists before we start talking about His attributes. I know you have had experiences which have convinced you that He is real, however I have had different experiences, and if He revealed Himself to you in some way, why wouldn't He reveal Himself to me as well? I know my heart was sincere and I truly wanted to believe (though I'm not so sure now, as Christianity doesn't seem all that it is alleged to be).
You said yourself that you struggled with doubts as well. Perhaps your experiences weren't as convincing as you remember? You also described the process of putting aside your doubts as "silencing the brain." Most people believe that the thinking processes of our brains are how we arrive at objective truth about the universe and the world around us. For this reason, I don't think that silencing my brain would be a good idea.
I have been to your blog, and mostly I have found pictures of biblical images in wood grain. If these are the "miracles" that you say you have seen, I'm not sure I could be convinced by them, since as a species we are wired to recognize faces and familiar images, even in inanimate objects.
I don't want buy "fire insurance." I don't want to comfort myself with something that could be an illusion. I don't want to profess something I don't believe in, because I feel that would be dishonest. It would also make me feel physically ill, having to "lie" about something so important. I want to be completely honest with myself, with others, and possibly with God. That is partly why I don't fear God so much anymore, because if I state my real doubts there's no possibility of "lying" to Him or being a "bad" Christian (strange as that may sound to some).
I have stated before that in one way I trust God more now that I'm an atheist. I trust that a loving god would not condemn me to hell for all eternity for something that I cannot in good conscience do (profess something I don't believe in). I trust that an omniscient god would understand that I have done everything I could to believe in him, and the rest is in his hands. I also trust that a god who is "not willing that any should perish" would not let me die without knowing the truth.
I'm afraid you're just going to have to leave me to my unbelief for now. Though I am open to the possibility, it doesn't look like I will change my mind. I would certainly be convinced, though, by any direct evidence of a deity or personal experience of one (if the experience was presented in such a way that I knew I was not hallucinating or imagining it). I do not deny the fact that you may have had some very powerful experiences yourself, but the experiences of someone else are not likely to convince me. All that would be "proven" was that God had appeared to you. I would be forced to conclude that God did not want to appear to me for some reason.
I have taken the liberty of publishing this response on my blog. I thought you wouldn't mind, since our conversations up to this time have been public, and I link to your blog and twitter account. Though people who read me are mostly atheists, I will ask them to be respectful when tweeting you.
Thank you for your concern and the interesting exchanges.

--A.J.

What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys

Thursday, August 21, 2014

The Reason I'm A Feminist (Is Not What You Think)

"Feminism" is a nowadays a dirty word to a lot of people, as it is sometimes associated with victimhood, perceived slights and controlling what others can and cannot say. It often has a bad reputation, and with merit. But it can also be used as a force for good, as it has been in my life.
Feminism is not just about legal rights and linguistics, or about what society is doing wrong. I consider myself a feminist not because of the crimes I perceive to be committed against me, but because of what I aspire to be. Feminism is my inspiration to become a better person and a better woman--and feminism specifically says that as a woman, I can become a success, I can achieve my goals, and I can become more confident and comfortable in my own skin. Feminism makes such inspirational ideas accessible to women who would otherwise wonder how exactly these ideas would apply to them in our society.
Whenever I have to make an important decision or settle on a course of action, my first thought is, "What would a strong woman do? What would a confident woman do?" These questions are what give me the courage to do what is necessary. I also think of taking a stand as "summoning my inner feminist." Without feminism we would not have the idea of female empowerment, and my life would be very different.
Feminism can make the timid woman braver, the self-critical woman more accepting of herself, and the shy woman more outspoken. I am living proof of that. I would not have this blog if it were not for feminism. Different people are motivated by different ideas or concepts. I am motivated by the idea of being a strong, feminist woman. Feminism has given me something to aspire to, and a philosophy to live by.
I carry myself like a feminist role model, not necessarily with the intention to crush the patriarchy or shatter the glass ceiling. I define success and happiness on my own terms, with money and power being only one factor, and try to help people and animals whenever I can. That's what I believe should be synonymous with the word "feminism."
 I believe it is entirely appropriate to refer to oneself as a feminist when discussing women's issues, as when discussing animal rights one may refer to herself as an "animal rights activist," "animal lover," or "pro-animal rights." When discussing women's issues especially, I don't believe that this term is exclusionary at all, as using the term "animal rights activist" when discussing animal welfare would not preclude one from being for human rights.
There is no one word to encompass everything as far as human and animal rights are concerned. Even the word "humanist" implies a philosophy that is beyond human rights, and could even be construed as exclusionary to animals.
Most people in society would not advocate against women's rights, or for actually harming women (at least, not on purpose). But rather than making the concept of feminism unnecessary, I believe that this actually means that most people are feminist to a degree, though they may not choose to describe themselves as such or not wish to be associated with its negative aspects.
Of course if others choose not to use the title of "feminist," I do not blame them. The word will always have negative connotations for some, and others may be motivated by a different ideal.
As human beings, and, if we choose to describe ourselves as such, as feminists, it is our responsibility to try to communicate as clearly as possible; however there will still be some who accidentally or purposefully misunderstand our intentions. If, after trying to communicate that we are not against men, but pro-woman, and that such a term does not exclude also being pro-man, some still choose to twist our words, that is no longer our problem.
A movement should not be defined by outsiders. A few men, or women, who misunderstand our intentions does not take away what feminism is. Feminism is merely the empowerment of women and girls--or at least, it can be. It should be. I believe it can be saved, and that it is worth saving. That is why I think of myself as a feminist.

What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys

Tuesday, August 19, 2014

Grandpa's Soaps Are Coming To Life

This story is based on an unintentionally sexual, unintentionally hilarious skit I saw while in chapel at my Christian elementary school many years ago. I have tried to be as accurate as possible with the dialogue. I'm sure it was longer than this, but this is what I remember, the gist of it:

 A teenage girl (from the high school campus of my school) opened an invisible door onstage and walked into a "room." She started snooping around on invisible coffee tables, etc, looking for something. Eventually she came to what appeared to be an invisible medicine cabinet and started rifling through it. (I assumed she was in a bathroom, though it might have been a kitchen.)
A teenage boy came from the other side of the stage and started watching her (not creepy at all).
The boy leaned on the invisible toilet, chin resting on his fist, grinned and said, "Hi," frightening the girl.
"Looking for something?" he asked.
"No, I was just, um, leaving. I was looking for the way out and got lost."
"Uh-huh. Sure."
I was confused at first, and rather surprised. Though the words "sexual tension" weren't in my vocabulary at the time, I was pretty sure I knew what it was: It was a real-life reenactment of one of my grandfather's soap operas!
I sighed in relief and settled back to enjoy the show. It was nice not having a message I had to take seriously. There was a message in everything, in that school, and even then I was burnt out. (I often wondered things like, "Why can't they just give us candy on holidays without a card explaining what the candy symbolizes?") Nothing was without some kind of lesson they had to hammer home, especially in chapel.
So I let my guard down and decided to enjoy the show while I still could. Sure enough, there was a message.
The girl tried to leave, the boy grabbed her wrist, they struggled, and she slapped him. Another boy casually walked in and saw the last of the action.
"Why did you hit him?" he asked, in astonishment.
"I hit him...because he took something that belonged to me."
"What did he take?"
"He took...your soul."
"What?!"
"You're a Christian, right?" she asked.
"Yes," he answered.
"I'm Jesus," the first boy said.
"And I'm Satan," the girl said.
I was surprised, and started laughing in shock at this point.
The boy with the soul didn't answer, but started to walk past Satan towards Jesus.
"What are you doing?" she demanded.
"I'm going to Jesus."
"Why?"
"Because He's the Son of God, and you're the devil." 
"But I can get you things. Like money! Cars! Women!" She made come-here gestures with her hands, and the kid appeared fascinated and started to follow her.
Jesus interrupted. "But those are just things, materials. Only I can get you into heaven."
"You're right," the Soul agreed. He turned back to Satan. "I choose Jesus."
"No! No! No! It isn't fair!" she screamed, sank to the floor and broke down crying while he and Jesus left, presumably to go grab some dinner or something.
After the play, they all took a bow together, holding hands. A teacher came up, hugging Satan around the shoulders, and explained, "I just want to say, she really is a nice girl, so if you see her around the high-school campus, don't be thinking, 'There goes that...devil-person.'"
I remembered hearing the phrase "devil-woman" to describe the villain of the Disney movie 101 Dalmatians, but I came to the conclusion that that was a phrase that was forbidden, frowned upon. I guessed if you called someone the devil, you couldn't acknowledge that they were female; that would make it worse somehow.
Even then, I knew the joke was on them. The teachers and students who put on that play had inadvertently created something that was part lover's spat, part daytime drama, part unintentional hilarity. I was really surprised that the devil had offered him "women" at the elementary school campus. And though I might expect Satan to offer women as bribes, I didn't expect Christ to call women "just things."
I'm also not sure why Satan was looking for the boy's soul in the bathroom (or kitchen?). With Jesus and Satan being different sexes, it was certainly spicier than the teachers intended. I don't think they knew how very sensuous it was, at least for me. Maybe that's why I still find salvation stories arousing to this day.

What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Driven To The Breaking Point By A Goddamn Cat Shoe

The hurt kitten, whom we found about two weeks before, was more active now, but the toes on his bad leg curled under, like a gorilla walking on his fists. It caused me no small amount of grief, but as I didn't know how to build him a shoe or cast, I did nothing. Feeling rather helpless, for days I nagged my mom about his foot (never mind the fact that she was busy working, running a household, and trying to figure out what medicines to feed him to keep him alive).
"I have to think about how to do this," she said. "He needs it all the way up to his ankle."
"Just a simple little shoe," I said. "Anything is better than nothing."
I'm not sure, in retrospect, that his foot was the most important thing to worry about, but apparently I have very precise ideas about how cats should walk. I also wonder now why I begged her to do it but felt helpless to do it myself.
Finally I had had enough of his foot causing me distress. Fuck her! I thought. I'm rebelling!
So I summoned my inner feminist, grabbed some cardboard, cotton and stretchy medical tape, and cobbled something together resembling a shoe with a cardboard sole. It was much easier than I thought it would be; if I had known sooner how simple it would be, it would have saved me a lot of grief.
"See?" I pointed out. "Just a simple little shoe, which prevents him from bending his toes. It's not perfect, but it will do for now."
To my surprise, she praised my efforts. "Good job. Looks like it works."
"I try not to go behind your back like that," I said later, self-consciously. "I normally try not to be 'rebellious.'"
"You're twenty-three years old; how can you possibly be rebellious?" she asked.
I was astonished; I had never thought of it that way before.
"You didn't go behind my back," she continued. "You just took charge."
I was actually shocked to find out that she was not a bit upset, and disgusted to think that it had never occurred to me that I could do it on my own. She should have been more decisive or confident, perhaps...but then again, so should I.
My parents are the easiest people to please that I know. How many times have I heard, growing up, "Your mom's so nice; she gives you so many choices," and "What happens at Auntie's, stays at Auntie's." But I still thought that bandaging the cat was usurping her authority. Four years out of Christian school, and I'm still afraid of disrespecting my parents, who never get offended.
 I wish I had discovered this sooner, that it's impossible to rebel at twenty-three, and that cat shoes are surprisingly easy to make, before I had thought "Fuck her," and wasted my energy getting angry for no reason.

What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys

Symbols And Events

"I know this sounds strange, but he has to live," my mom remarked to me the other day regarding our injured kitten. "It's not just about him. I don't know why that is."
"Is it because so many people told us to put him down?"
"Probably, yes."
I felt it too: The cat had become a symbol of my values and beliefs. If he lived, I was right; if he died, I was wrong. If I was so sure of myself and the rightness of what I was doing, I wondered, why did I still need to be vindicated?
I wanted to save him through the Power Of Atheism: No prayer, no looking to a god, just hard work, research, intuition and determination. As ridiculous as it seemed even to myself, it was still "me vs. God" (a mentality I thought I had grown out of in my teens, as I became more skeptical).
What is wrong with me? I wondered. Why do I have to be proven right? And most of all, what do I do if he dies?
Maybe you should realize that not everything says something about you as a person or about your choices, the wiser, calmer side of me thought. You're not to blame for everything. Sometimes things just happen.
Of course. Things just happen. So simple, so obvious, and yet so hard to accept. When everything is either from God or Satan, and when an all-powerful deity either does everything or lets everything happen, nothing can "just happen." When people don't want to be or feel helpless, and when society is addicted to stories with a hero and a villain (as this article from Cracked.com so aptly demonstrates)...sometimes you become the villain. Sometimes you end up blaming yourself.
What happens does not always determine whether you are good or bad. It does not always incriminate or acquit others either.

I stroke his soft fur back and forth, enjoying the vibrations of his purring. He is still alive. And knowing this simple truth eases my burden considerably.
Events do not determine what kind of person I am.
I do.

What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys

Thursday, August 7, 2014

The Kitten, Or Why I Don't Believe In Animal Euthanasia

"Oh, look at that kitty!" my mom smiled and pointed, stopping the car. "Oh no, he's dragging his leg, go get him!"
As I grabbed him, he bit down on my finger, harder than it seemed possible, drawing blood in two places. It was quite painful. "Oh, fuck!" I yelled, but somehow managed to get him in the car. He would bite me two more times, but I guess that's the price one pays for a free kitten (my mother didn't get bit at all, though, which somehow doesn't seem fair).

The next day we took him to the vet. The x-ray said that his pelvis was "shattered," as the vet put it, broken in four or five different places. His stomach was filled with some kind of fluid (though we wonder now if it was air, as we later discovered he had a punctured lung).
The vet seemed grim and sympathetic. The cat might have internal bleeding, he said ("Vitamin K is a blood-clotting agent!" my mom later said). He might have Feline Infectious Peritonitis (FIP), a disease that attacks cats' intestines and kills them, the vet said ("There are people on the internet whose cats have survived this!" Mom said).
The doctor seemed to be leaning towards euthanasia. The cat was in a lot of pain, he said. We decided instead to take him home and at the very least let him die in a comfortable environment.
"Not to say anything about your expertise," Mom explained, "but we have pulled many animals back from the brink before, and we'd like to try it now." (Even my skeptical dad has learned by now not to doubt our magic.)
People who heard of what had happened said how sorry they were, how hard it is to have to do this, then were shocked when told he was still alive. They said we should have put him down.
After one day I even stopped giving him his antibiotic, because he needed gut flora and antibiotics don't work on viruses anyway; another controversial move, I am sure.
 An acquaintance of ours, a nice lady with some unconventional ideas, helped us find the herbs we needed. She said she had recently had to put down her own eighteen-year-old cat. "An enema could damage his bowels," she said, concerned (the kitten doesn't poop any other way, leaving us with no choice--and leaving us overjoyed when he shits on the carpet). I don't think it's a coincidence that her cat died of a bowel blockage.
Really? I thought in desperation. You had telepathic conversations with your cat, but all of a sudden you're too conventional to shove some glycerin up her ass? 
"I know some about taking care of people, but I don't know much about cats," she also said. I guess the famous Library of Alexandria didn't have anything on the subject. I would think that someone who spent a past life as a scholar in ancient Egypt would know all about taking care of cats (or gods, as the case may be).
Mom says that when she called the vet about a week later to order a laxative for him, the doctor sounded sympathetic, then surprised.
I know that he is a very nice guy, and that he was only doing his job, and that he's only human, but a small part of me still wants to do a little dance and scream, "Kiss our asses, you big fat know-it-all!" Such a fantasy is particularly satisfying when, after worrying over the cat for the past week-and-a-half, after all the research, medicines, and enemas, after rearranging my life to fit his needs, people still think we're not doing the right thing, that we're being selfish and harming him.
It has surprised even me how little pain he seems to be in anymore. He cleans himself, plays a little, nurses on our mama cat (the rescue cat we thought was fixed). Before writing this post, I lay on the floor for a while, the kitten on my chest, petting him and listening to him purr, sigh, and fall asleep on my heart. He is a pampered little prince now, and he knows he is loved.
The worst thing that could happen is that he dies right now, which I don't think is very likely anymore. In that case, he still lived an extra week-and-a-half, he had raw hamburger and milk and massages, he spent time with new siblings who were nice to him and who made him purr just to look at them, and he knew he was loved and part of a family.
 I made myself sound kind of dumb the other day when I remarked, "I'll bet he's much happier than he would be if he were dead."
"Uh...yeah," my mother replied, like I had said something obvious.
But I meant it too. I don't believe any animal would choose to die, no matter what cats say telepathically to their owners. That is why I don't believe in putting an animal "out of its pain."
I realize that not every animal can get the same level of care and attention that he has now, and that overcrowded shelters have to keep up certain standards of sanitation by law, and that some potential pet owners only want cute, clean, healthy, low-maintenance, non-disabled pets (and sometimes only babies).
But as dog as my witness, until I am compelled to stop, I will still try to save as many animals as I can. Because either God is working through me to do just that, or He doesn't give a shit and I'm their only hope.

(For more on Marshmallow, the kitten, and other animals, see my "Animals& Euthanasia" tab at the top of the page, or The Kitten, Part Two: He Wanted To Live)

What do you think of this? Leave a comment below, or send me an email at: atheistjourneysblog@gmail.com
Follow or tweet me here: https://twitter.com/atheistjourneys