Atheicon features a large database of relevant quotations, biographies, glossary terms, and arguments, all in support of a natural worldview. Check it out at http://atheicon.com

Atheicon was created to help non-theists (atheists, humanists, skeptics, etc.) in their quest for civic equality through education. This “Atheist Lexicon” contains information that spans the gamut on the subject of “belief”, including content around world religions and religious information, as well as inspiration for the non-believer through witty and insightful quotes, argument, fact, and more. Explore your worldview by exploring those of theists, with a special focus on Judao-Christian belief. Increase your ability to make cogent arguments against belief while respecting others’ right to believe what they choose. No internet connection is required.

But Atheicon is more than just great content. The user interface is gorgeous; modern and responsive. It’s been said that “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication”. Atheicon’s user interface follows that mantra. But it’s not just attractive. It’s also fast and easy to use. Searches are multi-threaded making them incredibly responsive. And the entire user interface can be navigated with just one finger. The main menu is only a thumb flick away!

Select content can be shared via email, copied to the clipboard, or even posted to Twitter. For example, if you post a quote to Twitter and it’s more than 140 characters, Atheicon will attach a picture of the rendered quote to the tweet. And many content areas allow for tagging favorites, which can also be searched.

I hope you enjoy using Atheicon and really get value from it as a tool for education and inspiration. George H.W. Bush once said: “No, I don’t know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God.”

He must not have read the Constitution. More recently, Richard Dawkins affirmed that: “Atheists are the new gays. In the closet and pretty much disqualified from public office.”

Perhaps Atheicon will help, in its own small way, to provide a future where an open atheist isn’t branded as immoral or amoral, and can enjoy civic equality with the rest of the country.

At the other end of the house, opposite the base station, is my bedroom, where the WiFi issues occur. Initially, I added a WiFi extender, in the form of an Apple Airport Express. I’ve tried two models, and both gave me great signal strength, but the connectivity would intermittently stop (as it did without the extender), sometimes requiring a restart of the extender. I eventually got rid of the extender, and decided to research a different solution.

Upon thinking about the problem further, I realized that the iPhone rarely, if ever, had network issues. It’s always the larger devices. What gives? And then it dawned on me. I remember having to use an older 900Mhz wireless house phone to get better signal at one point because of all the walls and microwave in between. The way it works is, the lower the frequency, the better it is at going through barriers, but the shorter the distance it can travel. The higher the bandwidth, the farther it can travel, but the fewer barriers it can pass through before the signal degrades.

So I went into the Airport configuration utility, and set the base station to segregate the frequencies onto separate WiFi networks, so I see two different WiFi network names when browsing for a network. I then make sure that I “forget” the 5Ghz network, so my device cannot automatically connect to it, and then I explicitly connect to the 2.4Ghz.

So far, the problem seems to have been alleviated. I see a slightly higher signal strength than before, and although it sometimes drops very low, I always have connectivity. Prior, it would drop in strength and I’d lose network connectivity. My belief is that the devices were trying to stay on the faster 802.11n network at 5Ghz, which would drop out sometimes, and then it would switch to the 802.11g network and recover. Then every so often, it would reconnect to the 802.11n network again, repeating the cycle.

The other recommendation I would make, and one I will try if my connectivity doesn’t remain constant, is to just move the base station to limit the barriers between it and the farthest part of the house. I just figured this made more sense, and is cheaper than buying a bunch of really long ethernet cables.

To those, like Republican party sycophant and Mitt Romney oral bidet Ari Fleischer, who want to compare this nonsense to Larry Doyle’s anti-Catholic article posted in the Democratic party ass rag “The Huffington Post” have made one crucial mistake: the article condemning Catholic mass is completely correct. In the article, one comment describes Catholic mass as a mystical dark ritual “in which a black-robed cleric casts a spell over some bread and wine, transfiguring it into the actual living flesh and blood of their Christ. Followers then line up to eat the Jesus meat and drink his holy blood in a cannibalistic reverie not often seen outside Cinemax.” This ritualistic cannibalism is accomplished through transubstantiation. So, yes, Catholicism is a cult of human sacrifice. If the Catholic church didn’t have the power it currently wields it would be referred to as a cult.

So those on the right who choose to define their socio-political views by ascribing to those of a single, elitist party, and those of a media bitch like Rush Limbaugh, need to check their intelligence and virtue at the door. He’s an entertainer who’s treated as a leader in the party, with no responsibility or accountability. As such, he sets the tone for the debate, and consequently, candidates are forced off-message. And ultimately, the party of personal liberty and small government is mired in our bedrooms deciding how we can use our penises, vaginas, and anuses.

So in the interest of clarity for the Republican voting public, and a bit of what I call “tardy honesty”, I give you some of the top things Mitt Romney believes as a practicing Mormon, with some descriptive commentary.

1. Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers and we were all born as siblings in heaven to them both (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163).
2. He believes that God lives near a planet called “Kolob”.
3. He believes in baptizing dead people. Yeah, whether they like it or not!
4. God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children (Mormon Doctrine, p. 516).
5. There are three levels of heaven: telestial, terrestrial, and celestial (Mormon Doctrine, p. 348).
6. He believes that The Garden of Eden was in Missouri.
7. He believes that it was impossible for Negroes to go to Heaven before 1978. I think that’s when “Shaft” was cancelled.
8. He believes that he’s going to become a god (DC 132:20).
9. There are many gods (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163). Soon that’ll include one more: God Romney.
10. He believes he’ll own a planet after he dies. He already owns Earth.
11. He believes the real Christian God is not eternal but rather that He was once a man from another planet.
12. He believes that he needs to wear magic underwear, created by Mormons, which is not to be removed unless he is bathing.
13. He believes it’s a sin to drink anything containing caffeine, to use tobacco, or imbibe hot drinks for pleasure.
14. There is no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet of God (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 188).
15. A plan of salvation was needed for the people of earth, so Jesus and Satan both offered a plan to the Father. Jesus’ plan was accepted. In effect, the Devil wanted to be the Savior of all Mankind and to “deny men their agency and to dethrone god” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 193; Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 8). Good thing God had Jesus to help him make such an important decision.
16. And, of course, if it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is no salvation [the context is the full gospel including exaltation to Godhood] outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Doctrine, p. 670). Funny how all religions seem to be the one, true religion. But no, this one really is the one.

There are many more tenets of the Mormon faith that would make your eyes roll, like the whole golden plates thing. But these should keep you busy until November.

“I endorse it. I think it was correct,” King said. “Contrary to what many have said, it sought to outlaw neither prayer nor belief in God. In a pluralistic society such as ours, who is to determine what prayer shall be spoken, and by whom? Legally, constitutionally or otherwise, the state certainly has no such right. I am strongly opposed to the efforts that have been made to nullify the decision. They have been motivated, I think, by little more than the wish to embarrass the Supreme Court. When I saw Brother Wallace going up to Washington to testify against the decision at the congressional hearings, it only strengthened my conviction that the decision was right.”

Rob Boston also notes that, in a time when some states still made it illegal to buy, sell or use birth control, Dr. King was in favor of greater access to it and was a strong progressive when it came to economics, health care, and poverty. He was also, of course, a fierce opponent of the Vietnam War.

That the House of Representatives declare 2012 as the “Year of the Bible” in Pennsylvania in recognition of both the formative influence of the Bible on our Commonwealth and nation and our national need to study and apply the teachings of the holy scriptures.

Read resolution 535 and choke on your own bile here.

I’m all for people reading the Bible in order to understand what’s actually in it. I have a feeling that it may wake a few people from their ignorant Judao-Christian slumber. But is it really a necessity for people in our country to accept this mythos as part of our governance model?

Saccone doesn’t even try to take a secular route in explaining it:

“As not only Pennsylvania, but the United States, continues to face great tests and challenges, House Resolution 535 serves as a reminder that we must look to our faith in God and the Holy Scripture to provide us with the strength, wisdom and courage to conquer these great trials,” said Saccone. “All over the Pennsylvania Capitol, one can easily see the tremendous influence that Christianity and the Bible have had over our founders and predecessors. These images and quotes illustrating the beliefs and morals that have shaped our great Commonwealth must never be forgotten.”

So the next time we’re faced with horrible adversity, let’s all pray for it to magically go away. Yeah, that works. Has anyone noticed that when people pray for these selfish miracles, their prayers go unanswered? If I were wrong, we’d live in a world where everyone’s favorite sports team wins every game every year, and we’d all be 30 pounds lighter and having sex with super-models atop our piles of lottery winnings.

And if 2012 is the ‘Year of the Bible’, what was every single year before this? Should we expect a ‘Year of the Koran’ in the future? In its own way it, too, shaped our nation. Personally, I’d like to see a ‘Year of the Kama Sutra’. That’s something I could get behind.

But the worst part is that the resolution passed 193-0; without a single voice of dissent. So foreign theocracies are bad, but good ol’ fashioned American theocracy is just what we need! Yeah, the bible can help bring back the good old days of slavery, subjugation of women, and pork-less Sundays. Unbelievable.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation can’t believe it either.

“Our constitution grants sovereignty not to a deity or a ‘holy book,’ but to ‘We, the People.’ There is no reference to God, the bible, the Ten Commandments or Jesus in the U.S. Constitution, just as there are no references to ‘consent of the governed,’ ‘civil liberties’ or ‘democracy’ in the bible. Those who have truly studied the bible realize that it is a moral quagmire, a behavioral grab bag, which has been used to justify automatic rule, tyranny, slavery, the degradation of women and gays, child abuse, war, atrocity and mayhem,” noted FFRF.

So I got my minute of fame, but it was in Canada. Does that even count? I wonder if I’m still big there. Anyway, you can listen to the one-minute spot here: The Zipcat Pro Radio Spot.

Seriously, Cee Lo Green? Changing the lyrics to John Lennon’s “Imagine” is wrong on countless levels. Let’s focus on two.

1. Artistic Integrity. You don’t change an artist’s work. And unless Josh Krajcik on FOX’s “X Factor” is a “hot-blooded woman”, he deliberately sang Alanis Morissette’s “Uninvited” keeping said reference to being female in order to maintain this integrity.
2. Intended Message. John Lennon generally had a secular (though spiritual) message in his works. This one, in particular, was a message that the abolishment of all organized religions would yield a better, more peaceful world. Cee Lo Green’s is the opposite, and wrong I might add. As the artist, only Lennon has the right to make such a fundamental change.

It’s hard to tell if this was a gaff by someone who simply didn’t know or remember the lyrics well enough, or if it was a deliberate attempt to pander to those in the viewing audience who believe in Christian mythology. It could have even been an attempt by Cee Lo Green to change the lyrics deliberately such that it became more religiously inclusive. Perhaps he thought that he knew better than John Lennon, with regard to how a message of peace and love should be delivered within the context of a song by John Lennon.

Hitchens was someone whose boisterous, peremptive, larger-than-life personality seemed poised to overtake any illness or challenge, regardless of how ridiculous and illogical that may have seemed to the various portions of the brain that provide the faculties of critical thinking and reasoning. That’s how powerful his intellectual contributions were to our world. He made us think, no, believe that he was a Homerian hero; a fixture, not a man.

But he was a man. An extraordinarily gifted man.

Many articles have been published before and after his passing which discuss his ability to smoke and drink us all under the table while effortlessly writing a few thousand words on the most complex topic, straight from his mind, at the speed of typing; never a braggart, a friend to every man. I won’t (and can’t) adequately discuss these things. They’ve been covered to the point of banality. What I will say is that he is one of a very few who truly mesmerize me in print and in debate. His ability for discourse equaled his ability to think. That mind. That voice. What a powerful, Orwellian combination. He had the intellectual equivalent of a nuclear arsenal, and he wielded it only for the enlightenment of those around him.

To describe him further risks the use of cant, overused and mostly meaningless metaphor. But his life and impact on lives makes the use of such phrases strangely appropriate. And so, he was a transformative figure. I’m sorry to see him leave us. But I’m equally happy to have been able to see him actively transform those lives, of which one was my own. He once said, “Being a writer is what I am, rather than what I do.” It was his life; his raison d’etre. He feared the inability to write more than chemotherapy, more than radiation treatments, more than losing his voice, and more than the threat of an impending death. So he wrote, and wrote, and wrote, through all of it, right up through his last days, transforming lives every step of the way.

His legacy will surely be one of continued transformation through his many works, as it should be. Would he have it any other way?

I recently read your recommendation concerning the complete ban of mobile phone use while vehicles are being driven. I’ve even heard talk of the potential use of technology to disable mobile phones entirely while a vehicle is in motion.

The evidence for the dangers of distracted driving are quite compelling. One such statistic from the NHTSA reads: “Some 3,092 roadway fatalities last year involved distracted drivers, although the actual number may be far higher”. They went on to note that this is an epidemic. “At any given daylight moment, some 13.5 million drivers are on hand-held phones”, according to a study released last week by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

I couldn’t agree more. Even hands-free use of mobile devices is distracting to a driver, though many might argue to the contrary.

But you’re not going far enough. Below, I have crafted “The Argentini Plan”, in which I seek to eliminate all significant distractions for drivers. My plan is based on research, as well as decades of experience driving on public roadways.

The Argentini Plan

The following shall be banned from use while a vehicle is in motion.

Embedded vehicle distractions. Any controls on the dashboard or console are to be banned as they distract the driver, taking their eyes and/or attention off the road for seconds at a time. These controls include, but are not limited to: air conditioning system and vent controls, radio/mp3/CD/DVD players, speedometers (and RPM displays), trip computers, GPS and navigation systems, fuel gauges. Other features of the typical vehicle that are distractions include side and rear-view mirrors, glove compartments, center consoles, door compartments.

Third party vehicle distractors: Additional significant distraction is caused by the following, which should be banned from being within a vehicle when in motion: passengers, pets, drivers who haven’t had enough sleep, drivers who don’t have a license, drivers who cannot properly control their vehicle (terrible drivers and those with sufficient driving impairment), thoughts not centered around the act of driving or desired destination.

Likewise, the following should be banned from being within the driver’s reach inside the vehicle while it is in motion: prepared foods, beverages, makeup, reading material, portable electronic devices, eyewear, hats, cigarettes (and sources of ignition), purses and other containers for personal belongings, medical supplies, groceries/packages, umbrellas.

So let’s get serious. Mobile phones are a cause of significant distraction to a driver who uses them improperly (a.k.a. while driving). But so are many other accepted amenities built into cars. For example, there have been cases where a driver was in a head-on collision with another vehicle simply because they glanced down at the speedometer to verify that they weren’t exceeding the speed limit in a residential area. Seriously.

So what’s the real answer? I think it’s fine to recommend and even enforce some common sense behavior, like not talking on a phone while driving, not texting, and so forth. There are short-sighted (or dim-witted) and selfish people who need this recommendation. But to cater to the absolute lowest common denominator by banning entire device use while driving, when they have perfectly legitimate uses for an active driver (e.g. GPS), is madness. That kind of thought process leads to the complete ban of personal driving privileges.

Perhaps you (the NTSB) should take all the time and energy devoted to the “madness”, and aim it squarely at technology and auto manufacturers to encourage them to build additional safety features into vehicles. Google has the patent on cars that drive themselves. Today. They have already logged over 100,000 miles of driver-less travel in California with existing technology. Many luxury vehicles already feature the ability to detect an impending impact and adjust the car’s trajectory to avoid it, or to alert the driver who may be falling asleep at the wheel. Wouldn’t it be great if all our vehicles could help to protect us from accident and injury in this fashion, as airbags have done?

Sincerely,
Michael Argentini