Religious people talk a lot about faith. Politicians too, usually when they're trying to get the "people of faith" vote. I will attempt to define the word "faith" for us all now (from the atheist's perspective, of course).

Faith: the ability to believe in something that is unsupported by any evidence and is in fact contradicted by what evidence there is.

Any people of faith out there? Comments?

p.s. It is my opinion that most people would be just fine without this "faith", that they don't need it to keep from being "filled up with despair" (an actual quote from a reply I got once), but they are afraid to even entertain the notion because when the people were filling their heads with this nonsense they also drilled it into them that it is a "sin" to question anything that they were being told.

I will make my comments at the bottom of this:

Bush signs Mexico fence into law
US President George W Bush has signed into law a plan for 700 miles (1,125km) of new fencing along the US-Mexico border, to curb illegal immigration.
Mr Bush said the US had not been in control of the border for decades.

Illegal immigration is expected to be a major question in next month's US mid-term elections.

Mexican officials have opposed the fence, with outgoing President Vicente Fox calling it "shameful" and likening it to the Berlin Wall.

About 10 million Mexicans are thought to live in the US, some four million of them illegally.

An estimated 1.2 million illegal immigrants were arrested last year trying to cross into the US via the border states of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California.

'Nation of immigrants'

In signing the Secure Fence Act 2006 into law, Mr Bush said that his government would tackle illegal immigration by means of increased funding and numbers of immigration officials.

Ours is a nation of immigrants - we're also a nation of law
President Bush


He said that remote cameras, satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles would also be used to create a "21st-century" border with Mexico.

"We're modernising the southern border of the United States so we can assure the American people we are doing our job of securing our border," he said.

"Ours is a nation of immigrants. We're also a nation of law.

"Unfortunately the United States has not been in complete control of its borders for decades. Therefore illegal immigration has been on the rise."

But Mr Bush promised to balance the tightening of the border with a temporary guest worker programme and moves to grant eventual citizenship to some of the illegal immigrants already in the US.

Those moves are opposed by many within his own Republican party.

'Not impenetrable'

The BBC's Nick Miles in Washington says that, though few US congressmen have questioned the need for some action to reduce illegal migration, many have queried how effective the fence will be.

TJ Bonner, president of the National Border Patrol Council, a union representing patrol agents, told Associated Press that it would not be enough on its own.

"A fence will slow people down by a minute or two, but if you don't have the agents to stop them it does no good. We're not talking about some impenetrable barrier," he said.

Mexico has pledged to challenge the fence at the United Nations and on Wednesday presented a declaration against the policy to the Organisation of American States, supported by 27 other Latin American and Caribbean nations but opposed by the US.

'Unnecessary and offensive'

The BBC's Duncan Kennedy in Mexico City says the fence has united Mexican politicians in opposition.

Across the political divide, politicians have come together to condemn what they see as an unnecessary and offensive barrier, he says.

And they accuse the United States of hypocrisy for enjoying the benefits of cheap Mexican labour but not being prepared to offer Mexican people a chance to cross the border legally, our correspondent said.

Part of the funding for the fence is likely to come from the $1.2bn (£0.6bn) set aside for it in a recent homeland security bill, but the full cost may be greater and the source of the funding is still unclear, our correspondent says.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/6088084.stm

Published: 2006/10/26 15:26:48 GMT

© BBC MMVI

Is it just me or does this remind anyone else of a "country club" mentality?

"This sure is a nice country club we have here Bob."

"It sure is Bill, but you know, sometimes non-members try to get in"

"Yes, I've noticed that too, I wonder what we can do?"

"I know! Let's build a fence!"

"Yeah, that'll keep out those undesirables!"

"Of course, that doesn't apply to Pedro, the guy that cleans the pool. Or the locker room guys. Or the caddies"

"No, no, of course not"

What's next, fences between states?

Well guess what? Mr. Nugent was entertaining, funny, and not at all extreme. He makes very bold statements and he likes to say things like "slap some sense into'm" but he really isn't as narrow-minded or as wild eyed as I expected. We both want many of the same things for America, we just disagree on the best way to get there in many instances. One interesting moment came when a Viet Nam vet got up to ask the first question of the night and rather than asking a question, called Ted a coward and draft dodger (very loudly and at length). Ted handled himself very well. I may disagree with his answers but I admired the way he stuck to his guns and answered all questions. How 'bout that shit?

The University of Wisconsin has something called the Distinguished Lecturer series. Tonight (OK last night, whatever) they had Howard Zinn as the speaker. Here is a link to his wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Zinn

He is an historian, a professor emeritus at Boston U. in the Political Science department and the author of numerous books including "A People's History of the United States" which I read this past summer. He talked about a number of things including the futility of war and he also mentioned that he thinks we should strive for a world without borders. Howard is a bit of an idealist.

Tomorrow night (by my reckoning) Ted Nugent will be appearing on the same stage. He is not a part of the Distinguished Lecturer series. It will be interesting to hear how completely different Mr. Nugent feels about some of these subjects. I'm thinking he sees a world with not only borders but fences, to keep everyone out of "his" America. Or maybe he's not as right-wing extreme as I've heard. His lecture is titled "God, Guns and Rock and Roll". Good thing it's free.

It's getting late but I want to get at least something down tonight. I'm sure people wonder why anybody would want to be an atheist. Well for me it's not about wanting to be one, I just am one. How could I not be. If it was about what I wanted I would do what most people do; sift through all the different theories and beliefs of various people and religions and cobble something together that works for me. I'm pretty sure that's what I did for the first twenty years or so; I was raised a catholic with all the guilt and fear (and love, right) and sort of emphasized what made some sense to me and downplayed the stuff that seemed really off (like Limbo for unbaptized babies and original sin and oh yeah, how about transubstantiation, that one is out there) and figured that I was a believer in my own way.

Well that was OK for a while but at some point I was inspired to dig deeper, to really confront what I professed to believe. This point came when I engaged in a spirited, ongoing debate with my one atheist friend. I found myself having to defend a position that I really wasn't sold on myself. A lack of faith? Perhaps. But why should faith have anything to do with it? Why couldn't I support my position with facts and evidence (like he could his)? This was the beginning. (more to come)