The Lying Game

“Yeah, Romney lied, but ALL politicians lie!”

Well, not quite. More accurately put, all people lie.

So, if we’re going to discount Romney’s lies on the basis that all politicians lie, then by logical extension, we have to call our own assessment of politicians’ truthfulness into question because we are ourselves liars. That is, if it’s not so big a problem that Romney lied because politicians lie, then it must not be that big a problem that politicians lie because we all lie. At which point we might as well just give up on all of this “reality” stuff.

Considering everyone is dishonest to one degree or another, we have to gauge honesty in terms of quantification. We can’t say “Obama lies and Romney lies” as if once that categorization has been made, it equalizes them. “Liar” isn’t a categorization, it’s a scale. Romney lied a lot in the debate, with so many lies per minute that it probably qualified for the Guinness Book of World Records. (Somebody should really give them a call, because now I’m curious.)

That’s not to say Obama didn’t lie at all. He did. Just not nearly as much as Romney. There has to be some kind of threshold for truthfulness, where we recognize that telling 10 lies is worse than telling 2, and where we don’t dismiss both candidates in a debate equally just because they told 1 or more lies. That’s ludicrous.

If people are apparently unable to tell the difference between a speech with a few exaggerations and one that’s complete fiction, it’s time we rethink our entire approach to thinking, let alone politics.

An Explanation for the Religious

Hello there. I’ll cut right to the point.

Look, the point isn’t to get you to stop believing in God, or whatever else you want to believe in. You might think there’s this terrible, concerted effort on the part of the secular world to get you to give up your faith, but there’s not. Sure, yeah, there are definitely people who want that to happen — and I’m not going to lie, I feel like the world would be a much better place if we all learned whatever lessons there are to be learned from religion, just like any other historical document, and move on — but for the most part, all we want is for you to not interfere in our lives. And you’re misinterpreting our desire to avoid your interference as an interference in your lives. Which, well, it is, but so is pushing someone’s boot off your throat.

But here’s the actual point: the point is to get you to acknowledge that perhaps humans’ interpretations about God are flawed. It’s happened so many times in the past, where science has demonstrated that certain assertions made by religion have been inaccurate or outright wrong, that the idea that it’s not going to continue to happen is incredibly arrogant.

In the end, here’s the thing: If you can’t allow that humans’ interpretations about God are inaccurate, then you’re placing yourself in a greater position than this being you claim to worship. You’re saying, in effect, “we know exactly what God’s intentions are.” You’re saying that your understanding of God is perfect, that humans can be perfect. Isn’t that contradictory to your beliefs?

Even if the Bible actually was inspired by God (and full disclosure, here, I don’t think it was, but for the sake of argument let’s assume that it was), it would still have been transcribed by human hands, through human brains, all of which are fallible. Maybe God knew this. Maybe we were supposed to get it wrong. If our understanding were perfect, what would the point have been in doing anything beyond that point?

Ultimately, you can’t truly believe in God while also assuming you understand his intentions and instructions. If you actually believe everything you claim to believe about him, then all of that is unfathomable to you. Genuinely unfathomable. To claim you really know is so arrogant it’s blasphemous.

For instance, how do you know — how can you be sure, if God is truly omnipotent and omniscient and all that — that creationism doesn’t exist only to encourage scientists to work even harder to figure out how things really work? “God works in mysterious ways,” after all, right? And how can you say it’s otherwise without making assumptions that undermine your own faith in an omnipotent and omniscient God? How can you try to dictate others’ lives in the name of God without being supremely arrogant in both directions?

That’s the point. That’s the point of all our efforts. We don’t care what you believe, we care what you do in the name of your belief. We care that your arrogance is ruining lives, and possibly contributing to the ruin of our planet, and undermining what should be your own faith.

So please stop. Please actually believe in God, and just stop.

The Drug War: Friendly Fire

A reminder that the only reason marijuana was ever a “gateway drug” was BECAUSE of the misinformation campaign about its “dangers”. When you categorize all drugs in the same way, once people try the harmless ones like pot, they’re going to think, “well, maybe I was lied to about meth as well. Maybe it’s also not as bad!”

There are terrible drugs in the world that WILL fuck you up or even kill you, and even with responsible use they can become addictive nightmares that can ruin your life. They should be avoided, and it’s important for people to be aware of the dangers of these drugs. But manufacturing and/or propagating deceptive and inaccurate information isn’t going to change that. In fact, it’s only going to make it worse. ‘Cause, see, when you lie to someone, and they catch you lying — which they inevitably will –, you lose their trust, particularly about the subject you lied to them about.

And that’s particularly dangerous when you actually DO have valuable truths to convey. It’s irresponsible to allow your personal fears and convictions to taint the truth, and to keep you from doing what’s right.

If you want to keep people from doing dangerous drugs, be honest with them. And let them do the safe ones. Most importantly, treat them like adults and they’ll probably act like adults.